GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you Michelle, that was brilliant. Can't begin to imagine what it felt like having to see and listen to SRF...bad enough doing the copy and paste of updates, I could feel myself wanting to rant at him with each post.

Hope you get back for Monday ...if judge gets them out early enough, might b verdict day, tho I doubt it somehow

Thanks again xx

I will be there on Monday - whether I get in is another story. I`ve not worked out how to play the game yet. Stand at the front - people edge in from the side. Stand at the side, people all but stick their elbows out at the front lol. I`m sure there`s a well practised knack - I just haven`t worked it out yet!
Any of my pupils who didn`t go away this half term have had their lessons cancelled (by me) and postponed until Saturday and Sunday...explained I had some urgent business to attend to :thinking:
 
I will be there on Monday - whether I get in is another story. I`ve not worked out how to play the game yet. Stand at the front - people edge in from the side. Stand at the side, people all but stick their elbows out at the front lol. I`m sure there`s a well practised knack - I just haven`t worked it out yet!
Any of my pupils who didn`t go away this half term have had their lessons cancelled (by me) and postponed until Saturday and Sunday...explained I had some urgent business to attend to :thinking:

How about a stink bomb?:D
 
You haven't heard his "My partner has been missing since Monday..." crap repeatedly upon Cam News page loading then? :D His voice is surprisingly high - which might be another clue he's the missing BeeGee.

Missing BeeGee...oh my...nearly choked on my late night secret biscuit!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 
Thank you, again, Michelle for giving more texture to the day. An horrendous day in many ways, when we were all expecting so much .. I guess I mean an almost collapse of Defence today. But Mr Flinty, skilled in all he does and, to be fair, he is IS's Defence, soldiers on - insults the Prosecution truth, normal and then cunningly uses Helen's book to support the Murderer.
You have given such terrific insight to the Court at St Albans of all that we cannot see. It must be exhausting. It has been exhausting and displacing of all other 'interests' whilst sitting at home on the edge of one's seat, without the rigour of Court - and travel and lacking any cushion.

I can just image IS 'linking' the Jury, when he thinks what a good citizen, 'fiancee' and supporter of Helen, as his Defence portrays him in such a light ..
But - I am sure he shall not be sleeping well at night now - he knows he did it. And he is now the Grotesque Greedy Homeless Wicked. - (without)
Bless you, Michelle for everything.

You`re welcome Joely xx
 
Missing BeeGee...oh my...nearly choked on my late night secret biscuit!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I'd love to take the credit for this immense comparison but sadly it was a wonderful member far wittier and more observant than I :D Pure genius it is.
 
Did the jurors faces tell you anything about how they felt? I know when I was one I could barely control my face. I'm sure it said you're guilty most of the way through!

I know that they looked incredulous on many occasions. However when the defence barrister is stating his "case" - I don`t know Flightpath - I really don`t - because in truth some people are easily swayed and very impressionable. However as has been pointed out, the Judge has the final directions (is that the right word?), and this seems one of the most straightforward, black and white cases one could get - IS or Joe and Nick...and all jokes aside, the J/N story could not possibly be believed by anyone. Anyone!
 
I keep thinking of the fact that because of his fantasy of Joe n Nick he really has only given the jury two options: do these men exist and did they do all he said OR was it IS. That's the only choice. Because of his defence. So whatever Flint says is irrelevant as it simply boils down to that. He made up that story and it's whether that story is more believable than him killing her. That's the jury's choice.

Sadly the jury do not HAVE to choose, a fact of which SRF is very aware in his summing up.

He is trying hard to cast reasonable doubt in their minds that IS committed the crime whilst avoiding any reference to ‘Joe and Nick’

If he casts that doubt then in theory IS could be acquitted without any reference to who actually committed the crime as it’s only IS on trial not some other person, fictitious or otherwise.

That said there is more than sufficient evidence to show IS is a determined liar which should weigh heavily with the jury in determining his guilt whatever SRF serves up
 
Thanks Michelle230. I also recall jury being told by the judge categorically not to allow ourselves to be swayed either way until the very end of the case in order to do right by the law. So imagine they were told similar and are keeping it all in.
 
Respectfully snipped.

Thank you so much Michelle. Your reports are so valued and your insight exceptional. I did wonder whether there would be a noticeable difference in IS's demeanour and it appears there was. I have read Russell Flint charms the jury. I do hope they have their heads well and truly screwed on. I despair when a barrister attempts to effect an incorrect verdict and have to say I think it has more to do with their ego than much else.

Michelle, like you, I am having terrible trouble with my posts. I am having to edit mine after posting and I must remember to use Word to avoid this. I think it has to be something to do with this site. I keep getting a message to say my memory is low but I have a huge amount of memory available. If I try to use my iPad on this site and wish to backspace the wretched thing backspaces about 20 letters, or even more at times.

Thank you again for your views on today's proceedings.

Hi IB (oops... I typed IS at first and quickly corrected it!),
Yes I have exactly the same message about being low on memory and only when I`m on this site. I remember the same happening last year when I was on this site following another case.
As I say, I find the only way to type a long post is by using Word and copy/pasting.
 
I've only just understood the significance of Helen being found with no shoes on- BECAUSE SHE WAS AT HOME when she was killed. Remember how IS wanted all visitors to take their shoes off? Unless we are supposed to believe that Helen was just incredibly considerate of the kidnappers' cream carpets?

I mentioned this a good while ago - when we were wondering if he called for Helen to go look in the cesspit. No way would she have trotted out there barefoot - yet many of her photos curled up on the sofa etc. do show her barefooted at home. Always thought he'd caught her without footwear on - the slimeball!
 
Or turn up in a nappy you've been wearing since the day before.

Stop it Tortoise you've gone too far now!

What do you mean - from the day before? I`m confused. How often should they normally be changed then :gasp:
 
Hi All,
I`m having big problems with my laptop which is running frustratingly slow. Also I always seem to have even more issues re slowness when on the WS site. There are so many posts I want to reply to but the letters/words I type show up 30 seconds or more after I type them (hence lots of typos!). It`s so frustrating! So for longer posts, I type out first then copy/paste.
Anyway I was in court afternoon only. Ticket 507 was rubbish and I was put next to the barrier in the carpark across the road – kindly the barristers used megaphones so that I could hear. (Tortoise, that`s for your benefit in case you felt guilty lol)
Jokes aside.
So Mr Trimmer was as you would expect. After he finished, the Judge said that perhaps it was a good time for a break. However Mr Flint stood up and said that he would like to start his summing up. My guess is that he didn`t want to the jury to have the prosecution summing up fresh in their minds to discuss at break. Clever.
I know we all wondered what on earth he could possibly say. And yes – what * could * he say? But of course what was clear to me, (I`m sure other more experienced court attenders would know this) but it was the first time I`d seen it so blatantly in action – he didn`t put any meaningful case for IS`s innocence on the basis of any evidence (of which there was none as well we know). All he did was negate, and chip away at all the actual evidence *against * IS. What I particularly disliked was that time and again he used emotionally manipulative words e.g. the jury should be “brave”, they should have “courage”, they should have “strength” to see beyond the obvious. All these manipulative words as he tried bit by bit to dismantle the overwhelmingly strong case that shows IS murdered Helen and Boris.
I know it`s their job. I know. But I don`t care! I know the often used expression, “I don`t know how he sleeps at night”, and yes – I don`t know how he will – but sleep he will do. Like a baby, I`m sure! And you know what – G-d forbid one day he finds himself in a similar position, where a dearly beloved member of his family has been murdered – I`m pretty dammed sure that he would want justice done!
I am not going to court tomorrow morning. As the Judge was planning out the last remaining days, he said that perhaps the defence summing up and his directions could both be finished tomorrow (court finishes at 2 pm as the Judge has other business to attend to). However Mr Flint said that actually he needs quite a bit more time! Really??
So he will continue earning his huge salary tomorrow morning , trying his best to set a murderer free. I will not – I cannot – listen, so I will not be there. However I will go for an hour in the afternoon as the Judge aims to start his directions from 1 o`clock until 2 pm. I expect there will be an early lunch.
With regard to IS - I watched him the whole time Mr Trimmer was talking. He blinked a lot. He frequently cocked his head to one side – in a…sort of weird bird-like way (sorry –that`s the only way I can describe it). On one occasion he did genuinely look very emotional and seemed to be fighting back tears – when Mr trimmer was talking about – was it a book dedication in one of Helen`s books – mentioning the GGHW – her “happy ending”? Something she wrote – so warm and loving about him. He did seem genuine in his tears at that moment. However the rest of the time…nothing…just nothing. Calm, unperturbed, almost like a third party involvement.
When Mr Flint was summing up…this loving man…this man with an unblemished history…this wonderful relationship…this man who was in a more than adequate financial situation – (yes Mr Flint – let`s hope you don`t have a child who ends up like Helen one day), during this time IS was looking directly at the jury. It`s the onlt time I have seen him do this other than the very occasional fleeting glance. This time he could gaze at them as a good, loving, innocent, wronged man.
Thanks Mr Flint.
You do know the beloved Trimmer has defended plenty of people as well?

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
 
I just passed by that info, I thought she gave up work after a bad seizure but it might be me getting it wrong

here it is



PS His £7 K compo in 1978 was £40k in today's money. Quite a windfall when compensation would've been rare.

I've been away from the laptop so this might already have been said - on Diane's 'memorial FB page' there are photos of her sitting at a desk most likely working in the school where she worked as school secretary - until her death I believe. Here's a link to the FB page - it somehow just seems wrong to post any photos of her on here but if you look and scroll down there are a few posted in 2010 and one is of her sitting at a desk in front of a computer - most likely at work. https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=diane helen stewart (lem) - in loving memory
 
Time for bed - but just wished to include some of my thoughts of today.
It was lovely that Hunkerdown was travelling and not caught up with the hearing ..
And Alyce as always keeping the record straight - along with the experienced WS -
Sadness for Pip - but I know you are away beyond what 'others' think - you are your own person and a devoted friend of Helen's
And many more compassionate and interesting posts - thank you.

I re-read Helen's book last night - mostly to find out how IS and Defence may have used an option within it to protect his Life Sentence.
But I was carried away by her story again, her truth, her beauty, her openness towards mistakes within a marriage. She was very patient with JS - as he was with her. And it seems certain she would have given IS a long rope - after being in such a beautiful tension of 'give and take' with JS.

This 'love-bomb, sitting at home within his own Guilt. A Guilt, which may have come from the fact that he could not save Diane (understandable) or a deeper darkness. There is no challenge to this at present. It is Helen Bailey and Boris, we are here for in asserting Justice for her in all her giving, her loving, offering all she and JS had earned between them in their individual ways to a Widower she met whilst grieving.

This feisty, intelligent being who knew how to be stripped of everything when she lost her partner and husband of 22 years, was so vulnerable and in giving to her Planet Grief as she would naturally do as a Writer and an empathic being, was SPOTTED. And devastatingly now, she was spotted by IS .. as if she were carrying a metal detector.
I do not wish ever to insult Helen in suggesting that IS didn't grab a bonus in her being so lovely and fun and beautiful - but I do believe he rushed up to Highgate and interrupted her personal space, rather than waiting until they arranged a meeting. And he was drawn up there when he saw the Highgate house - no doubt goggled her and knew of her books.
Disgusting that his inadequacy should draw him to the very star that he was jealous of -and wished to mimic from the very first time he saw her as 'important' on the Widow/Widower's pages. He leaped - and then played cat and mouse with her emotions - so that if he withdrew, as he did, she would miss him.
Such a calculating ************* and then everything, little Helen needed, halogen bulb fixing, sewerage fix, he was there mimicking again all she needed.
When she couldn't got to Broadstairs after John's death - he was like a worm presenting fish and chips.

BUT - when it cam to Helen's real choices - such as staying in London, her 'love affair choice of place' - he pulled back and used his Sons as the reason for Royston. Staying there for him was not just for his Sons it was for his EGO.

And he was driven and driven to melt Helen - all that she was with JS - all that she was with her friends .. all that she was with her family, and her writerly success. The 'seed' (yes possibly Strimmer) started to fester - and instead of it growing toward a good harvest it had no chance with the perverted view of love that this man has.
As if said before, I do not deny a love of family within him but he is NOT able to substantiate it fully because there is only ONE person in this life that is truly important, inadequate - tussling to be great and that is IAN STEWART. He is a danger to others in the future - not only for money but through a chink within him where he needs to devour people - estrange them - when they are in competition to his storyline of himself.
 
Were they all guilty evil murderers?
No idea, just saying it isn't as simple as the good guys stick to prosecution and the evil ones defend. I'm sure Trimmer has disgusted people in the past for taking on a defence case. I suppose it all balances out.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
2,072
Total visitors
2,212

Forum statistics

Threads
601,939
Messages
18,132,222
Members
231,187
Latest member
missylaforme
Back
Top