Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes but she was using his phone and his bank card after his death don't forget. She could have ordered food for one person and used his card.Surely it should be easy enough to ascertain whether/when he had food delivered to his house by checking his credit card statements
But surely Police know more or less the time he died, no?Yes but she was using his phone and his bank card after his death don't forget. She could have ordered food for one person and used his card.
Yes, when the trial started, it was stated that:But surely Police know more or less the time he died, no?
So it would be easy to check the time and who really used the card.
JMO
They don't have a time for his murder. They say the evidence suggests she killed him on November 1st.But surely Police know more or less the time he died, no?
So it would be easy to check the time and who really used the card.
JMO
I would say it seems really unlikely they were arguing (and eating separately) that evening, with how she planned to (and did) lure him to his death.Yes, when the trial started, it was stated that:
Prosecutors allege Beal stabbed 42-year-old Billingham in the neck on 1 November 2021 in the main bedroom of their home in Moore Street, Northampton, after hiding a knife in a drawer.
If the takeaway order was placed before then, she might be telling the truth. Otherwise, she lied, whether the food order was placed or not.
Fiona Beal: teacher was mentally ‘broken’ when she killed her partner, trial hears
Defence claims Beal had been in a coercive relationship with Nicholas Billingham, who she stabbed and buried in back gardenwww.theguardian.com
I’m not saying the food refusal turned into an argument there and then, but it might have been just one more reason (however extreme) for her to think ‘enough is enough’I would say it seems really unlikely they were arguing (and eating separately) that evening, with how she planned to (and did) lure him to his death.
I have to keep reminding myself that FB is the defendant and not Facebook.Much of the family's evidence about Nick being controlling appears to be hearsay that has come from FB.
Much of the family's evidence about Nick being controlling appears to be hearsay that has come from FB.
Regardless of anything else, ordering a takeaway wouldn't prove anything. The scenario could be that she was cooking something that he didn't like.Surely it should be easy enough to ascertain whether/when he had food delivered to his house by checking his credit card statements
Right? Like this constitutes the death penalty? I can’t see how she won’t be found guilty. She had many, many other choices. She chose to murder him.Regardless of anything else, ordering a takeaway wouldn't prove anything. The scenario could be that she was cooking something that he didn't like.
I don't like fish, but that doesn't mean nobody else can have a fish dinner. I would say,
"You go ahead, I'll just get a takeaway."
An opportunity to have something that they don't like! Win win.
She seems seriously mentally disturbedRight? Like this constitutes the death penalty? I can’t see how she won’t be found guilty. She had many, many other choices. She chose to murder him.
I've seen an estimate of 3-4 weeks, with a pause over Easter.Can someone explain how they work out/who decides how long a trial is going to take? 5 weeks for this one seems a lot, when much more complex murder cases are allocated less time