GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #10

[jessie]

True.

I will admit I am still bothered to an extent about his capacity to inflict the fatal injuries. Its the same with the stun gun, he says he used it and I think he did, but he didn't use it effectively and I have a feeling it is because he was worried about its effect if he aimed it at her for too long. I do think he wanted to kidnap Becky and scare her, I know he dismembered Becky but he found it very difficult and couldn't continue. Maybe that was because of his fibro, maybe it was because he couldn't face doing more. He does seem to have capacity to feel emotion and empathy (for instance how SH felt in a threesome). I think the suffocation doesn't stack up with that, however bothered or jealous he was. As he says he had a plan and I do think he wanted that plan to work. JMO

I am thinking exactly the same way Tortoise.
I have just watched SH's two vids again (in March?) and from what I see (I'm just an ordinary person), she is lying. Her manner, her pauses, the total lack of shock and abhorrence at what has happened, her replies accompanied by her glances at the officer questioning her as if she is waiting for acceptance - not an open and honest person imo.
I wavered previously, but she is involved I'm sure.
Whether she can stand up to the prosecutions questioning tomorrow I have no idea. She has shown little emotion so far.
But now she will be the one putting up a fight for her freedom, as Becky did.

 

[edgedweller]

True.

I will admit I am still bothered to an extent about his capacity to inflict the fatal injuries. Its the same with the stun gun, he says he used it and I think he did, but he didn't use it effectively and I have a feeling it is because he was worried about its effect if he aimed it at her for too long. I do think he wanted to kidnap Becky and scare her, I know he dismembered Becky but he found it very difficult and couldn't continue. Maybe that was because of his fibro, maybe it was because he couldn't face doing more. He does seem to have capacity to feel emotion and empathy (for instance how SH felt in a threesome). I think the suffocation doesn't stack up with that, however bothered or jealous he was. As he says he had a plan and I do think he wanted that plan to work. JMO

I cannot believe that he really thought Becky would not recognise him. Even with a mask and hat on - a hat that he seems to wear often. His build alone - how many adult men are 5'5" tall? No disrespect to short people, I'm 5'1 myself, but he would be totally familiar to her - his voice, mannerisms, height, clothes and shoes, even possibly the smell of him or his deodorant - everyone has their own scent. Ridiculous to think that a girl of 16 could be so easily fooled.

I think he alone, or he with SH tried it on with BW, got rejected or laughed at, and he lashed out. They or he may have tried to assault Becky but realised she had her period (why didn't the prosecution ask about that?!) and it was a no-go. What option did he/they have? She threatened to tell, a fight ensued, hence the multiple injuries. They/he overpowered her, and suffocated her.
Haven't made up my mind about SH yet. I actually feel pity for her, even if she is guilty. She didn't have a great start on life, has never even had a job or any purpose in life other than claiming fraudulent benefits and eating takeaways with a metrosexual sulky mentally imbalanced Neanderthal. Of course lots of people have *****ty childhoods and don't aid and abet murderers, or even just choose to live with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hexenb]

Some of this is simply bizarre..... I am by no means a nosey person with regard to what my OH does, but really, if he was packing a suitcase with handcuffs, sellotape and a stun gun, I think I might, just might, want to ask him what the plan was for that day !

It wouldn't have looked odd wonder how often he takes a rape kit out with him!

 

[skibaboo]

I wonder how much SH has turned a blind eye to in the past, so was perhaps used to pretending to know nothing about what was going on under her nose.

Just thinking about it, this couple had been together 7 years, neither with a proper work history, living on benefits yet could afford to run a car and have £10,000 in savings - despite having a child to provide for.

We know that NM worked cash in hand whilst claiming benefits - so she obviously turned a blind eye to that.

We know that NM gave a different address to that of SH despite living there, which could suggest that both were claiming benefits individually, with SH getting more than she was entitled to if claiming to be a single mother. So, benefit fraud.

It appears they didn't have a tv licence, so again breaking the law - albeit minor.

So, if NM had a history of getting involved in less-than lawful activities, and SH either participated, or ignored what was going on (for example if he was dealing with stolen goods), then it wouldn't be that difficult to believe that she could have suspected he was up to no good (passing on stolen goods etc) , but told the police that she hadn't noticed anything, as she didn't want to be questioned too much about what was going on, or about what she knew about previous things that had gone on.

So, once she had denied seeing or hearing anything, and once NM had also told that story, I guess it was impossible to go back on that and admit to seeing or hearing some of it, as she then looks guilty - and he then looks like he is covering up for her.

Just giving her the benefit of the doubt! I still think the pair of them are lying through their teeth though. His story is complete nonsense.

Agree rach. I think of NM as a bit of a delboy. I'm convinced they have been commiting benefit fraud, as well as other illegitimate means of income. Possibly dealing in dodgy electronics/ maybe even drugs.

I've lived off benefits for over 10 years now because of health problems. We have a car because it's necessary, it's old now, if something goes wrong were stuffed. If we have a takeaway it's a rate treat. We have no social life, we have to scrimp and save for Christmas. And juggle, juggle money to pay bills and buy food. There is never anything left. If I had savings of 5k? Not only would I have dipped into it, it would have been gone years ago!


The only way I can believe the story of events and that SH is innocent, is if she is used to turning a blind eye, used to strangers coming round at all hours, is naive and thick as two short planks.

 

[mrazda71]

I am thinking exactly the same way Tortoise.
I have just watched SH's two vids again (in March?) and from what I see (I'm just an ordinary person), she is lying. Her manner, her pauses, the total lack of shock and abhorrence at what has happened, her replies accompanied by her glances at the officer questioning her as if she is waiting for acceptance - not an open and honest person imo.
I wavered previously, but she is involved I'm sure.

See, for me, I don't see Shauna waiting for acceptance, I see her making direct eye contact on and off during the conversation which indicated truthfulness. Liars will either make little eye contact or will stare at you while talking in an effort to hide their lying.

ETA - this of course doesn't take into account conditions like Autism which often features issues around eye contact.

 

[MamaJoJo]

Something stood out to me after today's testimony from NM...

He continues to maintain that, if SH knew ANYTHING, she would have gone to the police. He has repeated this many times. While most of us have been incredulous about SH's assertions that she knew NOTHING, it seems from today's testimony that she did know many "hinky" things (all of the shopping trips, no toilet, suddenly seeing her family, not mentioning BW, actively lying to the police...the list goes on). How can she maintain that she didn't know SOMETHING, ANYTHING was amiss? And, in turn, how can NM continue to imply that SH is such a moral, upstanding person?

Let's say that SH is dense and didn't put 2 + 2 together. Did she question NM's actions, at all? Did she ask him why he was being so cagey, so deceitful, so distant to his mom and DG during their time of despair? It just simply doesn't add up.

 

[jessie]

See, for me, I don't see Shauna waiting for acceptance, I see her making direct eye contact on and off during the conversation which indicated truthfulness. Liars will either make little eye contact or will stare at you while talking in an effort to hide their lying.

ETA - this of course doesn't take into account conditions like Autism which often features issues around eye contact.

Isn't it good that we all see things differently - and that we can say them with respect. Thanks, I'll look again at those vids. and bear in mind your point of view.

 

[mrazda71]

Something stood out to me after today's testimony from NM...

He continues to maintain that, if SH knew ANYTHING, she would have gone to the police. He has repeated this many times. While most of us have been incredulous about SH's assertions that she new NOTHING, it seems from today's testimony that she did know many "hinky" things (all of the shopping trips, no toilet, suddenly seeing her family, not mentioning BW, actively lying to the police...the list goes on). How can she maintain that she didn't know SOMETHING, ANYTHING was amiss? And, in turn, how can NM continue to imply that SH is such a moral, upstanding person?

Let's say that SH is dense and didn't put 2 + 2 together. Did she question NM's actions, at all? Did she ask him why he was being so cagey, so deceitful, so distant to his mom and DG during their time of despair? It just simply doesn't add up.

I just look at it all and think - she's 21 ... your brain has barely finished developing at that age and I can't expect my teenage to twenty something year old daughters to act and think and see things like I do because the way we think as mainly (according to the Websleuths poll) 40 + year old women is SO different.

 

[Tortoise]

I hope, when the Jury retires, they are allowed to take the circular saw and the red suitcase into the jury room with them.

yes, the jury get to have all the exhibits with them in the deliberation room, as well as facilities to play back CCTV recordings and recordings of interviews.

 

[Hexenb]

And which freezer? That big one at the bottom of the stairs or one in the kitchen? How could he be sure SH wouldn't look in it?

So the toilet is off bounds and so is the freezer what a load of c**p he is spouting!

 

[Clio]

"I waited to hear for Shauna to come back in. I needed to know she was in the house to hear the door slam"
"I heard her coming in so that is when I did the stairs and the door."
"Either I shouted and asked for a hot drink or Shauna offered a hot drink"
"When his mum Anjie returned, Matthews said he made the "major mistake" of claiming he was in the kitchen when he heard the front door slam."

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-...hews-quizzed/story-28078299-detail/story.html

Why would he see that as a major mistake if SH had known what had happened at that point?

If, and it’s a big if, NM is telling the truth here, I wonder when it was that SH realised he was lying and when it was she discovered they had a body on their hands.

SH is in the kitchen when he slammed the door to simulate Becky leaving. When AG gets home NM tells his mum that he was in the kitchen when they heard Becky slam the front door.

But SH knows NM wasn't with her in the kitchen when the door slammed. At some point SH would realise that NM was lying to AG.

 

[Alyce]

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-...hews-quizzed/story-28078299-detail/story.html

Why would he see that as a major mistake if SH had known what had happened at that point?

If, and it’s a big if, NM is telling the truth here, I wonder when it was that SH realised he was lying and when it was she discovered they had a body on their hands.

SH is in the kitchen when he slammed the door to simulate Becky leaving. When AG gets home NM tells his mum that he was in the kitchen when they heard Becky slam the front door.

But she knows he wasn't with her in the kitchen when the door slammed. At some point SH would realise that NM was lying to AG.

Or it could be that NM realises he has made a major mistake, because it was going to be SHs story that she was in the kitchen, washing her hands when the front door slammed and she then went into the lounge, where NM was sitting playing on his phone....
So when SH tells her story, then AG will realise that one of them is lying

 

[sar2them1984]

Where have people suddenly got the idea that they are benefit fraudsters...people keep mentioning it and I'm just wondering why? We don't know that they were scamming the state...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Tortoise]

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-...hews-quizzed/story-28078299-detail/story.html

Why would he see that as a major mistake if SH had known what had happened at that point?

If, and it’s a big if, NM is telling the truth here, I wonder when it was that SH realised he was lying and when it was she discovered they had a body on their hands.

SH is in the kitchen when he slammed the door to simulate Becky leaving. When AG gets home NM tells his mum that he was in the kitchen when they heard Becky slam the front door.

But she knows he wasn't with her in the kitchen when the door slammed. At some point SH would realise that NM was lying to AG.

Possibly he saw it as a problem because SH was telling police she was in the kitchen, and Anjie may have already told police that NM told her he was in the kitchen. But then that means that he knows what SH told the police and is that proof they were trying to align their stories?

I don't know, its quite confusing to work through who knew what at what stage!

 

[kimlo]

Where have people suddenly got the idea that they are benefit fraudsters...people keep mentioning it and I'm just wondering why? We don't know that they were scamming the state...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Because he gave a diffrent adress to the one that he actually lived at. If someone was committing benefit fraud they would have an official address where post went, and an actual address.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[ColourPurple]

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-...hews-quizzed/story-28078299-detail/story.html

Why would he see that as a major mistake if SH had known what had happened at that point?

If, and it’s a big if, NM is telling the truth here, I wonder when it was that SH realised he was lying and when it was she discovered they had a body on their hands.

SH is in the kitchen when he slammed the door to simulate Becky leaving. When AG gets home NM tells his mum that he was in the kitchen when they heard Becky slam the front door.

But she knows he wasn't with her in the kitchen when the door slammed. At some point SH would realise that NM was lying to AG.

Wow . Good find. So straight away if SH was innocent she would know NM was lying about where he was when the door slammed.

Another thing that struck me whilst reading that article is that he mentions his mother coming back. IF the "kidnap plan" had gone to plan then he ran the risk of his mother returning while he was out with Becky tying her to a tree! How suspicious would that look if his mother comes home , he and Becky are missing, Shauna's sat there with her daughter and then Becky later returns having been kidnapped and driven to a wooded area just around the time NM was out.

 

[skibaboo]

Where have people suddenly got the idea that they are benefit fraudsters...people keep mentioning it and I'm just wondering why? We don't know that they were scamming the state...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

I'm just going off my gut feeling. Taking into account CML is SH's address, NM is listed as living elsewhere but lives at CML, the cash in hand job which he asked for 4 weeks off. The amount of take always, able to spend 90 odd quid on cleaning products etc. And a discussion I once had with a friend who mentioned how everyone does it round her way, as if it's no big deal.

I'm not saying it's true, I just feel it may be so. I didn't mention it before but have had the feeling for a while. If they aren't and it's all legit, I need to move to a cheaper city!

 

[ColourPurple]

Because he gave a diffrent adress to the one that he actually lived at. If someone was committing benefit fraud they would have an official address where post went, and an actual address.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

With him having a different address and talking a lot about his fybro and mental health problems, I wouldn't be surprised if he was also claiming some kind of disabilty payment and possibly had his gran or somebody else registered as his carer too. But compared to what theyr'e accused of benefit fraud is small fry.

 

[LookingForClues]

What continues to stand out to me is that NM and SH were by their own accounts almost constantly at his mom's house. SH was her caregiver. And yet, at the very time when they SHOULD have been there 24/7, when his mom/stepfamily was in crisis, NM and SH found reasons to be as far away as possible (except the first 2 days, when they "acted natural" so no one would know what had really happened, but as soon as the police were involved, those 2 skedaddled). In fact, they suddenly get back in touch with SH's mom and stepdad after being estranged for a few years, spending a ridiculous amount of time at their house, even spending the night at least once.

I find it hard to believe that NM's mom didn't ask him to be with her, to help search, and so forth. What "normal" excuse could he possibly have to tell her that would be acceptable to her?

"Gee, Mum, sorry, I've got to fix my plumbing and it's going to take me days and days, possibly weeks to do that. I've no free time to spare. I can leave Shauna with you for a few hours today but after that, I need her so we can do some shopping for drain cleaner, bleach, 5 boxes of cling film and some other household cleaning items. Then, we're going to make up with Shauna's mum and spend days on end with her. I know you've got things covered here, you won't mind that we're too busy to be supportive of you and DG while you freak out because BW is missing. Ta ta!"

And beyond that, if SH wasn't involved, wouldn't she wonder why they weren't helping AG and DG? We know there was no love lost between NM/SH and BW. But once it became clear that BW really appeared to be missing, how do they tell his mom that they're not interested in helping look for her or being with the rest of the family?

 

[ColourPurple]

Or it could be that NM realises he has made a major mistake, because it was going to be SHs story that she was in the kitchen, washing her hands when the front door slammed and she then went into the lounge, where NM was sitting playing on his phone....
So when SH tells her story, then AG will realise that one of them is lying

Yeah if they're both in the kitchen and say they heard a door slam then later, if they get caught, NM can't say it was him slamming the door, like he can if SH's alone in the kitchen when she hears it.