GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #14

[Clio]

Yes I hope the judge corrects that

Or clarifies

 

[Tortoise]

Yes I hope the judge corrects that

I think it follows - if she didn't know what he was planning to do, or was doing, then there is nothing else putting SH at the point of knowing harm may come to Becky. Much the same as joint enterprise.

 

[Tortoise]

I'm quite pleased. Means I can go and pick the kids up (in the driving wind and rain - felt like I was on an arctic expedition this morning...), get home, make a brew, sit down and catch up.

How much notice will we get when the jury come back to announce the verdicts? I want to make sure I'm here!

5-10 mins!

 

[Tortoise]

Can anyone guess as to why the judge has imposed reporting restrictions on his summing up? Is this normal practice? I have never followed a trial or been in a court before.

I cannot even hazard a guess

 

[ColourPurple]

If found guilty of conspiring to kidnap - that would surely be based on the texts they sent each other. Both would be found guilty of that obviously (sorry!) as you can't conspire with yourself. I don't actually believe there was a kidnap plan. However apart from being at every location at the 'right time', that is the most evidence they have on SH. So, his ridiculous kidnap story which is clearly untrue, could be the one thing that gets SH a guilty verdict!

BIB or could be the one thing that saves her from a murder conviction(if they really are saying if shes not guilty of conspiracy to kidnap she has to be not guilty of murder)

 

[Clio]

I think it follows - if she didn't know what he was planning to do, or was doing, then there is nothing else putting SH at the point of knowing harm may come to Becky. Much the same as joint enterprise.

JE is exactly what is implied. If that's true, then if the jury decide there was no joint kidnap plan for example, then it follows that they cannot find SH guilty of murder.

 

[Clio]

UK & Eire say they are currently talking about "other charges" against NM/SH which have not been part of this trial

ETA Judge still outlining legal charges. Summing up not started yet

 

[Tortoise]

ah, I see they are talking about the other charges - the indecent images prob.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

This is really frustrating. It was implied the other day that SH would need to be found guilty on Count 1 (conspiracy to kidnap) in order for her to be found guilty on Count 2 (murder).

I don't know why because in my eyes they're different issues. I really don't think she was in the room when Becky was attacked, but I reckon she knew he was going to do something as he wouldn't have taken the risks he did. And I sure as hell believe she knew about everything that happened afterwards. It my mind it makes her very nearly as guilty as him. I bet she went nuts when Becky died, I don't think that was part of their plan, certainly not in that house at that time.

 

[ColourPurple]

I think it follows - if she didn't know what he was planning to do, or was doing, then there is nothing else putting SH at the point of knowing harm may come to Becky. Much the same as joint enterprise.

But that only makes sense if there definitely was a kidnap plot. If it's just something NM made up to cover what really happened then she could be not guilty of conspiracy to kidnap(because there was no kidnap plan) but guilty of murder by being involved in what did really happen

 

[Bathsheba]

If SH is found not guilty on all charges do you think she will be given a new identity? (I hate the thought of it because I really believe she was an equal partner in this with NM)

 

[Alyce]

I cannot even hazard a guess

I've been googling but cant find any stated reason. Perhaps he just doesn't want his every word being tweeted line by line. Although, I cant see why not, as the summary is going to be exactly that.

 

[MamaJoJo]

I think it follows - if she didn't know what he was planning to do, or was doing, then there is nothing else putting SH at the point of knowing harm may come to Becky. Much the same as joint enterprise.

But, wait! SH can be found guilty of murder even if she isn't found guilty of CtoK, right?

I know a bunch of you have been batting this back and forth this last week and I thought I was following along. TIA for clarifying this for me.

ETA: And I see now that the batting around is still going on this morning! It just seems to me that it's COMPLETELY possible to murder someone even if you didn't conspire to kidnap them first.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

5-10 mins!

Are you kidding me?!?!?

*having palpitations at the thought of missing it*

 

[ColourPurple]

UK & Eire say they are currently talking about "other charges" against NM/SH which have not been part of this trial

ETA Judge still outlining legal charges. Summing up not started yet

Ah their child *advertiser censored* charges, plus his voyeurism and sexual assault charges

 

[Clio]

I think it follows - if she didn't know what he was planning to do, or was doing, then there is nothing else putting SH at the point of knowing harm may come to Becky. Much the same as joint enterprise.

Yes but what if the jury believe that they went to CH jointly planning to do something to Becky, which did NOT involve kidnap, which resulted in her death. Then what?

 

[ColourPurple]

But, wait! SH can be found guilty of murder even if she isn't found guilty of CtoK, right?

I know a bunch of you have been batting this back and forth this last week and I thought I was following along. TIA for clarifying this for me.

I think she can but her defence said otherwise.

 

[YidArmyRach]

BIB or could be the one thing that saves her from a murder conviction(if they really are saying if shes not guilty of conspiracy to kidnap she has to be not guilty of murder)

Does she? Couldn't the jury decide that the kidnap story was rubbish, so there was no conspiring to kidnap Becky, but whatever did happened that day, SH was involved in? Or is it not as simple as that?

I don't believe there was a kidnap plan for that day (I don't believe they'd take their child with them for a start), but I can believe something happened which got out of hand. It could have even have been a row between SH and Becky which escalated for all we know. I just don't believe MN secretly went up there to kidnap or murder Becky, whilst SH was having her massive cigarette in blissful ignorance.

 

[Alyce]

If SH is found not guilty on all charges do you think she will be given a new identity? (I hate the thought of it because I really believe she was an equal partner in this with NM)

It's an interesting thought isn't it.

Technically, if she is found totally innocent, they I don't see that the police ? the authorities ? are under any obligation to do anything for her, other than allow her to walk out the door of the Court to freedom.

Realistically, given the strength of feeling about this case, I doubt they could leave her to walk the streets of Bristol. But just what they are obliged to do, I don't know.

 

[Tortoise]

But that only makes sense if there definitely was a kidnap plot. If it's just something NM made up to cover what really happened then she could be not guilty of conspiracy to kidnap(because there was no kidnap plan) but guilty of murder by being involved in what did really happen

it is the crown's case that this was a kidnap conspiracy leading to murder. why the two have to both be present I don't know.

IMO NM wouldn't have said it was a plan to kidnap if it wasn't. it seems just so out there.