GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #15

[skibaboo]

I'm going to miss you guys on here. We've All come so far in this case. What on earth am I going to do with my day now?
:boohoo: :sad:

You mean you won't be on other threads, no other cases? Please, Have you evaded the infamous websleuths addiction? It's kinda like pringles.. 'once you pop' Or maybe you just haven't felt the cravings yet

I have a feeling we will still be seeing you around

 

[Legal]

If I understand correctly, it seems that a husband and wife/ civil partners cannot be found guilty of conspiracy if no other person is involved. Which means if NM and SH had been married, the situation might be very different. The prosecution would have had to find another way to secure a conviction of manslaughter for SH.

 

[Tortoise]

I remember Retribution saying wtte 'do not be fooled by NM's tears - they are tears for NM only'

I also remember feeling very confused by aspects of NM's behaviour - demanding SH's name not be mentioned, saying 'obviously I don't want this being shown to a certain person', and asking for her to be removed from his screen in court. I wondered previously if he was angry with her for making him out to be a violent partner. Seen in the light of the verdicts, and Retribution's words, I think I can understand it better.

It's part of the ACT they had agreed on. 'don't let her know what I've done - she'll hate me.., I've let her down'

And then in court there was something about him turning his back on her. Same thing - part of the act - too ashamed of himself for what he had done to her, SH. But then we had the odd reporter noticing a quick smile in SH's direction, not thinking anyone would pick up on it. That's when he let his guard down, and it looks now that he was communicating to her - you're doing well, our plan is working - I promised I wouldn't drop you in it'.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

If we all shout for Beesknees at the same time, do you think she'll hear us? She's not been here since the verdicts came through!

All together now......1....2.....3.......BEEEEEEEEESKNEEEEEEEEEEEES!!!

:bee:

 

[Insp.Dots]

If we all shout for Beesknees at the same time, do you think she'll hear us? She's not been here since the verdicts came through!

All together now......1....2.....3.......BEEEEEEEEESKNEEEEEEEEEEEES!!!

:bee:

Perhaps she's 'buzzed off' to find 'Retribution'.......COME BACK.....WE NEED YOU!!!:back::chillout::guitar::hot:

 

[Tealgrove]

YES YES YES

WOW! I caught up this morning, figured we'd hear something by Friday. Took my dogs out for a walk and sat at the Lake pondering Becky's life and death for a a couple of hours.

I came back, and just on a whim, turned to WS and holy moly WE HAVE VERDICTS! I can't believe how quickly the jury came back. Good for them. No messing around. They knew what was what and served Becky well. Unfortunately, nothing will bring Becky back but at least we witnessed JUSTICE FOR BECKY!

May they rot away in jail, paying the ultimate price for taking Becky's life year after year after year.

I was initially, teary and shaken to be honest when I first read the news of the verdicts, but now I feel a calmness.

I think we will hear more but it doesn't matter anymore.

It's over Becky. Sleep tight. Now you can rest in peace.

 

[Tealgrove]

Perhaps she's 'buzzed off' to find 'Retribution'.......COME BACK.....WE NEED YOU!!!:back::chillout::guitar::hot:

I wondered where Beesknees was too. She needs to see this.

 

[Alyce]

BBC News 24 now .......special programme for Becky

 

[Cherwell]

"Throughout this awful ordeal, we have been worried about the public perception of us. Please understand that we made a choice to try and keep a low profile as far as the media is concerned. This is for a number of reasons including wanting the police investigation and court trial go ahead without any problems.

"We recognise that the media have their job to do and were of course of great help when Becky was missing, but we do not want to be part of anything that goes on about the details of Becky's death and what happened afterwards."

https://www.avonandsomerset.police....trial/tribute-to-becky-from-the-watts-family/

I think it's very sad that the Watts family have felt that they need to defend their wish to keep a low profile. I respect that, and have felt for them throughout. They seem to be very dignified people.

 

[ColourPurple]

Well you go out on the school run with a quick Mum and son Costa thrown in (left my phone at home for the first time in years!) and come home to THE news!!

Wow! I'm shocked ... not at the verdicts as such but at the speed that they came back.

I'm hoping that we'll now hear some of the information that made that verdict so quick for the jury to come to.

I dont think the verdicts are anything to celebrate though ... there is just nothing but sadness all round.

For Becky and her loved ones, of course but also for Nathan and Shauna's daughter, the unborn twins and the children that Nathan and Shauna were ...

It's possible to feel sadness whilst also welcoming the verdict.

 

[ColourPurple]

I remember Retribution saying wtte 'do not be fooled by NM's tears - they are tears for NM only'

I also remember feeling very confused by aspects of NM's behaviour - demanding SH's name not be mentioned, saying 'obviously I don't want this being shown to a certain person', and asking for her to be removed from his screen in court. I wondered previously if he was angry with her for making him out to be a violent partner. Seen in the light of the verdicts, and Retribution's words, I think I can understand it better.

It's part of the ACT they had agreed on. 'don't let her know what I've done - she'll hate me.., I've let her down'

And then in court there was something about him turning his back on her. Same thing - part of the act - too ashamed of himself for what he had done to her, SH. But then we had the odd reporter noticing a quick smile in SH's direction, not thinking anyone would pick up on it. That's when he let his guard down, and it looks now that he was communicating to her - you're doing well, our plan is working - I promised I wouldn't drop you in it'.

Another thing Retribution said was that they were both compulsive liars.

 

[ColourPurple]

Originally Posted by Tortoise View Post
I still wonder why the jury went for manslaughter for SH. Still, it was unanimous.

Perhaps they felt they couldn't get her on Murder with the evidence? So glad they used their 'common sense' as a whole. IMO Jury have done a fantastic job and if any of them ever read this 'Well Done'.....must have been an incredibly hard trial to sit through and not one they will ever forget!

I think in the end it came to question 7 of those 21 questions , the only difference between murder and manslaughter for SH was whether she took part in the kidnap plan believing Becky could A)come to some harm (manslaughter) or B) suffer really serious bodily harm or death (murder).

 

[epiphany]

Teen had no idea she was subject of Matthews and Hoare's lust

The teenager had no idea she was the subject of Matthews and Hoare’s lust and was unaware of communication between them about her.

Last year, Matthews wrote to Hoare: “How did you message her as I can’t?” She replied: “Why can’t you? I just went on her Facebook and clicked message.” Matthews said: “Dunno, I’ll show you when I finish work.”

Hoare messaged the teenager via Facebook at 3.13pm on November 11 2014 - exactly a year before she was convicted of the kidnap of Becky Watts.

On January 2, at 6.15pm, Matthews messaged Hoare that the girl had come into the takeaway where he worked, Law’s Kitchen.

“She came into the shop but didn’t speak to me,” he sent.


Another 16-year-old girl 'lucky to escape after killer pair contacted her on Facebook months earlier'


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6808661

 

[sar2them1984]

I hope they add Benefit Fraud to the list as well. UNLESS BOTH get a 'Whole Life Sentence' (Which is unlikely i'd think in SH's case at least) they should also have charges of falsely obtaining benefits and housing thrown at them. I'm also wondering if there will be a 'serious case review' by Social Services as at the time SH had regular contact with her Social worker. We mustn't forget there was an innocent 2 year old caught up in all this horror. Not to mention the Unborn Twins. SOoooo many affected it really is horrific to think this happened in a city full of people!

I believe a serious case review is already underway bit was adjourned pending the trial.

Benefit fraud wise - they'd problem get a fine or a couple of months...small fry stuff really. I can't see anyone pushing for it tbh

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[eneri12]

Well I wasn't expecting those verdicts so quickly, got a few funny looks when I gasped out loud on the bus in my way home from work! Very pleased with all the verdicts.

I also feel the utmost respect for the Watts family and the dignity they have shown, and feel ashamed that they feel they need to justify why they've stayed out of the media. Different people deal with grief in different ways and they should be allowed to do so without feeling they need to justify why.

Hopefully JI and DD can try and rebuild their lives now. Odd there's been virtually nothing in the media about either of them.

 

[Tortoise]

I think in the end it came to question 7 of those 21 questions , the only difference between murder and manslaughter for SH was whether she took part in the kidnap plan believing Becky could A)come to some harm (manslaughter) or B) suffer really serious bodily harm or death (murder).

quite, but why did the jury think it was a and not b?

they must have believed that there was no plan to kill as part of the kidnap plan. is that because NM denied he planned to kill Becky? did they believe his stupid reason about teaching her a lesson? did they think it was for sex only? if they thought it was for sex - did they think through whether they would have just let Becky go afterwards? etc..

I think they could have benefited from spending more time on probing those questions. never mind I suppose, it is what it is, and better than her getting off on the kidnap and the killing charges.

 

[LookingForClues]

I think in the end it came to question 7 of those 21 questions , the only difference between murder and manslaughter for SH was whether she took part in the kidnap plan believing Becky could A)come to some harm (manslaughter) or B) suffer really serious bodily harm or death (murder).

I also think that SH's INTENT is part of the equation. I've been reading the questions over and over and suddenly it dawned on me about intent (bolding by me):

6) Are you sure that Hoare participated or continued to participate in the kidnapping of Miss Watts intending to kill her or to cause her really serious bodily harm and that in the court of that attack Matthews suffocated or strangled Miss Watts while intending to kill her to cause her really serious bodily harm?

If yes: Guilty of murder.

If no: Not guilty of murder, but go to question 7.

7) Are you sure that Hoare participated or continued to participate in a kidnap of Miss Watts and that all sober and reasonable people would inevitably realise that some harm might be caused to Miss Watts and that during the course of the kidnap Miss Watts was suffocated or strangled by Matthews and was killed?

If yes: Guilty of manslaughter.

If no: Not guilty of manslaughter.


Read more: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-...tory-28146837-detail/story.html#ixzz3rD8BeOTI
Follow us: @BristolPost on Twitter | bristolpost on Facebook

 

[Ellmau]

Sorry if already posted (videos of statements at link)

'She was beautiful, happy, feisty, caring, witty': Full statement from Becky Watts' family

Becky Watts' family sobbed in court as the guilty verdicts were read out. Afterwards a complex and emotional statement was read out on their behalf, expressing their grief, gratitude, anger - and most of all, the depth of their love for Becky

What a moving statement. I have such respect for this family and the way they've dealt with the horrible thing that has happened to them.

 

[kodi]

That is a conundrum certainly.

I, as I'm sure many here, know people who have had the most abysmal upbringing including mental, physical and sexual abuse. Yet they have overcome the difficulties because of an innate sense of determination, of wanting to escape the past and have a 'normal' family life in adulthood.

One's early life and upbringing always leaves scars that never heal, so why is it that sometimes things like this happen?
Vincent Tabak had a normal, middle class upbringing, intelligent guy, good job - look what happened there.

Is it nurture or nature ?? Big question.
It shows a magnanimous spirit to feel that the evil actions of people are a product of their unloved childhood. They would have become decent contributing members of society if only ......

I tend to the belief that it is nature, not nurture, that is to blame but I really have no answer, nor understanding.

:goodpost:Jessie. My thoughts, as well, but I'm having a hard time herding them into a coherent paragraph atm. JMO :gaah:

 

[Cherwell]

One thing that's tickled me a bit. A jury of ten women and one man, and it's the man who is chosen as foreman, er foreperson!
I bet there are wimmin all over the internet getting their knickers in a twist over that! :floorlaugh: