GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #5

[sar2them1984]

Ah thank you, I was hoping we would hear whether or not they knew about the appointment and about Becky being at home on her own.


If this had been a plan of NM's to kidnap Becky and SH wasn't involved at all, I wonder why SH was there. From NM's point of view wouldn't it have made much more sense to say he could take the cake tin and leave SH at home with the child.

Quite a risk of SH catching him in the act if she is there with him.

Unless the kidnap plan was hatched between the two of them and SH had a role, or wanted in particular to be there.

Her wanting to be involved makes sense considering the stun guns were bought in one of her names

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[sar2them1984]

It's a hallway.

My bad - I thought she said corridor in the video but it was late so I may be mistaken

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[sar2them1984]

I do think there was a fantasy discussed involving kidnapping RW, they both had a shared sexual interest in young females that much we know from court. The intent was there definitely but possibly NM decided to seize the opportunity when it presented?

I'm guessing though after more thinking that SH knew that the kidnapping plot was due to take place that morning,after all they stopped on the way to get batteries for the stun gun. Would be interested to know who went in and purchased them

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[mrazda71]

I'm not thinking too much regarding "the stun guns were bought in her name'" - it could just be that NM bought them using either an eBay account in SH's name or using a PayPal account in her name or he just got them sent in her name as she's the one most likely to be at home to receive the parcel.

 

[sar2them1984]

This is just a recording of what he said after his arrest. I'm expecting a refined timeline and story from him, and hoping to infer his intent from that. I can't imagine he's sticking by his original statement, and trying a manslaughter plea. His barrister wouldn't have any of it.

This was as you say his first interview - according to this Becky was alive and left the house that morning so yeah we're going to hear the alternate version at some point

I wonder whether he confessed because the police were onto him and the net was closing or whether he was presented with some finding which made him confess

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[sar2them1984]

I agree, their accounts match too closely. Imo, NM and SH are consummate liars, with years of experience at deceiving family and friends. SH being with NM since 15 yrs old, these kind of twisted relationships, I always imagine is like a cult.

As SH has visited the home numerous times, it's easy to recapture a scene in your mind that you've put into practice so often, maybe even within days before the fatal day.

I'm in two minds at present like most here, either SH, with child, remained out of sight and hearing until Becky would be subdued and placed in car (SH knowing full well the plan though).

or, SH gave her child a treat, sat her in front of t.v./put her down for nap on sofa, then she went upstairs and chatted with Becky while NM crept up behind and grabbed her. He is quite short, doesn't have the reach a bigger man would have so it was difficult, I'm assuming. Anything like this scenario is near impossible to prove unless NM changes his mind and gives another version of events.

Becky fought for her life, she KNEW this was serious and his threats to kill her were now being played out. He could have released her at anytime and said it was a joke, a cruel one at that but no.

Also, I'm not buying it was accidental, NM's plan was to kill Becky at one stage after abusing her.

NM allegedly stabbed Becky 15 times after death, the rage must have been electrifying. Stabbing can be a substitute for rape also. Was SH present? Did she participate?

It will be interesting when it's revealed how much physical evidence (fingerprints, DNA contamination) on tools, Becky's body and injuries etc. forensics has picked up on by SH.

JMO

Like others have suggested I assumed the stabbing was merely for practical purposes I. E draining of body fluids

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[sar2them1984]

I'm not thinking too much regarding "the stun guns were bought in her name'" - it could just be that NM bought them using either an eBay account in SH's name or using a PayPal account in her name or he just got them sent in her name as she's the one most likely to be at home to receive the parcel.

Hmm true but if you were going to buy them for nefarious purposes but didn't want your other half to be implicated then you wouldn't purchase them in her name..

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[mrazda71]

At the point of purchase maybe the nefarious plans were only ever a fantasy.

He also strikes me as thick as 2 short planks .. "obviously"

 

[mrazda71]

And before anyone says that you don't buy things for a project you don't plan to carry out - I have half the contents of Hobbycraft in my house which I know if I'll never live long enough to use them all

Also, they may well have been purchase for any other reason, protection if NM was involved in drug dealing (though we have yet to hear from anywhere other than 'Retribution' that drugs were an issue)

 

[sar2them1984]

I didn't realise you could buy stun guns so cheaply - they start from around 15 quid upwards...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Bluey]

I wonder why they didn't use the stun guns - they obviously intended to as they bought batteries for them on the way...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

I seem to remember reading that he has confessed to taking a stun weapon with him. I need to try and find that.

Begs the question, why did they purchase two stun guns? One each makes sense. I suppose they could've been bogof?

I do wonder why they were left at their house and not hidden at Barton Court, perhaps took them, but didn't use them.

Maybe they planned to use them, but not in the actual kidnapping itself?

Edit, hadn't finished what I wanted to say.

 

[bos]

There's lots I can't get my head around but why would NM have claimed to have strangled BW when suffocation either by clamping hand over nose and mouth for too long or being put in a bag with no air would perhaps lend a bit more credence to his manslaughter defence?

Like many of you, I am not 100% sure of SH being involved in the murder but it was pointed out to me earlier in this thread that if the planned kidnapping was a joint enterprise, then BW's death could have been foreseen as a possible/likely consequence & she should therefore be found guilty.

 

[sar2them1984]

I keep wondering what part, if any, SHs pregnancy had in this.

I've had a look through all the recent online newspaper reporting on the trial and they all say SH "who was pregnant at the time". Add that to the word in the local area if how far gone she was at the time it doesn't seem impossible that she was a good couple of months pregnant (she doesn't look it particularly in the video, aside from putting on some face weight but then again my SIL didn't show at all until the last few weeks of her pregnancy). Is that why she didn't participate (if we agree with her story of being outside) because of being pregnant - perhaps she was worried of getting injure!?

Was that also the reason why NM shouldered all of the blame thinking she'd get off Scott free and be able to keep the children? I don't know there's something about the pregnancy which is niggling me.

I'm also suprised that the press haven't made more of the fact tha she was pregnant at the time

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[sar2them1984]

There's lots I can't get my head around but why would NM have claimed to have strangled BW when suffocation either by clamping hand over nose and mouth for too long or being put in a bag with no air would perhaps lend a bit more credence to his manslaughter defence?

Like many of you, I am not 100% sure of SH being involved in the murder but it was pointed out to me earlier in this thread that if the planned kidnapping was a joint enterprise, then BW's death could have been foreseen as a possible/likely consequence & she should therefore be found guilty.

I'm also sure in the opening statements that the prosecution stated that cod was categorically not what NM stated it was...why lie about that when it's so easily disproved..

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Alyce]

I'mnot suggesting they wanted the child around but surely they would have had access to someone who would look after the child if this was a planned kidnap as NM has claimed? For me his excuses still sound odd, it really doesn't add up, it seems so much more opportunistic than planned , particularly the lack of planning and running around shopping after the fact. The mask thing just sounds odd.

My guess is they didn't have anyone to look after the child. From what I read, pre trial, SH stuck to NM like glue, went everywhere with him, even accompanied him on his pizza delivery job. Her on line stuff ( not sure if I can mention this ) was all messages to him, no one else. I dont think she had any friends.
Also,as we now know, she was estranged from her mother and they could hardly leave the child with AG - so I dont think there was any alternative to having the child with them all the time.
Far as I know, SH did not work, so no reason ( or possibly spare money ) to have child in daycare.
Neighbours were quoted - pre trial - as saying that NM and SH didnt really talk to anyone in the neighbourhood - kept themselves to themselves - so doubt SH had anyone to turn to for babysitting facilities.

I agree re the opportunistic element - I dont think this was planned for that particular day - and I dont believe they had the stun guns with them, simply because it was not planned. Plus, as I have said earlier, I think they took the opportunity and invited Becky back to their house - easier to do this if she willingly got into the car with them. Stun gun could be used later.

 

[Clio]

I seem to remember reading that he has confessed to taking a stun weapon with him. I need to try and find that.

Begs the question, why did they purchase two stun guns? One each makes sense. I suppose they could've been bogof?

I do wonder why they were left at their house and not hidden at Barton Court, perhaps took them, but didn't use them.

Maybe they planned to use them, but not in the actual kidnapping itself?

Edit, hadn't finished what I wanted to say.

He admits taking both guns to Becky's house.

After his arrest Matthews told police he had taken two stun guns to Becky’s house in order to kidnap her and ‘teach her a lesson’ for being selfish and treating his mother badly.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6585167

The officer also told the court how Matthews described his and Hoare's movements on 19 February - the day of Becky's death.

The jury heard that he told DC Clare French that he and Hoare had let themselves into Becky's family house using a key Becky's stepmother had left out for them.

http://www.itv.com/news/west/story/2015-10-07/becky-watts-trial-day-2/

Becky returned home on the morning of the 19th before AG was picked up and taken to hospital so why would AG leave a key out for them if Becky was home and could let them in? I wonder if they were expecting the house to be empty and were surprised when Becky was home? I don't think the guns could have been used as Becky is reported to have fought for her life. Perhaps there wasn't time to use the stun guns and that's why they weren't disposed of later?

 

[Alyce]

That really stood out for me too - why say something is planned when it sounds completely opportunistic?? Much easier to say it was heat of the moment and something went wrong - and then they panicked. Stupid people generally get caught.

Perhaps because NM thought it sounded not as bad if he said he was only going to do a * pretend* kidnap of Becky, just to teach her a lesson for being so unkind to his mother ........ rather than admit the truth, which was that he saw his opportunity to seriously abuse Becky on that day.

 

[Alyce]

Ah thank you, I was hoping we would hear whether or not they knew about the appointment and about Becky being at home on her own.


If this had been a plan of NM's to kidnap Becky and SH wasn't involved at all, I wonder why SH was there. From NM's point of view wouldn't it have made much more sense to say he could take the cake tin and leave SH at home with the child.

Quite a risk of SH catching him in the act if she is there with him.

Unless the kidnap plan was hatched between the two of them and SH had a role, or wanted in particular to be there.

SH was there to assist ( IMO )

 

[Alyce]

Hmm. Very good point.

This joins nicely with something I thought about earlier... We are reading reports of what the jury are hearing, a tape of what NM/SH said during initial post-arrest interviews. There's nothing as yet to say that either will stick to those early statements, whether they intend to deviate or not, or whether the changes they might make are helpful to them.

I thought that interview with SH was on Thursday Feb 26 - before they were arrested ?

I agree, it will be most interesting to see what changes - if anything - they make to these initial statements

 

[Alyce]

I agree, their accounts match too closely. Imo, NM and SH are consummate liars, with years of experience at deceiving family and friends. SH being with NM since 15 yrs old, these kind of twisted relationships, I always imagine is like a cult.

As SH has visited the home numerous times, it's easy to recapture a scene in your mind that you've put into practice so often, maybe even within days before the fatal day.

I'm in two minds at present like most here, either SH, with child, remained out of sight and hearing until Becky would be subdued and placed in car (SH knowing full well the plan though).

or, SH gave her child a treat, sat her in front of t.v./put her down for nap on sofa, then she went upstairs and chatted with Becky while NM crept up behind and grabbed her. He is quite short, doesn't have the reach a bigger man would have so it was difficult, I'm assuming. Anything like this scenario is near impossible to prove unless NM changes his mind and gives another version of events.

Becky fought for her life, she KNEW this was serious and his threats to kill her were now being played out. He could have released her at anytime and said it was a joke, a cruel one at that but no.

Also, I'm not buying it was accidental, NM's plan was to kill Becky at one stage after abusing her.

NM allegedly stabbed Becky 15 times after death, the rage must have been electrifying. Stabbing can be a substitute for rape also. Was SH present? Did she participate?

It will be interesting when it's revealed how much physical evidence (fingerprints, DNA contamination) on tools, Becky's body and injuries etc. forensics has picked up on by SH.

JMO

Totally agree. I think SH was a full participant in everything that happened.

Also, re the going into the garden for a cigarette and taking the child out to feed the rabbit. Probably something SH had done many times, but I dont believe it happened on that day.
If they decided to take advantage of the opportunity that had arisen - Becky in the house on her own - then I believe they acted immediately. They did not know how long AG would be out of the house, the quicker they could get Becky to leave with them, the better.

Re the stabbing, post mortem, I am thinking that could have been NMs idea that this would aid disposal of the body - drainage ?