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

[Lady Demelza]

http://m.askthe.police.uk/content/Q766.htm?viewsinglecontentelementid=25554
I don't think you can have a stun gun in the UK let alone have purchased one in your own name. As I said, they were most likely gained illegally. In reference to it being in SH's name,I haven't sen that but doubt it's correct.

 

[epiphany]

Thanks Alyce yes she could be sitting there watching tv at that age I was thinking along the lines of if she wandered and see something she shouldn't have done would SH have took that risk?

As sick as it may be, actually the way many sociopath/s operate and think: Would I/We deliberately murder Becky with our young child downstairs in the home?

Well, he admits that he planned to kidnap Becky with his wife and child downstairs in order to teach her a lesson. May be thinking, one or both of them, who would believe we would try this with our child in tow? Let's go for it.

Had she admitted to her involvement after the fact--the dismemberment & cleanup, I'd be more inclined to doubt her involvement and participation in kidnap plan. But having difficulty. She's more bonded to him than the child imo

 

[epiphany]

Except they were bought in SH name...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Just adding link:

<snip>

In court: Jon Kay, BBC News

Two stun guns were found at home of Mr Matthews and Miss Hoare, the court was told. Prosecution said they were ordered in name of Shauna Phillips

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-34464909

 

[sar2them1984]

Missed that sorry, im intrigued as to where u can buy them in the UK and have to give ur name? I thought u couldn't purchase them here in the UK? Not being facetious just must have missed something?

You can purchase them online...I saw a documentary about it not long ago

I've also just Googled "buy taser online uk" and had hundreds of hits so I'm guessing it's actually fairly easy..illegal yes but very easy

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Lady Demelza]

Even if both of them were psychopaths I still can't get my head around why their child would be there, surely that would be a massive logistical hindrance? A real inconvenience. I don't think we are dealing with a ted bundy intelligence here. It makes no sense. How easy is it for a 2/3 yr old to say "Aunty Becky hurt" "Aunty Becky poorly "?

 

[sar2them1984]

Buy all accounts the child was always with them .. perhaps it was a case of necessity rather wanting the child to be around

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Lady Demelza]

You can purchase them online...I saw a documentary about it not long ag

I've also just Googled "buy taser online uk" and had hundreds of hits so I'm guessing it's actually fairly easy..illegal yes but very easy

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Thanks, that clears that up&#128522;

 

[Lady Demelza]

Buy all accounts the child was always with them .. perhaps it was a case of necessity rather wanting the child to be around

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

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.

 

[Lola68]

Oh I'm not disputing in the slightest that she knew what had happened. You have to be one special person not to. She's fully implicated in that bit but was she involved in the murder? Know what was happening but didn't take part? Or was completely ignorant until after the fact...That's the sticking point for me

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

My thoughts exactly - I very much doubt she was completely ignorant of the 'plan', more that she went along with it without thinking it through or knowing what the likely conclusion would be

 

[eneri12]

Maybe NM has made up the mask thing, or even the whole kidnap plot in some bizarre attempt to protect SH? Hes taking all the wrap for it and hasn't implicated her once. I wonder how easy it would be to prosecute her without all the cctv that shows she went with him to purchase the materials they used to hide RWs body. I'm going to put it out there and say I don't think they will find her guilty of murder just going on what we've heard so far but obviously that could change. I just think to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that she was directly involved in the killing will be very difficult. Just MOO

 

[sar2them1984]

Eneri I agree. I know it's early in the trial but unless they pull something out of the bag I just can't see a conviction for the murder charge. .. the other charges yes as the evidence is more cut and dry but murder....it's going to be difficult

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[eneri12]

Yeah I was going to add that I think guilty on the other charges but not murder. It's still early days though but as you say, it's going to be difficult.

 

[sar2them1984]

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.

I personally think that there was a plan to kidnap Becky but not necessarily that day. Something happened which made them take a more opportunistic approach, maybe finding out AG was at hospital which meant they had to take the child. Might also be the reason why they bought the batteries for the stun guns on the way to Beckys home

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[epiphany]

From memory, the house was the right hand side of a semi ( as you would look at it from the street ).
The front door was to the right side of the house, with a largish window to the left, so I would assume this was the living room.
SH says that the kitchen is * half way down the hall * so either the kitchen is directly behind the living room ( so looking out to the back garden ) or it is down the hall on the right side of the house ( again imagining that you are looking at the house from the street ) , so in that case, the window would be looking out to the right side of the house, or to the back garden, or perhaps there are two windows.

There was something today ( NMs statement ? ) where he talked about SH going into the kitchen and then out to the garden - I know it is not conclusive but it sounded like the door to the garden leads off the kitchen.

^^ RBBM

So 2 doors in Becky's home. Door from kitchen leads to garden and then there's the front door:

From SH's interview--

She said: 'I think we got there about 11-ish. I heard music from upstairs. I went into the kitchen to get a cigarette and went through to the garden.

'Probably within 15 or 20 minutes I came back into the kitchen to get a drink and wash my hands and I heard the front door slam.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-Becky-Watts-laughed-police-interview.html


Where's the stairway...not that close to the kitchen? IF so, easy to have plan to kidnap Becky from home, transport down the stairs and into vehicle while child watching TV or while child with SH in garden. Somewhat risky with child in other room, but risky is often part of the Thrill.

 

[sar2them1984]

^^ RBBM

So 2 doors in Becky's home. Door from kitchen leads to garden and then there's the front door:

From SH's interview--

She said: 'I think we got there about 11-ish. I heard music from upstairs. I went into the kitchen to get a cigarette and went through to the garden.

'Probably within 15 or 20 minutes I came back into the kitchen to get a drink and wash my hands and I heard the front door slam.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-Becky-Watts-laughed-police-interview.html


Where's the stairway...not that close to the kitchen? IF so, easy to have plan to kidnap Becky from home, transport down the stairs and into vehicle while child watching TV. Somewhat risky with child in other room, but risky is often part of the Thrill.

All depends on the layout of the house I guess...also is the child used to being left alone in front of TV? Much more likely to stay put and not make a fuss if so...

A lot seems to have been made about the child being in the garden with SH almost as if the child was taken out of the way.

Seems to me that if that's the case then in a weird kind of way they're trying to protect the child I. E taking it away from what's about to happen, acting normal afterwards..I'm guessing the dismemberment took place at night when child asleep. Also NMs willingness to take the whole blame is almost an attempt to keep the child with its mom..not sure how well I'm putting this across..

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Cherwell]

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.

I agree, this is exactly what I've been thinking. It seems more likely that he either made a move on Becky and she resisted, or there was a violent quarrel which ended in her death. Let's not forget the cause of death was suffocation. He might have pushed her face down on the bed, or pinned her down with a pillow to stop her screaming. And this explanation would sound a lot more plausible than the kidnap story, so it's difficult at this stage to see why he hasn't offered it.

 

[Lola68]

And possibly she thought Becky was still alive when they drove back to their house that night (if this was the original plan), which might explain why they ordered takeaway, had a 'normal' night etc. I imagine Matthews would be pretty panicked at this point - his behaviour in B&Q doesn't make it look like a calculated, preplanned murder (tho I accept he could just be stupid/not thought things through). But I'm veering towards thinking that Shauna didn't know he'd killed her until the following day, hence the apparent arguing that was heard by neighbours.

But equally I find it very hard to believe that Shauna was completely ignorant of the whole thing (there was a dead body in her house?!) - why would Matthews claim she had nothing to do with it? Could he actually be very loyal/protective of Shauna? Or did Shauna threaten to tell the police what actually happened if he didn't absolve her of responsibility? Could they be putting their child first? (perhaps for the first time)

Who is manipulating who??

 

[sar2them1984]

I agree, this is exactly what I've been thinking. It seems more likely that he either made a move on Becky and she resisted, or there was a violent quarrel which ended in her death. Let's not forget the cause of death was suffocation. He might have pushed her face down on the bed, or pinned her down with a pillow to stop her screaming. And this explanation would sound a lot more plausible than the kidnap story, so it's difficult at this stage to see why he hasn't offered it.

Exactly some of the information given is so far fetched that actually you start to think there may be some truth in them. If they were excuses then why not just make up a more belivable story

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[sar2them1984]

And possibly she thought Becky was still alive when they drove back to their house that night (if this was the original plan), which might explain why they ordered takeaway, had a 'normal' night etc. I imagine Matthews would be pretty panicked at this point - his behaviour in B&Q doesn't make it look like a calculated, preplanned murder (tho I accept he could just be stupid/not thought things through). But I'm veering towards thinking that Shauna didn't know he'd killed her until the following day, hence the apparent arguing that was heard by neighbours.

But equally I find it very hard to believe that Shauna was completely ignorant of the whole thing (there was a dead body in her house?!) - why would Matthews claim she had nothing to do with it? Could he actually be very loyal/protective of Shauna? Or did Shauna threaten to tell the police what actually happened if he didn't absolve her of responsibility? Could they be putting their child first? (perhaps for the first time)

Who is manipulating who??

She knew for certain what had happened by the time AG got home imo .. certainly by the afternoon when LO visited

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[eneri12]

And possibly she thought Becky was still alive when they drove back to their house that night (if this was the original plan), which might explain why they ordered takeaway, had a 'normal' night etc. I imagine Matthews would be pretty panicked at this point - his behaviour in B&Q doesn't make it look like a calculated, preplanned murder (tho I accept he could just be stupid/not thought things through). But I'm veering towards thinking that Shauna didn't know he'd killed her until the following day, hence the apparent arguing that was heard by neighbours.

But equally I find it very hard to believe that Shauna was completely ignorant of the whole thing (there was a dead body in her house?!) - why would Matthews claim she had nothing to do with it? Could he actually be very loyal/protective of Shauna? Or did Shauna threaten to tell the police what actually happened if he didn't absolve her of responsibility? Could they be putting their child first? (perhaps for the first time)

Who is manipulating who??

Thinking along the same lines as this. It's so confusing! Would hate to be a juror on this case.