GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #6

[ColourPurple]

Yes bear in mind the charges of 'MAKING Indecent Images of Children".......I am scared of what else has gone on!!

Although they did say they weren't in relation to Becky, I do wonder if their intention was to take photos. Memory cards would be so easy to hide or dispose of too.

SH's lawyer has labelled the texts as too trivial for her to be sending if she knew Becky was dead, and seems to be using the texts as proof of her innocence but if the memory cards were part of the overall "kidnap" plan then a text about them would be far from trivial. It would be something she'd want NM to know about, in case he was intending to buy some while he was out, thinking the ordered ones hadn't arrived in time.

 

[Tortoise]

Ahhh yes I remember seeing that now and not thinking much of it..so what's the mitigating factors do people think. .

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

sounds like SH has made an admission if that is the case

 

[ColourPurple]

Ahhh yes I remember seeing that now and not thinking much of it..so what's the mitigating factors do people think. .

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Random possibilities...learning difficulties, domestic abuse, post natal depression ?

 

[Tortoise]

I don't buy the lawyer's argument about the texts being too trivial. Sounds like grasping at straws. The texts show SH up for what she is if you ask me, all the more shocking that she's functioning normally with Becky's body lying in her bath.

 

[Cherwell]

Yes bear in mind the charges of 'MAKING Indecent Images of Children".......I am scared of what else has gone on!!

That just means viewing them on a computer. Not creating original images.

 

[Tortoise]

That just means viewing them on a computer. Not creating original images.

but it could also refer to taking photographs

 

[Insp.Dots]

Ahhh yes I remember seeing that now and not thinking much of it..so what's the mitigating factors do people think. .

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Yes, I've been thinking about that. Possibly that SH will say she was scared of him or something? We know when they were both arrested they were both very much 'together' in their defence. Since then she has had pregnancy issues, he is now refusing to look at her, though according to court so far is still taking all the blame. Her Lawyer is obviously going along the lines of 'it wasn't her fault'. He's a major crime barrister though his defense so far of her seems quite futile, picking at DNA contamination, taking the seriousness out of their text messages. It's his job to do his best obviously but I feel for him as from what the evidence is showing so far she has 'no defence'. I just hope she doesn't get off on a technicality. I go along with the 'tough' background and that she has possibly been groomed by SH from 14years old but she has had so many opportunities since before her arrest where she could have helped to put things right. Even her postings on Facebook when Becky went missing upset me, she posted all the ones that made it look like Becky had 'run-a-way' or took the limelight off them. Their helpfulness when the Police arrived, it makes my blood boil. From all I've seen she has said plenty about Becky's issues. NM was not with her in the police interview there was no pressure on her to talk about those things, yet she gave a sparkling performance. In my experience those who are under someones control are timid in their talking, they will say as little as possible. Usually as they are scared witless. All my own thoughts though Sar, I bet you wished you never asked now!!

 

[Insp.Dots]

but it could also refer to taking photographs

That's what I thought it's 'Making' not Possessing or downloading?

 

[Tortoise]

Ahhh yes I remember seeing that now and not thinking much of it..so what's the mitigating factors do people think. .

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

My guess is she will still deny any involvement in the murder and will say she found out during the dismemberment of the body and was scared for her own safety now knowing what NM was capable of.

 

[Insp.Dots]

When Becky was found there was clothes found were they all hers? I can't remember was just wondering what SH was wearing that day of the murder if there was any evidence on them and maybe they were stashed with Beckys remains:thinking:

I know the puffa jacket was hers. I think they took extra clothes of BW with the laptop and tablet etc to make it look like a runaway. Am guessing the clothes that were 'on hangers', perhaps a sign they did it in a hurry or why take hangers? I think there were slippers and boots too, but not sure which were Beckys. BW was actually wearing a leopard print onesie and Green Sweater as I remember.
Hopefully more will come out next week. The Police certainly had a ton of evidence to go through. Amazing that they got the case to Trial so quickly! MOO

 

[Insp.Dots]

sounds like SH has made an admission if that is the case

I did wonder that but would they not have said that at the beginning?

 

[Cherwell]

but it could also refer to taking photographs

That's what I thought it's 'Making' not Possessing or downloading?

You would think so, but it's a legal term. Someone posted a link about it upthread.

Here it is http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ry-2015-**ARRESTS**-6&p=12121510#post12121510

 

[Tortoise]

I did wonder that but would they not have said that at the beginning?

I did jury service in a murder trial and one of the defendants altered his defence midway through the trial. we as the jury were sent out of court during this and we were only informed when the defendant took the stand.

 

[Insp.Dots]

My guess is she will still deny any involvement in the murder and will say she found out during the dismemberment of the body and was scared for her own safety now knowing what NM was capable of.

I guess he could have told her something like : "it was an accident, but no-one would ever believe me. You HAVE to help etc etc" BUT and it's a big BUT she had the chance to tell the Police that at her arrest or after. I'm sure they would have been pretty blunt with her about what was coming IF they/she were charged. This was also before the body was found too, so Police no doubt would have been quite in depth with their questioning.
I imagine she would have been petrified on arrest, she isn't overly bright and would probably feel quite lost without Nathan beside her but, if innocent I don't understand why at that point she didn't breakdown and tell all?

 

[Insp.Dots]

I did jury service in a murder trial and one of the defendants altered his defence midway through the trial. we as the jury were sent out of court during this and we were only informed when the defendant took the stand.

Thank you, I got the feeling that the Jury hadn't been told anything and it was around the time they were sent out due to Legal wranglings. Will be interesting to see what occurs.

 

[Tortoise]

You would think so, but it's a legal term. Someone posted a link about it upthread.

Here it is http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ry-2015-**ARRESTS**-6&p=12121510#post12121510

thanks, but my point is it doesn't exclude taking the photos. It can be clicking on images etc but it can also be creating them yourself.

 

[Tortoise]

I guess he could have told her something like : "it was an accident, but no-one would ever believe me. You HAVE to help etc etc" BUT and it's a big BUT she had the chance to tell the Police that at her arrest or after. I'm sure they would have been pretty blunt with her about what was coming IF they/she were charged. This was also before the body was found too, so Police no doubt would have been quite in depth with their questioning.
I imagine she would have been petrified on arrest, she isn't overly bright and would probably feel quite lost without Nathan beside her but, if innocent I don't understand why at that point she didn't breakdown and tell all?

firstly I don't think she is innocent, so I don't think it did happen like that, and secondly she's probably put in a late change to her plea.

 

[Insp.Dots]

firstly I don't think she is innocent, so I don't think it did happen like that, and secondly she's probably put in a late change to her plea.

Yup, can't say I believe that could be true either. I think she is guilty as charged but think she may well throw whatever she can in to get out of it.

 

[ColourPurple]

Something that's puzzling me. I agree it's a stretch to believe SH didnt hear the circular saw (unless she has hearing difficulties or was heavily medicated with sleeping tablets) but how did the neighbours not hear it either? And with them describing SH and NM as very quiet usually, surely they'd notice the sound of a circular saw.

 

[Cherwell]

Yes, I went to comment and couldn't find it. Thanks Cherwell and Epiphany, I had no idea that it meant that I literally thought 'the taking of' photos'. Never realized it was so complicated!

It is, I'm still not quite sure about the terminology. I can't find a clear legal reference to originally creating (my words) a pornographic image. It looks like it might be as simple as "taking" a photograph! There's a whole spectrum of offences including publishing, distributing, possessing etc.

For an offence under section 1 of the PCA 1978 the prosecution has to prove:

That the defendant deliberately and/or knowingly either made, took, or permitted to be taken, distributed or showed indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs, or possessed them with a view to their being distributed or shown, published or caused to be published an advertisement for indecent photographs.

The photograph or pseudo-photograph was indecent. In both section 1 of the PCA 1978 and section 160 of the CJA 1988 a photograph includes an indecent film, or a copy of a photograph or film, or computer data capable of conversion into a photograph. See section 7(4) of the PCA 1978 and section 160(4) of the CJA 1988.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/indecent_photographs_of_children/