GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #7

[bos]

Tortoise;12131234]I'm thinking the police probably emptied the house of clutter, performed their forensic analysis of an empty bathroom, and then put everything back after. I remember them saying that one of the stun guns on a downstairs table that looked like a torch had been loaded into their removal van. I doubt the police then forensically examined all the items removed, that would be a mammoth task. Could have been evidence of minute blood spatter they missed in this way.

This is what I feel too; when one of the CSI people earlier in the trial was questioned by the defence re possible cross contamination and the changing of gloves when examining contents of the shed, she said something along the lines of (paraphrasing) when deemed necessary, when there was an item particularly rich in DNA. That underlines that there is a judgement call involved as to what is likely to yield DNA evidence and therefore be swabbed. Whatever was in the bathroom after the arrests was likely to have been tested by the police but there is no reason to suppose that those things were there if/when dismemberment took place. We've seen boot liners hidden in the back of cookers and stun guns down the back of their bed so although the majority of evidence relating to dismemberment was found in KD and JP's shed, I do believe it possible that they could have moved stuff about within the house after dismemberment. If the police had viewed every single item in that house as potentially yielding blood/DNA evidence, they'd have had to place every single item into evidence bags before removing from the house and putting it into the van to prevent cross contamination.

Although it's surprising that no evidence of blood was found in their bathroom, it's not impossible given thorough covering/cleaning/degradation through time though I personally would have thought that the plastic used to cover would have been found in the same way packaging/receipts were, unless they were then used to wrap Becky's body parts.

At the moment, if I were on the jury, I couldn't find SH guilty on conspiracy to kidnap or murder but could on perverting the course of justice and preventing burial. MOO

 

[CoverMeCagney]

https://www.facebook.com/UK.database?fref=ts

No coverage today from UK & Eire Database:

Due to an unforeseen emergency I will not be in a position to bring you live updates of the Becky Watts murder trial.
However I will definitely post a detailed update of today's proceedings at 5pm.
So sorry. I will resume with the trial updates tomorrow. Apologies.

Here's the ITV Twitter feed for the case, nothing happening as yet this morning
https://twitter.com/itvbeckytrial

 

[Tortoise]

This is what I feel too; when one of the CSI people earlier in the trial was questioned by the defence re possible cross contamination and the changing of gloves when examining contents of the shed, she said something along the lines of (paraphrasing) when deemed necessary, when there was an item particularly rich in DNA. That underlines that there is a judgement call involved as to what is likely to yield DNA evidence and therefore be swabbed. Whatever was in the bathroom after the arrests was likely to have been tested by the police but there is no reason to suppose that those things were there if/when dismemberment took place. We've seen boot liners hidden in the back of cookers and stun guns down the back of their bed so although the majority of evidence relating to dismemberment was found in KD and JP's shed, I do believe it possible that they could have moved stuff about within the house after dismemberment. If the police had viewed every single item in that house as potentially yielding blood/DNA evidence, they'd have had to place every single item into evidence bags before removing from the house and putting it into the van to prevent cross contamination.

Although it's surprising that no evidence of blood was found in their bathroom, it's not impossible given thorough covering/cleaning/degradation through time though I personally would have thought that the plastic used to cover would have been found in the same way packaging/receipts were, unless they were then used to wrap Becky's body parts.

At the moment, if I were on the jury, I couldn't find SH guilty on conspiracy to kidnap or murder but could on perverting the course of justice and preventing burial. MOO

It is a puzzle that the police don't appear to have found the plastic coverings/rubble sacks and tape, if they were used to mask the bathroom.

I would say these would have been the last items to come down, after the completion of packaging the body parts. Lets say the body parts had been put in cases ready for collection by the boys with the van. NM and SH were in a hurry to leave the house that day because the police were calling them and wanting to do a search. So they rushed off to SH' step-dads house, leaving the cases in the house, but not having had time to do their clean up of the bathroom.

Middle of the night comes / early hours of the morning and NM / SH chance going home to meet the boys with the van and load it up.

Following morning before 10am NM texts Anjie to say the police have been and found nothing. But the police have found the bath sparkling, the bathroom window open and the door shut.

I would say they didn't go to bed that night. And that the wall coverings were stashed somewhere out of sight in the house with items piled on top. The police wouldn't have been looking for it and there was just too much stuff for them to even walk through most places.

Which means the plastic/tape was disposed of after the first search. I doubt they would have gone anywhere near the shed where the cases were being stored, so possibly dumped it in another bin somewhere en route to their newly found bolt-hole.

 

[TheBelgianDetective]

Just a thought and a bit of confusion.. What actual proof do they have that there was a sexual motive to this case on the part of the killers? I can see that the prosecution is painting a picture of 'sexual deviants' to the jury however we all know that there is usually a long history of sexual behaviour with minors if offenders are sexually attracted to younger people. The only evidence that her step brother was sexually attracted to teenagers is the fact he went out with SH when she was 14, but they have been together for many years. I'm sure he murdered her for many other reasons but his (and her) pattern of behaviour doesn't indicate a sexual motive.

Does anyone have more information on this?

 

[pinklilies]

https://twitter.com/siobhanrobbins

Is reporting Becky Trial. Starting 10.30am.

 

[Tortoise]

10:50
[h=3]Court resumes with first witness[/h]Proceedings are back underway at Bristol Crown Court.
The first witness today is a flatmate of Jamie Ireland who is accused of assisting an offender.
Simon Knight knew Ireland for “a number of years”.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6673031

 

[musicaljoke]

It is a puzzle that the police don't appear to have found the plastic coverings/rubble sacks and tape, if they were used to mask the bathroom.

I would say these would have been the last items to come down, after the completion of packaging the body parts. Lets say the body parts had been put in cases ready for collection by the boys with the van. NM and SH were in a hurry to leave the house that day because the police were calling them and wanting to do a search. So they rushed off to SH' step-dads house, leaving the cases in the house, but not having had time to do their clean up of the bathroom.

Middle of the night comes / early hours of the morning and NM / SH chance going home to meet the boys with the van and load it up.

Following morning before 10am NM texts Anjie to say the police have been and found nothing. But the police have found the bath sparkling, the bathroom window open and the door shut.

I would say they didn't go to bed that night. And that the wall coverings were stashed somewhere out of sight in the house with items piled on top. The police wouldn't have been looking for it and there was just too much stuff for them to even walk through most places.

Which means the plastic/tape was disposed of after the first search. I doubt they would have gone anywhere near the shed where the cases were being stored, so possibly dumped it in another bin somewhere en route to their newly found bolt-hole.

If I understand correctly, the police called the day before to say that they would be doing a search. Surely, if the police were already suspecting this couple, they would have posted a watch on the house during the night and would have the suspects' every move carefully tracked. The super-clean bathroom is befuddling.

 

[Tortoise]

ITV Becky Trial ‏@ITVBeckyTrial [video=twitter;656769796009271296]https://twitter.com/ITVBeckyTrial/status/656769796009271296[/video]
We're hearing from a friend of James Ireland - he's recounting a conversation about him 'helping a friend pick up some stuff' #beckywatts

 

[Tortoise]

If I understand correctly, the police called the day before to say that they would be doing a search. Surely, if the police were already suspecting this couple, they would have posted a watch on the house during the night and would have the suspects' every move carefully tracked. The super-clean bathroom is befuddling.

doesn't appear that they did see the white van collection, they only picked that up a lot later from CCTV

 

[edgedweller]

Just a thought and a bit of confusion.. What actual proof do they have that there was a sexual motive to this case on the part of the killers? I can see that the prosecution is painting a picture of 'sexual deviants' to the jury however we all know that there is usually a long history of sexual behaviour with minors if offenders are sexually attracted to younger people. The only evidence that her step brother was sexually attracted to teenagers is the fact he went out with SH when she was 14, but they have been together for many years. I'm sure he murdered her for many other reasons but his (and her) pattern of behaviour doesn't indicate a sexual motive.

Does anyone have more information on this?

There were texts between NM and SH about kidnapping teenage girls and bringing them home to their "attic". Also a rape film of a teenager on one of their devices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LBB]

Just a thought and a bit of confusion.. What actual proof do they have that there was a sexual motive to this case on the part of the killers? I can see that the prosecution is painting a picture of 'sexual deviants' to the jury however we all know that there is usually a long history of sexual behaviour with minors if offenders are sexually attracted to younger people. The only evidence that her step brother was sexually attracted to teenagers is the fact he went out with SH when she was 14, but they have been together for many years. I'm sure he murdered her for many other reasons but his (and her) pattern of behaviour doesn't indicate a sexual motive.

Does anyone have more information on this?

i was wondering the same. It doesn't seem sexually motivated to me, more motivated by anger and jealousy, although it does seem from the texts there was an interest in young girls.

I do wonder if in the openings of cases, some prosecuting barristers state things to plant the seed but then don't follow up. Perhaps because they believe that was what was happening but have no evidence of it or because they carried away maybe or perhaps just don't know their case that well yet. I wouldn't have thought this would be allowed though, however, In a case I was in court for, the prosecution outlined at the beginning that they would show one thing. When it came down to it, they couldn't show that at all. So for example toe prosecution said ''I'll show you jury, that X was selling on Y.'

When the final witness came on the stand (a police officer), the defence barrister said 'Did you find any evidence of x selling on y'. The police officer had to admit there was no evidence of this.

I wonder if this happens often. The defendant was found not guilty in that case.

MOO.

 

[Tortoise]

ITV Becky Trial ‏@ITVBeckyTrial [video=twitter;656770982292684800]https://twitter.com/ITVBeckyTrial/status/656770982292684800[/video]
Friend says JI saw both a male and a female at the address where he picked up 'some bags' and loaded them into the van #beckywatts

 

[still-searching]

ITV Becky Trial ‏@ITVBeckyTrial 18s18 seconds ago
Friend says JI saw both a male and a female at the address where he picked up 'some bags' and loaded them into the van #beckywatts

 

[pinklilies]

ITV Becky Trial ‏@ITVBeckyTrial [video=twitter;656770982292684800]https://twitter.com/ITVBeckyTrial/status/656770982292684800[/video]
Friend says JI saw both a male and a female at the address where he picked up 'some bags' and loaded them into the van #beckywatts

I wonder why it's the friend saying what JI saw and not JI himself.

 

[Tortoise]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins [video=twitter;656771215424663552]https://twitter.com/SiobhanRobbins/status/656771215424663552[/video]
Jamie said one of his friends got a phone call to go and help him move some stuff.Jamie (JI) used a work van to go and pick up some stuff.

 

[Tortoise]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins [video=twitter;656771367686270976]https://twitter.com/SiobhanRobbins/status/656771367686270976[/video]
Says JI went to pick it up from Barton Hill.Says JI saw a male and female at Barton Hill. Says JI put some bags into the van and drove off.

 

[edgedweller]

I wonder why it's the friend saying what he saw and not JI himself.

Yes, surely this is hearsay?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tortoise]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins [video=twitter;656771534091104256]https://twitter.com/SiobhanRobbins/status/656771534091104256[/video]
Knight says JI said he took them to a house in Southmead where he unloaded the bags and drove back to the house in Barton Hill.

 

[Callista]

Well that's interesting, especially if it was late at night (when someone would usually be asleep). How is SH going to explain that away?

Also, as I'm not a member of the criminal underworld I don't know how this sort of thing works, but presumably you ask *what* you are picking up as part of a job before agreeing to it, just to assess the risk if nothing else.

 

[Tortoise]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins [video=twitter;656772019858644992]https://twitter.com/SiobhanRobbins/status/656772019858644992[/video]
He said JI said he heard a female in a house shouting, telling the male to get out of the house.