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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm still not convinced that SH took part in the actual murder - the clean up? Yes, probably -

Do I think that SH was probably controlled by NM? yes possibly.

I have a friend, she's a mum of 3, got a degree, a job in law and comes from a great family background and yet her partner is a very controlling alcoholic. She behaves completely differently when he's around than at any other time. Unless you've lived it, personally or watched it happen to a close friend or family I don't think you can possibly comprehend the complexities of that kind of relationship.

I think it's wrong to call anyone a monster and see them as a purely one dimensional character.
 
can they not get prints from the clingfilm wrappings?

In the prosecutions opening statement they said they found SH's DNA inside a knot of one of the bags used in disposal but we haven't heard any detail about this yet.
 
Thanks for this - I have to say this makes me even more puzzled as to why NM is telling this (rather farfetched, TBH) kidnap story involving masks and stun guns! From the link it seems that he's giving them enough to get a whole life sentence (use of weapons, murder of child involving abduction, etc) whereas if he'd just said he and Becky had an argument which got out of hand while SH was outside having a cigarette, he'd be facing a lesser sentence, and it would be much easier to believe that SH wasn't involved in the actual murder at all. It also may have prevented the prosecution bringing in the threesome evidence as it wouldn't be relevant (even if it's ended up helping SH).

Even if the kidnap story were true, I really can't understand why he hasn't made up a less incriminating story - as they're the only two witnesses to what happened, they could've said anything. It doesn't make sense...

Could it be because NM or SH used the stun gun, this rules out a random argument that got out of hand? NM wouldn't know what forensics could reveal at the time he gave his statement.
Also, I think NM liked giving the scenario of snatching Becky to 'teach her a lesson for disrespecting his mother', as if it's a normal and innocent thing to do. Bizarre! JMO
 
The witness had threesome with SH and NM since 2014.


The Breeze SouthWest ‏@breezesouthwest 2h2 hours ago
#BeckyWatts trial: Court hears the witness had a sexual relationship with NM and SH from 2014.

Ah so SH was 19 or 20.
 
ITV Becky Trial ‏@ITVBeckyTrial 2m2 minutes ago

Jury was also able to hold the duplicate saw to "feel the weight of it"

Presumably his fibromyalgia wasn't giving too much trouble when he used the saw then.
 
This is how I see it. SH stoked NM's fantasies started by underage *advertiser censored*, in attempt to please she texts him suggestively about abductions. SH attempts to initiate a 3some with the girl from NM's work, but it comes to nothing. NM feels frustrated. Meanwhile SH dislikes becky, feels she is draining money from parents which is rightfully SH & NM's (hence talk about wills, clothes, becky not respecting electrical items she was bought). NM and SH discuss abducting a school girl, buy stun guns x2 and handcuffs. NM is reaching a sexual frustration peak as missed opportunities (girl in the shop) and SH feeding hatred of becky into his ear (jealousy, as she is aware NM has some sexual attraction to Becky.) Something ignites NM into action (??? maybe to be released after the trial) and after he discoveres Anje is going to hospital leaving Becky alone, he takes this opportunity. SH willingly wanting to see Becky damaged (rape/violent abduction is probable). They enter the house, NM full of adrenaline goes straight upstairs with mask on - not thinking becky will instantly recognise him due to his short height. Becky starts screaming, shouting down to SH and fighting. With no tools to help subdue her (handcuffs and stuns downstairs) and B recognising him (he wasn't counting on this) further inflaming NM's frustration, he smothers her to "teach her a lesson" that he is in control of the situation and that she is not to stop his plans. Killing B is further than their initial plan,however hatred of becky and adrenaline, plus obsession with NM means SH readily accepts the situation and plan the disposal etc. They put body into the boot of the car and sit down to discuss their alibi and exit plan. They return home, research on their phones (how to get rid of a body) and attempt to cut her up with a knife (back of leg wound) and realise it's harder than first thought. Stabbing abdomen in frustration and annoyance that Becky has ruined their perfect fantasy. NM buys saw and dismembers. SH enjoying their shared secret (jokey text about being "long at work lol" when buying saw) NM Contacts friends who willingly help, thinking it's drugs or stolen items, (realising its not pretty quickly, but it's too late, they have already implicated themselves by fingerprints on the bags, so sit tight). Police become suspicious because NM and SH do not help and have bleached bathroom in messy house and last people to see her alive. then fingerprint in blood seals the deal. SH can act coldly as she feels justified that B has died, the threat is out of her hands, and this joint act binds NM and SH irrevocably together, also motive is to keep them together so she will do anything. Modern day Wests or Hindley/ Brady.

I don't know (possibly because I'm not a psychopath) but wouldn't it have been easier to have just pretended it was a joke, once the mask slipped and she recognised him. He could have just told anyone that Becky informed, that he was just having a laugh and she was over-reacting. Did being recognised really leave him with no choice but to kill her .... if at that point he hadn't done anything else to her? That is based on just him being in the room.

If SH was up there as well, and taking part, then I can see that it would be harder to make out it was a joke, and harder to explain what exactly had just happened.
 
Could be that he knew theyd discover the kidnap conversations.

Plus remember police had evidence that one of them had watched a video of a rape where a girl was restrained with a hand over her mouth.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...urder-trial-hears-teenager-cut-power-saw.html


On their own, I can't see those things being strong enough to support a conspiracy to kidnap charge, especially because the prosecution accepts Becky wasn't actually kidnapped or sexually assaulted. By far the strongest evidence of the kidnap plan is that NM claims there was a kidnap plan! Which is what makes it so puzzling...
 
As a fibro sufferer when I first read this I was how the hell was he lumping the poor girl around I'm pretty sure with all that had gone on he would have a flare!
 
I'm still not convinced that SH took part in the actual murder - the clean up? Yes, probably -

Do I think that SH was probably controlled by NM? yes possibly.

I have a friend, she's a mum of 3, got a degree, a job in law and comes from a great family background and yet her partner is a very controlling alcoholic. She behaves completely differently when he's around than at any other time. Unless you've lived it, personally or watched it happen to a close friend or family I don't think you can possibly comprehend the complexities of that kind of relationship.

I think it's wrong to call anyone a monster and see them as a purely one dimensional character.


I could go either way. Although we're hearing that NM was controlling, SH seems to be the instigator when it comes to contacting the girl they both liked and also telling NM about attractive girls she'd seen that she wanted to knock out and bring home.
 
Presumably his fibromyalgia wasn't giving too much trouble when he used the saw then.

Yes! NM, such a liar! He probably told the witness this to get her sympathy to sleep with him.
 
I don't know (possibly because I'm not a psychopath) but wouldn't it have been easier to have just pretended it was a joke, once the mask slipped and she recognised him. He could have just told anyone that Becky informed, that he was just having a laugh and she was over-reacting. Did being recognised really leave him with no choice but to kill her .... if at that point he hadn't done anything else to her? That is based on just him being in the room.

If SH was up there as well, and taking part, then I can see that it would be harder to make out it was a joke, and harder to explain what exactly had just happened.


And one thing we haven't seen on the list of evidence so far is the mask. The DIY masks mentioned wouldn't have been any use for disguising a person and were bought afterwards . So I hope they ask him where the mask is that he claims to have worn?
 
I'm still not convinced that SH took part in the actual murder - the clean up? Yes, probably -

Do I think that SH was probably controlled by NM? yes possibly.

I have a friend, she's a mum of 3, got a degree, a job in law and comes from a great family background and yet her partner is a very controlling alcoholic. She behaves completely differently when he's around than at any other time. Unless you've lived it, personally or watched it happen to a close friend or family I don't think you can possibly comprehend the complexities of that kind of relationship.

I think it's wrong to call anyone a monster and see them as a purely one dimensional character.

I somewhat agree, but your friend hasn't helped her husband to commit rape and murder and I'm sure she wouldn't. To exonerate SH from not seeking help before NM got to Becky, ring the police while he was up in her room, is just utterly wrong imo.
There are many here who've been in those shoes, an adult makes choices, and SH made hers. JMO
 
Bit of a puzzle though. If SH ( or rather her defence ) is going down the SH was controlled and totally submissive route then surely SH would do whatever NM told her to do, including taking part in the killing.
Or are we supposed to believe that SH was so submissive that she asked no questions about anything NM did over those 4 days and managed not to need to use the bathroom during all that time because NM told her not to ?

I'm not buying that she was so scared of him she went along with it. I'd be far more scared of living with a psycho who had a dead body in the house for 3 days. She had ample opportunity to get help for herself if she really was scared of him .... when he was out buying the saw, she could have phoned the police and told them what he had done (especially if she was innocent of all of it).
 
I could go either way. Although we're hearing that NM was controlling, SH seems to be the instigator when it comes to contacting the girl they both liked and also telling NM about attractive girls she'd seen that she wanted to knock out and bring home.
I think sexual fantasies are a huge leap from putting them into action.
Some women have Rape fantasies (not my idea of fun personally) and they may even role play with a partner but I doubt they put themselves in a position of it happening in real life.

Also, it's VERY easy to read words on a page, a text, a Facebook comment and misconstrue it.

I'm keeping an open mind until after the verdict and fall out because until then we only know half of a story in my opinion.
 
Presumably his fibromyalgia wasn't giving too much trouble when he used the saw then.
Liking this isn't enough - I thought exactly the same. It was bad enough to make him feel inadequate but wasn't giving him any trouble when he had to over power, kill and dismember a girl all on his own...

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
 
On their own, I can't see those things being strong enough to support a conspiracy to kidnap charge, especially because the prosecution accepts Becky wasn't actually kidnapped or sexually assaulted. By far the strongest evidence of the kidnap plan is that NM claims there was a kidnap plan! Which is what makes it so puzzling...


BIB
When I first saw the kidnap charge, I thought this term was being used because NM and SH had tried, forcibly, to take Becky from her house to theirs ? I thought it was just how the charge had to be worded.

Clearly, from the text info, I realise that there was an actual fantasy re kidnap - but why on earth use it , when a simple argument that got out of hand would have been a much more straightforward explanation.
Although, as Prime Suspect says, perhaps in NMs world, this is the normal kind of thing to do when you want to teach someone a lesson !
 
A lot of good points there.

The way I see it NM was sexually attracted to teeange school girls. Once SH could no longer fufill that role herself she could either lose him to one or join him in his fantasies and bring one/them into the relationship . Would be interesting to know how old the friend was when she joined them in a threesome. I think SH was doing things to keep him rather than to please or obey him.

Witness was 17, SH was 16.
 
I somewhat agree, but your friend hasn't helped her husband to commit rape and murder and I'm sure she wouldn't. To exonerate SH from not seeking help before NM got to Becky, ring the police while he was up in her room, is just utterly wrong imo.
There are many here who've been in those shoes, an adult makes choices, and SH made hers. JMO
Since when is it fact that NM raped anyone?

and you know what, she's (my friend) has done many things, that you or I wouldn't just to keep her ship on an even keel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
289
Total visitors
465

Forum statistics

Threads
608,873
Messages
18,246,914
Members
234,478
Latest member
moonfoundation
Back
Top