CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #16

[human]

Old WS'er but haven't posted since Casey Anthony. I've been watching for these to come up but so far nothing, so thought I'd pipe in. I hope you all can answer these or at least explore/discuss.
The biggest question is how many baby monitors did they have? Recently AB said the girls had separate bedrooms. CW says he saw SW on the baby monitor doing that horrible thing and he was able to see both girls. If only one monitor, why were the girls together at 2am instead of their own beds.
Another question... CW was fired from his company the same day he was arrested. Why? A company cannot fire someone just for having been arrested, can they? (Innocent until proven guilty). Anyone in HR to answer that? Do they have evidence against CW by way of gps or cameras? And why did CW's company pay for the funeral? That seems odd.
TIA

If Colorado is a right to work state, you can be fired for any reason except for race, religion and age, is it? Those are the Federally protected rights. Otherwise, you can be fired for no reason. I do not think there has to be any due process

 

[Jennifer17]

If Colorado is a right to work state, you can be fired for any reason except for race, religion and age, is it? Those are the Federally protected rights. Otherwise, you can be fired for no reason. I do not think there has to be any due process

Putting bodies of little girl in oil tanks that the company owned (and he confessed to) is probably reason enough, too.

 

[Inthedetails]

I wonder if his self-worth or identity took a hit when he went from working as a mechanic at the dealership to the oilfield?

If he did automotive in high school, and then went to auto tech school, and wanted to work for NASCAR---I would think that being a mechanic at a Ford dealership would be a good fit for him.

Did he get laid off from the dealership? Fired? He and SW both worked at the same dealership---did they both change jobs at the same time?

How long was he working for the oilfield.

I'm disappointed he wasn't knocking on the doors of nearby NASCAR for a job. Seems ideal for him.

jmo

 

[Inthedetails]

we need a delete button

 

[Misy]

Putting bodies of little girl in oil tanks that the company owned (and he confessed to) is probably reason enough, too.

But he confessed after he was arrested and talked with his dad. Also regarding the baby monitor, if only one (probably in Cece's room) and if all of that supposedly happened in a "moment" I think his story falls apart right off the bat.

 

[ZsaZsa]

That's what I'm thinking. I'm wondering if this ties into why LE thinks the little girls might have been killed first, as August 12-13 is listed for their deaths?

If they were killed in the clothes they wore on the 12th, to the party. As opposed to in their night clothes if killed during that night or early morning.

 

[tjredline]

If they were killed in the clothes they wore on the 12th, to the party. As opposed to in their night clothes if killed during that night or early morning.

I *think* the girls were in their pajamas when they were killed and I say that because the assumption is they were killed in their beds. With such a early bedtime, I would think they'd put on pajamas and then climb into bed. Of course this only works if they were in fact killed in their beds.

What time was the party again? And I wonder if they still napped.

 

[ZsaZsa]

So do you think that he mistakenly left the fitted sheet he’d used to move SW’s body at the work site, and did not realize it until he returned home to wash the sheets & make the bed?
He then panicked & decided to throw out the matching top sheet & pillowcases so the fitted sheet wouldn’t be able to be matched with anything in the home?
But then why would he miss getting that trash out on Tuesday?

I bet he didn't even know that it was in the trash. IMO Shannan put it there when she discovered someone else had been sleeping in her bed. CW thought she had taken the sheets and tossed them in the laundry, but she didn't want to ever use them again...
Had he noticed them he would have got rid of them, I am sure. He keeps getting tripped up in details.

 

[Sleutherfly]

I agree with the theory the grave was temporary til he could get her into a tank. It was probably much harder to carry dead weight up all those stairs than he’d imagined.

I'm a little behind as a took a bit of a break. Since the bed sheet was found at the property, I wonder if CW intentionally left it there to mark the site so he could go back to move her. LE found her pretty fast so I'm thinking that either the grave was very shallow or there was an obvious marker.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

I wonder if his self-worth or identity took a hit when he went from working as a mechanic at the dealership to the oilfield?

If he did automotive in high school, and then went to auto tech school, and wanted to work for NASCAR---I would think that being a mechanic at a Ford dealership would be a good fit for him.

Did he get laid off from the dealership? Fired? He and SW both worked at the same dealership---did they both change jobs at the same time?

I've always wondered about them both working at the dealership, and both of them leaving. And why? And did they both leave at the same time?

 

[human]

I don’t think a sheet would be a good marker. It could get blown away

 

[Waterdog]

This is something that has bothered me because that is exactly what it states.

Bothers me too. Some say it’s worded like this to be able to charge for the unlawful termination of the fetus due to how the laws are. But if this isn’t true, that the fetus actually died because the mom died first then why is it in his official charge worded that way? That would be inaccurate, if so. Wouldn’t the prosecution have the burden of proving this to be true in order for him to be convicted of 4 deaths?

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Old WS'er but haven't posted since Casey Anthony. I've been watching for these to come up but so far nothing, so thought I'd pipe in. I hope you all can answer these or at least explore/discuss.
The biggest question is how many baby monitors did they have? Recently AB said the girls had separate bedrooms. CW says he saw SW on the baby monitor doing that horrible thing and he was able to see both girls. If only one monitor, why were the girls together at 2am instead of their own beds.
Another question... CW was fired from his company the same day he was arrested. Why? A company cannot fire someone just for having been arrested, can they? (Innocent until proven guilty). Anyone in HR to answer that? Do they have evidence against CW by way of gps or cameras? And why did CW's company pay for the funeral? That seems odd.
TIA

*raises hand*

One of my family members is an owner in a company. One of their employees killed someone on their property. The company offered to pay for the funeral and all expenses associated with. It was a Goodwill gesture.

Additionally, in the same case I'm talking about, they found through law enforcement investigation that some people were dating others in the company that reported to each other, and that was outside their rules for their company.

Every. single. person. was fired.

Many people were fired that were dating each other, even though they had nothing to do with the death and murder. And yes, once they found out the employee was dating another employee against company rules, they were fired even before the person was arrested.

....her family may be getting more than funeral expenses fwiw from company for sure imho and personal experience

 

[Waterdog]

I've always wondered about them both working at the dealership, and both of them leading. And why? And did they both leave at the same time?

Oh gosh, I missed that he was a mechanic, I thought he sold cars.
It makes you wonder if something happened other than they felt the industry wasn’t for them and they quit.

 

[Sleutherfly]

Everyone please read this response in the respectful tone in which it is intended.

@gitana1.... [Sigh]. Now you've gone and made me do it. Now you've gone and made me look up the Rules of Evidence. (I'm a Colorado divorce lawyer---we don't use the Rules of Evidence. (This is an exaggeration, but not much of one.)) I'm restating portions of your post in purple for clarification.

Yes, you are technically correct. I mischaracterized the statement of a party opponent as an exception to the hearsay rule when technically the statement is by definition not hearsay. Sorry.

However in my mind, the distinction has always been without a difference. The rule is drafted in a very confusing way. First, they define the term. "'Hearsay' is a statement other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." CRE 801(c). BUT, even if it meets that definition, it is still not hearsay IF it is a "prior statement by the witness"... OR an "admission by a party opponent." CRE 801(d)(1 & 2). Most normal people (lawyers not being normal) would read that and say that the two things at the bottom (prior statement and admission) were exceptions to the general rule, but they would (technically) be wrong, because there are explicit exceptions defined in Rules 803 & 804 (the difference between them being whether the witness (declarant) is available to testify or not.

"We all learn that in law school as the law on the that is based on the common law and is virtually the same federally and in every state."

When I was in law school in Texas , we were required to understand the distinctions between the (then) Texas Rules of Civil Evidence, Texas Rules of Criminal Evidence, Federal Rules of Civil Evidence, and the Federal Rules of Criminal Evidence. That was a booger. And a long time ago. I should read the Rules more frequently than I do, but I can assure you that the divorce lawyers I try cases against don't know squat about evidence. It's sad.

"I feel it is important to be accurate when we hold ourselves out to be professionals, because our friends here rely on our expert opinions to be reliable."

That's why I don't want to be verified---because I want to be here and discuss things without my lawyer hat on. I'll let you be the expert. I do find it frustrating when I try to chime in on something I know about only to be corrected. But that's okay.

"Also, no. That was not the original question. . . ."

Maybe I was confused. I could have sworn that someone asked at some point that if CW wanted to maintain the theory he posited in his "confession," could they just offer his videotaped confession as his testimony. I apologize if I have conflated the different issues here. That was the question I was trying to answer.

"We see media interviews come in at trial in the guilt phase, regularly, when the defendant does NOT testify. I cited to a famous example - Scott Peterson."

You've got me at a disadvantage. The last big trial I watched closely was the OJ Simpson case. I will say, however, that I see these crazy, long criminal trials from different states, and they go on and on for weeks, and the judges let the attorneys go far and wide with evidence that is not (IMO) relevant to the crime that was allegedly committed. So IMO, just because a judge in Peterson (or whatever) allowed it doesn't mean that it should happen. But whatever.

I'll consider the verification thingy. If I do it, then I would hope that we could respectfully have differences of opinion.

Have a nice day.

ETA: I "replied" to you comment, but it doesn't appear above. Not sure why. Weird.

You are correct. This topic came up when discussing whether CW would likely take the stand and people were saying he would need to in order to tell his theory. Then someone asked if the defense could just use his confession.

 

[zencompass]

The last part of your statements are exactly my point. That he had it on live view. And I believe that they will be able to establish that through their provider?

Dear Dixiegirl!

Great points !

 

[mickey2942]

CW would be well served to take any deal that is offered to him, if one is...

The arraignment is scheduled for November. We probably won't have much more information until that time. Unless another anonymous source turns up...which, who knows what will happen...this case is a roller coaster!

 

[pinkie60]

I was required to get verified before posting my expert opinion.

"We ask that posters that are posting with expertise in a specific area contact Admin so they can confirm your credentials. This is 100% voluntary and no one is ever required to reveal their true identity unless they want to post as an expert. Please know that Admin does not reveal ANYONE'S identity if you should choose to be confirmed.

We ask that members not post with expert information in any area unless you have been verified-especially in those areas where questions are posed specifically to experts."

Professional Posters & Verified Insiders

Yes, like my house!

But she was gone so much, so he probably knew the trash days.

yet in her video she talks how wonderful it is she can work at home. Does anyone know how much traveling she had to do for this job?

 

[zencompass]

Firstly I acknowledge and deeply respect everyone's compassion and great caring on this thread.

Your deep humanity shows through each of your posts.

I don't have anything to add before the November 19th Court date except how heartbroken I feel about this horrible and inexplicable crime.

I know we all feel this way. How can a human being ever understand the "why" of all of this?

I will certainly join you all when we follow the court case.

In the meantime, I don't have anything to add.

I just felt so moved by all of your posts to express my deep gratitude to you all on this thread.

 

[Sleutherfly]

Not to make a bad situation worse did he become sexually interested in the girls

I've wondered this but didn't want to mention it. I would hope if he had impure thoughts that he would have just offed himself but maybe as a narcissist, that didn't seem like an option.