Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #30

[Deleted member 230544]

Yes and it seems that he was just as involved in it as she was.

@Jennifer17 If posts are accurate, SW and CW mutually were acting in bad faith financially.

 

[borndem]

He may have killed his wife “in the heat of passion,” but that wouldn’t apply to the kids.

Agreed. That situation reminds me of the charges/verdicts given in the J. MacDonald case. The evidence showed that he killed his wife and older daughter in a fit a passion, but he killed his younger daughter in cold blood so as to make the scene look like outsiders came in and killed his family, leaving him as the sole survivor. He was convicted of two counts of 2nd degree murder and one of 1st degree murder.
It could be that this one may have a similar mix of charges against CW.

 

[Backstroke10]

I don't think I believe that story about him being homosexual. Although I can certainly see how he would have felt inadequate next to Shanann. Maybe he felt inadequate all his life.

I've been thinking about this case non-stop. Thinking about how he never had any girlfriends, the Nascar friend saying he never went out with them, etc. it's the only thing that makes sense to me as a reason why he did this. IMO

 

[The Saint]

Does anyone know if CW also posted on Instagram and Twitter?

Yes, Chris did. I read his posts.

 

[MsBetsy]

Wow I think I’m impartial I feel like being objective is a good thing . So I explained the exact reasons that would not convience me to convict were as following
1. The baby moniter
2. The interview
3. I don’t buy the family annihilator profile
Meaning just bc he is a white male in his 30’s in August with a pregnant wife doesn’t mean he is self righteous , paranoid, anomic or disappointed to fit that profile . But I am not a criminal profiler nor have I qualified . To me it’s the same if I would say is a child killer based upon her desperation of losing him. That is a key component of women who kill but I would not base my verdict on either.
4. I also stated him not calling 911 could not convince me he killed the girls
5. I said fingerprints would , or a weapon would
Other than that I didn’t speak upon witness testimony which would be a deciding factor whether they would be there or not .
I was only going on the list of evidence Pommy Momny gave me and explaining what would not be a deciding factor for me . She was gracious enough to explain the legal definition when I misspoke terminology . There is so much more evidence and testimony to come . Do you believe that based upon the baby monitor , the family annihilator profile, the interview and not calling 911 would be all the prosecution would need to convict him? These are the points I said I need more than . I also stated I understood it was enough for Pommy to convict him . I have never prosecuted criminals like you nor have I had the experience like you with criminal professionals . I am just stating my opinion on what I would need personally and I need more .

So even if they can show how he lied about everything having to do with the crime, tried to cover it up, and blame it on the victim, you still wouldn't believe he killed them?

 

[esayer]

Does anyone know if CW also posted on Instagram and Twitter?

I've seen his twitter and it was super boring, just working out stuff.

 

[Marli61]

DBM... I was reading what I responded to wrong. May need to go to bed, but you guys are way too interesting.

 

[cailleach]

Also, no bail was set. He has no prior criminal record, so it's surprising maybe he's not given at least a super high bail amount. The state has a nice tight case against him , IMO. Get ready for some big bombshells at the trial. I can't wait.

We know the prosecutor knows the COD's at this time and they haven't altered their charges. If it revealed clear evidence linking SW to the murder of the girls, they'd be compelled to act accordingly. It's not like they can just decide to continue charges that aren't true. Therefore, I agree there's plenty of evidence against CW on all counts.

 

[Best of What's Around]

Fair enough, I just think we need to be careful about hearsay (Shanann told me that Chris told her . . .). We never actually heard CW say that. I don’t disagree that Niko was wanted. But, the whole “oops, we did it again” t-shirt implies it was an accident, doesn’t it?

When someone is dead, we are going to have a lot of hearsay because they can no longer speak for themselves, IMO. In context of the video, it is clear to me that the tshirt meant surprise! we were successful!....because he himself says I guess when you want something you get it (going off memory here).

 

[Allabouttrial]

I've been thinking about this case non-stop. Thinking about how he never had any girlfriends, the Nascar friend saying he never went out with them, etc. it's the only thing that makes sense to me as a reason why he did this. IMO

I could be wrong but wasn't it a case of no serious girlfriends rather than none?

 

[bonjoviblonde]

So it's wrong to label CW as a "family annilihilator" because it's not been a proven fact yet but it's ok to put all kinds of labels (that are not a proven fact) on SW, the murder victim? And no matter what else she may or may not be, she is and always will be a murder victim.

 

[gitana1]

Wow I think I’m impartial I feel like being objective is a good thing . So I explained the exact reasons that would not convience me to convict were as following
1. The baby moniter
2. The interview
3. I don’t buy the family annihilator profile
Meaning just bc he is a white male in his 30’s in August with a pregnant wife doesn’t mean he is self righteous , paranoid, anomic or disappointed to fit that profile . But I am not a criminal profiler nor have I qualified . To me it’s the same if I would say is a child killer based upon her desperation of losing him. That is a key component of women who kill but I would not base my verdict on either.
4. I also stated him not calling 911 could not convince me he killed the girls
5. I said fingerprints would , or a weapon would
Other than that I didn’t speak upon witness testimony which would be a deciding factor whether they would be there or not .
I was only going on the list of evidence Pommy Momny gave me and explaining what would not be a deciding factor for me . She was gracious enough to explain the legal definition when I misspoke terminology . There is so much more evidence and testimony to come . Do you believe that based upon the baby monitor , the family annihilator profile, the interview and not calling 911 would be all the prosecution would need to convict him? These are the points I said I need more than . I also stated I understood it was enough for Pommy to convict him . I have never prosecuted criminals like you nor have I had the experience like you with criminal professionals . I am just stating my opinion on what I would need personally and I need more .

Being unable to convict on anything other than direct evidence is not "impartial" or objective. However, based on your statement here, I see you may not fully understand the difference between circumstantial and direct evidence. And that's okay. It is confusing and MANY people don't. I did try to explain it though, in my post. But here is an example again: Fingerprints are circumstantial evidence. So is DNA.

I do not prosecute criminals.

I think that the evidence they have thus far, which is much more than you listed above, yes, is enough to convict CW, beyond a reasonable doubt, once it is backed up and presented via testimony of witnesses, investigators and videotaped statements, etc.

I also think they have much more than we know thus far that will damn him even further.

That being said, with enough wild cards on the jury and a solid presentation of a defense, which I suspect will include testimony from his family about how horrible and abusive SW was, and other stuff that may not cast her in the most perfect light, anything can happen.

 

[The Saint]

This is CW's Twitter -- now private
Tweets with replies by Chris Watts (@WattsTastic) | Twitter

 

[BelleIsle]

It was confirmed in the text he sent her in response to the ultrasound picture. He said "I love this little peanut already".

I thought the question was if he initiated the pregnancy...I might have missed something.

 

[MsBetsy]

I've been thinking about this case non-stop. Thinking about how he never had any girlfriends, the Nascar friend saying he never went out with them, etc. it's the only thing that makes sense to me as a reason why he did this. IMO

Yes, I can see why you might think that. You could be right. I had thought the shyness and lack of relationships might indicate Antisocial Personality Disorder, or something similar.

 

[gitana1]

Yes, it will be very interesting to see if these people testify. Are they currently on the witness list?

I don't know. One is anonymous so we don;t know her name. The other I don't see on there. But he stated he spoke to the FBI AFTER that list was already released. They can add to it. The investigation is on-going.

 

[kkdj]

For those who think an affair is not evidence of a possible motive for murder in such a case as this, why do you think LE almost always asks someone whose spouse is missing, how the marriage is going and whether they're seeing anyone else?

I agree. Lots of people have affairs that don't murder their mates but many mates who do murder their mates are embroiled in an affair. It's definitely a factor.

 

[Steelhead]

Two things are important here:

The timing of the Facebook deletion

If this was a new behavior

For me, it’s only relevant if he’s never deleted his Facebook before.

If he deleted his FB one week before the murders, then that puts it at appx. 8/6. SW and kids came home on 8/7.

 

[MsBetsy]

I've seen his twitter and it was super boring, just working out stuff.

That doesn't surprise me. For some reason I don't see this guy as being a "deep" conversationalist.

 

[gitana1]

So it's wrong to label CW as a "family annilihilator" because it's not been a proven fact yet but it's ok to put all kinds of labels (that are not a proven fact) on SW, the murder victim? And no matter what else she may or may not be, she is and always will be a murder victim.

I would hope that if they had to convict her based on the 'evidence' that's been presented in an attempt to show how SW could possibly have been the killer, they would be just as adamant that there wasn't enough to convince them.