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

[JudgeJudi]

But he did not defend anyone. No lives were saved.

I'm suggesting he will say that he was defending the baby who, according to him, was being actively strangled by SW.

 

[Allabouttrial]

I think the interview was Tuesday, the day following the killings.

People may laugh when nervous. But I am wondering why he was more nervous than he was grief stricken.

Maybe because he was lying?

 

[WildWest]

Does anyone remember Nigella Lawson's strangling incident captured on film? She's an English TV Chef and her husband said he was trying to make her focus, she wanted to talk about grandchildren. Seems like talk of children or grandchildren brings out the beast in some men.
Would anyone believe it if they didn't see it with their own eyes? I'm sure Saatchi wasn't known for DV either before this.

'Why Charles Saatchi grabbed me by the throat': Nigella Lawson explains | Daily Mail Online

CW would only have to do this once to give SW an inkling of what he's capable of, I'm just speculating here.

Ugg, this takes my mind back to one of her SM videos where she tells CW not to "choke" Dieter.

 

[NuttMegg]

Not sure about small children's soft bones. I have an idea that they may disintegrate.

maybe so. i keep remembering the la brea tar pits, but iirc that was crude that got very thick as the gases left. Ppl here have said this is not thick like alaska crude, but i still would bet bones would last a really long time. Imo

 

[Jennifer17]

It sounds to me like he had some legal help in getting that vitally important legal detail in there. But he may have looked it up himself too.

If he did, that will be traced unless he used a library computer.

 

[pocketaccent]

Not a new statement. He said one child was blue, sprawled on her bed. His wife was actively strangling the other child. And he attacked his wife in a rage.

So isn't that defending his child, who was being strangled by SW? That is how I interpret it.

And I think it was carefully crafted by him to avoid first degree murder charges.

If he had said that both kids were deceased, then he has no legal excuse to harm his wife. But if she was in the act of killing one of the children, then he has the right to defend and protect them.

Or just this -I got so mad, my wife killed my children, I got there too late to save them, I couldn't control my anger, so I killed her in a rage. Second degree murder.

 

[Marli61]

I can only see nervousness when the dogs began barking.
I watched that one without the sound and to me, it could have been any pleasant experience in his life that he was talking about.

I agree. Or maybe even annoyance. Annoyed that those noisy dogs were interrupting his feeble attempt to cover his actions. It was probably hard to think period, let alone think up believable lies when dogs are barking their heads off behind you.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Ugg, this takes my mind back to one of her SM videos where she tells CW not to "choke" Dieter.

Oh I think I must have missed that one. Do you happen to have a link, so I can watch?

 

[Jennifer17]

I have never seen a person laugh after the unexpected deaths of their children. I can’t even imagine. There’s tons of videos online of grieving parents speaking to the media for one reason or another, and I can’t think of a single example where they laughed, nervous or not.

Yes and to suggest that someone would laugh after they know that their children are dead is way outside the realms of possibility to me. And if you laugh inappropriately when you should be grieving, you should seek help.
It is socially inappropriate.

 

[Johnny1181]

Like I've said, I don't see his actions in the way others do.

How do you interpret his actions of running from his bedroom to the bedroom, which probably took seconds, where CeCe "was actively being strangled" to actions of rage rather than saving his precious baby girls? I think life saving measures of an actively being strangled baby and a baby who was "blue" may have worked. Particularly with the help of 911 and an ambulance on the way. jmo

Did his rage for his seemingly loving wife and devoted mother supersede his love for his babies and fatherly drive to save their lives?

 

[Marli61]

Ugg, this takes my mind back to one of her SM videos where she tells CW not to "choke" Dieter.

Good grief. I cannot keep up with the videos.... I'm going to hope she was kidding???

 

[MsBetsy]

I think the real question is, will he testify at all? Given all of the improbable and illogical elements to his "mitigation" story, he'd have to be pretty erudite to avoid getting brutalized on cross. From what I have seen Jodi Arias, he is not.

I think the defense would be wise to keep him off the stand.

 

[Bill Carson]

Mods, please remove if not allowed, but I think this will be interesting and informative, with respect to how high-profile cases are handled in the State of Colorado, and what we can expect going forward.

I know that we are watching the court filings in the Watts case here:

Colorado Judicial Branch

I went looking for other cases of interest around the state and found a couple of comparable cases, in terms of interest and publicity. I'm going to post links to the court filings pages for those cases. I think is very interesting to see how these cases are handled differently and similarly, and from the docket sheets we can get an idea what to expect in the future of this case.

Here is the page listing for the People v. James Holmes case (Aurora Theater Shooting). Note there are many pages of filings--

Colorado Judicial Branch - 18th Judicial District - Homepage

And here are the two pages for the People v. Robert Dear, Jr. case (Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood Shooter).

Colorado Judicial Branch

Colorado Judicial Branch

 

[Jennifer17]

Or just this -I got so mad, my wife killed my children, I got there too late to save them, I couldn't control my anger, so I killed her in a rage. Second degree murder.

Except that he just stepped out of the room for a moment. Thrive must indeed be great if she can kill two children in a moment.

 

[NuttMegg]

I'm suggesting he will say that he was defending the baby who, according to him, was being actively strangled by SW.

surely there is a big loose end .......that he didn't call for help i think the jury might notice that

 

[gitana1]

Yes, indeed.
I've heard a some folks downplay circumstantial evidence more than once since I've been here on WS. Some say that they think it is weak. They want "direct evidence." If we stop to think about or count how many times we have seen direct evidence in these trials we watch, we come up very short indeed with our direct evidence numbers. The defendants rarely testify. Eyewitnesses are very, very scarce. Obviously, murder victims cannot testify on the witness stand, but their blood, other fluids, and bodies surely can. Weapons testify as well, as do fingerprints, footprints, iphones/tower pings, automobile odometers, DNA, autopsy reports/toxicology/ME testimony, security cameras, receipts, SM, and so much more. And many defense attorneys and prosecutors will agree that eyewitness testimony is often the weakest and least dependable evidence of all.
We should never underestimate the value of circumstantial evidence.

Well there are tons of murder cases that involve direct evidence. They either plead out or go to trial on something like insanity or self defense. Two good examples, the two guys who shot a neighbor in Texas recently, caught on tape. And the Colorado mass murderer - witnesses saw him kill people.

But otherwise, when it's a question of guilt or innocence, it's mostly circumstantial.

 

[Jennifer17]

I think the defense would be wise to keep him off the stand.

He would probably grin and smirk on the stand because of his supposed 'nervousness'.

 

[MsBetsy]

No I really can't imagine that he was laughing.

Would be laughing, as in the future, not past. Jmo

 

[cailleach]

I agree. Or maybe even annoyance. Annoyed that those noisy dogs were interrupting his feeble attempt to cover his actions. It was probably hard to think period, let alone think up believable lies when dogs are barking their heads off behind you.

As the Thayers have stated, he was all about 'How did I come off?' (paraphrasing) when he spent the night at their house. That along with already discussing selling the house are among the reasons they went to LE the next day. If you're truly pleading for the return of your family (whether someone has abducted them or they've run off) you don't give a fig how you appeared because all you care about is them coming home safely.

 

[Allabouttrial]

How do you interpret his actions of running from his bedroom to the bedroom, which probably took seconds, where CeCe "was actively being strangled" to actions of rage rather than saving his precious baby girls? I think life saving measures of an actively being strangled baby and a baby who was "blue" may have worked. Particularly with the help of 911 and an ambulance on the way. jmo

As I'm not certain what transpired that night, I can't give you a definite answer to that one. I can speculate, but at the risk of causing distress to SW's loved ones, I'm refraining from sharing my theories of what may have occurred.