Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #33

[molly1255]

@MassGuy Did your little niece fit?

LOL - I think MassGuy needs to get this on video tape and share it with the rest of us.

 

[human]

So one method would solidify premeditation but the other would certainly show utter depravity of soul.

Just imagine. Jamming the bodies of your own flesh and blood babies into an opening to hide them. Is that what the footprint on the bag was about? And the request for his foot prints? Were there marks from him using his body weight to jam them through a hole?

I can't. This is horrible. I really hope it's not true.

That makes sense.

 

[gitana1]

For what????

He's going to jam his niece's body through a small opening. Hopefully she will survive!!

(P.S. I'm trying for some levity because I can't really think about theposisble reality of the situation he's trying to figure out).

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Really? It's ridiculous to assume an innocent man whose kids were murdered would feel grief the next day? Why would that be ridiculous?

Help me understand, Tippy.

No - I don’t think that would be ridiculous.
jmo

 

[gitana1]

A month ago, Jon Buhler, a detective on the Scott Peterson case had this to say about CW:

"It does start to explain the incredible difference in between the emotions we would expect of a father grieving their children, and a guy like this that likely killed them. It seems like he was probably so far distant from this relationship and being a father, struggling with internal turmoil on where he wants to go..."

"I think he probably checked out of being a father a long time before this crime actually occurred, which explains why he is really not affected by it, comparing his reaction of course to Shanann's father and her brother in the courtroom."

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=317696292143783

It appears some would think this man is being ridiculous but I really don't understand why. I'm trying to.

 

[Best of What's Around]

It appears some would think this man is being ridiculous but I really don't understand why. I'm trying to.

Maybe they will argue in court that the prosecution can't show those media interviews because it would be too prejudicial on the grounds that he was clearly too busy lying to show any sign of profound grief, as any reasonable killer trying to push everyone to look elsewhere would do.

 

[mtnlites]

Really? It's ridiculous to assume an innocent man whose kids were murdered would feel grief the next day? Why would that be ridiculous?

Help me understand, Tippy.

If he were innocent, had just lost his whole family upon seeing his wife kill his children, it is logical to expect to see some expression of grief from him. As I have posted repeatedly, everyone expresses grief differently but I have yet to see anyone not express it at ALL. Even those who went into shock and kind of floated through the first few days still usually show some outward form of loss. It is my opinion, as a child loss parent who has worked with literally thousands of other child loss parents, and as a former family therapist who has written and published a book about child loss and grief, I see no signs of grief in CW in those porch interviews.

 

[Sark06]

No one has said that everyone must grieve in the same way. But you would not expect someone who was grieving to laugh and giggle and preen.
People who do not wail and cry, still maintain a demeanor of seriousness.

I would say self preservation would be the only thing that could trump grief

 

[Best of What's Around]

I would say self preservation would be the only thing that could trump grief

Do you think that will be persuasive to a jury? Should it be?

 

[rainynights]

I wonder if he hd a secret account. A man died where my husband worked and the wife came in for the final check

She thought it was some kind of one time super death benefit. He had been lying to her for years about the money he made.

He could have it direct deposit into two accounts.

Tax time? Hm. Problem

Now that's pretty messed up to think about.

Jumping off your post, and speaking of taxes, I did see a photo on SW’s FB page that she captions as ”finishing my taxes”.

I recall seeing posts earlier in this thread inquiring about who likely had greater control over the finances, and considering SW was involved in the completion of household taxes earlier this year, that would lead me to believe that she was the one who had greater control, IMO.

 

[MsBetsy]

He would not be the first man who did that.

No, I can think of another very infamous man who did this.

 

[Backstroke10]

That was the least solid part of his interview, IMO. He knew a lot about the construction of the tanks, but his last opinion of moving the oil around doesn't show much awareness of probable company monitoring practices. And having to know precisely how much oil is in each tank, not setting off alarms. And "time". You have to take it all with a grain of salt. But he did mention the tank model number, so some day when I have time I will look it up for myself.

I think someone posted in a previous thread something about that CW was in charge of these two tanks. If that’s the case then he may have been the one to get any alerts and obviously wouldn’t pass those alerts on to the company. I’m not sure about this though.

 

[pocketaccent]

LOL - I think MassGuy needs to get this on video tape and share it with the rest of us.

I did a video experiment with me in it for Jodi Arias trial. I was quickly urged to delete it to maintain my anonymity.
I did but not before many people viewed the video.

 

[roteone]

Or if one spouse has been the homemaker for several years and has not worked outside the home. Where I live they would get alimony, I think it's one year for every three years of the narriage.

Tysm

 

[Sark06]

Do you think that will be persuasive to a jury? Should it be?

If I were on a jury I would find it hard to believe an innocent man could function on a normal level after witnessing his children's murders but I'm too far away to be selected for this jury

 

[human]

How did Scott Peterson manage?
Neil Entwistle?
Chris Coleman?
Christian Longo?
Ross Harris?
Etc. Etc.

It's an intriguing question. It's really why we are all here for the most part. But sometimes it can't be answered.

I do not know about all of them, but Ross Harris was an obviously concerning person to me. I do not trust anyone who is so religious. It screams red flag to me. I realize not everyone will agree, but that is MOO.

Scott Peterson was so in love with himself.

I know zero about the others.

From the little we saw of CW, it was concerning to me because he seemed wooden in the pie video, the Christmas video, and he definitely upset at the checkers.

He did not want the little one squirted in the squirt video, but he did not have the ability to stop it.

To me it indicated that he would be upset with his life. But it did not show the depravity that he has.

We may hear more about his life or he may be allowed to plea . Then we will have to wait for the book when an author traces his life. I am sure he will love the attention.

Are there any authors like Ann Rule? People responded before but there did not seem to be a possibilty out there.

 

[borndem]

Juries consider the behavior and emotion of witnesses and videos every day. They ask themselves if it comports with the statements being made and/or accusations against them. Having no display of any devastation is extremely compelling evidence, IMO.

bbm
Absolutely. We certainly do it here on WS -- when we see someone speak about the loss of a husband or wife or child, etc. Some of those folks are seen by many of us as truly pitiful and honestly grieving. Some of those folks are seen by many of us to be rehearsed, stony, trying to cry (but no tears), etc., etc.

Certainly a juror does the same thing -- plus, the juror is in the same room as the person. It is indeed evidentiary. Certainly the jurors watch the person's actions/reactions during the trial.

 

[gitana1]

Feelings aren't ridiculous, no. Presumptions about how one is feeling by just looking at them is, imo. The insistence that people in certain situations only feel a certain feeling is what I was referring to.

Obviously I wasn't clear.

My apologies but it still isn't clear to me.

Presumptions about how someone is feeling by looking at them is one issue.

The second is "the insistence that people in certain situations only feel a certain feeling."

This are two very different concepts. Help me understand.

No one has said that people in certain situations only feel a certain
feeling. People are saying that normal, innocent people who aren't psychotic, on massive amounts of drugs, brain damaged and/or who aren't psychopathic, would indeed feel grief to the detriment of any other feeling, the day after their family is murdered.

I think that's a reasonable. No?

The second issue, well yeah, typically there are notable signs that are pretty common across all cultures that indicate a neurotypical, sober and sane adult is grieving. They include red eyes. Bags under the eyes or swollen eyes from lack of sleep or too much crying. Be smiling. Not caring about anything else in life except enduring the unfathomable loss. Not smiling or giggling. Not spending a lot of time grooming (at least that first couple days).

The reason testimony rather than written declarations are required when a person is going to give a statement under oath is so that the trier of fact can determine the credibility of the declarant. Based on their demeanor.

I mean that's actually on standard jury instructions in Colorado:

"For each witness, consider that person’s knowledge, motive, state of mind, demeanor, and manner while testifying. Consider the witness’s ability to observe, the strength of that person’s memory, and how that person obtained his or her knowledge. Consider any relationship the witness may have to either side of the case, and how each witness might be affected by the verdict. Consider how the testimony of the witness is supported or contradicted by other evidence in the case. You should consider all facts and circumstances shown by the evidence when you evaluate each witness's testimony."

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/02nd_Judicial_District/Denver_District_Court/example criminal instructions new pattern(1).doc

Finally, we have survived as a species by judging people's demeanor and veracity or signs of danger. I'm not sure why suddenly our human instinct at reading the signs people give would not be a fair gauge of the defendant's credibility in this case.

It's not like it's a subtle feeling he may not be showing signs of. It's a catastrophic one. One of the most intense feelings man can feel.

 

[scdiv]

No one has said that everyone must grieve in the same way. But you would not expect someone who was grieving to laugh and giggle and preen.
People who do not wail and cry, still maintain a demeanor of seriousness.

Agreed. And it's not just "grief" over his lost family that he wasn't showing. He confessed to killing Shanann. If his wife had MURDERED his two beloved daughters, "those kids are my life" - then he was also highly skilled at hiding anger, disbelief, shock, despair. How could he find his wife in a rage murdering their daughters, carry out killing his wife, and dispose of all three bodies in gruesome ways - without showing ANY indication that the events of the previous hours had traumatized him. No shock, regret, bewilderment, or horror at what his wife had done and his own response to kill his spouse. That is so much more than just not showing outward signs of grief. I have a hard time understanding how those events would not be absolutely traumatizing. JMO, but I don't know how anyone could possibly stifle all that unless it was deliberate.

 

[Tippy Lynn]

A new document was posted today. Just a modification to allow the CBI to collect the non-testimonial evidence.
https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...trict/caseofinterest/2018CR2003/Order C18.pdf