Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #41

[PommyMommy]

Good post. Could the information be coming from another prisoner, cultivated by the press?

It's possible.
MOO

 

[Charliegizmo49]

They're not close to "frivolous" motions. Regardless as to whether or not their motions are granted. This is what solid litigation looks like. They're working their case hard and smart.

This is my professional opinion based on my years in this business. It's not based on my feelings about CW and his guilt.

I don't know what else to say. Everyone is free to believe what they want.

Hard and smart is what they are paid to do. It’s admirable.

 

[Jennifer17]

I've linked the DA's response which cites the law.


Additionally, the District Attorney, both over time and regarding this specific investigation, has taken numerous practical steps to try to limit the dissemination of information to only that which Colo RPC–3.6 and the Court has authorized.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/19th_Judicial_District/caseofinterest/2018CR2003/[J] PEOPLE'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS D29, D30, AND D31 MOTIONS TO REQUIRE THE GOVERNMENT TO DO AN INVESTIGATION.pdf

But a source close to LE are giving out the information, not the Judiciary.

 

[Thepoet]

Innocent men don’t pretend they don’t know where their dead family is. Innocent men don’t ignore their dead children without at least trying to save them. Innocent men don’t hide the bodies of a murder that someone else committed. Innocent men don’t destroy evidence that could prove they are innocent. Innocent men don’t make another murderers crime look like their own. It’s absurd.

I, for one, cannot ignore all of that in case *maybe* there’s something horrible we don’t know yet about SW. Finding out something about SW isnt going to erase what I already know about CW. If that makes me bias then I guess I am. I’ve added up all of the information and it’s very clear to me he’s guilty of all crimes. I’m going to need some pretty hardcore proof to change my mind. I have zero empathy for him and think he’s a disgusting human. If it’s proven she’s the killer then I will think the same of her. I just don’t think there were two murderers in that house that night.

Bravo! Well said. SW's life has been so pulled apart, cherry picked, and analyzed, that if there was something there, we'd know it! And he'd still be a horrible murderer!

 

[flourish]

That was a rhetorical question. The answer is glaringly obvious.

Perhaps to you. Others have different opinions.

 

[gitana1]

Ok, given what we know, how do we determine what is true? This is a sincere question, and I genuinely want to know, if CW is telling the truth, how do we know? How do we determine what to believe and what not to believe in this hypothetical situation?

Logic. Knowledge of human nature. Reasonableness. Motivation.

 

[Amandaaa]

They're not close to "frivolous" motions. Regardless as to whether or not their motions are granted. This is what solid litigation looks like. They're working their case hard and smart.

This is my professional opinion based on my years in this business. It's not based on my feelings about CW and his guilt.

I don't know what else to say. Everyone is free to believe what they want.

I could not agree more.

I have been very impressed with them so far.

 

[MassGuy]

Logic. Knowledge of human nature. Reasonableness. Motivation.

So in a word commonsense. In two words, common sense.

 

[gitana1]

The source is unknown, and I'm not sure why everyone is calling them "leaks." It seems like ordinary reporting to me, but there are a few clues as to the source:

“He doesn’t have much to do in jail,” says a source who has spoken to Chris.

Chris, who occasionally speaks with guards and can talk to other prisoners, is keeping a low profile as he awaits his eventual trial.

“He sleeps a lot,” the source says. “He can just sit there and look at the picture and read the Bible.”

MOO

Well, you're right. It's not truly a leak because there's no gag order. The defense is allowed to discuss what they want to.

However, I fully believe the "source" was someone on the defense team. They are quite motivated to paint their client as a holy family man who spends his time staring at his dead family and reading the bible.

I don't believe any of it (at the least if he's doing so it's to make an impression) and I don't think any fellow prisoner or any prison staff would care to contact the media.

This is straight defense PR in my opinion. Timed perfectly to coincide with their motion response and to cushion the effects the release of the autopsy will have.

 

[nwmouse]

I, personally, would love CW to take the stand and tell his story. He's already accused her, he isn't suffering in silence.

Oh yes, I'd like to see CW take the stand but I doubt the Defense will do that. I'll bring along popcorn...

 

[bonjoviblonde]

Bravo! Well said. SW's life has been so pulled apart, cherry picked, and analyzed, that if there was something there, we'd know it! And he'd still be a horrible murderer!

Yep but I think some think they already know it. They think they’ve found that magical evidence that is going to let poor ole CW be innocent. I’m looking forward to the trial to see what it is.

 

[Thepoet]

They're not close to "frivolous" motions. Regardless as to whether or not their motions are granted. This is what solid litigation looks like. They're working their case hard and smart.

This is my professional opinion based on my years in this business. It's not based on my feelings about CW and his guilt.

I don't know what else to say. Everyone is free to believe what they want.

Kudos, and I believe you are correct. I think it may be likely the defense is doing a better job then they are given credit for, since they have been burdened by all of CW's baggage, from the interviews to his confession (before they were onboard). How much damage control are they faced with?

Also Gitana, we know the AP is a witness, but the prosecution doesn't have to disclose her proposed testimony? Correct?

 

[gitana1]

So in a word commonsense. In two words, common sense.

Yup! That's about it.

 

[Layla123]

They're not close to "frivolous" motions. Regardless as to whether or not their motions are granted. This is what solid litigation looks like. They're working their case hard and smart.

This is my professional opinion based on my years in this business. It's not based on my feelings about CW and his guilt.

I don't know what else to say. Everyone is free to believe what they want.

Please know that I hold your opinion in the highest regard, and I fully admit that I’m an amateur, but when I see an insulting motions from the Defense insinuating that the Coroners Office would be so incompetent that they wouldn't think to take a DNA swab from a child’s neck when there is uncertainty as to who strangled her, or to accuse the Prosecution of deliberately withholding the Autopsy reports when they haven’t even received them seems frivolous to me. I apologize for offending you.

 

[bonjoviblonde]

Logic. Knowledge of human nature. Reasonableness. Motivation.

It really is as simple as that. Let’s hope we have a jury with those qualities.

 

[Jennifer17]

Yep but I think some think they know it. They think they’ve found that magical evidence that is going to let poor ole CW be innocent. I’m looking forward to the trial to see what it is.

Gossip and innuendo about something that may or may not have happened before she met him.

 

[Nudgee]

If I was in her position I would feel like a part of that crime (I do not believe that the AP knew that he would kill his entire family and I do not blame them for anything CW did to his wife and his girls - just to make it clear!!). I would feel ashamed and I would fear that as soon as other people learned I was having an affair with him I could be supsected to be an accomplice. In my case I would have probably come forward just to have the chance to make things clear before it is too late. On the other hand: If I had a family (husband and perhaps even children on my own) I would probably have had a lot of sleepless nights and would not wan't them to find out because I would fear that this could destroy my own family as well. Either way for me it would be the worst scenario to be connected to such a person in any way. I do not believe that this is easy to deal with. So at the moment I'm not sure what to think about this...

But what I know is: Cheating s**** - especially if there are (little) children involved.

I agree with what you are saying.... which is why I think the AP came forward immediately!

 

[MKZoo]

I like that @gitana1 suggests reasonableness as a standard by which to assess CW’s behavior. Setting aside for the moment that the murders themselves are not reasonable, I’m just looking at his behavior following the killings.

It is not reasonable behavior for an innocent man who watched his babies be murdered and justifiably defended them by killing his wife to then pack up their bodies, drive them to a remote location, and conceal them in oil tanks and shallow graves. All of that is, however, reasonable behavior for a guilty man. I have honestly tried to see it differently but I cannot makes myself think otherwise. Jmo.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

It really is as simple as that. Let’s hope we have a jury with those qualities.

PRAYING!!!!

 

[gitana1]

Kudos, and I believe you are correct. I think it may be likely the defense is doing a better job then they are given credit for, since they have been burdened by all of CW's baggage, from the interviews to his confession (before they were onboard). How much damage control are they faced with?

Also Gitana, we know the AP is a witness, but the prosecution doesn't have to disclose her proposed testimony? Correct?

Yeah the defense has an uphill battle. But they're doing what they're supposed to. The defense are used to losing motions, BTW. It doesn't indicate they're doing a bad job. It indicates they have a hard battle. And it's about due diligence and making sure they try to preserve all their client's rights and make the state prove its case.

The state doesn't have to disclose proposed testimony except of experts. They do have to disclose any recorded surveillance, like recorded calls between a witness and a suspect, and police reports, which would often include witness statements, and anything that could be seen as "exculpatory" evidence, including witness statements.

https://www.hmichaelsteinberg.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Colorado-Rules-Of-Criminal-Procedure.pdf