Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #42

[flourish]

I assume then you believe SP is guilty. May I ask why you think so (beyond a jury verdict)? TIA!

Yes, I do. Oh geez I don't know that I remember all the details, but cement powder in his truck, a lot of circumstantial evidence, etc. We have a lot of circumstantial evidence with this case, too, and to be clear, I don't think CW is innocent, I'm just personally not ready to convict him on what we have now. I expect there will be a lot more to come out, and that will likely get me to stop hovering around the fence.

Believe it or not, this is not a comfortable, awesome place for me to be (near the fence/minority).

 

[MassGuy]

Again, and I'm feeling like I need to add this at the beginning and end of every post, which is pretty tiresome, but of course it doesn't justify it. His actions are quite unjustifiable. Like I've said numerous times, looking at his possible motives isn't looking to excuse him, nor do his motives excuse him! We don't have to agree with his motive--his motive is about him, not us.

Motive is important, and reaching a conclusion as to what it is, simply explains the act, and doesn’t excuse it. Agreed.

But saying that he may have been abused, so that’s a potential motive, still doesn’t explain the murders of his children.

Whatever the dynamic that existed between him and his wife, what he did to his children is inexplicable.

 

[human]

I'm wondering if people would think the same if the genders were reversed. Man and woman meet, he tells her he almost didn't even finish the date due to her personal style, then "fixes" her by getting rid of all her clothes and buying her a new wardrobe he found suitable.

People who are victims of spousal abuse often don't leave. Abuse is insidious in that it happens over time, and little by little so it becomes difficult to sometimes recognize from the inside of the situation. Questioning why a person didn't leave an abusive situation is really oversimplifying the complex nature of abuse.

Now, before y'all get your throwing tomatoes out, no, I don't know that he was an abused spouse. I also don't know that he wasn't.

Where's that "ducking behind the couch" emoticon? Lol

I have totally changed my mind since reading the SP book.

However, you are exactly right as to how he acts. People keep saying why doesn’t he do something to protect the children when she is being inapprorpiate . He is there on the scene. Why doesn’t he speak up.

Yup, Turn the tables and ask why the abused women does not speak up.

 

[flourish]

I did the same thing for my boyfriend when we were students, graduating and applying for jobs.

I was helping him dress for success and less like a student, so he'd have a more presentable image not only as a date but also to land a better job. JMO

That seems reasonable. I think it's the "almost didn't even finish the date" part that gets to me most, as it just seems really shallow and disrespectful. Imo. I'm also lucky my husband can dress himself fine and appropriately lol.

 

[nwmouse]

To me there are two things that are important and must be kept in mind; reality and context.

The reality is that Shanann, Cece, Bella, and Nico are dead and were murdered! The reality is that all of the evidence available points to CW as the murderer. There is no available evidence that SW killed anyone, just the self-serving accusations made by the person that, according to the evidence, is the murderer! The reality is CW did everything in his power to hide the bodies, cover up the crime and deliberately mislead LE. This reality is not only supported by the evidence, but by CW himself. He admitted it! The reality is that CW chose (Chose - it was his decision) a gruesome method to hide his daughter's bodies. The reality is that CW was committing adultery! That was also his decision. The reality is that CW participated in interviews where and when, he was well rested, well groomed, happy and where he posed and preened. Behavior totally in contradiction to a frightened, grieving father. The reality is that those who knew him and came into contact with him at that time, became convinced of his guilt (the Thayers, NUA, etc.) The reality is that CW is a liar and has lied about everything since that Monday morning when NUA became concerned. CW has admitted to the lies! The reality is that CW cannot be believed, because he, himself has admitted he's a liar!

Now context. The prosecution has filed numerous charges against CW, including five (not three) first degree murder charges. This was done very quickly. There can be no doubt that there is a great deal of evidence supporting these charges, evidence we don't have. In the context of this big picture, coupled with the evidence I have seen, I have to believe CW is guilty of four horrible and needless murders, along with numerous other crimes. If this case goes to court I believe it will be concerned more with degree and with circumstances, than with guilt. The defense will try to mitigate what was done and create doubt, but the evidence and CW's behavior will be the 500 lb gorilla in the room.

Thanks for such a great post!
I think CW is going to spend the rest of his life in the slammer.

Its possible the autopsy results will be made public in the near future so we will have more info.

His arraignment hearing in November will indicate if this is a DP case or if CW is going to plea for LWOP.

No matter what, CW has admitted to murdering his pregnant wife/unborn son and disposing of his toddler's and wife's bodies in the most cruel, disgusting manner.

And sadly, both CW's and SW's family and friends will carry the horror of their loss for the rest of their lives due to the ripple effect.

MOO

 

[Golden Girl]

I'm referring mitigation specialist for a defense for a death penalty, as they go back all the way to Childhood.

It's a nasty nasty proposition for the family in my opinion.

Wouldn't it be irrelevant? IMO, he is an adult responsible for his own actions, even IF he had a bad childhood. JMO

 

[PommyMommy]

Sooo behind on the threads, sorry! Inappropriate affect is a symptom of a wide range of mental illnesses and some physical ones too. Pseudobulbar affect is a symptom of a nervous system disorder and it is fairly rare. It usually involves exaggerated laughing or crying. CW didn’t appear to have exaggerated or uncontrollable reactions.

Thank you. Hoping you get caught up!
MOO

 

[MassGuy]

For those of you stuck at work today who can’t watch AB, I’ve got an appointment and won’t be able to watch and take notes until much later. If someone else can take notes, great, if not, I’ll do it as soon as I get home.

This is unacceptable. It’s like asking a 3 year old to perform Mozart.

We’re going to need you to drop everything and cancel.

Better late than never.

 

[Gardener1850]

Yep, exactly! It may not. But in the process it drags the family and all their family secrets and stuff that really doesn't matter to the case into the public eye. It makes them victims! In my opinion. I will refrain from calling Cindy Anthony a ... never mind,, but that's another matter for another thread.

Absolutely. His family are victims of his crimes too. You won't see me saying anything different. No matter how bad of stuff comes out about them or what they may say about SW on the stand. This crime is all his work IMO. I think he likely lied to his family and played them as well. He probably told everyone whatever lie would bring the most benefit to him at the time. His family members may have disliked SW at times ONLY because of lies CW told them. It must be very hard for them to reconcile what he told them and what the facts of the case are saying. They have my sympathy and my prayers at this time. I hope and pray they are able to see the truth of how he really is. That truth may shatter them but it needs to sink in for SW, Bella, Cece and Nico to have justice. They no doubt loved their grandchildren and may not want to admit CW did this on his own. But I hope the Truth wins. MOO.

 

[Golden Girl]

That seems reasonable. I think it's the "almost didn't even finish the date" part that gets to me most, as it just seems really shallow and disrespectful. Imo. I'm also lucky my husband can dress himself fine and appropriately lol.

Oh, sorry! I misinterpreted what the VI wrote. I'll go back and read it. I thought @Trinket78 said that SW had told people she "almost didn't go out with him on that first date" due to the way he dressed? JMO

 

[Seattle1]

For those of you stuck at work today who can’t watch AB, I’ve got an appointment and won’t be able to watch and take notes until much later. If someone else can take notes, great, if not, I’ll do it as soon as I get home.

Nobody can hold a candle to you. We'll gladly wait for your recap!

 

[gitana1]

IMO they can't technically ask for bail unless the prosecution reduces all the charges. Murder 1 in Colorado is a no bond charge. IMO even if defense counsel thinks there's something helpful to them in the autopsies, unless the prosecution views it the same way and reduces charges, it doesn't matter how the defense sees it until trial.

IMO one of the things I noted in the discussion a few threads back about the defense response to the autopsies being released is they mention they'll come out in court prior to trial in a proof evident hearing. I took from that they'd be asking for one at some point. (My opinion only). In a proof evident hearing the prosecution would have to show there's enough to go forward on the murder 1 charges and thus no bond is appropriate (I'm totally paraphrasing my own opinion and understanding here). It's a very low bar, and I've not seen a court (doesn't mean it's never happened) decide no bond or that burden hadn't been met. In short unless all charges are dropped/reduced, no bond is getting set.

All MOO

That's actually not really true. Per the Colorado constitution:

Section 19. Right to bail � exceptions. (1) All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties pending disposition of charges except:

(a) For capital offenses when proof is evident or presumption is great;

Article II, Bill of Rights

This is mirrored in the CRS:

2016 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 16 - :: Criminal Proceedings :: Code of Criminal Procedure :: Article 4 - :: Release From Custody Pending Final Adjudication :: Part 1 - :: Release on Bail :: § 16-4-101. Bailable offenses - definitions

"No bail" is not automatic. If there was something super exculpatory there would not longer be "evident proof" or "great presumption".

 

[katydid23]

I have totally changed my mind since reading the SP book.

However, you are exactly right as to how he acts. People keep saying why doesn’t he do something to protect the children when she is being inapprorpiate . He is there on the scene. Why doesn’t he speak up.

Yup, Turn the tables and ask why the abused women does not speak up.

CW was abused and frightened of his wife?

 

[liltexans]

Interesting but can I just ask if this is heavily researched as to how SP was raised? Because it does bug me that the mother is ALWAYS blamed. Did SP have a dad involved with his upbringing? And this "bad mothering," the smothering and oppressive mother, they KNOW this is how he was raised? I am not sure I buy this as the explanation for these sociopaths. Seems reductive and mommy-blaming IMO

Normally, I'm with you 100% about all of the "mommy blaming". I always complain that mothers get the blame no matter what and fathers usually get a pass, whether they were present or absent in the child's life. But Scott Peterson (and Ted Bundy for that matter) are completely different situations. I don't want to derail this thread, and of course, nothing about Scott Peterson's mother or any other murderer's mother or outside influence justifies the murderer's actions.

I haven't read much information about Chris Watts' family of origin. I get the impression that his childhood was normal/unremarkable. But that's just an impression, possibly due to an overall lack of information released thus far about his childhood.

 

[human]

I have said those exact words to my hubby before. and he LAUGHS. Because he really doesn't care about fashion one bit. It means nothing to him. He mocks people who do care.

But he works in the entertainment industry so he allows me to dress him so it doesn't hurt his career as it might, if he wore what he chooses for himself.

entertainment industry? There is a lot of latitude there. Now that is scary. My hubby bought his jeans at .....Menards. So do not give me your tale of woe.

 

[LittleFleurDeLys]

If it is 'abusive' to tell your spouse that they have a lack of fashion sense, and to pick out and purchase all their clothing for work and important events, then ARREST ME right now. I have been abusive for 36 years now.

My husband owns one shirt which I absolutely hate. It has weird colors on it and makes him at least ten years older. It simply doesn't look good on him. I told him at least 10000 times but he never listens to me...
I thought about secretly getting rid of it. I could never do this because I know he (somehow) likes it but I wish I could .

But back to topic: I think that there are always two parts playing in a relationship when it comes to situations like this. One who likes to lead and the other who want's to follow. He could have simply said: Shannan - thank you sweetie, but it's my style and if you want me than you'll need to accept me the way I am. Instead he accepted her buying him new clothes. I mean he was a grown up man and I'm sure he had the possibitly to speak for himself more than once. And at that point (without children and being married) he could have simply ended it in an instant. But for whatever reason he decided to hold on.

 

[Tippy Lynn]

If I were a defendant I would sure want someone like you on my jury.

I think it would depend on the evidence presented. I’m guessing more will come out that will sway me to one side.

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

Motive is important, and reaching a conclusion as to what it is, simply explains the act, and doesn’t excuse it. Agreed.

But saying that he may have been abused, so that’s a potential motive, still doesn’t explain the murders of his children.

Whatever the dynamic that existed between him and his wife, what he did to his children is inexplicable.

Agree, the deaths of the girls takes it out if the realm of being about the dynamics between CW and SW, if that were the case, they would still be alive.

 

[bonjoviblonde]

So now we are saying CW was abused by SW?

 

[human]

CW was abused and frightened of his wife?

As a scenario, he could be. I do not think this anymore, but his actions do show it. He seems to do whatever she wants. He does not save his child who does not want to be squirted, for instance. It could be because he is abused.Not physically, but mentally. Never good enough.Never does the right thing.

The fact that she is always praising him is as if she is the superior judge and he is the child who is imrpoving to meet her better standards.

That is a way of looking at it.

I do not like her gratuitous hyping of him on the net. It really bothers me. It’s as if she is approving.