UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 Apr 2016 #12

[tlcya]

Helen Bailey murder: Fiance Ian Stewart found guilty

Ian Stewart, 56, had denied murdering Helen Bailey at their home in Royston, Hertfordshire, in order to get his hands on her near-£4m fortune.


He was convicted at St Albans Crown Court following a seven-week trial.


Police say they will look again at the death of Stewart's wife Diane in 2010 following the verdict.

UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016
Thread #2
Thread #3
Thread #4
Thread #5
Thread #6
Thread #7
Thread #8
Thread #9
Thread #10
Thread #11

 

[Skigh]

The man convicted of murdering children’s author Helen Bailey appeared before a crown court judge today accused of killing his wife six years earlier.

Ian Stewart was jailed for life at St Albans crown court in 2017 after a jury convicted him of killing his 51-year-old partner, who wrote the Electra
We'll be bringing you the very latest updates, pictures and video on this breaking news story.

Man who killed children's author Helen Bailey charged with murdering his wife

 

[ZaZara]

The man convicted of murdering children’s author Helen Bailey appeared before a crown court judge today accused of killing his wife six years earlier.

Ian Stewart was jailed for life at St Albans crown court in 2017 after a jury convicted him of killing his 51-year-old partner, who wrote the Electra
We'll be bringing you the very latest updates, pictures and video on this breaking news story.

Man who killed children's author Helen Bailey charged with murdering his wife

Oh glory be! I hadn't seen that one coming at all, what a way to start the week! So they managed to find evidence to charge him?

Fingers crossed....

 

[Alyce]

This is brilliant news - so pleased he has not got away with this. I feel for Diane's family, justice hopefully will be done, but also very sad for them.

 

[Alyce]

I have started a new thread for Diane - have put it into Crime in the News as was not sure where it should go !

UK Diane Stewart, 47, found dead, June 25, 2010

 

[Tiny]

This is such great news. We all wondered about this as it seemed too much of a coincidence.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

Just saw this flag up on the Mail and was shouting 'No! No!' in disbelief after all this time and hearing nothing, followed by 'Yes! Yes!' as all of us who followed the original case had held suspicions about his first wife, given the circumstances of her death.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

Killer Ian Stewart ‘to appeal his conviction for murder of millionaire fiancée Helen Bailey’

His lawyers believe a new witness who saw victim Helen Bailey, 51, at a critical time could throw doubt on the safety of the verdict.


Killer Ian Stewart 'to appeal conviction for murder of millionaire fiancée'

 

[Alyce]

Wonder which witness it is.

Sounds like IS is getting worried about his upcoming hearing re Diane

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

And why has this witness only just materialised? Why didn't he or she come forward at the time, or did they and it was dismissed?

 

[Alyce]

There were a few witnesses who claimed to have seen Helen after the time that the Prosecution say she was already dead.
From memory -
A mother and daughter who lived round the corner, claimed they saw Helen that afternoon, walking past their house.
A woman who said she was driving home from the hairdressers, and saw Helen with Boris, walking along the road, just outside her ( Helen's ) house. Interestingly the clothing she described Helen as wearing, did not match any typical Helen clothing. This woman claimed she was driving quite slowly because it was raining. I remember us doing research and proving that there was no rain at that time on that day.

The third witness was a man in Broadstairs who claimed he saw Helen driving her car, a month or two after she had been killed. He was not a very positive witness and did admit that his memory became more focussed after a visit from a Sun journalist.

 

[Cherwell]

The third witness was a man in Broadstairs who claimed he saw Helen driving her car, a month or two after she had been killed. He was not a very positive witness and did admit that his memory became more focussed after a visit from a Sun journalist.

Didn't he also have poor eyesight, or wasn't wearing his specs - or something like that?

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

But that Sun report - only place I have seen it mentioned - says a new witness, which implies to me someone who hadn't come forward before?

 

[Alyce]

Didn't he also have poor eyesight, or wasn't wearing his specs - or something like that?

Yes he did, well remembered

 

[Alyce]

But that Sun report - only place I have seen it mentioned - says a new witness, which implies to me someone who hadn't come forward before?

Good point. Wonder what reason the person will give for not having said anything for 4 years

 

[ZaZara]

Well, eeeh.... how to put this tactfully?

A credible sighting after 4 years would hold more water if IS had been convicted of a no-body crime. Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to remember that this was not the case.

No date is mentioned in the report in The Sun, the sighting might even have happened after Ms Bailey's remains had been found.

IS and his team will have to prove that this new sighting is reliable and real. Against all other damning evidence. How does he think they will manage to pull that one off?

I predict we will hear no more of this, or very little at the most.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

I am not sure much will come of this. The Sun is only place I have seen reported.

An old lag who shared a cell with IS selling a tip to the papers for a few bob?

 

[Cherwell]

It doesn't sound as though it's likely to get anywhere. The "source" has phrased it quite cagily!

It is not thought an appeal has been lodged formally yet but a source said: “There is clearly enough for Stewart to believe he can mount a convincing attempt at overturning the verdict.”
The source added: “Actually doing so will prove very difficult.”

 

[T41]

Hello1 I'm back here after a very long time.

Interested Bystander said: ↑
Thank you Alyce. From what you say it looks as though the year and the month could be wrong. I wonder if it was misinterpretation of poor handwriting. The judge made it clear no parole before the end of his minimum term of 34 years. So no parole is possible after he has served half his sentence. Can he appeal that?

Yes could be the writing.

So 22 / 1 / 2021 should be 22 / 7 / 2051

so someone has misread the 7 and put 1 instead

and again, they have misread 5 and put 2 instead

very bad mistakes to make if that is what's happened.

I think he can appeal length of sentence yes... and am sure he will have a go.

Alyce, Feb 27, 2017

I couldn't find any update on this (but yes, I could have missed it), other than Alyce saying she hadn't had any feedback:

ZaZara said: ↑
Hi Alyce, do you have news about the Parole Eligibility Date (PED) : 22/1/2021??

Morning ZaZara. No, I have heard nothing further. Sent a few messages but no response at all. Very odd. Not odd that they have not responded to me, but odd that no amendment has been made to the date.
Seems they do not check their info once it is posted.

Alyce, Mar 12, 2017

So as I couldn't find an update here I have finally (I had many pages to posts to catch up on!) saw his Parole Eligibility Date does seem to have been amended but to 22/1/2050. I cannot seem to be able to work out how to copy and paste but the link is here:

https://www.thelawpages.com/court-cases/Ian-Stewart-19402-1.law

 

[neteditor]

I think any idea of an appeal against conviction is laughable. I mean, who knew about the location where her body was found? The previous owners of the house, a neighbour who was told it was a good place to hide a body long before the event, and possibly a few random plumbers down the years who might have worked on the house. An utter joke to think any of them would have wanted Helen dead, and far less had the opportunity to access the hidden cesspit. Nope, there is nobody else who could have committed this crime. And I think if an appeal was to be successful on one point, i.e. a witness (notoriously unreliable) who claims to have seen her after police say she was dead, they'd have to convince a judge the jury convicted on only that point wouldn't they? As mentioned, the jury already heard evidence of sightings which clearly they dismissed on the basis of the strength of other evidence that he was guilty. Not sure how any new witness could change that.