GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #1

[Tortoise]

I don't know if this is allowed, but suffocation is something that I thought about when I read about his 1st wife's sudden unexpected death.

 

[Tortoise]

[FONT=&quot]12:41[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][h=3]Stewart also went to local refuse tip with a duvet-shaped object said to have been used in the killing[/h]Mr Trimmer adds: “On the same day in the afternoon, the defendant went to a local refuse tip and is seen disposing of a large white object, probably a duvet used in the killing or transporting of Helen’s body.
“A few days later on the 13th the defendant is seen to visit the same refuse tip. The crown suggest that he was there to ensure that duvet had gone.
“Helen Bailey was not reported missing until a day or two later.”

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/live-day-one-murder-trial-12427078

[/FONT]

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Not sure he'll benefit from Helens estate at all now. It would be proceeds of crime wouldn't it?

Unless you mean if he had his own share of it?

No, he won't get a penny, unless of course he is found not guilty:

The Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Act 2011 (c. 7) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom altering the rules on inheritance in England and Wales.

The Act originates in a 2000 case, when a man murdered his parents. The court determined that not just the murderer but also his son should be disinherited. The Law Commission took the matter into consideration, and published a Consultation Paper in October 2003 followed by a Final Report on 27 July 2005, which became the basis for this Act.[1]

It came into force on 1 February 2012. Source: Wiki

 

[Alyce]

Looks like they got some good evidence from the PM, thank goodness...

Stewart took part in campaign to find 'missing' author

Prosecutors say Stewart took part in a campaign to find Helen - including a search for her locally.

Following the discovery of Helen’s body, tests were carried out.
Mr Trimmer said: “In her body traces of a drug called Zopiclone were found.
He said the drug is a sedative used for insomnia - adding: “It was prescribed to this defendant.
“Analysis of hair samples show that he had, the Crown say, been administering that drug to her for some time.


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-latest-9595054

 

[Alyce]

I don't know if this is allowed, but suffocation is something that I thought about when I read about his 1st wife's sudden unexpected death.

Yes, it's very hard to prove suffocation, so a possibility for sure. I so hope they will re investigate the wife's death. Length of time re the fit is another factor but will say no more on that here.

 

[Tortoise]

Gosh I just feel so incredibly sad and angry for her reading all this.

 

[Alyce]

No, he won't get a penny, unless of course he is found not guilty:

The Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Act 2011 (c. 7) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom altering the rules on inheritance in England and Wales.

The Act originates in a 2000 case, when a man murdered his parents. The court determined that not just the murderer but also his son should be disinherited. The Law Commission took the matter into consideration, and published a Consultation Paper in October 2003 followed by a Final Report on 27 July 2005, which became the basis for this Act.[1]

It came into force on 1 February 2012. Source: Wiki

Am fairly sure he would still retain his share of the house, if he contributed to the purchase.. Am so hoping he did not put any money in. His own house did not sell until a year after the Royston house was purchased, so hopefully Helen was the sole owner.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Awful as it is to read that he probably killed her intentionally and slowly, I am glad that it seems more likely he'll go down for murder.

 

[Tortoise]

[FONT=&quot]12:44[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][h=3]Stewart 'did not answer questions on arrest'[/h]The court has been told that when Stewart was arrested he provided no response to police.
But in December a defence statement was handed to prosecutors.
In the statement Stewart asserts that two men named ‘Joe and Nick’ were responsible for the murder and disposal of Helen’s body.

Mr Trimmer continues: “The Crown say simply this was a long planned deliberate killing, a cynically executed murder that had money as its driving motive.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-latest-9595054

[/FONT]

 

[Alyce]

Gosh I just feel so incredibly sad and angry for her reading all this.

Me too. Some cases affect me more than others but even I did not think it was going to turn out to be such a cruel and calculated murder. Even though I had no doubts he did it, I was still thinking it was something that happened unexpectedly in a panic, not a cold pre planned event. No wonder he had no problem or qualms about staying in the house, knowing that Helen's body was lying yards away from him.

 

[Alyce]

[FONT="]12:44[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#141414][FONT="][h=3]Stewart 'did not answer questions on arrest'[/h]The court has been told that when Stewart was arrested he provided no response to police.
But in December a defence statement was handed to prosecutors.
In the statement Stewart asserts that two men named ‘Joe and Nick’ were responsible for the murder and disposal of Helen’s body.

Mr Trimmer continues: “The Crown say simply this was a long planned deliberate killing, a cynically executed murder that had money as its driving motive.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-latest-9595054

[/FONT]

Ah Joe and Nick .......... interestingly, I read, elsewhere, a theory that someone put up which was not dissimilar to this. Are we going down the drugs route ?

 

[Tortoise]

[FONT=&quot]12:44[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][h=3]'Helen was already dead when she was reported missing'[/h]At 3.57pm on Friday April 15, 2016, the defendant, ‘seemingly under pressure from those who were concerned about Helen’, reported her missing, the prosecution said.
“In reality, the defendant had already murdered her and and hidden her body in a septic tank buried in the ground underneath the garage at their home.
“He sent texts to her phone knowing of course that they would be recorded but not answered. He had possession of her phone himself. He denied that and insisted the phone was not with him.”


12:48
[h=3]His defence[/h]Stewart was arrested in July and interviewed - he gave no response following the discovery of Helen’s body. In a defence statement served on the crown on December 12, 2016, the defendant asserts that two men named just Joe and Nick were responsible for the murder and disposal of the body of Helen Bailey.


12:49
[h=3]'Money was the driving motive', jury told[/h]The prosecution state that this was a long-planned, deliberate killing. It was a “cynically executed murder” that had “money as its driving motive”.


12:52
[h=3]Bailey met Stewart on the internet and referred to him in a book as the 'Gorgeous Grey Haired Widower'[/h]In October 2015, Helen published her first adult book - called “Bad Things Happen in Good Bikinis” after the accidental death of her husband while on holiday on 2011. She described in the book how she had moved on with her grief and had begun chatting on the internet to a man referred to as the ‘Gorgeous Grey Haired Widower’. This was Ian Stewart, who she went on to live with. The pair became engaged and kept details of their engagement private, to the extent that Stewart’s two sons knew nothing of the engagement or the upcoming wedding.
Mr Trimmer said: “Helen Bailey had booked flights for her and Stewart to go to Palma in June 2016 and had arranged for their regular dog sitter Maria Rogers to look after Boris.
“Helen’s father was taken seriously ill in March 2016. It would be very out of character for her not to stay in touch.”

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/live-day-one-murder-trial-12427078




[/FONT]

 

[Tortoise]

[FONT=&quot]12:55[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][h=3]Stewart was set to 'benefit' £1.8m in event of author's death[/h]The court heard when the couple bought a £1.5million home together in Royston, Herts., it was Helen who put in the majority of the money.
In the event of her death Stewart would ‘benefit’ to the sum of £1,800,000, the court was told.
That’s on top of the value of the house in Royston and a second home they shared in Broadstairs, Kent.


12:57
[h=3]Court adjourns for lunch[/h]The court has now adjourned for a lunch break - it is expected to reconvene after 2pm.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-latest-9595054


[/FONT]

 

[Tortoise]

[FONT=&quot]12:58[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][h=3]Author made a will in 2014, naming Stewart as the beneficiary[/h]The prosecution state that on the event of her death, Stewart would benefit from £1.8million in addition to the value of the main Royston house and the second home in Broadstairs. Helen Bailey made a will in 2014 - she was apparently concerned that Stewart might be financially vulnerable if she died.
She expressly provided that her marriage to Stewart would not automatically revoke her will, as would otherwise have been the case. A Power of Attorney was registered in May 2015, giving control of her affairs in favour of the defendant and her brother John Bailey should she become unfit to administer her own affairs.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/live-day-one-murder-trial-12427078

[/FONT]

 

[Alyce]

So, is there any evidence of this engagement or is it just the story IS is telling ? Very very odd not to even tell the two sons.

I think he was just trying to create a story that they were moving towards a wedding, when the reality was Helen was moving away from him.

 

[Tortoise]

Ah Joe and Nick .......... interestingly, I read, elsewhere, a theory that someone put up which was not dissimilar to this. Are we going down the drugs route ?

I don't know how he can say this and still allege he thought she'd gone missing.

 

[Alyce]

[FONT="]12:58[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#141414][FONT="][h=3]Author made a will in 2014, naming Stewart as the beneficiary[/h]The prosecution state that on the event of her death, Stewart would benefit from £1.8million in addition to the value of the main Royston house and the second home in Broadstairs. Helen Bailey made a will in 2014 - she was apparently concerned that Stewart might be financially vulnerable if she died.
She expressly provided that her marriage to Stewart would not automatically revoke her will, as would otherwise have been the case. A Power of Attorney was registered in May 2015, giving control of her affairs in favour of the defendant and her brother John Bailey should she become unfit to administer her own affairs.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/live-day-one-murder-trial-12427078

[/FONT]

Just seen another snippet on this - now added by Cambridge News. Beginning to sound like another Ian we know - Johnston ( Sadie Hartley trial )

She expressly provided that her marriage to Stewart would not automatically revoke her will, as would otherwise have been the case. A Power of Attorney was registered in May 2015, giving control of her affairs in favour of the defendant and her brother John Bailey should she become unfit to administer her own affairs. The defendant twice enquired about this, requesting copies of it in June 2016 when Helen was still regarded as ‘missing’.

 

[Tortoise]

This has to be the longest planning I've heard of, apart from Sadie Hartley case. Psychopath is all I can say. IMO.

 

[Alyce]

Lots of tweets now that the details are being revealed.

 

[MillyM]

Will be interesting to see who he alleges these Joe and Nick characters were. Is he going to imply blackmail?

Always supicious for me when he failed to appear in press or TV appeals. Of course with the public all now so alert to body language, he was no doubt afraid of giving something away.