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

[Interested Bystander]

I think it was in one of the early tweets that the prosecution's case is that he probably dragged her in the duvet to the garage.

Thanks for all the updates Alyce.

Do you not think there would have been evidence left on/between the paviours that something had been dragged across them; maybe small threads from the fabric of the duvet cover. If the "bricks" are anything like ours they would not be the smoothest surface to drag something across. However, it might be that rain could have washed any evidence into the sand filling between each "brick". I wonder whether the police even thought to check, (microscopically) OR, indeed, the sack barrow mentioned earlier was used. What a grim thought.

Are we sure that the duvet itself was dumped? I seem to remember it was said to be a duvet cover. If he used the duvet to drag H to the garage it is quite likely it would have urine deposited on/in it and if it still had a cover on it, surely that cover would have been damaged by the dragging, as would an uncovered duvet. If not thrown away, the duvet would definitely have needed laundering. IS couldn't risk not doing so. A dead body is very likely to empty the bladder, especially if it is disturbed and/or have brick dust deposited on it.

I wonder why the Pros. asked how HB+IS dried their bed linen? The must have some sort of evidence they thought might be important but, unless we didn't hear all the questions, the son who lived at home during the week wasn't asked whether or not linen was actually drying during the four days before IS reported H missing.

 

[jessie]

If I were on the jury, I think at this stage, I would start having doubts about this being a clear cut murder. Just me?

I consider that reasonable MillyM. Certainly shows you are taking an unbiased view of the case.

I think you posted this after one of the son's evidence?

I can certainly understand that evidence provides a completely different view of IS.
.
I'm sure the jury will take everything into account but it's hard not to be moved by the evidence of family - they must be having such a dreadful time understanding and believing what could have happened.

 

[michelle230]

I was in court today.
Firstly I just want to say that the two sons are fine and dignified young men. How hard it must have been to not only give evidence...not only to give evidence in a case where their father is on trial for murder...but to give evidence where the father was in clear view of them as they were in the witness box.
At break time a small group stood talking together outside the courtroom - including the two sons and Helen`s brother (also a lovely man). He shook hand with the boys and it was very touching to see the decency of these people who find themselves thrown together in such a painful situation. None of them asked for, or in their wildest dreams, would have expected to spend so much time together in this situation. It further adds to the disbelief that if IS is guilty, he should put his own sons through this ordeal.
It is clear that Helen and the boys really liked each other (Helen had given J the personalised number plate she had from her former husband as they had the same initials). There`s lots more I could write but I`m mindful that this is a public site.
One other thing that I don`t know if it was mentioned - it`s in regard to the note. One son said that when he and his father were looking through Helen`s papers/things he saw a (the?) note which read "Gone to Broadstairs. Call me. Love you". He said that the handwriting was small and neat - like Helen`s? - who I think he thought at first had written it. But at some point, his father said that * he * had written it when he was going to Broadstairs. I don`t know - it was kind of confusing and not much was made of this by the Counsel but I wondered if it was originally planned to look as if it was from Helen, and then IS knew it wouldn`t work, so then said it was from him! I may be wrong but that`s my understanding.
Also kind of strange that one son was told greater (though still very sketchy) details of the two guys, but the other was told very little. I have my theories as do others who were present but don`t really want to expand.
However IMO these guys are a fabrication.
Michelle

 

[michelle230]

Also quite a few have expressed that they think IS may well not take the stand.

 

[Ironside]

Also quite a few have expressed that they think IS may well not take the stand.

If I was his defence I'd advise him not to take it as the prosecution will tear him a new er... wound if he does.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[Legally Bland]

“I discussed this with Jamie, but Jamie hasn’t seen dad at a visit yet. I’ve been visiting dad every Sunday, but the first time he mentioned the two men was in December 2016.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/new...bailey-murder-trial-week-12452783?98797?98098

Also kind of strange that one son was told greater (though still very sketchy) details of the two guys, but the other was told very little. I have my theories as do others who were present but don`t really want to expand.
However IMO these guys are a fabrication.
Michelle

RSBM. I read Alyce's quote as J hadn't visited IS in prison, but it's worded a bit oddly so not sure. That may explain why J has little knowledge of Nick and Joe.

Or maybe IS thought O would be more sympathetic to the tale or some other reason.

 

[Alyce]

Do you not think there would have been evidence left on/between the paviours that something had been dragged across them; maybe small threads from the fabric of the duvet cover. If the "bricks" are anything like ours they would not be the smoothest surface to drag something across. However, it might be that rain could have washed any evidence into the sand filling between each "brick". I wonder whether the police even thought to check, (microscopically) OR, indeed, the sack barrow mentioned earlier was used. What a grim thought.

Are we sure that the duvet itself was dumped? I seem to remember it was said to be a duvet cover. If he used the duvet to drag H to the garage it is quite likely it would have urine deposited on/in it and if it still had a cover on it, surely that cover would have been damaged by the dragging, as would an uncovered duvet. If not thrown away, the duvet would definitely have needed laundering. IS couldn't risk not doing so. A dead body is very likely to empty the bladder, especially if it is disturbed and/or have brick dust deposited on it.

I wonder why the Pros. asked how HB+IS dried their bed linen? The must have some sort of evidence they thought might be important but, unless we didn't hear all the questions, the son who lived at home during the week wasn't asked whether or not linen was actually drying during the four days before IS reported H missing.

Just bringing this bit of the evidence back up - I also could not remember the exact description re the duvet.


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.




So either it was just the duvet, or the duvet had a white cover...my guess would be duvet and cover.
As you say, the cover would have marks on it from the drive, probably be ripped in places..not safe to keep and wash.

The route - house to garage - could also have been out of conservatory door and across a section of the garden. Less chance of being seen and may have been easier, dragging on grass rather than brick.

 

[michelle230]

RSBM. I read Alyce's quote as J hadn't visited IS in prison, but it's worded a bit oddly so not sure. That may explain why J has little knowledge of Nick and Joe.

Or maybe IS thought O would be more sympathetic to the tale or some other reason.

Apparently IS was punched by the two guys and he (IS) was afraid and feared for his family`s safety. How very strange that he didn`t report the menacing and threatening situation to the police. After all, surely he wanted to protect his family?
And the mention of the guys telling IS to take Helen`s phone to Broadstairs? This was briefly mentioned somewhere.
Yes – of course they did…It all makes sense now

 

[Alyce]

Having just checked re the duvet evidence, I also came back, again, to the info re what was in the cess pit.

A pillow slip, a dog toy ( that makes me so sad ) and two black bin bags.

Trying now to think what purpose the bin bags served.

 

[Tortoise]

RSBM. I read Alyce's quote as J hadn't visited IS in prison, but it's worded a bit oddly so not sure. That may explain why J has little knowledge of Nick and Joe.

Or maybe IS thought O would be more sympathetic to the tale or some other reason.

One of the tweets said J had never visited his dad in prison.

 

[Tortoise]

Oliver Stewart ends testimony saying he had visited his father in prison "almost every Sunday," but his older brother Jamie had never gone

https://twitter.com/wmarxsky

 

[Tortoise]

Michelle, how did IS react to his sons giving evidence? Same as usual?

 

[Ironside]

Having just checked re the duvet evidence, I also came back, again, to the info re what was in the cess pit.

A pillow slip, a dog toy ( that makes me so sad ) and two black bin bags.

Trying now to think what purpose the bin bags served.

Perhaps he put the bags on her after she died to stop her dna getting everywhere on the journey to the cesspit.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[Tortoise]

Oh, another question for Michelle - was the Tesco footage clear that it was IS and Helen?

 

[Alyce]

Perhaps he put the bags on her after she died to stop her dna getting everywhere on the journey to the cesspit.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

Yes, or perhaps used them as an outer cover ( body and duvet inside the bags ) - same reason re dna, but also bin liner handles would make it easier to drag the body

 

[Tortoise]

Strange too that IS never offered to tell JS that Helen had gone, until JS looked for her next morning and asked.

And I thought it odd that IS took OS aside (into his study) to tell him that Helen had gone. Like he had built up to telling him, and it wasn't a casual conversation, as it would have been if Helen really had just gone away for a break.

 

[michelle230]

Michelle, how did IS react to his sons giving evidence? Same as usual?

He did show emotion at times...like..."my boys..my boys..." although they didn`t look at him which must have been difficult for them as he was in their clear line of vision when giving evidence. I didn`t see, but someone noticed that he shed tears when J took the stand.

Re: the Tesco question, the videos were shown just before 4 pm. I honestly can`t remember but to be honest I think that this detail, along with many others, does not seem to be pushed/strongly/questioned by either side. I`ve noticed this since the trial began.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Just bringing this bit of the evidence back up - I also could not remember the exact description re the duvet. Surely, if it was only soiled, he would have washed it, especially if it was just the cover. Surely, if it was only soiled he would have washed it but maybe not. I know some people throw anything soiled with blood/faeces etc throw the item away.


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.




So either it was just the duvet, or the duvet had a white cover...my guess would be duvet and cover.
As you say, the cover would have marks on it from the drive, probably be ripped in places..not safe to keep and wash.

The route - house to garage - could also have been out of conservatory door and across a section of the garden. Less chance of being seen and may have been easier, dragging on grass rather than brick.

This is what I read but I am inclined to think that the Prosecutor would be more accurate. IS had every reason to be less than honest.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/live-day-one-murder-trial-12427078
14.22
Stewart told police Helen was upset after 'incident in her Jeep'
On April 11, Stewart told police at an early stage that Helen had loaded his car with items of rubbish to be taken to the tip, including a soiled duvet cover and cardboard boxes.
He also said Helen had left the address sometime in the morning to buy milk but had an incident in her Jeep and had come home upset, saying she was never driving again.

 

[michelle230]

" I think that this detail, along with many others, does not seem to be pushed/strongly/questioned by either side. I`ve noticed this since the trial began."

I`ve been thinking about this. I wonder if it`s because the police have got such a strong case and so much evidence that when they give evidence, there will be nothing left to question. Just my thoughts!

 

[Joely 123]

Very revealing - and trust a Solicitor to give him the once over!