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

[Alyce]

This is the testimony re the Tesco footage ( or at least the bit of info that we have )

Alleged CCTV footage of Stewart and Ms Bailey together

The first CCTV footage jurors are being shown is on April 9, 2016, of Ms Bailey and Stewart at a Tesco store.

Mr Wynn said whilst the couple were there an incident of shoplifting occurred and a security guard asked to use Stewart’s phone.

This CCTV footage was obtained during the investigation of that theft, he said. The CCTV is now being played and this is the first alleged sighting of Ms Bailey on CCTV.

The defence deny the two people seen in the footage were Ms Bailey and Stewart, jurors are told.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...83?98797?98098


Am still trying to work out the relevance, which no doubt will become clear eventually.

 

[Alyce]

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.

Very good point.

Because the Pros statement said * large white object * and * probably a duvet * I was imagining a large duvet.

But in reality, having suffocated Helen ( allegedly ) it might have made it easier - and less weight to deal with - if he took the duvet out of its cover, and just used the cover ( and the bin bags ) to transport the body.
We have been told by the pathologist that there were no signs of struggle,no wounds etc on Helen's body, so presumably there would be nothing on the actual duvet, just on the cover.

So the tip item could have been the cover only.

 

[Joely 123]

Great illumination on time schedule .. and then he is still able to drive to Cambridge ..sounds fit and well to me

 

[Interested Bystander]

Very good point.

Because the Pros statement said * large white object * and * probably a duvet * I was imagining a large duvet.

But in reality, having suffocated Helen ( allegedly ) it might have made it easier - and less weight to deal with - if he took the duvet out of its cover, and just used the cover ( and the bin bags ) to transport the body.
We have been told by the pathologist that there were no signs of struggle,no wounds etc on Helen's body, so presumably there would be nothing on the actual duvet, just on the cover.

So the tip item could have been the cover only.

Urine would be the only likely "find". Once the body is dead the sphincters relax and both urine and faeces can leak but urine is most likely. However we don't know where she was killed but moving a body will cause pressure and cause leakage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphincter
Sphincters relax at death, often releasing fluids.[SUP][2][/SUP]

 

[Joely 123]

Alyce, thank you so much for updates, and especially beyond Cambridge News (I follow this) .. and your great decretive analysis x

 

[Joely 123]

Michelle - thank you for 'backstage' information. I was alerted to the writing being similar and thought of as Helen's. Red alert there. And my view of OS having more information than JS is that he was the one to visit IS in prison (it seems as if JS had not - certainly not in December when the story of'villains' was revealed to OS. I also feel that OS is a more emotional witness, being younger, and JS has distanced himself into objectivity.
How lovely to hear of the boys and Helen's brother sharing warmth - and gentle respect - in a vile and heartbreaking situation.

 

[Joely 123]

The dog toy is something I mentioned earlier. Did it have saliva of Boris, which proved poison - or (hideous thought) did he tempt Boris into the pit with the toy? I imagine he would not have needed the latter ploy because if Helen is there, Boris would have jumped anyway - if alive.

 

[Tortoise]

It wasn't until 22nd April that the police searched the garden and cesspit (the wrong one) with sniffer dogs.

So what came out today about the Jeep not being parked over the manhole when police first went to the house, is probably not that relevant. I doubt they were looking into manholes at that early stage.

 

[Alyce]

I think they did the first house search on Monday April 18 ........ so presumably it was sometime between the Monday and the Friday April 22 when they came back with the dogs and cesspit expert ! that the Jeep was moved to cover the manhole.

 

[michelle230]

Isn`t it beyond stupid to run to (on * the * day), and subsequently harass, the solicitor! Hardly the sharpest tool in the box, or clearly so consumed with greed that he simply couldn`t wait or consider what it would look like if things got more complicated. Of course it looks like exactly what it is! This, as well as increasing the Standing Order to £4000. With regards to the property, apart from anything else, the POA was joint with Helen`s brother. He must have known it wasn`t going to happen (the flat sale), or else he was totally deluded.
He was never going to get away with this. He has not only sealed Helen`s fate, but as far as the evidence goes, his own too.
Michelle

 

[michelle230]

Michelle - thank you for 'backstage' information. I was alerted to the writing being similar and thought of as Helen's. Red alert there. And my view of OS having more information than JS is that he was the one to visit IS in prison (it seems as if JS had not - certainly not in December when the story of'villains' was revealed to OS. I also feel that OS is a more emotional witness, being younger, and JS has distanced himself into objectivity.
How lovely to hear of the boys and Helen's brother sharing warmth - and gentle respect - in a vile and heartbreaking situation.

Hi Joely,
Remember than O was younger than J when he lost his mother and was left with his father as his only parent.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Isn`t it beyond stupid to run to (on * the * day), and subsequently harass, the solicitor! Hardly the sharpest tool in the box, or clearly so consumed with greed that he simply couldn`t wait or consider what it would look like if things got more complicated. Of course it looks like exactly what it is! This, as well as increasing the Standing Order to £4000. With regards to the property, apart from anything else, the POA was joint with Helen`s brother. He must have known it wasn`t going to happen (the flat sale), or else he was totally deluded.
He was never going to get away with this. He has not only sealed Helen`s fate, but as far as the evidence goes, his own too.
Michelle

I am half expecting IS, when he takes the stand, to say the £4000 was to pay off the two villains or various other bills that maybe H used to pay. He will have an excuse. He has had a lot of time to sit and think about it.

 

[Tortoise]

Fancy telling his son that he was in danger. It's bad enough to drag him into his dark world of deceit, but to put fear in him too. That is just below low.

 

[Joely 123]

I hope it as clear to the Jurors as it is to us. IS is showing psychopathic tendencies where he can be above all in his authority and guilt. It is impossible to change standing order, go to Solicitors with demands over Gateshead property, rush to a tip with laundry, pretend to write a note from Helen, turn up a bowls in Cambridge, buy Chinese food .. without cracking with remorse. And then lying to his own Sons over and over again. Reminds me of the canoe disappearance where he lied to his Sons for years.

 

[Joely 123]

Total sense in madness x

 

[Zab]

What puzzles me... if it looks like that it is a clear cut case that IS is guilty, why have they planned the proceedings to last 6 weeks? I have this awful feeling there are more sordid news to come, as if it was not already. I feel very sorry for both families involved.

 

[Alyce]

Isn`t it beyond stupid to run to (on * the * day), and subsequently harass, the solicitor! Hardly the sharpest tool in the box, or clearly so consumed with greed that he simply couldn`t wait or consider what it would look like if things got more complicated. Of course it looks like exactly what it is! This, as well as increasing the Standing Order to £4000. With regards to the property, apart from anything else, the POA was joint with Helen`s brother. He must have known it wasn`t going to happen (the flat sale), or else he was totally deluded.
He was never going to get away with this. He has not only sealed Helen`s fate, but as far as the evidence goes, his own too.
Michelle

Am thinking that the reason for his great haste - on the Monday - was so that he could pretend Helen had agreed all of this before she went away to Broadstairs ?
He probably knew that JB ( who seems to be a lovely, decent person ) would not make too much fuss about him running the day to day stuff - bills etc - and would not keep a check on that side of the cash flow.
But also probably realised that JB would not agree to him carrying out the sale of the flat or increasing his personal spending allowance.

 

[Joely 123]

I am there 100% with you Michelle. We all know how love and trust is blinding when so young - and in maturity facts come to focus. There is no doubt that both Sons loved their Father - and must be in terrible anguish but JS was able to answer with a certain detachment, which he had already established within himself.

 

[Joely 123]

If I were one of the Jurors - thinking matters over tonight.
My questions would be - why within a close family, previously an alone Father after their Mum died, would IS not talk more on the evening (11th) and day of 12th of his deep worry about Helen 'taking off' with only a note of 'I need time'. And if there had been - in truth - any history of attempted threat over Helen's paper in her study - surely he would have discussed this with his closest people. AND when John Bailey was worried about his Sister, in the beginning - surely IS would have told him of his fears rather than only to comment on a note from Helen. He deceived them all at that time - whilst he was flexing his argument over Gateshead conveyance -and shifting money - and going to the tip, he lied when he told his son a Bowls that he was in pain through sitting in the car for the journey to Cambridge. He lied when he told OS that he found a note, which does not exist. He lied to OS about Joe and Nick .. and he has lied throughout his presented defence.
He is now - seemingly - able to lie to himself. And through pleading 'not guilty' he has given the pain to his sons that he could have avoided. That is only my thought and doesn't alter the jury decision.

 

[pinklilies]

And in my opinion, he lied to Helen when he told her he was gonna marry her.