GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #2

[sar2them1984]

Work is an absolute nightmare at the moment so I'm having to catch up at the end of the day and by the time I've caught up I've mostly forgotten what I want to comment on. However I managed to jot down a few thoughts today...in no particular order:

1. I can understand Helens reluctance to initially announce the engagement given it was so soon after the death of JS and after meeting IS. People can be quite judgemental after all. However I would have thought it would have been more common knowledge by the time of her death

2. It surprises me that IS isn't able to explain what exactly upset Helen so much after her drive to the shop. If my other half came back in the supposed state that Helen did I'd be questioning what had happened to make him feel like that or caused that reaction. It doesn't seem that IS pursued this (if it did actually happen)

3. I may be recalling facts incorrectly but if testing proved Helen was being drugged only from January onwards then how are the concerns which Helens mom raised prior to January explained?

4. Eileen further mentioned that Helen had very high blood pressure so much so that doctors had warned her she could have a heart attack/stroke sitting at her desk. I'd be intrigued to know whether Helen was in medication for this and how similar the medication was to the ziplocane?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[DollyDiamond]

I too have felt the Prosecution seem to be taking a softy softly approach - I'm hoping its because a/ the evidence against him is so overwhelming they've no need to play hardball and b/ they are keeping their powder dry for some really knockout blows to come. Here's hoping!

 

[DollyDiamond]

Thanks for your kind words. I was paraphrasing John Bailey - the direct quote from his tribute to Helen on the 'Planet Grief' blog is as follows:

'Helen was exceptionally unlucky to lose both John and her own life in such different and tragic circumstances. However despite those tragedies I think her mantra 'It will all be alright in the end, I promise you' remains an enduring message from her to us all'. That brought a tear to my eye.

 

[michelle230]

I too have felt the Prosecution seem to be taking a softy softly approach - I'm hoping its because a/ the evidence against him is so overwhelming they've no need to play hardball and b/ they are keeping their powder dry for some really knockout blows to come. Here's hoping!

Glad it`s not just me then and I share your thoughts about possibly the evidence yet to come is so strong that there is no need for deeper questioning.

 

[Squamous]

Ah, thanks for that Dolly. He sounds like a wonderful brother. I really struggle with the fact that in the end it wasn't alright for poor Helen.

 

[michelle230]

I'm disappointed to read this, Michelle, because haven't you been in court on several days?
Reliant as we are on live reports and tweets, which are of necessity condensed, I'm always aware that we're not necessarily getting a complete account. I'd particularly like to know if the police witness explained why they weren't able to lift that hatch straight away.

Hi Cherwell,

Not had time to go to court unfortunately but maybe one day later in the week. I`ve just been aware of the quick procession of witnesses and very few questions.

 

[michelle230]

Hi Cherwell,

Not had time to go to court unfortunately but maybe one day later in the week. I`ve just been aware of the quick procession of witnesses and very few questions.

Sorry Cherwell, just saw the question about the hatch. I wasn`t in court that day, but it seems very odd indeed that this wasn`t raised, especially by the defence. But maybe it will all make sense in time...

 

[michelle230]

I wonder if IS has any friends who will give evidence on his behalf. So far we haven`t heard of anyone apart from one (or maybe two) women who contacted him to offer support when they heard about Helen going "missing". The one woman I recall offering support was an old friend from their children`s school, who was part of a couple that used to socialise with him and his wife. But did he, himself, have any friends offering support at the traumatic time of his missing partner?

 

[DollyDiamond]

Ah, thanks for that Dolly. He sounds like a wonderful brother. I really struggle with the fact that in the end it wasn't alright for poor Helen.

I know, it's so desperately sad and unfair.

 

[Cherwell]

Hi Cherwell,

Not had time to go to court unfortunately but maybe one day later in the week. I`ve just been aware of the quick procession of witnesses and very few questions.

Yes, I was just wondering how it compared with how it was when you were on the spot. Usually reporters do skip some things, because you sometimes get an extra snippet from a different reporter.

I know you weren't there the day they were talking about the hatch - it's just something I hoped was covered in more detail in court than in the reports.

 

[Joely 123]

Work is an absolute nightmare at the moment so I'm having to catch up at the end of the day and by the time I've caught up I've mostly forgotten what I want to comment on. However I managed to jot down a few thoughts today...in no particular order:

1. I can understand Helens reluctance to initially announce the engagement given it was so soon after the death of JS and after meeting IS. People can be quite judgemental after all. However I would have thought it would have been more common knowledge by the time of her death

2. It surprises me that IS isn't able to explain what exactly upset Helen so much after her drive to the shop. If my other half came back in the supposed state that Helen did I'd be questioning what had happened to make him feel like that or caused that reaction. It doesn't seem that IS pursued this (if it did actually happen)

3. I may be recalling facts incorrectly but if testing proved Helen was being drugged only from January onwards then how are the concerns which Helens mom raised prior to January explained?

4. Eileen further mentioned that Helen had very high blood pressure so much so that doctors had warned her she could have a heart attack/stroke sitting at her desk. I'd be intrigued to know whether Helen was in medication for this and how similar the medication was to the ziplocane?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I am answering your question No. 3 Sar2them 1984. I remembered at the beginning of the trial, when Dr Piper was Witness - he talked of an approximate time frame (3 months) January - April. He also said there were traces of Zopiclone in Helen's hair - dating back to December 2015 .. but said this could be due to 'Axial Diffusion'. I posted these quotes higher up this thread but shall find them again, if needed, later.

 

[Rayemonde]

I know a lot of people have been wondering how Helen could have been taken in by IS, but I recall a previous poster saying that Helen had written that after her husband's death, she eventually realised that he wasn't such a wonderful man after all... Does anyone else remember this? She may have made the same mistake again with IS.

 

[Florrie]

I am answering your question No. 3 Sar2them 1984. I remembered at the beginning of the trial, when Dr Piper was Witness - he talked of an approximate time frame (3 months) January - April. He also said there were traces of Zopiclone in Helen's hair - dating back to December 2015 .. but said this could be due to 'Axial Diffusion'. I posted these quotes higher up this thread but shall find them again, if needed, later.

I seem to recall that Dr Piper said that every section of hair represented 4 weeks. A certain number of cms per month ...not sure how much.
It's how they knew that Shannon Matthews had been drugged regularly if I remember correctly.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Florrie]

I know a lot of people have been wondering how Helen could have been taken in by IS, but I recall a previous poster saying that Helen had written that after her husband's death, she eventually realised that he wasn't such a wonderful man after all... Does anyone else remember this? She may have made the same mistake again with IS.

I think it's natural when you know somebody very well to be aware of their faults...we all have them. I wonder if this was just Helen musing as she came to terms with her grief and how to cope.

IS could have been the lovely man he seemed to be in a different scenario. Being out of work etc doesn't mean he could and should have been a "rebound" relationship. Just a shame that the evidence suggests otherwise.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Alyce]

I wonder if IS has any friends who will give evidence on his behalf. So far we haven`t heard of anyone apart from one (or maybe two) women who contacted him to offer support when they heard about Helen going "missing". The one woman I recall offering support was an old friend from their children`s school, who was part of a couple that used to socialise with him and his wife. But did he, himself, have any friends offering support at the traumatic time of his missing partner?

I actually wonder if he has any friends ?

He doesn't appear to work and it would seem he has not done so for quite some time ( as in years ) so no work colleagues.
His children are adults now, so all the - possible - school connections to other parents may have faded away.
He has mentioned in his evidence that Helen made friends with the neighbours - did he ?
The only comment I remember, from neighbours, is that when Helen was there, the gate was always unlocked, they could visit. Once Helen went *missing* the gates were always locked. Whilst I can appreciate that might be preferable, even to an innocent person who wanted to avoid folk constantly calling round when he was stressed out, it still gave the impression that IS did not have much contact with neighbours.
He is an only child, so no sibling support.
Perhaps friends from when he lived in Bassingbourn ? or still has some contacts with the widow/widower groups he used to belong to.

 

[mrazda71]

I was reactive to your post because you had brought it up a number of times throughout the thread and I resented the implication that by saying something about someone being evil meant that you didn't understand the complexities of people. But I should have responded with a cooler head.

THANKS

I do understand that Ian was not pure evil and that everything he ever did was not out of evil. However, the discussion of why he did certain things and to the depth of every little thing is to wonder on motive and how this all started.

For me, I saw all the missing posts on Twitter with Helen and I read the thread here on Websleuths and when everything came to light about IS, I was even more intrigued because, like you said, he's just a man. He's every man. He is the reason why crimes such as this are so scary - everyone said he was lovely, not a bad bone in his body... etc etc. He looks pretty harmless, sounds pretty harmless, acts pretty harmless - where are the warning signs?

THAT WAS EXACTLY MY POINT, AFTER REFLECTION IT SEEMS YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEANT.

That's what people are doing. They're just trying to associate warning signs to him, because that's how self-preservation works.

But alongside that, here is a man who IS evil in my book. Not in a fairytale kind of way, but in a he's a murderer kind of way. Yes, not inherently evil, but do we really let him get a pass because he's been a good boy previously?

I'VE NEVER SUGGESTED HE 'GET A PASS' FAR FROM IT. BUT, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT SOMEONE GETS TO OVER A HALF CENTURY IN AGE AND SUDDENLY REVEALS THEIR 'TRUE' SELF. BY ALL ACCOUNTS WE'VE HEARD SO FAR, HE WAS A GOOD HUSBAND AND FATHER AND OTHER THAN A DEAD HELEN & BORIS, WE HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO GO ON.

I don't doubt Helen had her faults - we all do. The reason people weren't bringing them up is because it serves no purpose. Anything brought up about IS and his accent and/or underpants is simply observational, like 'that wasn't what I expected'. It doesn't mean he's this evil character because his voice doesn't sound how we expect...

I WASN'T EXPECTING ANYONE TO BRING UP HELENS FAULTS, NO ONE HERE (OTHER THAN THE ONE MEMBER WHO DID KNOW HELEN IN REAL LIFE) KNOWS WHAT THEY WERE, HOW CAN THEY?

He's not the sum of this one event. But this one event is so huge and so atrocious, you wonder if there were other events that preceded it. Hence looking at the wife.

<modsnip>

As you've mentioned, you're free to your opinion. But with that comes the freedom for others to have theirs and not feel like they'll be mocked or ridiculed for posting.

THAT WAS NEVER MY INTENTION, WEBSLEUTH IS NOT A PLACE FOR THE SENSITIVE AND IF I UPSET YOU, I APOLOGISE UNRESERVEDLY.

I think we all want the same thing in the end and that's for justice to be served

AND I'M SURE IT WILL BE, IAN IS UNDOUBTEDLY GUILTY SO WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT ON THAT .

Please do not take my capitals as 'shouting', I'm on my phone and it was the easiest way to respond to your many varied points

 

[Cherwell]

<modsnip>

Speaking for myself, it's not like that at all.

I had never heard of Helen Bailey before her murder, and I have not read any of her novels. I am not in her target audience and don't have any children who might be. So she was not a "famous person" in my eyes.

Since hearing of Helen's murder I have read some extracts from her book about bereavement, and many passages from her blog. As I said earlier, this has given us an insight into her personality, opinions and feelings that is rarely available when we discuss a murder victim here. It does not make us "fans". Naturally our sympathies are with her as the victim.

 

[Joely 123]

I seem to recall that Dr Piper said that every section of hair represented 4 weeks. A certain number of cms per month ...not sure how much.
It's how they knew that Shannon Matthews had been drugged regularly if I remember correctly.

I checked back on Dr Piper's words on toxicology. It is interesting - in terms of Eileen Bailey's Witness video where the Defence tried to 'undermine' her memory of dates - and perhaps she did not have all dates exact - but I think Dr Piper's statement allows for the happenings that the Defence said applied to December, 2015 rather than Eileen Bailey's timeline memory - AND MAKES HER STATEMENT TRUE.

 

[Joely 123]

I actually wonder if he has any friends ?

He doesn't appear to work and it would seem he has not done so for quite some time ( as in years ) so no work colleagues.
His children are adults now, so all the - possible - school connections to other parents may have faded away.
He has mentioned in his evidence that Helen made friends with the neighbours - did he ?
The only comment I remember, from neighbours, is that when Helen was there, the gate was always unlocked, they could visit. Once Helen went *missing* the gates were always locked. Whilst I can appreciate that might be preferable, even to an innocent person who wanted to avoid folk constantly calling round when he was stressed out, it still gave the impression that IS did not have much contact with neighbours.
He is an only child, so no sibling support.
Perhaps friends from when he lived in Bassingbourn ? or still has some contacts with the widow/widower groups he used to belong to.

Helen did write about going to a neighbour's home with GGW and the happy evening they had. But I can't help believing that Helen would always be invited to events - and this doesn't necessarily suggest that IS would be. His life seemed to be supportive of his Sons - and sharing pursuits with them - such as driving into town with Jamie to .. perhaps to buy dog food - attending Jamie's bowls match - attending ARSENAL MATCHES - eating Chinese food.
But I don't think a socially engaged person - who doesn't remember names (given allowance for stress in interviews) of the 'new man' who was going to fix the Conservatory - or that there is no such colour as a Brown Dachshund. Only mention Boris because he was Helen's beloved and must have known this if he could listen well to others. And through this lack of sociability, I believe Helen had less opportunity to share her lovely home in Royston with her Brother and his Partner .. and many of her other friends.

 

[Joely 123]

Apologies if I'm commenting in the wrong place, I'm still getting the hang of this! Just want to say Hi and thank everyone for such an interesting and illuminating ongoing discussion. As others before me have said, I am glad to have found an outlet for my emotions, opinions and questions on this very distressing case. I did not know Helen but felt I did through her wonderfully clever, funny and direct writing. She communicated with such truth and was clearly a class act in all kinds of ways, both professionally and personally. It must have been quite something to have known her as a friend. For her to have met such an appalling and premature death, along with that beautiful little dog Boris who she loved so much, makes me feel pure rage!

I suppose I should declare an interest here - I'm a writer of a similar age to Helen and though not widowed, found myself unexpectedly single late in life. This thread is not about me but I'd like to share some observations that I hope others will find interesting. Like Helen, I relied on my gorgeous little dog for comfort and company as I contemplated a scary future as a single woman, a few decades past the first flush of youth. It is a daunting prospect for many of us and sadly this goes some way to explain why so many women 'settle' for men who really aren't worthy of them.

I think it's pretty clear to any reasonable person that Helen and IS were not an obvious match. Her intellect, achievements, eligibility, wealth (of course) and general appeal were far above his. He should have been a fling at best - her 'transitional man', ie the one who moves you on mentally from your lost love and prepares you to meet the next one. IS was not marriage material - so why did Helen (and why do so many other women) settle?

As Helen's brother has stated, Helen was hugely unlucky to have fallen for a dangerous psychopath and her fate at his hands was so mind bogglingly horrific, she could never have predicted it. Had she even known he was capable of harming her beloved Boris, she'd have shown him the door. It is heartbreakingly ironic that her blog was full of safety warnings for widows hitting the internet dating scene. It's too late for Helen and Boris but I hope other women who find themselves in a similar situation to Helen's in mid-life can learn some lessons from her tragedy.

I married a sociopath and I now see (with that wonderful thing called hindsight) that there were umpteen clues he did not love me and had only pursued me for my high salary and comfortable lifestyle. I willfully ignored/dismissed every clue about his real feelings for me. I now puzzle over why I clung to this denial for so long and went ahead and married a cold, self-serving man I knew in my heart did not love me. My blood ran cold when I read the little digs IS repeatedly made about Helen, how you would find her books in charity shops for example, describing her as menopausal and constantly emphasising her anxiety (anxiety he had no doubt contributed to with his constant, subtle undermining of her). This was my ex husband's modus operandi too. He was happy for me to bankroll our lifestyle, pay for flash cars and 5* holidays yet he was dismissive of my work, mocked me at every opportunity and would never acknowledge that my talents and toil had paid for these things. I became jumpy, anxious and introverted - a shadow of the happy, outgoing, fun woman I was when I met him. I believed I was at fault, that he was right to point out my inadequacies. I now totally understand how older women can override their own feminine intuition in romantic matters and see a relationship as they want it to be and not as it really is. I suspect this is a very common scenario and many unhappy, late life marriages result. In most cases, they do not end in murder.

I hope, armed with this self-knowledge, I would not allow myself to be duped by such a man again. I only wish Helen had been given the same opportunity to learn this lesson but the sociopath she fell for took her life. Not content to share the luxury lifestyle she so generously offered him (and his grown up sons), he believed he deserved to have it all to himself and killed her to get it. What happened to Helen is the most unlikely and extreme life 'plot twist' imaginable. Her death, along with her beloved dog, at the hands of a man who professed to love her, reminds us starkly there are far worse things than being a middle aged single woman.

I hope you'll forgive me for throwing these very personal thoughts into the mix. I have been so impressed with the high standard of the debate here on Web Sleuths and the polite, respectful camaraderie between contributors. God bless.

Beautifully written angle, Dolly Diamond, of how it is to be subjected to duping. Thank Goodness you came through and are here - but it must have been such a heartbreaking and self-diminishing time for you.
I was reading a part of Helen's book this afternoon when she first shared a weekend with her GGW and how she could eat again, and read the Sunday Papers after a terrible time of when she drank wine from a whisky glass, with her jacket still on, after an evening out. Where she kicked a dropped piece of shortbread across the kitchen - too in despair to lift it - and when she allowed Boris to jump onto her bed with muddy paws and couldn't care.Helen describes herself as a very exacting person - and so when she reached this point of Grief and natural 'Depression' - she was so open to attracting the very person who seemed right for her, and yet was the very person to avoid. (the last two lines I write with direct experience). Dear Helen - so kind and gracious towards Oliver and Jamie - weeping that she is there only because their Mother is not.
No wonder - apart from Justice - we are all deeply engaged here. And so grateful to all the accomplished Web Sleuths who, brilliantly, give us ongoing answers.