GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #3

[looroll]

Pictures of recovery shown to jury

DCI Kent added: “None of us really knew what we were going to find when we started to excavate, the well was about 1890 in its construction.” Further photos are being shown to jurors as the search and rescue team continue to excavate down into the side of the well. A photo is now shown to jurors of what DCI Kent saw when he first looked into the cess pit. DCI Kent said: “When the body of Helen Bailey was fully removed, it became apparent what the black lines I saw when I first looked into the cess pit were. “Helen was wearing a black or blue and white striped top when she went into that well. “The white material had rotted away, but the black material remained on her body when she came out of the cess pit.”

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-more-12512651

My god, this truly is too horrific to comprehend. Poor poor Helen and Boris, I am currently reading her book and it makes me want to weep. She truly went through hell and thought she had found her 'Happy ending'. God bless her soul xx

 

[Alyce]

This is what makes me think he never intended to kill her all along. I think he only intended to gaslight her until her confidence was so crushed he could take control of her finances.

I keep wondering if she discovered his plan that Monday morning and there was some kind of set-to between them during which he overpowered her and accidentally suffocated her while trying to subdue her or prevent her from leaving.

He had to hide her body because he knew evidence of the zopiclone would be in her system. I think the "great place to hide a body" line came to him and it seemed safest as he could get her in there without being seen.

He still wanted control of her money though so in the end his greed in this respect is what caused his downfall.

BIB there was no indication on Helen's body of any kind of resistance or defensive activity from her.

I agree re him only wanting to keep her drugged - initially - so he could control the money. But perhaps it wasn't working fast enough.Helen was having episodes of sleep and forgetfulness but was still functioning normally for much of the time.

My guess is his cancer scare was the initial trigger, which would tie in with the drugging from January ( as far as we know ).
Even though he got the all clear on April 5, perhaps he thought he might have another scare and not be so lucky next time.

Thinking that he might not have many years left, killing then seemed the fastest way to allow him control of more money straight away.

 

[DollyDiamond]

minusfour - this baffles me too, he was presumably counting on the cess pit being a totally safe hiding place for the bodies of Helen and Boris to bide his time for seven whole years before she is declared dead and he gets his pay day. However this perhaps was not such a bad prospect, as he is now living in high style in a mansion and perhaps assumes he will cash in on the sale of her flat up north and have access to her ongoing book royalties? It would appear he did not think he would be regarded as a suspect in her disappearance - bizarre! I don't understand why he didn't try to make her death look like suicide or accident, perhaps dumping her body at the Broadstairs address? The cesspit makes it crystal clear it was foul play.

 

[Legally Bland]

I'm not sure where some of the frustration is coming from. The police investigation and prosecution case looks pretty strong to me so far. We've still got more evidence to come. Hang tight.

 

[cottonweaver]

Re "no struggle" upthread


Here's consultant path Cary on the "subtle " means of killing that may have been employed which leaves no marks even though actual COD was undetermined.

"sleep hold" IIRC. She has no shoes, is dressed . We can almost picture her, sleeping on the sofa as per the press photos of her.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-day-12435557

ETA- A possibility - Lunch , plus a sherry plus the Zop meds? We had previous testimony that Helen continued her Dad's tradition of a sherry at lunch.
Effects of Zop + alcohol were likened to date-rape drug rohypnol but can't remember source for that comparison now.

 

[DollyDiamond]

Yes, Boris was so little - I've always thought he was carried to the cesspit, dead, in that pillow case. Poor little love. This evidence is very upsetting - how her loved ones must feel just doesn't bear thinking about!

 

[DollyDiamond]

I'm not sure where some of the frustration is coming from. The police investigation and prosecution case looks pretty strong to me so far. We've still got more evidence to come. Hang tight.

Thanks for those wise words - I think like others I'm just getting emotional as these awful details are coming out.

 

[mrjitty]

I'm not sure where some of the frustration is coming from. The police investigation and prosecution case looks pretty strong to me so far. We've still got more evidence to come. Hang tight.

Agreed - very strong so far.

 

[Moll]

He did think he would be regarded as a suspect, he said so to the police very early on (Re Dolly Diamond's post #183, sorry, forgot to incorporate quote.)

 

[Alyce]

Stewart rearrested after body found

The case has been called back on. Detective Constable Joanne Kerr, of Hertfordshire Police, is now giving evidence. DC Kerr said after the first sequence of interviews on July 11 and 12, and after Stewart was arrested, Stewart was released on bail. “He wasn’t able to go back to Baldock Road in Royston as the house was still under police control. “He was bailed to a hotel in Letchworth. On July 15 Stewart was re-arrested at the hotel. “The significant change was that police had established the body of Helen Bailey was in the cess pit. “He was interviewed again for the final time, before he was charged for the offences.”

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-more-12512651


I wonder did he say anything in this final interview

 

[cottonweaver]

Yes, Boris was so little - I've always thought he was carried to the cesspit, dead, in that pillow case. Poor little love. This evidence is very upsetting - how her loved ones must feel just doesn't bear thinking about!

I hope her relatives aren't there today, for their sakes. At this stage I am able to detach myself from the horror - in comparison to last year.

As for bold. IDK. Always speculated that this was used in conjunction the black bin liner, if you follow. There were two bin liners that had to be disposed off and assume smothering/depriving of oxygen was cause of death.

 

[ColourPurple]

Originally Posted by MillyM
Something has gnawed at me almost from start of this case last year. This statement from Jay Nolen-Latchland today and the evidence from two during trial contain, for me, a factor which is red flagging. I don't know if for anyone else, but this won't leave my head.

I also have thoughts, might be the same

What are your thoughts?

The only thing that jumped out to me was this bit

[FONT=&quot]“I met Helen for the first time in London in November 2015. “Both of our partners were ill at this time, so we had a lot in common. “[/FONT]

IS was ill in November 2015? Have we heard this before? I know he was ill in 2016 when he had his op but other than his ongoing myasthenia gravis did we know about an illness in November?

 

[mrjitty]

minusfour - this baffles me too, he was presumably counting on the cess pit being a totally safe hiding place for the bodies of Helen and Boris to bide his time for seven whole years before she is declared dead and he gets his pay day. However this perhaps was not such a bad prospect, as he is now living in high style in a mansion and perhaps assumes he will cash in on the sale of her flat up north and have access to her ongoing book royalties? It would appear he did not think he would be regarded as a suspect in her disappearance - bizarre! I don't understand why he didn't try to make her death look like suicide or accident, perhaps dumping her body at the Broadstairs address? The cesspit makes it crystal clear it was foul play.

This is why i think she was murdered on the spur of the moment

He did not have a lot of time to action the cover up and had nothing pre-planned.

He disposed of her in the best hiding place he had close to hand.

 

[DollyDiamond]

I also have thoughts, might be the same

I imagine you are alluding to the involvement of others, in addition to IS? Yes it has crossed my mind - and it absolutely must have been investigated by police and discounted.

 

[mrjitty]

Thank you Mr Jitty. So no last minute surprises. I still cannot believe that in the OP case Defence disclosure was made on the first day of the trial. Nel must have been furious.

That was largely because Masipa ran such a poor trial.

No High Court judge I know would allow such nonsense.

 

[Alyce]

What are your thoughts?

The only thing that jumped out to me was this bit



IS was ill in November 2015? Have we heard this before? I know he was ill in 2016 when he had his op but other than his ongoing myasthenia gravis did we know about an illness in November?

It may be that IS was already feeling unwell, due to the intestines situation. There is a comment on Planet Grief where Helen says things have not been good since before Christmas ( 2015 ).


eta..this was not the thing I was thinking of though

 

[perfectvirgo]

In practice Counsel work it out between themselves.

There is no "trial by ambush" so the witnesses and all their briefs of evidence are disclosed to the defence pre-trial.

The prosecution will develop a list of witnesses they intend to call.

Of course there may end up being overlap however this is not really an issue as neither Counsel will want to call a witness who is hostile to their case.

So if someone is truly more appropriate as a defence witness then it is likely that defence will want to call that witness because they will want to lead the witness's evidence in chief. Prosecution will prefer to cross examine that witness. So this can be agreed between counsel.

A witness who is truly pretty neutral like the sons make a good prosecution witness, and the defence can cross examine.

We have seen in big trials like Pistorius that it can get pretty tactical.

The prosecution frequently does not call all its witnesses - which leaves it open to the defence to call them.

So then it can happen that neither side calls them.

Games within games!

Great Summary. It's worth mentioning that if a witness officially turns 'hostile' under direct examination, that is to say a prosecution witness answers in a way which overtly supports the defence case, then the barrister can ask permission from the judge to treat them as a 'hostile witness'. If granted this gives the right to use cross-examination techniques, in particular to ask leading questions - effectively putting words in the witness' mouth by suggesting the answer.

 

[ColourPurple]

Just wondering what would have happened to IS's sons' inheritance had IS died first? Presumably if Helen died first , IS got his big inheritance and his sons would then inherit it from him when he died but if he died first would they only get IS's share of the main house? If IS's initial plan was drug Helen enough to get POA could his time in intensive care have made him ponder what would happen if he died before Helen and before he'd got POA. Could that have been what made him decide she must die first?

 

[Alyce]

Interview questions were unanswered

“It became apparent that Stewart didn’t want to say anything in police interviews”, DC Kerr said. “However, officers still proceed with all the questions they wished to ask, even if it becomes apparent that there is to be no answer to them.”

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-more-12512651


answers my question up thread - so no comment all the way on July 15

 

[DollyDiamond]

He was obviously working up to killing Helen IMO but I think it is possible that something triggered the event that day. My only other feeling is that maybe Helen had an adverse reaction to the possible withdrawal of the drug. Seizures are a known occurrence when sudden withdrawal of Zopiclone is made. I would like to know whether her brain, after 3 months in the cesspit, could have shown this up or not.

Interesting. I doubt her brain could have revealed much evidence after three months decomposition. Don't want to be gruesome here but I recall once reading an article about autopsies that said the brain deteriorates to a jelly/liquified state very quickly.