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

[Alyce]

Stewart's third interview of the day shown to jurors

A fourth interview is now being played to jurors in the courtroom, where another prepared statement from Stewart is given to police. The interview took place on July 12 - and was his third interview of that particular day. Stewart is asked if he feels fit and well, to which he replies “reasonably”.
In the statement, Stewart said that he admitted renewing the two Arsenal season passes, and did it using Helen’s joint account card details as he believed payment needed to be from the season pass holder, which was Helen.

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

 

[SiSi]

Just musing . . . . has anyone ever who responds "No comment" ever been found NOT guilty?

 

[DollyDiamond]

Bearing in mind his visits to the solicitor about the sale of Helen's flat, it looked like he thought he would get POA while she was missing. Maybe he was planning to sell up, pocket all the cash, not tell the new owners about the cess pit, maybe start a new life abroad somewhere with no extradition agreement with the UK?

I think you have presented a very compelling theory about his future intentions!

 

[LozDa]

Just musing . . . . has anyone ever who responds "No comment" ever been found NOT guilty?

I mean, we know that they have, of course. But I did just find this that's an interesting article on the 'No Comment' response.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/going-no-comment-a-delicate-balancing-act/65781.article

 

[DollyDiamond]

Yup it was for both of you lol.
Thanks I get what you mean now and I've pondered it before, but don't get how you came to that conclusion from
the artists Jay's comments.PM if you'd rather not say publicly.

What leaped out for me in the artist friend's statement was her description of going into IS house before the publicity walk for Helen - she said something to the effect that IS son Jamie followed him from room to room - I thought that was an interesting observation for her to make.

 

[Alyce]

Standing order was changed

Stewart is asked if Helen’s debit card for her personal Barclays account is in the filing cabinet, together with her debit card from the joint account which he used to renew the Arsenal season passes. “I want to know who changed the standing order from Helen’s Barclays account”, the interviewing police officer tells Stewart. Stewart, as previously, remains silent.

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

 

[Alyce]

Couple had £20,000 in joint account

In the final prepared statement given to the jury, which existed before the interviews on July 12, Stewart said: “Helen and I both have personal bank accounts and one joint account. “We both contribute £600 per month to the joint account. This is for household expenditure. “I have not tried to set up new standing orders from Helen’s personal account to our joint account. “I have not changed the existing standing order from Helen’s account from £600 to £4,000 per month. We have in excess of £20,000 in our joint account’.”

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

 

[SiSi]

I mean, we know that they have, of course. But I did just find this that's an interesting article on the 'No Comment' response.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/going-no-comment-a-delicate-balancing-act/65781.article

Thanks for that article LozDa. "No comment" is such an emotive phrase in criminal cases, a jury is always going to be influenced by it whether or not the eventual outcome can be "proved" in court as either "guilty/not guilty" . . . .

 

[Alyce]

Jury hears how Stewart was arrested on further charges

Stewart is now being interviewed again at 7.42pm on July 15 - after he was rearrested. The interview comes after Helen’s body was found in the cess pit of the couple’s home. In the interview, Stewart is further arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice, and disposing of a body in a manner likely to disrupt the coroner. Stewart again denies to answer any questions. The video of the interview has now been switched off in the courtroom. There will be a lunch break until 2pm.

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

 

[Alyce]

Back at 2pm

Just to add, there have been no separate tweets today ( that I can see ) from other journos

 

[Squamous]

Thanks for that article LozDa. "No comment" is such an emotive phrase in criminal cases, a jury is always going to be influenced by it whether or not the eventual outcome can be "proved" in court as either "guilty/not guilty" . . . .

If the solicitor had just been presented with the tale of Nick and Joe I can understand why he/she might have advised IS to go no comment! It would be interesting to know if N&J were mentioned at that point or if they were a later, um, "recollection".

 

[cottonweaver]

Thankyou for the updates Alyce.

I need to go back and check the evidence to find out why he made such errors by doing the 2nd& 3rd standing order attempt so late on the day.
For life of me can't u'stand how he could have fluffed the first attempt (despite having all her passwords etc) and thus have made it look as if she had made the change prior to her disappearance. ( Succeeding within the timeframe of the afternoon would've avoided his trouble here .)

 

[ZaZara]

Former owner describes cess pit

That’s the end of Mr Polley’s evidence. There will now be a statement from Michael Shannon, who is retired. He said: “In 1974 I moved to Baldock Road in Royston. We were there until 2013 when the house was sold to Helen and Stewart. “Over the years we were there we made changes to the structure and I had a garage built at the side of the house. “The house had a well when it was built in 1899, when we moved in, the well now formed a cess pit. It was not covered by a building, until I had the garage built over it. “There was an inspection plate put over the cess pit which became part of the concrete floor to the garage.”

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

Couple were shown cess pit before buying house

“I was present when Helen and Stewart visited the house to view it before buying it. “I went round the house with them. I recall pointing out to them the inspection plate in the garage and telling them that underneath is the cess pit. “I met the couple socially on several occasions. I had asked by police the arrangement I had made to empty the cess pit when I had the house. “The cess pit was emptied three months before I sold the house in July 2013. “We had it emptied about every three of four years.”

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


ah, more evidence that IS was well aware of the cess pit

BBM


Totally clear that IS knew everything about the cesspit.
Other than that, I find the evidence frustrating !
M Shannon does not mention the septic tank on the other side of the garage.
This makes me wonder if the cesspit and the septic tank were connected at all ~ septic tank functioning as an overflow for the cesspit (or even the other way round, though this is unlikely IMHO).

Also because M Shannon mentions an inspection plate. Covering half of the entrance under a concrete floor is odd IMHO. Why not leave it as it was, if you intend to continue to use it?

I wonder if someone was living in the guestrooms in the garage. If not, the fact that the septic tank had to be emptied indicates a possible connection as an overflow.

This would have made life much easier for IS, as he might have had the septic tank emptied instead of the cesspit.

BTW one way of extending the time before the cesspit would have to be emptied, would be to take your showers in the guestroom instead of in the house.

 

[cottonweaver]

If the solicitor had just been presented with the tale of Nick and Joe I can understand why he/she might have advised IS to go no comment! It would be interesting to know if N&J were mentioned at that point or if they were a later, um, "recollection".

From the sequence we heard in week 1 seems to have been much later, in December, he came up with this one, shortly after he told the son. Then police re-interviewed the son.

 

[Cherwell]

As for [pillow case]. 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.

I meant to pick this up earlier.

The use of a bin liner would minimise any possibility of traces being left in whatever he used to transport the body, such as a wheelie bin. Any loose hairs etc would remain in the bag.

 

[Squamous]

From the sequence we heard in week 1 seems to have been much later, in December, he came up with this one, shortly after he told the son. Then police re-interviewed the son.

Ah, thanks. So it was quite extended amnesia about these shady types (although I picture them as being more like the Chuckle Brothers).

 

[Interested Bystander]

Apropos whether anyone else other than HB and IS were in the house on that day. Would that not have been verified by the police at the start of the investigation? If there was any doubt as to the whereabouts of any other person I am sure the police would have followed through. Whether there has been any collusion at any point is a moot point.

 

[cottonweaver]

I meant to pick this up earlier.

The use of a bin liner would minimise any possibility of traces being left in whatever he used to transport the body, such as a wheelie bin. Any loose hairs etc would remain in the bag.

Yes, we'll never know.
Sheet plastic is also great for say, lining a wheel barrow but
it's interesting that the 2 bin liners didn't go to the tip with the equally contaminated duvet.
I feel it's odd that there are two and that asphyx is much quicker and assured with a plastic bag than fabric alone.

 

[DollyDiamond]

If the solicitor had just been presented with the tale of Nick and Joe I can understand why he/she might have advised IS to go no comment! It would be interesting to know if N&J were mentioned at that point or if they were a later, um, "recollection".

Haven't we already heard in court that IS first presented his Nick and Joe story in December? Presumably that must be the first time he told it to his defence team - they would not have sat on it so long if he had given it to them earlier. I for one cannot wait to hear the full details of this little fantasy - how the mysterious Nick and Joe knew about the hidden cess pit, evidence that they benefited in any way from killing Helen, etc. IS cannot be claiming he knew what they had done or where they had hidden the bodies, because he is pleading Not Guilty to ALL the charges, including preventing a lawful burial.

 

[DollyDiamond]

Apropos whether anyone else other than HB and IS were in the house on that day. Would that not have been verified by the police at the start of the investigation? If there was any doubt as to the whereabouts of any other person I am sure the police would have followed through. Whether there has been any collusion at any point is a moot point.

I don't think anyone is suggesting anyone else was in the house on the day of the murder - as you say, the police have established no one else was. It is more a discussion of whether IS, in his increasingly emotional state in the early stages of the police investigation, confided anything in his nearest and dearest. My feeling is he could well have shared some, inaccurate, self-serving version of events, because he seems to me such a weak character he would struggle to keep his cool, remain composed and not breathe a word of anything to those closest to him. I am not suggesting any kind of collusion and I don't think anyone else is. This is speculation only - and as you say it is a moot point as only IS is in the dock and rightly so.