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

[MillyM]

Listening to O giving evidence was painful. When asked for more detail/more depth to the "Nick/Joe story (i.e. the conversations that IS and O had about this "crucially important situation" in prison during his weekly visits), poor O kind of stumbled and didn`t seem to know what to say. He then answered by saying that that was all they had discussed because "time was limited to an hour each visit and they had other things to talk about".

Surprised son would say that. If it were my dad on a murder charge that I believed him wholly innocent of, I would have jumped on this for all the details he could give in order that I could try and help him in some way. I would have asked had he told his solicitor, and then got onto solicitor myself after to see how important they thought this information and how we could find out more. I certainly wouldn't have left my dad's comment as being of no more relevance than an aside about the day's weather.

 

[Cherwell]

I believe he was asked what he thought his father meant when he said he had "been dealt with" and that`s when he said they didn`t discuss it as no time and other things to talk about...

Right, well, that I don't believe. Sorry.

If he'd said, "He wouldn't tell me", or "He refused to go into details", I could accept that.

 

[MillyM]

Something new has emerged from some chats I've been having with Alyce.

If you look at both sons' evidence, they say they were told by IS on Tuesday evening, that Helen had left a note and gone to Broadstairs. Neither of them say anything about him telling them Helen had (physically) left on Monday.

I think that's quite significant and it points to him inventing the note and the Broadstairs scenario on Tuesday.

Looking at OS' evidence, we know he was at home on the Monday evening before 5:30, when IS left to go to Cambridge for Bowls. OS didn't need to leave for cadets until 6:30. Yet he said "It was normal. Everything was normal. I didn't see Helen or the dog."

Now to my mind, that is far from normal. Being in the house, at a time when perhaps normally Helen might be cooking supper, being out with Boris, for over an hour. She's not gone in her Jeep, so she must have gone walking with Boris for an hour or more at that time. Isn't that a very long walk for a very little dog? What is also strange, to my mind, is that OS was not surprised that IS was driving to Cambridge, and wouldn't have asked him if Helen was also going with him, or if she was driving him. Jamie was surprised that IS made the journey.

OS was not asked if he cooked for himself or if he would normally have expected Helen to have cooked, or what normal was.

To my mind it is strange that both sons noticed Helen and Boris' absence on Monday, but neither said a word about it with IS.

Jamie got back from bowls to an empty house at around 9pm, I think probably slightly before 9pm. IS had left bowls at the same time and was seen on CCTV at the Chinese restaurant at 8:49pm. Presumably he then had to wait for the order to be made up and wouldn't have got home with the food until after 9:15 or so. Yet Jamie said "when I got home I only saw my dad".

I'm not sure we have heard the whole truth. Sorry if it upsets a few people, but I think we should be able to discuss the evidence without having to hide these things for fear of upsetting anyone. If anyone has a valid reason for me not putting this up on the board that I haven't considered, I shall reconsider and ask a mod to remove it if so.

I think possibly there were conversations about where Helen was on the Monday. And IS gave a different story because he hadn't thought about the story of the note yet, like 'she's out walking the dog' or 'I don't know where she's gone', or 'she's gone to bed because she's been having sleep problems recently'. I think they might be protecting their dad by saying there was no conversation about Helen on Monday, and that he implied to them (on Tuesday) that Helen had left (and left a note) on the Tuesday. I think IS had a story of Helen vanishing while out with Boris, but then changed that to Broadstairs because he suddenly got very nervous that police would concentrate on the house. It's perhaps one thing planning on using the perfect place to hide a body and quite another, after you've done it, and start to get paranoid about being caught.

Another piece of evidence that supports his change of story is him telling the solicitor that Helen was unwell. He could very easily have said she's gone away for a short break.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-week-12452783

"I am not sure we have heard the whole truth," you say, Tortoise. You and me both, 100%. No question.

 

[michelle230]

Surprised son would say that. If it were my dad on a murder charge that I believed him wholly innocent of, I would have jumped on this for all the details he could give in order that I could try and help him in some way. I would have asked had he told his solicitor, and then got onto solicitor myself after to see how important they thought this information and how we could find out more. I certainly wouldn't have left my dad's comment as being of no more relevance than an aside about the day's weather.

But that`s the whole point! One of many "whole points"!

 

[michelle230]

Right, well, that I don't believe. Sorry.

If he'd said, "He wouldn't tell me", or "He refused to go into details", I could accept that.

Cherwell - see my response to Milly...

 

[snoopydog]

Surprised son would say that. If it were my dad on a murder charge that I believed him wholly innocent of, I would have jumped on this for all the details he could give in order that I could try and help him in some way. I would have asked had he told his solicitor, and then got onto solicitor myself after to see how important they thought this information and how we could find out more. I certainly wouldn't have left my dad's comment as being of no more relevance than an aside about the day's weather.

Although this is going to sound totally sexist. I've found a lot of men to be less enquiring of the small details than what women are.... possible this was a reason for lack of quizzing his dad at the time, along with the shock of this totally random new information... OS was probably baffled then IS most likely changed the subject asap because he hadn't made up anymore of the fable in his head yet...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cottonweaver]

Cottonweaver, could you elaborate a little on the "taking the court into your confidence" thing- I'm not familiar with the phrase?

sorry,
It was bandied about in another trial followed here. In that case it was about the perpetrator who lied and lied.

In my post I just meant it as – be totally upfront with the evidence. Have faith that Justice can deal with the full and unvarnished truth and the wisdom to then come to the right outcomes for all, in both long and short term . Get everything out in the open, onto the table.

Of course it's just an ideal and it doesn't happen that much in practice.

Even myself as a witness in a crim trial I recall subtle pressure to varnish my testimony( be more unequivocal to get the conviction) even when it was the other way. ( Def was clearly guilty, victim was an autistic teenager who was very vulnerable. I knew her mother vaguely. It really was not a pleasant ethical situation to be in even preparing to be a witness. )

 

[Squamous]

Although this is going to sound totally sexist. I've found a lot of men to be less enquiring of the small details than what women are.... possible this was a reason for lack of quizzing his dad at the time, along with the shock of this totally random new information... OS was probably baffled then IS most likely changed the subject asap because he hadn't made up anymore of the fable in his head yet...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We are also talking about a man that we believe capable of killing his supposed life partner and effectively storing her body in the toilet, as well as that of their family dog (I know he was Helen's dog, but any dog in the house is a family member ime!). If IS is guilty, which he surely is, I doubt very much that his children have been brought up to question his word or authority.

 

[cottonweaver]

Has anyone know why IS often had the username "sykic " for his various accounts?

Normally that's word play on "psychic".

another point - may be unrelated to previous one ^ but ......
I know that RisenBishop member here has posted in thread 1 about IS possibly suffering from APD and whilst I don't know anything much about APD I do know he mentioned one of the key traits was emotional intelligence. I appreciate RBishop has a lot of professional expertise in this area so I'd defer to him on this.

APD explained below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

The WHO's classification has APD as needing 3 or more of the following:

1. Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations;

2. Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, though having no difficulty in establishing them;

3. Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence;

4. Incapacity to experience guilt or to profit from experience, particularly punishment;

5 Marked readiness to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society.

6 Callous unconcern for the feelings of others;

DSM gives a different classification of course. Way too complex for me to synthesise the theory as have no experience of it.

 

[snoopydog]

Has anyone know why IS often had the username "sykic " for his various accounts?

Normally that's word play on "psychic".

another point - may be unrelated to previous one ^ but ......
I know that RisenBishop member here has posted in thread 1 about IS possibly suffering from APD and whilst I don't know anything much about APD I do know he mentioned one of the key traits was emotional intelligence. I appreciate RBishop has a lot of professional expertise in this area so I'd defer to him on this.

APD explained below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

The WHO's classification has APD as needing 3 or more of the following:



DSM gives a different classification of course. Way too complex for me to synthesise the theory as have no experience of it.

Personally I think it would be very hard for us to speculate on what personality disorder he might have, he could also have a mixture of various personality disorders.... We would need to know a lot more about his childhood and upbringing. Personality disorders are often found in people who were sexually abused as children as far as I know. So far it sounded to me like him and his parents were pretty close... seems they're some of the only folk we've heard of visiting the house anyway, when the dog didn't bark :-l

Does anyone know if we will hear a psychiatrist evaluation about him? How does that usually work?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[michelle230]

Has anyone know why IS often had the username "sykic " for his various accounts?

Normally that's word play on "psychic".

another point - may be unrelated to previous one ^ but ......
I know that RisenBishop member here has posted in thread 1 about IS possibly suffering from APD and whilst I don't know anything much about APD I do know he mentioned one of the key traits was emotional intelligence. I appreciate RBishop has a lot of professional expertise in this area so I'd defer to him on this.

APD explained below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

The WHO's classification has APD as needing 3 or more of the following:



DSM gives a different classification of course. Way too complex for me to synthesise the theory as have no experience of it.

A lot of PD`s are co-morbid which means they exist together and overlap. IS definitely fits into the Narcissistic definition - one of the traits being a sense of entitlement, another being a total lack of empathy. Sociopaths are very good at knowing how to "act normally", "say the right thing", ape social conventions. He clearly has a number of PDs as defined by the DSM scale

 

[BatFace]

He's a nasty piece of work alright. Beyond that, I couldn't say.

 

[snoopydog]

He's a nasty piece of work alright. Beyond that, I couldn't say.

That's what I was thinking. I don't even want him to be able to hide behind a diagnosis of any mental disorder. He's an evil as far as I'm concerned right now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Florrie]

That's what I was thinking. I don't even want him to be able to hide behind a diagnosis of any mental disorder. He's an evil as far as I'm concerned right now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The diagnosis (or not) of a personality disorder will not allow him to escape justice. Personality disorders generally do not render a person unable to appreciate right from wrong unless there is a co-morbid diagnosis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[snoopydog]

The diagnosis (or not) of a personality disorder will not allow him to escape justice. Personality disorders generally do not render a person unable to appreciate right from wrong unless there is a co-morbid diagnosis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's good. I'm guessing there won't be any psych evaluation of him because he's denying everything anyway. Is that right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cottonweaver]

agreed, PD's don't diminish culpability, that's why prisons are chokka full of criminals with incurable PDs.

Still, I hope RisenBishop comes back and gives us benefit of his expertise though. He's best placed to give an armchair appraisal seeing as we won't get any psych evaluation and we may get some info released about his background after conviction.

agree about the co-morbidity. I tried to give IS the benefit of some justification, in the early days, as his social skills seemed so poor/inappropriate and wondered if he was also on the spectrum, but high functioning. ( as a number two)
(It's since transpired his social skills were probably only poor when he was under duress or in a jam. On the phone, with the police etc. so I've scratched that. )
I also considered depression as a second strand. Hey, I even tried the "he loved her at the start" line.
Have gone all round the houses with this individual and come back to the starting point - some variant of a psychopathic disorder.
We look for understanding when we're faced with something so incomprehensible.

 

[MillyM]

He had the sykic.com address as well as sykic.co.uk

http://website.informer.com/email/[email protected]

 

[MillyM]

I gather this is him on WordPress forums

https://generatepress.com/forums/users/sykic/topics/

 

[MillyM]

And more

https://sites.google.com/site/sykicweb/HomeS

 

[snoopydog]

I gather this is him on WordPress forums

https://generatepress.com/forums/users/sykic/topics/

I don't know how he won HB over with FB messages. From what I've seen he's poorly written. Poor Helen really must have been in such a bad way to fall for this guy. I doubt she'd have entertained him in any other circumstances whatsoever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk