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

[Squamous]

And more -

Next witness: Anthony Hurley, financial adviser and friend of Ms Bailey

Prosecution calls the next witness - Anthony Hurley, he is the chairman of financial advisory firm Hurley Partners Ltd. He knew Ms Bailey through her first husband, John Sinfield. He supported her following Mr Sinfield’s death.


He says: “She didn’t think there was a will. We were quite sure there was a will. We asked to look through John’s private papers.

“She was extremely bright, very intelligent, very articulate and on the occasion of john’s death was completely distressed and distraught, she needed quite a lot of help at that time.”

(Edited to reflect editing of source)

 

[ColourPurple]

[FONT=&amp]14:14[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Court is back in session

Proceedings have now resumed in court. The judge briefly deals with a couple of questions from the jury concerning Helen Bailey’s assets. He confirms that Stewart would have received the £235,000 pension fund and £1.2million life insurance pay out, separate to the conditions of her will.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-week-12531416

[/FONT]

Thank you members of the jury

Good to see that they're on the ball!

 

[Legally Bland]

This is from an hour ago, sorry if posted.

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826419152218886144]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826419152218886144[/video]More



Defence counsel tells jury Ms Bailey drafted will so 'absolutely no guarantee Stewart would benefit a penny'. Down to discretion of executor

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826431922708574208]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826431922708574208[/video]More



Email from will's executor to Helen Bailey read to court - contained 'expression of her wishes' 1/2

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826435281851125760]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826435281851125760[/video]More



AKJ tells jury that executor's role was to carry out will to ensure Mr Stewart was primary, but other benefactors to be factored in too

 

[JudgeJudi]

This is out of context with today's proceedings but ...

IS is so cold and calculating. His 101 call was ever so casual, and he only made that call when it became apparent that other people were very concerned about her disappearance.

I believe when he told the police, “If Helen does come back, I don't want to be with her anymore” it was just a ruse to deflect attention away from himself, knowing that if the police discovered her body, he would become the prime suspect, especially once they learned that he stood to gain a lot financially from her death.

He told the police, “You won't find anything in the garage. If anywhere, devices will be in the house”. I rather think the detectives were looking for more than just devices, and he knew it.

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826435498533146628]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826435498533146628[/video]More



Tony Hurley - Helen Bailey's friend of 30 years + sole executor of her will - takes stand @itvanglia

 

[cottonweaver]

he's answered my question- Hurley is executor of the will.

NB the many IS calls to the Hurley PA previously

 

[Squamous]

Continues -

Helen Bailey 'was prudent and careful' with her money

Mr Hurley is asked about Ms Bailey’s management of her financial affairs.

He says: “She was prudent, very careful, always worked herself for a living. Enjoyed the benefits of being married to John but certainly contributed fully herself in terms of financial contribution. She was certainly an equal with John during their marriage together.

“She was intelligent enough to know if people were taking advantage of her at all.

“She was comfortably off, living within the income which was produced from the investment we managed and was always careful about touching the capital.

“I think she had a lot more trust in my judgement than I even realised myself.”

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826436259438612493]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826436259438612493[/video]More



Court hears Mr Hurley provided support to Ms Bailey after death of her first husband John Sinfield



[Squamous, I can do tweets from Chloe for a bit if you're OK doing Cambridge News]

 

[pinklilies]

Bang on! We are trying to understand the thinking of a psycopath of average/below average intellect and thankfully, that's difficult for us. I think what it boils down to is he didn't love Helen but he was head over heels in love with her money. All this evidence about the finances makes me feel just as sick as the very distressing evidence about her and Boris in the cess pit. Because IS was well off, even without Helen's money. He didn't need to work, was mortgage free, with an income of nearly £2k a month and a six figure sum in the bank. To kill her and Boris for money was staggering, unfathomable, revolting GREED.

Was it you Dolly who said 'he didn't want the queen, just her crown [emoji146] ' I'd never heard that saying before (unless it's your own saying ) but it seems to be very appropriate. [emoji17]
Grammar

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Squamous]

Carries on -

Mr Hurley was unaware he was sole executor

Mr Hurley was unaware he was to be sole executor of her will. He says: “At the time we were discussing the importance of having a will, she did ask me to be an executor, it was a complete surprise to me that I was the sole executor.”

 

[Squamous]

And more -

Ms Bailey said in July 2014 she intended to live with and marry Stewart

In a July 2014 meeting Mr Hurley says he was told by Ms Bailey she intended to live with and marry Stewart.

“It was a particularly important meeting. During that meeting Helen explained she bought a new property. She was clearly making her relationship with Ian Stewart very much more permanent, that they were going to live together. It was her clear intention that she was going to marry him, without any clear timetable, she felt it was too soon after John’s death.

“She made it quite clear to me what was the intention, that once Mr Stewart sold his property that there would be a contribution to the new property, but it would not be 50 per cent”

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826437943053189120]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826437943053189120[/video]More



Mr Hurley describes Helen as articulate, bright, prudent, careful, always worked for a living. Says she was distraught by death of husband

 

[Squamous]

Thick and fast!

'Helen wanted Stewart and sons to have security if anything happened to her'

Mr Hurley introduced Ms Bailey to solicitor Ms King-Jones. He recalls discussing with Ms Bailey changes to her will in July 2014.

“At that this stage I didn’t know Ian Stewart particularly well. I’d only met Ian once at our house.

“That meeting had taking pace the previous July 2013. I didn’t know a tremendous amount about Ian.”

He said Helen was aware Stewart could not afford the house alone.

“Helen knew that the financial commitment would never be able to be managed by Ian, because he was unable to continue his occupation.

“It needed quite a lot of work doing to it.

“She basically said to me: ‘If anything, god forbid happens to me, the one thing I want to make sure is that Ian and the boys have the security of this house.’ “Helen was clear she wished to marry Ian Stewart, but not completely about the timetable.”

 

[DollyDiamond]

Was it you Dolly who said 'he didn't want the queen, just her crown [emoji146] ' I'd never heard that saying before (unless it's your own saying ) but it's very appropriate. [emoji17]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can't claim credit for that brilliant quote - it perfectly sums up the situation here!

 

[Squamous]

More more more! (And thanks for adding the tweets LB)

Insurance against inheritance tax

Mr Hurley said he informed Ms Bailey that in the event of her death there would be an inheritance tax bill of around £1.2 million.

He says: “Helen immediately said: ‘We can’t have that.’ I explained to her that for a very small outgoing she was able to arrange an insurance policy. He says he asked her when she planned to marry and she said: ‘I really cannot answer that now, but it would certainly be within the next five years’.”

He told her an insurance policy could be taken out for that period and renewed if necessary.

 

[Squamous]

I like this man, he appears to give good clear evidence!

Mr Hurley had 'no understanding' that he was sole executor

Mr Hurley said that he had no further meetings with Ms Bailey until a financial review meeting in July 2015 at which point it became clear that Ms bailey had sought the ‘interim’ will and was still struggling to come to a decision about what various beneficiaries would receive.

He is asked what action he would have taken if called upon to execute her will. He says he would have used the earlier email summarising her wishes. He says: “In the absence of any other document… I would have fallen back on this document. I would have relied upon this to give me the guidance of how to distribute the funds. But I had no understanding that I was the sole executor.”

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826440537649590277]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826440537649590277[/video]More



Mr Hurley tells court Helen was comfortable living off income from investments - 'Always careful ... almost frightened to touch the income'

 

[Legally Bland]

Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826441175460610048]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826441175460610048[/video]More



Mr Hurley tells court it was a 'complete surprise' to him to find out he was sole executor of Ms Bailey's will @itvanglia