GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #4

[Cherwell]

the prosecution case will conclude on Friday, and then the defence case begins next week, with Ian taking the stand on Monday apparently.

Excellent news! This is going to be .... interesting.

I wonder what witnesses the defence can produce, other than maybe a few people who are prepared to say what a jolly nice chap he is

 

[MillyM]

I guess he blew any hope of a manslaughter plea out of the water by a/ drugging Helen for months and b/ dumping Helen and Boris in the cesspit. A clearer case of premeditated foul play it's hard to imagine! So he had 2 stark choices, to plead guilty or not guilty of murder. Great to get confirmation from Lit Up today that IS WILL take the stand. What fanciful, Grim(s) fairy tale will he come out with? I bet the prosecution lawyer is rubbing his hands with glee as I type this!

The thing is, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, how can you PROVE it was him? I mean, if say you had a case of murder where there was DNA evidence or witness proof that's one thing, but here we have a case where unless he admits to it, it can't be proved it was him who drugged her or who put her in the cesspit. Yes, it all POINTS to him, but can each of those jury members prove beyond reasonable doubt - at this stage at least, things could well change in next weeks - it WAS him?

 

[icemaiden65]

Forgive my ignorance - can you buy paracetamol capsules that could be opened up and doctored with the Zopiclone, I haven't seen these? I think he would have been most likely to tamper with her vitamin/herbal capsules, safe in the knowledge that she took those daily (presumably she only took paracetamol sporadically).

There are quite a lot of herbal capsule remedies on the market, and some such as ginseng are surprisingly large - emptied out he could no doubt have easily put 2-4 crushed Zopiclone into one capsule. For Helen to have been doing things like collapsing on a beach and going home leaving her beloved Boris behind, I feel he must have been giving her massive doses. So he must have had more tablets than the 28 stated from the GP prescription. No doubt his computer and phone history could have revealed he was placing big orders online.

Yes Dolly, I said this earlier when I opened up one of my Paracetamol capsules and had a play. They literally just pull apart, then you tip out the powder and do the deed before slipping them back together as one whole capsule still looking untampered with. Like you, I think he was probably giving Helen huge doses.

 

[Cherwell]

double post, oops

 

[Cherwell]

The thing is, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, how can you PROVE it was him? I mean, if say you had a case of murder where there was DNA evidence or witness proof that's one thing, but here we have a case where unless he admits to it, it can't be proved it was him who drugged her or who put her in the cesspit. Yes, it all POINTS to him, but can each of those jury members prove beyond reasonable doubt - at this stage at least, things could well change in next weeks - it WAS him?

Who else could have done it?

'Beyond reasonable doubt' doesn't mean 'beyond ANY doubt'.
Absolute proof isn't necessary as long as there is enough circumstantial evidence (and there is shedloads of that).
You can't use DNA-type evidence where the crime has been committed in a domestic setting because the perpetrator's DNA is legitimately everywhere.

 

[ColourPurple]

The thing is, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, how can you PROVE it was him? I mean, if say you had a case of murder where there was DNA evidence or witness proof that's one thing, but here we have a case where unless he admits to it, it can't be proved it was him who drugged her or who put her in the cesspit. Yes, it all POINTS to him, but can each of those jury members prove beyond reasonable doubt - at this stage at least, things could well change in next weeks - it WAS him?

I think the fact that she was drugged over a long period of time with drugs that were his is gonna help convict him. Also the fact that he is saying Nick & Joe did it but he didn't mention them till December. What changed between July when he was first in custody and December when he first mentioned Nick & Joe? If they existed what possible explantion could there be for him feeling it was OK to mention them in December but to not to breathe a word about them up till then? He knows he's busted because of the phone pinging at Broadstairs so his solution is to say NIck & Joe made him do it all. No doubt they told him to remove the router too.

 

[icemaiden65]

I have googled 'why do herbal vitamins taste so bad?' And there are comments on forums - saying such as 'in the industry we do not sweeten them to protect accidents with children' - and 'they make me want to puke'.

I was also thinking if Helen may have been recommended (in her searches) to use Mexican Yam, which I was by a herbalist as a natural antidote to the Menopause. And is brilliant - and comes in capsules.
No doubt IS has thrown away her products in her 'medicine cabinet' and IF so, why so? Nobody would throw out their 'missing partner's' belongings .. and most people, as Helen said in her book, can't even begin to face it when a beloved has died.
If he can clear her online history to support his 'innocence' he can hope to destroy her personal products - but he needs to answer the question, WHY!!!

I take Montmorency Cherry capsules daily - and am now hiding the box!

 

[ColourPurple]

Who else could have done it?

'Beyond reasonable doubt' doesn't mean 'beyond ANY doubt'; that is, absolute proof isn't necessary as long as there is enough circumstantial evidence.

The only other people with access to Helen, the house, the cess pit and the drugs over the period that we know she was being drugged were IS's sons and they don't appear to have been there at the time that Helen last connected with other people online whereas IS was. They also didn't go to Broadstairs with Helen's phone and they didn't remove the incriminating router from there. He's f*cked and he knows it and that's why he's invented Nick & Joe.

 

[ZaZara]

I guess he blew any hope of a manslaughter plea out of the water by a/ drugging Helen for months and b/ dumping Helen and Boris in the cesspit. A clearer case of premeditated foul play it's hard to imagine! So he had 2 stark choices, to plead guilty or not guilty of murder. Great to get confirmation from Lit Up today that IS WILL take the stand. What fanciful, Grim(s) fairy tale will he come out with? I bet the prosecution lawyer is rubbing his hands with glee as I type this!

Been thinking about that these days.

IMHO if IS had been cooperating, a line of defense might be claiming mental unstability due to his general ill health and the effects of the recent operation and general anaesthesia, cast reasonable doubt about the origin of the drugs and plead not guilty on basis of temporary madness and rage, a crime of passion of sorts but not even sure what happened, there was a quarrel and all of a sudden HB collapsed and was gone.
IS hid the body in total shock, and after that he felt there was no way back. Total panic. Thought about killing himself. Admits only to hiding the body and preventing a burial.

If it had not been for all the incriminating details like money, phones, internet, he might have gotten away with that, since the remains show no obvious cause of death.

Instead he invents Joe and Nick. :jail:

We haven't heard the entire case of the prosecution yet, so perhaps there is more, and reasonable doubt about the Zopiclone is ruled out.

 

[Cherwell]

And the note. The note that she couldn't have written.

 

[icemaiden65]

Been thinking about that these days.

IMHO if IS had been cooperating, a line of defense might be claiming mental unstability due to his general ill health and the effects of the recent operation and general anaesthesia, cast reasonable doubt about the origin of the drugs and plead not guilty on basis of temporary madness and rage, a crime of passion of sorts but not even sure what happened, there was a quarrel and all of a sudden HB collapsed and was gone.
IS hid the body in total shock, and after that he felt there was no way back. Total panic. Thought about killing himself. Admits only to hiding the body and preventing a burial.

If it had not been for all the incriminating details like money, phones, internet, he might have gotten away with that, since the remains show no obvious cause of death.

Instead he invents Joe and Nick. :jail:

We haven't heard the entire case of the prosecution yet, so perhaps there is more, and reasonable doubt about the Zopiclone is ruled out.

Hoping that prosecution comes up with a real trump card!

 

[DollyDiamond]

I recall the 'reasonable doubt' principle/circumstantial evidence explained by a barrister like this:

If you have cast iron proof someone committed a crime, eg witness evidence, dna, that's like a single, unbreakable thick steel cable: but if the evidence instead comprises of many slim threads of circumstantial evidence, all woven together, it can amount to a cable that's every bit as strong. Apologies, I haven't quoted it very well from memory, but I thought it was quite a clever analogy!

 

[DollyDiamond]

Been thinking about that these days.

IMHO if IS had been cooperating, a line of defense might be claiming mental unstability due to his general ill health and the effects of the recent operation and general anaesthesia, cast reasonable doubt about the origin of the drugs and plead not guilty on basis of temporary madness and rage, a crime of passion of sorts but not even sure what happened, there was a quarrel and all of a sudden HB collapsed and was gone.
IS hid the body in total shock, and after that he felt there was no way back. Total panic. Thought about killing himself. Admits only to hiding the body and preventing a burial.

If it had not been for all the incriminating details like money, phones, internet, he might have gotten away with that, since the remains show no obvious cause of death.

Instead he invents Joe and Nick. :jail:

We haven't heard the entire case of the prosecution yet, so perhaps there is more, and reasonable doubt about the Zopiclone is ruled out.

Also, I suppose if you think about it, he has committed such a breathtakingly audacious crime for high stakes, he's bound to stay on that track now and plead Not Guilty even though he has only a slim chance of being acquitted. To me, it's like he's put all his chips on the roulette table - he's come so far, he's got to hold his nerve and see it through with the hope that, against all odds, he walks out of that court room and wins all the money he killed Helen for.

As I've said before, stupid people are too stupid to know they're stupid. Just as he thought he could fool Helen (and sadly he did), Helen's loved ones, the police and health care professionals, maybe he believes he will take the stand and convince the jury he's this wonderful guy who's incapable of killing a woman and her dog for money. I would love to see him up there getting increasingly flustered and confused as he's cornered by the Prosecution. We know he fell to pieces when police searched his house and wanted to interview him so I somehow doubt he will be Mr cool, calm and collected answering a lawyer's questions in a packed courtroom! The phrase: "Give him enough rope and he'll hang himself" springs to mind.

 

[ConcernedCitizen17]

Hi all. I've been lurking and appreciating the discussion for a while now (though it feels a bit weird to use the word "appreciating" in such a tragic context). Snoopydog (I think) has posted recently about IS's comments in the bereavement FB group. Is this off-limits for linking? I'd be interested to read the comments, but don't want to ask anyone to break the rules.

 

[BatFace]

Yes, not to be too graphic here but dead bodies left in liquid absorb it in large volume - no way was Helen nearly 12 stones on the day she was murdered and I hope the Prosecution will make that clear to the jury, as the pathologist's report could possibly be misleading. Obviously her weight is an important factor in terms of his ability to transport her

I would be very surprised if Helen weighed more than 9 stone, looking at photographs of her.

 

[MillyM]

Trial Week 2

10 points I still would like clarity on, mainly from JS's evidence.

1.
“My dad told me that on the Monday [April 11] Helen had come home saying she never wanted to drive again.

Point: When did IS tell him this?

2.
“On a Monday I normally get up at 7.30am, and I did the same this Monday. We have an alarm at the house.

Point: At what time did he leave the house? Is the alarm normally switched on last thing at night or not? Was it on when he left that morning? Did he reactivate it if it was? Did he activate it even if it had been off? Did he just leave without any interference with the alarm either way?

3.
“When I got up I was going to work in Royston. After work I had a bowls match in Cambridge, and planned to go directly from work to Cambridge.

Point: What is his means of transport to work - car, bicycle, walking, public transport? What time did he leave Hartwell Lodge and what time did he arrive at work? He 'planned' to go straight from work to bowls. Did this plan go ahead or was there a change? What time did he leave work and by what means of transport did he arrive at the bowls in?

“I got through to the final of the competition, it was an important match.

“Dad and I had spoken over the weekend over whether he was coming, and he wasn’t sure whether he was going to come or not.

4.
“I got to the bowls club and he was just walking in in front of me, I was surprised to see him there but I was happy.

Point: Presumably father had travelled separately in his own car?

5.
“In the game I lost and was disappointed. Coming back from Cambridge, I went straight home and dad said he would get me a Chinese to cheer me up.

Point: So father and son leave the bowls separately? If son had arrived by public transport or even possibly bicycle, why did he not travel home with his father? Did both leave the bowls at the same time?

6.
“There’s one we normally use on the market hill in Royston. I saw him next at home.”

Point: So if they left bowls separately, with son going straight home and father stopping for the takeaway, was this an error reported in Cambridge News? »» **The Lotus House restaurant in Royston, where Ian Stewart took his son Jamie on the day of Helen Bailey's alleged murder** ««

Point: If he saw his father next at home, when he arrived home was his father already there? If he wasn't, did JS find the house in darkness when he arrived or lights on? Was the alarm activated or off?

7.
“I got home between 9-10pm. I only had chance to speak to him for five minutes after the bowls match, nothing was said about Helen at that point.

Point: What time did he leave the bowls and if he went straight home, how long would the journey normally be expected to take?

8.
“When I got home I only saw my dad."

Point: Was his father already there? If so, and if both had been travelling in cars, left at roughly the same time but father had to make detour for the takeaway, how did father still manage to be home first?

9.
The next footage is of Royston Household Waste Site on April 11, 2016, where Stewart can allegedly be seen at the site.

Point: Was this clearly and positively identified as IS, or just going by car and a vaguely similar male figure?

10.
The next footage is the same waste site on April 13, showing Stewart’s BMW car coming back to the same site.

Point: Again, was this clearly and positively identified as IS as driver?


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

 

[MillyM]

As he liked making things I wonder if he visited paint shops and picked up bleach (chlorox) and acetone - which I learn from the net can be easily obtained in such. Then with the aid of an online tutorial made up his own chloroform. I have never tried it ! - but it would have been a means to knock HB out cold before suffocating.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Paracetamol in her body does suggest this could have been the way he did it.

I have to amend my earlier post where I said, “… we know Helen liked herbal remedies, and if she was menopausal it's very possible that she may have used black cohosh. Black cohosh can be brewed to make a bitter, dark tea ...” because I’ve just read where her brother, John, told the court that she drank very weak tea and the bitterness of both black cohosh and the zopiclone would have been too great.

HB had been drugged for at least 3 months but we haven't heard that she suffered from headaches on a regular basis though, so I think it highly unlikely that paracetamol capsules were normally used to administer the zopiclone.

However, if she took a black cohosh capsule on a daily basis, IS could have packed some or all of the capsules with zopiclone, there would be no bitter taste, and she would be self-medicating. If she had a headache on 11 April, and he was giving her the paracetamol, he could have removed most but not all of the paracetamol from that capsule and topped it up with more zopiclone. As I quoted earlier re the paracetamol found at post mortem, “The level of this was low and negligible really - below the concentration you’d expect to have a therapeutic effect”.

The two combined could have had quite an impact as indicated by the occasion when she slept for 5 hours after waking up one morning.

Click to enlarge.

 

[Duchy]

As I quoted earlier re the paracetamol found at post mortem, “The level of this was low and negligible really - below the concentration you’d expect to have a therapeutic effect”.


Click to enlarge.

So this refers to just a residue of paracetamol powder left in the capsules after they have been emptied and refilled with zopoclone?

 

[Florrie]

So far the Prosecution seems to be very low key...they are letting the evidence speak for itself. However, having seen that IS is planning to take the stand I should think they are rubbing their hands together with glee. Get him up in the stand and give him enough rope to hang himself....which he will do.
Looking forward to the cross examination as I think they will crucify him.

I am longing to hear about Joe and Nick.
Also looking forward to seeing how much he plays the victim on the stand and what techniques he uses to try and manipulate the jury.

I think the jury are onto him already though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk