GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #5

[cottonweaver]

this one's in line with your opinion on control and planning Tortoise.

( he's in trouble tomorrow afternoon then - it'll be double whammy from Trimmer. He'll have a collapse tomorrow aft?)

 

[Lit Up]

Thanks Cottonweaver for the warning. Unfortunately I have a 10-11 appointment otherwise I`d be heading to St Albans now with my sleeping bag (forget the first day of the Harrods sale - this is a far worthier cause!!).
I`ll sit on someone`s lap if need be. Lit-up???

send me your picture ha ha

 

[Nellie Nelson]

Yes Cottonweaver. It is US site and therefore US biased forum software/sensibilities.

We have a lot in common but we are still 'separated by a common language'.

 

[LozDa]

Just caught up. What a day!

My greatest fear with this case was that he would tell a tale just believable enough that it would knock some certainty away from the jury as to his guilt. I worried that Joe and Nick would be just convincing enough that a tiny little bore of doubt would fester.

And then I read today's evidence.

:laughing:

I have never heard anything like this in my life. I am incredulous!! This would be the most hilariously ridiculous scenario that could ever be presented and I would laugh until the end of days... if it weren't for the fact that a beautiful, witty, strong-willed, dynamic woman had her life cruelly snuffed out by this absolute cretin.

I hope the jury and the judge are as incredulous as us. He needs to be locked up for the rest of his miserable life.

 

[Cherwell]

Ironside, it's a race thing.

If it was a universally recognized generic term for 'violent/aggressive' crime in the US [as it is in the UK] it would not be a 'naughty word' here.

It's ironic that we are prevented from using it in a non-racial manner. It's an equal opportunities word as far as we are concerned :biggrin:

 

[Tortoise]

Line of the day for me -

[FONT=&quot]"Stewart breaks down in the witness stand as he said: “It was a way of continuing the love from Diane on to Helen."


[/FONT]

 

[Tortoise]

this one's in line with your opinion on control and planning Tortoise.

( he's in trouble tomorrow afternoon then - it'll be double whammy from Trimmer. He'll have a collapse tomorrow aft?)

I'll tell you what he won't like. And that is when the jury comes back in after 30 minutes (all of which they'll have spent queuing for the toilet) with a verdict.

 

[cottonweaver]

I'll tell you what he won't like. And that is when the jury comes back in after 30 minutes (all of which they'll have spent queuing for the toilet) with a verdict.

:hilarious:

 

[Duchy]

And also seems that either IS or Jamie cannot remember when Jamie's birthday is

IS Jamie’s birthday was on April 13,

Jamie During the week of April 11, dad rang me My birthday was a few weeks after.

Well spotted!

 

[Duchy]

This morning I was worried that the jury might believe his lies... I'm no longer worried.

Nor am I.

This idiot! How can Helen have fallen for him? A fat, thick Gross Grey Haired Widower who shites over the bed, lays around in bed or on the sofa all day watching daytime TV, can't do anything physical, plays about inventing useless things......urgggh! Gross! What a waste of Helen. I hate him! Anyone who has spoken of him being charming needs to take a good long look at themselves. Poor Eileen, poor John, poor Tracey....I bet they are besides themselves.

 

[BatFace]

Yes, I know, but "phobia" is a strong word for the revulsion which is shared by pretty much everybody towards sewage.

It reminds me of when I had my first house-share and we were working out a chore rota..."I don't do bins," said one girl, "they knock me sick!"

Yeah, because the rest of us just love them. It still annoys me, more than twenty years later!

 

[Duchy]

But who in that house would be googling Nottingham Trent?! The sons were both at work (and both graduates iirc), I can't see Big Broad Bean fancying any academic pursuits and I agree with your opinion on Helen.

Maybe Joe was looking to widen his career prospects?

Girlfriend?

 

[Duchy]

Yes, thank god. I had lunch today with another friend who gave a police statement. She said she was no. 164. There is so much more I could say but I don't think I'm allowed to divulge too much. When the police announced she was missing I sent IS a message and he immediately responded " how did you find out?" I thought it was a strange thing to say, not to ask if she had contacted me. He said he'd better put something on Facebook.

Would you be able to talk about it after he gets sent down Pips?

 

[Legally Bland]

It's ironic that we are prevented from using it in a non-racial manner. It's an equal opportunities word as far as we are concerned :biggrin:

Swings and roundabouts.

On most UK sites we wouldn't be able to say 'twat' and 'bollocks'.

And those two words are certainly applicable to Ian Stewart and his testimony.

 

[Duchy]

My thoughts exactly, I think he has made a huge strategic error in admitting there was no note and that he fabricated that story and repeatedly lied to his sons, the police and everybody else. It weakens his credibility even further (if that's possible). The real reason he lied about the note is crystal clear - to send police towards Kent and away from the crime scene and Helen and Boris' bodies.

His story today, such as it was, only confirms what has been growing ever more obvious in recent days. That although the murder was pre-planned by at least a year, (showing ruthless forward thinking and intent), its execution was bungled and poorly thought out. He didn't have a strong and credible back story worked out in advance (not even for his sons' consumption), and the desperate, 11th hour invention of Joe and Nick was never going to fool anyone.

IS will ultimately be damned by his own idiocy and conceit. I hope Trimmer really goes to town and humiliates him on the stand, exposing his lifelong 'victim' act for the cynical sham it is - and pointing out he's been scuppered by a combination of greed, arrogance and stupidity. He's no master criminal, more Cretin than Crippen!

Well the note is perverting the course of justice so that will be an extra charge.

 

[MillyM]

Fiance in Helen Bailey trial 'was attacked by tattooed ****', court hears http://shr.gs/c0piNYJ


Ian Stewart, 56, claimed he was attacked on his doorstep by a tattooed stranger named Nick who said: “If you tell anyone, you won’t see Helen again.”*

Stewart said children’s author Helen, 51, was subject to a campaign of harassment by two men named Nick and Joe over past business dealings.*

He claimed he was set upon by Nick as he opened the door at the house the couple shared in Royston, Herts, on April 11 last year.*

Stewart told St Albans Crown Court: “He pushed me back into the hall and he must have tripped me at some point.*

“He said, ‘Helen is with us, she is helping us solve a problem. Don’t tell anyone’.”*

Asked who he thought Nick meant by “us”, Stewart said he assumed it was Joe.*

He added that the man told him they had taken Helen and her daschund Boris to Broadstairs, Kent, where they had a holiday home.*

Stewart, who was tearful during his evidence, is accused of slowly drugging his fiancee over several weeks and murdering her in a financially-motivated plot.*

He said that Helen, whose body was found in a cesspit under their garage, had confiscated his sleeping medication and repeatedly fed herself the sedatives.*

A postmortem examination found traces of the anti-insomnia medication Zopiclone, which had been prescribed to Stewart.*

The former software engineer, who insisted several times he had no hand in Helen’s death, claimed he rarely cooked for her and that she would have noticed the taste if he had laced her food.*

Simon Russell Flint, defending, asked: “Did you administer Zopiclone to her surreptitiously in any way, at any time?”*

He replied: “No, I never did.”*

Asked if the couple ever argued, he said: “No. I can categorically say that because after we were in a relationship for six months Helen said to me, ‘This isn’t a proper relationship, we haven’t had an argument’.”*

Stewart denied he was after Helen’s fortune, saying he had more cash than he could spend.*

 

[DollyDiamond]

The funny thing is I'm not in the least surprised. It had to be this, or nothing from him.

What does surprise me however is that Helen had no clue. Whilst he might be charming (I don't know but some people seem to think so) he's just not credible in the slightest.

Helen was 'settling' BIG time. She was lost after losing her husband and jumped head first into a serpent's lair.

She's not the only middle aged woman to sell herself short and compromise massively on a man, through fear of being single, and sadly she won't be the last. Most women end up in an unhappy relationship, their confidence and joie de vivre eroded day after day by a narcissist. Helen ended up dead. My heart breaks for her.

 

[MillyM]

Quote Originally Posted by Alyce View Post

And also seems that either IS or Jamie cannot remember when Jamie's birthday is

IS Jamie’s birthday was on April 13,

Jamie During the week of April 11, dad rang me My birthday was a few weeks after.

Well spotted!

I thought that odd too. Just one of a number of little incidences, which may or may not be important in the bigger picture, but you would have thought the legal teams would have checked all these gaffs.

 

[icemaiden65]

Girlfriend?

Looks like she did a stint at Bristol Uni from 2013 (source, FB).

 

[Tortoise]

Quote Originally Posted by Alyce View Post

And also seems that either IS or Jamie cannot remember when Jamie's birthday is

IS Jamie’s birthday was on April 13,

Jamie During the week of April 11, dad rang me My birthday was a few weeks after.



I thought that odd too. Just one of a number of little incidences, which may or may not be important in the bigger picture, but you would have thought the legal teams would have checked all these gaffs.

I wondered if it was a journo error and he said 30th, not 13th.