GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #6

[Moll]

I found the websleuths thread when dear Helen first went missing......30 odd pages...in....seems the neighbors were the ones who tipped off the police to the cesspit in the garage.....it was after that she and Boris were found........

I noticed you were the only other member browsing the first thread!

 

[Lit Up]

I would like us - our Web team to think about this.
Many others who knew Helen would no doubt wish to do something in her memory of their choice.
But I suggest we have a 'fundraising' as our gift to the memory from us.
We are all suffering deeply whilst sleuthing for Justice -and it would be good to honour our love and commitment towards this justice - and indeed our huge regard for Helen and Boris.
I feel - we could do it in many ways .. to give a Widow some support? or a Widower? or a Creative writing course in Helen's name - OR the one I love most is to have a Sculpting of Boris to give to John Bailey in the memory of his Sister.
How do you feel?

Buy the bikini book. Money will go to the beneficiary of Helen's estate, presumably her brother John, as she had no kids. I've already bought about five copies of the book and given most of them away!

 

[icemaiden65]

I just watched the ITV dramatization on YouTube. Quite chilling. But isn't it alarming that a) the jury only found him guilty by 10-2 (one fewer and he'd have walked), and b) he served just 12 years.

Life, and he got out after 12 years? Was there a minimum sentence imposed before he would even be considered for parole?

 

[Joely 123]

Our Dachshund group - including close friends of Helen loved the idea of a sculpture of Boris as a gift to john, When we can collate this to our WS (if they wish) - we shall send him our gift and memory of Helen and Boris to honour all our sharing of grief. We can't be John Bailey within this plight but we can give him our greatest honour in recognition, but giving him Boris. And it shall all happen, thankfully - x

 

[Cherwell]

I found the websleuths thread when dear Helen first went missing......30 odd pages...in....seems the neighbors were the ones who tipped off the police to the cesspit in the garage.....it was after that she and Boris were found........

I think it later emerged that the police were aware of it by then, and had already made arrangements for it to be emptied, but they didn't tell the neighbour that. They tend not to divulge more information than they need to.
Of course they were still very interested in what the neighbour had to say, so the latter thought they had given the police the big breakthrough!

 

[Squamous]

This was what was said about Joe and Nick. It's a bit garbled but the gist is that they could find no leads at all I think -

14:41
Officer investigated ‘Joe’ and ‘Nick’

DC Kerr was asked to inquire whether there were mentions of Joe and Nick in documents that appeared to be relating to John Sinfield, Helen’s late husband. “The documentation we were asked to research were diaries from 2001, 2003 and 2009. “There were mentions of a Jo, or Joe, some had contact details or company names. “We were also asked to look into the name of Nick. “I can confirm that this defendant has no previous convictions, or cautions.”

 

[pinklilies]

This was what was said about Joe and Nick. It's a bit garbled but the gist is that they could find no leads at all I think -

14:41
Officer investigated ‘Joe’ and ‘Nick’

DC Kerr was asked to inquire whether there were mentions of Joe and Nick in documents that appeared to be relating to John Sinfield, Helen’s late husband. “The documentation we were asked to research were diaries from 2001, 2003 and 2009. “There were mentions of a Jo, or Joe, some had contact details or company names. “We were also asked to look into the name of Nick. “I can confirm that this defendant has no previous convictions, or cautions.”

Ah you found it Squamous. I knew I'd read that and was searching for the same quote myself. [emoji106]

 

[DollyDiamond]

Thank you ZaZara as that's helpful, yes Trimmer did indeed raise the red flags didn't he...and not only that but he got IS to acknowledge them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And yet I feel Mr Trimmer's questioning about their early 'courtship' (the subtext being IS' sinister motivation in targeting Helen), would have had so much more impact if he had used the word 'widow' instead of 'widower'. He said: "Widowers are very vulnerable at that time in their lives", and: "Widowers with a lot of money. might they be a target?"

Unless Mr Trimmer was misquoted, the correct word was widows, for he was clearly referencing Helen the widow, and not widowers such as her evil, gold digging killer!

I really hope the prosecutor is working hard this weekend to sharpen his delivery and land some knockout blows on Monday. IS can lie all he likes, but Mr Trimmer must let him know the world knows full well he killed Helen and Boris in cold blood and disposed of their bodies in the most degrading way he could. Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done - and that means IS being fully and repeatedly confronted in open court with the truth of his evil deeds. Helen cannot speak for herself and confront the man who took her life and that of her beloved dog - Mr Trimmer is now her representative. I want to see the gloves come off on Monday, and I'm sure Helen would too.

 

[hunkerdown]

I think the disparaging comments about his appearance have little to do with how people generally feel towards others- most decent adults judge a person by their character rather than their looks- but it is almost impossible not to be critical about every aspect of IS, because we are so revolted by what he has done. Crucially, we are trying to understand exactly how he could have appeared at all attractive to Helen- a clever and cultured woman of smart appearance, who enjoyed a bit of glamour in her life. Given that he does not appear to be the sharpest tool in the shed, and his personality seems petulant and crotchety under any kind of pressure, one might expect him to compensate for that by putting his best foot forward physically, at least. Instead, we see the unprepossessing and shambolic figure of a man than nobody could really consider to be in the same league as Helen.

It just leaves me feeling infuriated by his every utterance about her, and the attitude he has, which just drips with contempt and disrespect. HOW BLOODY DARE HE?! He should have felt like the luckiest man alive, but it wasn't enough for his staggering sense of entitlement. Even looking at him makes me angry.

Amen to that!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DollyDiamond]

I think Eileen's question though makes it apparent that she knows Boris would usually bark with excitement even if he knew people.

My little dog has the most incredible sense of radar around the front door, she sits up and starts barking and hyperventilating when a visitor is on the driveway and hasn't even reached the front door. Dogs are incredibly territorial and protective over what they see as the gates to their castle! It is irrelevant who the visitor is - she would react equally hysterically if it was me or a random postman (though she might try to nip the postman - wouldn't succeed though, as she's a pensioner pooch without a tooth in her head, bless her!)

Boris struck me as quite an excitable chap like Dolly-Dog (I suspect small breeds are even more prone to guarding the front door). I don't doubt he barked enthusiastically whenever anyone arrived at 'his' front door, whoever the visitor was, and that he did so when IS' parents arrived and failed to wake poor Helen, for obvious reasons.

 

[DollyDiamond]

I think it later emerged that the police were aware of it by then, and had already made arrangements for it to be emptied, but they didn't tell the neighbour that. They tend not to divulge more information than they need to.
Of course they were still very interested in what the neighbour had to say, so the latter thought they had given the police the big breakthrough!

It's disappointing to say the least that the police took a full three months to locate the second cess pit and recover Helen and Boris' bodies. If it wasn't the neighbours who finally tipped them off, then I wonder what/who did finally alert them to its location? This will obviously be a sensitive subject for police and one which will no doubt be raised again at the close of the trial.

I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, but logic and statistical probability should have told them 1/ Helen was killed by IS and 2/ her body was hidden somewhere in or around the family home. As someone else posted here earlier, that house should have been ripped apart way before July 2016! That IS was able to retain control of his and Helen's mobile phones without police ever intercepting them is another huge frustration. Those phones could have blown his Nick and Joe BS sky high!

 

[Duchy]

Just noticed this at the bottom of the new 'And Beyond' blog page that IS was designing.

 

[Cherwell]

It's disappointing to say the least that the police took a full three months to locate the second cess pit and recover Helen and Boris' bodies. If it wasn't the neighbours who finally tipped them off, then I wonder what/who did finally alert them to its location? This will obviously be a sensitive subject for police and one which will no doubt be raised again at the close of the trial.

This emerged during the prosecution evidence, but I can't remember the details now. We wondered for a while why they didn't lift the lid earlier, but it turned out they were waiting for the operator who came and drained it a few days later.

I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, but logic and statistical probability should have told them 1/ Helen was killed by IS and 2/ her body was hidden somewhere in or around the family home. As someone else posted here earlier, that house should have been ripped apart way before July 2016! That IS was able to retain control of his and Helen's mobile phones without police ever intercepting them is another huge frustration. Those phones could have blown his Nick and Joe BS sky high!

Yes, it's hindsight, and we have to remember that the police can't go confiscating phones, still less ripping buildings apart, unless they have good reason. I'm sure they wanted to, but they couldn't do much without IS's permission until he was arrested and charged. And they can't arrest people without solid reasons. And we should be glad of that!

I wouldn't worry about Trimmer. His opening words to Stewart were pretty powerful and are a taste of what's to come. But he spent most of the day laying subtle little traps which Stewart duly fell into. Good work.

 

[BatFace]

Just noticed this at the bottom of the new 'And Beyond' blog page that IS was designing.

I can't quite make it out- are you saying that he's been recently active on the website he was "building" for Helen?

 

[DollyDiamond]

I'm almost positive that Helen's brother will do something beautiful to honour her memory with some of the money from her estate. It might go some way to healing the pain of what IS did to try and get his greasy paws on it. I hope so.

Amen to that Batface! I lived in Highgate village for 20 years and can well understand why Helen loved it. It's an enchanting mix of old school elegance and big-hearted friendliness which, from what I have learned of Helen, must have been a perfect fit for her.

As she spent so many happy years there with her husband (and in my view would never have left had her life not been sent tragically off-course) I feel it would be the perfect location for a lasting tribute to her. Many distinguished writers have a blue plaque there, Charles Dickens and Sir John Betjeman among them. As you rightly say that is a matter Helen's beloved brother John will no doubt consider when he feels the time is right. He strikes me as a man of wisdom and discernment and will I'm sure make the right decision on this. Whatever choices he makes in the future regarding his late sister, he can be assured of the full support of the many people who loved and admired her.

 

[Duchy]

I can't quite make it out- are you saying that he's been recently active on the website he was "building" for Helen?

No not recently active. It's just something I hadn't noticed before when I looked and I don't think it has been mentioned here on the forum. It's the 'with love' words I am pointing out, although it does say 2017. Maybe it has been automatically updated as the website isn't complete.

 

[DollyDiamond]

This emerged during the prosecution evidence, but I can't remember the details now. We wondered for a while why they didn't lift the lid earlier, but it turned out they were waiting for the operator who came and drained it a few days later.



Yes, it's hindsight, and we have to remember that the police can't go confiscating phones, still less ripping buildings apart, unless they have good reason. I'm sure they wanted to, but they couldn't do much without IS's permission until he was arrested and charged. And they can't arrest people without solid reasons. And we should be glad of that!

I wouldn't worry about Trimmer. His opening words to Stewart were pretty powerful and are a taste of what's to come. But he spent most of the day laying subtle little traps which Stewart duly fell into. Good work.

My recollection of the police evidence is that they first paid attention to the correct cesspit in July (I don't have the dates to hand but approx three months after the murder) and that when they finally did, there was a further delay of a few days while they awaited the professional drainage people to open, explore and empty it with them. It would be no surprise to me if Helen's loved ones were hugely shocked and disappointed to learn that her body lay undiscovered for around 12 whole weeks, on her own property.

Obviously had police done a thorough search of the garage the week she disappeared and discovered the cesspit and the bodies, then they would have had every reason they needed to arrest IS on suspicion of murder, confiscate phones and rip the house apart. Early recovery of the bodies would have provided so much more evidence against IS and given the crown a watertight case.

Hopefully the evidence is already sufficient to convict IS and the very fact that Helen and Boris were found where they were, despite that 3 month delay, is a powerful indication that only he could have done it.

I so wish I shared your enthusiasm for Mr Trimmer's opening gambits but I must be honest and say I've been a little underwhelmed so far. However I shall reserve judgement for now and hope by close of play on Monday I'm singing his praises louder than anyone!

 

[MissTwiddle]

Trimmer: “How would people take advantage in this situation?”

Stewart: “Widowers are very vulnerable at that time in their lives. They could be confused”

Trimmer: “Widowers with a lot of money, might they be a target?”

Stewart: “Yes. It is suggested people are to be careful and just get to know people.”

Hi, another new one joining in a little. I want to see justice for Helen and Boris xx

It's been puzzling me why Trimmer would ask these questions in that context and I was wondering whether he was trying to establish if Stewart really believed he had more than enough money like has been claiming, especially if he had more than enough money when they first met.

I think it's interesting that he answers the question without personalising it and without detail. I.e. he didn't say that 'he' had to be careful or offer any ways that 'he' might have protected himself from gold diggers, this doesn't fit because at other times he loves to talk about himself and what he has been through. It was like he merely brushed aside the question, I personally think he did that because he couldn't relate or because he is on the defensive and thinks it relates to Helen and not him. I also think that it could just be another 'confession', he's let it slip how he got his foot in.

It's also interesting when he uses the words 'vulnerable' and 'confused'. Trimmer asks him 'How?' and rather than answer 'how' he answers by placing hallmarks on people. He would know how if only because he would have read or heard stories about how people have been taken advantage of but rather than use words to describe the advantage taker such as 'there are some snakes out there....' he places all the blame at the victims door by being vulnerable and confused.

 

[Florrie]

Hi, another new one joining in a little. I want to see justice for Helen and Boris xx

It's been puzzling me why Trimmer would ask these questions in that context and I was wondering whether he was trying to establish if Stewart really believed he had more than enough money like has been claiming, especially if he had more than enough money when they first met.

I think it's interesting that he answers the question without personalising it and without detail. I.e. he didn't say that 'he' had to be careful or offer any ways that 'he' might have protected himself from gold diggers, this doesn't fit because at other times he loves to talk about himself and what he has been through. It was like he merely brushed aside the question, I personally think he did that because he couldn't relate or because he is on the defensive and thinks it relates to Helen and not him. I also think that it could just be another 'confession', he's let it slip how he got his foot in.

It's also interesting when he uses the words 'vulnerable' and 'confused'. Trimmer asks him 'How?' and rather than answer 'how' he answers by placing hallmarks on people. He would know how if only because he would have read or heard stories about how people have been taken advantage of but rather than use words to describe the advantage taker such as 'there are some snakes out there....' he places all the blame at the victims door by being vulnerable and confused.

I think IS has been advised by his counsel to say as little as possible. Sadly he has already blown that by taking the stand and giving just about the worst story going with lots of detail. As such Trimmer has very little work to do....nobody hearing such hogwash could think it is true.
I really want to see Trimmer nail him next week though, put him under real pressure so that we see the true nature of this man come through.
This happened several times when Ben Butler was tried for the murder of his daughter and was widely reported in the Press. He lost control of his temper several times and displayed for the jury just what his true nature really was. May the same thing happen with IS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Moll]

And yet I feel Mr Trimmer's questioning about their early 'courtship' (the subtext being IS' sinister motivation in targeting Helen), would have had so much more impact if he had used the word 'widow' instead of 'widower'. He said: "Widowers are very vulnerable at that time in their lives", and: "Widowers with a lot of money. might they be a target?"

Unless Mr Trimmer was misquoted, the correct word was widows, for he was clearly referencing Helen the widow, and not widowers such as her evil, gold digging killer!

I really hope the prosecutor is working hard this weekend to sharpen his delivery and land some knockout blows on Monday. IS can lie all he likes, but Mr Trimmer must let him know the world knows full well he killed Helen and Boris in cold blood and disposed of their bodies in the most degrading way he could. Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done - and that means IS being fully and repeatedly confronted in open court with the truth of his evil deeds. Helen cannot speak for herself and confront the man who took her life and that of her beloved dog - Mr Trimmer is now her representative. I want to see the gloves come off on Monday, and I'm sure Helen would too.

If it has been correctly reported ('widows' and 'widowers' being easily confused) it was not Mr Trimmer who started saying 'widowers', but IS, trying to avoid the clear implication of the question asking how people might be taken advantage of. Mr Trimmer then just followed him through.
I don't see any lack of sharpness or power in the cross-examination, Dolly. This isn't the closing speech. It is far more powerful to let IS fall into polite little traps than to be thunderous in condemnation at this stage.