GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #8

[neteditor]

Crown says 'overwhelming' evidence against Stewart
“In very short terms the Crown say there is overwhelming evidence on which the Crown say, you must find Stewart guilty. “If you were to think to yourself ‘I am sure this defendant is a liar, an actor, and is telling us something that is simply not true’ then the next stage of that logic would be why is he lying to us? Why is he behaving like an actor? “The only answer to that is probably because he is guilty of these offences.”


Prosecutor says Stewart's account 'absurd'
“I would say his account is absurd. You have the narrow choice to choose whether it was this defendant who killed Helen Bailey, or Nick and Joe. “It’s not the whole world to choose from, it’s this defendant, or Nick and Joe. “Or if the Crown suggest you take the view that Nick and Joe are imaginary, who don’t have proper names, who don’t exist, and have been imagined to pull the wool over your eyes. “If Nick and Joe don’t exist, then it is this defendant who killed Helen Bailey.”


Killing of Helen Bailey 'wicked'
Mr Trimmer adds: “The Crown say one thing you will have understood is that whoever did this, and the Crown say there is no doubt it was Ian Stewart, it was a wicked thing. “The killing was wicked, the disposal of the body is wicked, the way in which it was done and planned was wicked. “But you have to get past that notion and consider the facts.”

... now that I have put it clearly in your minds Love Strimmer to bits.

 

[Squamous]

I have re-read....

So, this is what I am understanding...

IS told his defence information that they didn't put into the statement. They then presented him with the defence statement without these pieces of information and he signed off on it.

Presumably, now that this information has come into the case, but they're not in the statement, they need the jury to have this information to consider, so the defence are confirming that they had received this information they just hadn't put it in the defence statement. So now it is part of the agreed facts, rather than as part of the defence statement that will be given to the jury.

Does that sound at all feasible? That's the only thing that makes a semblance of sense in my head.

Yes. The agreed facts are that IS mentioned those things rather than they happened though.

The fact that he started talking about the Zopliclone just before the results came back makes him sound even more guilty to me!

 

[Alyce]

Kidnappers putting body in cess pit 'absurd' - prosecutor
“The notion of Joe and Nick putting them in that cess pit is quite absurd. Why would the kidnapper bring the uninjured, drugged body of Helen Bailey back and put her in the pit? Why would all the places in the world would they choose that place? “They had no beef with Ian Stewart, they had no reason to frame him or to make his life difficult. “Why put the dog in that pit? Why would Nick and Joe want to go to the trouble of taking that dog, killing it, taking it back and putting it in that pit. “Why would they bother to take the dog’s toy back to that pit? “Nonsense isn’t it. Why would they want to put to put the pillow slip, the bin bags in that pit?”

Prosecutor asks why alleged kidnappers would risk returning body
“Why would Nick and Joe want to go back there at all? They know police are involved. Why go back to the place where police might turn up at any time, with presumably the body and the dog in the car? Why take the risk?”

Stewart 'nearly got away with it' - court told
“Nick and Joe don’t exist and didn’t do it. However, Ian Stewart on the other hand, what better place? And shortly he very nearly got away with it. “A little while longer, had the police not on July 15 made that final search of that cess pit, her body may have remained in that pit, sunk to the bottom and decomposed. “In a few years they might have found some bones. “Stewart’s acting, his sadness, his insistence she had gone away, his electronic records he left behind, all showed Helen had just run away. Showed a riff between lovers.”



http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-case-12612181

 

[Florrie]

Hi everyone. Sorry I've been quiet but I had a really horrible message from one of the widows who feels that I have been wrong in joining this group, merely to "speculate" and to cause her family upset. I've thought long and hard about my actions, and I feel that you guys have supported me in my grief far more than those who are casting judgement. This is a taste of what they can be like! Hunkerdown, I love the idea of Bailey, what a wonderful tribute. It seems ironic that I am being condemned for posting in a public group, which is how all the widows met each other in the first place. I have gone with Hunkerdown's view, as a true friend in "real life" who knew Helen for over 10 years - to honour Helen and also to send the prosecution details that they might have missed.

Let's hope justice for Helen and Boris will quickly be served x

Oh Pip I am so sorry to read that.
The last thing I would want to do is cause Helen's family anymore grief and upset but quite honestly in their position NOTHING could cause me more grief than what this man has done.

I hope nobody here would be posting just to speculate, rather the more experienced folk pick apart the facts/evidence and consider it. It's not about speculation but about disgust that something g so awful has happened to somebody that so many people admired and were inspired by.

I hope you are okay as that message must have been hurtful to you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ColourPurple]

Hi everyone. Sorry I've been quiet but I had a really horrible message from one of the widows who feels that I have been wrong in joining this group, merely to "speculate" and to cause her family upset. I've thought long and hard about my actions, and I feel that you guys have supported me in my grief far more than those who are casting judgement. This is a taste of what they can be like! Hunkerdown, I love the idea of Bailey, what a wonderful tribute. It seems ironic that I am being condemned for posting in a public group, which is how all the widows met each other in the first place. I have gone with Hunkerdown's view, as a true friend in "real life" who knew Helen for over 10 years - to honour Helen and also to send the prosecution details that they might have missed.

Let's hope justice for Helen and Boris will quickly be served x

I'm sorry you've had to go through that. You've been nothing but respectful to Helen and Helen's memory.

People cope with things in different ways and everybody is entitled to an opinion but that's all the horrible message you received was... an opinion. It's not fact, it's just one person's opinion . They're entitled to it and you're entitled to ignore it. Don't waste anymore energy on it.

 

[hunkerdown]

Hi everyone. Sorry I've been quiet but I had a really horrible message from one of the widows who feels that I have been wrong in joining this group, merely to "speculate" and to cause her family upset. I've thought long and hard about my actions, and I feel that you guys have supported me in my grief far more than those who are casting judgement. This is a taste of what they can be like! Hunkerdown, I love the idea of Bailey, what a wonderful tribute. It seems ironic that I am being condemned for posting in a public group, which is how all the widows met each other in the first place. I have gone with Hunkerdown's view, as a true friend in "real life" who knew Helen for over 10 years - to honour Helen and also to send the prosecution details that they might have missed.

Let's hope justice for Helen and Boris will quickly be served x

Good for you Pips - Helen herself received some rather harsh judgement from the widow group who I think sometimes feel that they 'own' some of Helen and that she was 'one of theirs'. Like I said previously, Helen was many things to many people and I know never wanted to be defined by her grief and was so ready to move on into the next chapter of her life - we all know that this was cruelly snatched from her. The only thing that gives me any crumb of comfort is the knowledge that she was happy and excited for the future at the time of her death. I think we should all be left to deal with how we feel in our own way - I know for me personally, this forum has been a great source of comfort and information (and also some cracking humour when needed) we all share the same goal - we want to see justice done for an incredible woman and her little dog [emoji173]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Alyce]

Helen Bailey was 'grossly deceived'

“This defendant was intimate with Helen Bailey one month after they first met face to face. “It’s perfectly plain and you’ll see this in the extracts from her book, Helen was overwhelmed by love longing, absolutely besotted with him, the Gorgeous Grey Haired Widower. “It’s a matter of common sense that somebody shortly bereaved may not have the logical equipment to see they are being deceived. “The Crown say Helen Bailey was grossly deceived by somebody who was preying on her.”


Stewart would have inherited Helen Bailey's wealth after her death
“In 2012 there had been discussions about Helen’s wealth and making a will, because Ian Stewart signed the first 2012 will as a witness. “But if you sign a will as a witness you may not benefit from that will. “By 2014 Stewart had moved forward this far, Helen Bailey wanted to ensure by 2014 that even if she died before she got married, Stewart would be so well provided for he would be utterly comfortable for the rest of his life. “From 2012 to 2014, Stewart had achieved that milestone from Helen Bailey. He told you he had plenty of money and was well provided for, she didn’t think so. “She trusted Tony Hurley to abide by those wishes. “There’s no doubt that if she died after that will, all that under the will would have become Stewart’s.”


http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-case-12612181

 

[ColourPurple]

Sounds as though it was just Defence having to get certain sections of the book copied in order to give to Jury to put in their bundles ...........all that detective research yesterday for nothing ......sigh

Grrr. So the prosecution never did get the chance to properly challenge his claims. I think the fact alone that he mentioned zopiclone before it was even found doesn't look good for him.

 

[Alyce]

Kate Bradbrook ‏@katebradbrook 6m6 minutes ago

#helenbailey Prosecution say notion Nick & Joe brought drugged HB back to pit at house with dog "quite absurd


#helenbailey Prosecution tell court HB "grossly deceived by someone who was praying on her


( am sure she means preying )

 

[Alyce]

Prosecutor says Helen Bailey wanted to provide for Stewart
“Helen was so worried about his financial circumstances, that Stewart wouldn’t have to pay for the inheritance tax, so she took out a policy that if she died, there was sufficient money to pay the inheritance tax. “Ms Bailey was sufficiently taken by Stewart to make sure Stewart was sufficiently provided for.”




http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-case-12612181

 

[Florrie]

Grrr. So the prosecution never did get the chance to properly challenge his claims. I think the fact alone that he mentioned zopiclone before it was even found doesn't look good for him.

In many ways they don't need to challenge it as it's absolute nonsense of the highest order to anyone who hears it.

I would hope that the jury will have stored it in their heads and just walk back in with a guilty verdict rapidly.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jessie]

I have re-read....

So, this is what I am understanding...

IS told his defence information that they didn't put into the statement. They then presented him with the defence statement without these pieces of information and he signed off on it. RSBM

Now I've calmed down a bit I think it's just IS doing the usual and attempting to blame others for what is in fact his own mistake. !

 

[icemaiden65]

I'm making dunces caps as we talk.

Make one for me too please! I'm lost here.

 

[ColourPurple]

Kidnappers putting body in cess pit 'absurd' - prosecutor
“The notion of Joe and Nick putting them in that cess pit is quite absurd. Why would the kidnapper bring the uninjured, drugged body of Helen Bailey back and put her in the pit? Why would all the places in the world would they choose that place? “They had no beef with Ian Stewart, they had no reason to frame him or to make his life difficult. “Why put the dog in that pit? Why would Nick and Joe want to go to the trouble of taking that dog, killing it, taking it back and putting it in that pit. “Why would they bother to take the dog’s toy back to that pit? “Nonsense isn’t it. Why would they want to put to put the pillow slip, the bin bags in that pit?”

Prosecutor asks why alleged kidnappers would risk returning body
“Why would Nick and Joe want to go back there at all? They know police are involved. Why go back to the place where police might turn up at any time, with presumably the body and the dog in the car? Why take the risk?”

Stewart 'nearly got away with it' - court told
“Nick and Joe don’t exist and didn’t do it. However, Ian Stewart on the other hand, what better place? And shortly he very nearly got away with it. “A little while longer, had the police not on July 15 made that final search of that cess pit, her body may have remained in that pit, sunk to the bottom and decomposed. “In a few years they might have found some bones. “Stewart’s acting, his sadness, his insistence she had gone away, his electronic records he left behind, all showed Helen had just run away. Showed a riff between lovers.”



http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-case-12612181

Brilliant, even IS couldn't up for a reason that they would do all this other than they might have been trying to frame him.

 

[cottonweaver]

Good for you Pips - Helen herself received some rather harsh judgement from the widow group who I think sometimes feel that they 'own' some of Helen and that she was 'one of theirs'. Like I said previously, Helen was many things to many people and I know never wanted to be defined by her grief and was so ready to move on into the next chapter of her life - we all know that this was cruelly snatched from her. The only thing that gives me any crumb of comfort is the knowledge that she was happy and excited for the future at the time of her death. I think we should all be left to deal with how we feel in our own way - I know for me personally, this forum has been a great source of comfort and information (and also some cracking humour when needed) we all share the same goal - we want to see justice done for an incredible woman and her little dog [emoji173]
/QUOTE][/

Well said hunkerdown. Some of those things you have said have been apparent to many of us on here for a good while now.

 

[Alyce]

Increasing quantities of drug given to Helen
“Ms Bailey was given Zopiclone. She was having drugs ingested into her system in increasing concentration. “It doesn’t build up in her system, but the concentrations are increasing up to the point where she dies. “The suggestion that will be floated is that she took these drugs herself. “Why would she be taking them in increasing concentration? “That is the curious nonsense, especially you remember the evidence about how she felt. “Why would you bother talking to your mother about feeling very sleepy. if at the same time you are taking increasing concentrations of sleeping tablets? Bizarre nonsense. “This defendant had had Zopiclone prescribed to him on two separate occasions, he knew perfectly well the effects of that drug.”


Drug could have been put in scrambled egg
“Not only was there Zopiclone in Helen’s system but paracetamol. But what do those tablets look like? Ordinary tablets? Was he saying ‘got a headache love, want some paracetamol?’ “In addition, Stewart did cook Ms Bailey breakfast. “The result of taking Zopiclone is not that it tastes bad, but once you have ingested it the saliva has a metallic taste. “But it’s not the tablet that’s tasting bad or sharp, it’s the side effect. “There is nothing unreasonable in the notion that Stewart could have put Zopiclone in Helen’s scrambled egg.”

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-case-12612181

 

[cottonweaver]

Grrr. So the prosecution never did get the chance to properly challenge his claims. I think the fact alone that he mentioned zopiclone before it was even found doesn't look good for him.

BIB It seems so convenient doesn't it.

 

[Alyce]

Kate Bradbrook ‏@katebradbrook 2m2 minutes ago

#helenbailey Pros say suggestion HB took zopiclone knowingly "bizarre nonsense" while telling her mother she was feeling sleepy

 

[Squamous]

Sorry to hear that Pips. You are entitled to make your own choices, and the need to talk and discuss is so natural (as Helen found in her grief). If Helen's family really are upset by this forum then I am sorry to hear it but in itself, it isn't wrong. I think having people who knew Helen here is a powerful moderating force in remembering that we are talking about a real person rather than a faceless murder mystery. I'm very grateful for the input that all of those who knew Helen have given.

 

[ColourPurple]

Yes. The agreed facts are that IS mentioned those things rather than they happened though.

The fact that he started talking about the Zopliclone just before the results came back makes him sound even more guilty to me!

Exactly. If it was true that he knew she'd taken it on two occasions some time ago then why woud he think to menion it when he knew there was going to be a pathologists report.It's almost like he knew she had taken it right before she died and that it would show up in tests...