GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #9

[BatFace]

Interestingly, I went back to this article and thought that the first comment on it sounds just like someone we are all now very familiar with.

Nick Joe Dave... Mike?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-51-missing-two-weeks.html#comments-3554692

That's got to be him, hasn't it? Urgh.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Ironside]

Interestingly, I went back to this article and thought that the first comment on it sounds just like someone we are all now very familiar with.

Nick Joe Dave... Mike?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-51-missing-two-weeks.html#comments-3554692

Oh that must be him. I really see this as him wanting the world to know the house was very thoroughly searched rather than a sympathy move.

I just downvoted it haha!

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[mrjitty]

Unless we are Judge Masipa.

Seriously, I hope that what you say is right in English law. Must be, surely. :crossfingers:

Well I can confirm that Court's and Juries should make natural and logical inferences.

Unfortunately at times speculation seems to be elevated into "doubt" - usually by speculating about individual points of circumstantial evidence and not looking at the big picture.

 

[LozDa]

Oh that must be him. I really see this as him wanting the world to know the house was very thoroughly searched rather than a sympathy move.

I just downvoted it haha!

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

YOU SHOW HIM, Ironside! [emoji23]

 

[Tortoise]

All fascinating and very interesting stuff, Tortoise. My only worry is that IS's grammar is weak and he often uses responses which show poor syntax. How does one allow for that? When one listens to him, despite his professed excellence in a certain subject indicating intelligence (physics - 1st Class Hons), his grammar lets him down badly.

I don't know.

I think it was just a very clever question and he was under pressure to not think about it and give an immediate response, because delay shows tailoring.

Since we know his whole defence is a lie, and ergo everything he says will be what he has to construct on the hop, and not an honest answer from memory, I don't think we have much if anything showing his normal grammatical construct.

He may even be fabricating details about his past, so I don't know where I could look to find his truths

 

[Tortoise]

Yes, it's a very self-serving distortion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Far be it from me to be suggesting anything derogatory in the slightest about him innocent: ), but someone in that courtroom apart from the one on trial seems to have the knack of employing deception, manipulation and (so I am told) charm. Hmm.

 

[Tortoise]

I'm going to stick with my original estimate of a verdict within 30-60 minutes, I am sure they all know exactly how they are going to vote. Nothing to discuss or pretend to discuss, gives them enough time to elect a foreman, vote and write a note to the judge.

 

[Moll]

Yes, Mr RF has been very slippery indeed. As if the jury have to understand IS's motives to convict him. As if Helen's expressions of love meant he was worthy of them. And so on.
I draw comfort from the thought that the judge is going to spend a morning clarifying the issues and from Michelle's assurances that the jury didn't look charmed by him.

 

[Interested Bystander]

I don't know.

I think it was just a very clever question and he was under pressure to not think about it and give an immediate response, because delay shows tailoring.



Since we know his whole defence is a lie, and ergo everything he says will be what he has to construct on the hop, and not an honest answer from memory, I don't think we have much if anything showing his normal grammatical construct.

He may even be fabricating details about his past, so I don't know where I could look to find his truths

Yep, thank you. What you are doing is really quite fascinating. What sort of area is it normally used for, ie law, psychology, ??

 

[Tortoise]

It's all going to be over tomorrow, isn't it? Well, perhaps we will be talking about it for a bit longer, but it will be strange not to have you all here. I'll miss Helen too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Welcome to the Hotel California.

Did you not know that once you are here you can never leave?

Sorry about that, and all.

 

[Cherwell]

I'm going to stick with my original estimate of a verdict within 30-60 minutes, I am sure they all know exactly how they are going to vote. Nothing to discuss or pretend to discuss, gives them enough time to elect a foreman, vote and write a note to the judge.

What, asking for special punishment for him?

 

[Tortoise]

Yep, thank you. What you are doing is really quite fascinating. What sort of area is it normally used for, ie law, psychology, ??

Well, it is used in some parts of the US by police, the guy I watch is called Peter Hyatt and he does training wherever it is requested. Also by insurance companies and employers who wish to weed out job applicants who may not be what they present themselves as, and private firms who want to find out which employee has committed theft against them etc.

There is a FANTASTIC video of his that I would love to share but it is on a case we aren't allowed to discuss for fear of being sued. You know the one I'm sure. Otherwise I would post it up for everyone to watch. It is AMAZING.

 

[Alyce]

I'm going to stick with my original estimate of a verdict within 30-60 minutes, I am sure they all know exactly how they are going to vote. Nothing to discuss or pretend to discuss, gives them enough time to elect a foreman, vote and write a note to the judge.

That would be an excellent result - hoping you are right.
Apart from being a very quick ending to what must be the most difficult and harrowing time of their lives for Helen's family, it would also show certain folk that distortions and misquotes are not appreciated by a smart Jury.

 

[Tortoise]

Just to add a bit more to my previous post, he says it is a science that never fails, and it can be proved by his success rate at getting confessions.

 

[icemaiden65]

Well, it is used in some parts of the US by police, the guy I watch is called Peter Hyatt and he does training wherever it is requested. Also by insurance companies and employers who wish to weed out job applicants who may not be what they present themselves as, and private firms who want to find out which employee has committed theft against them etc.

There is a FANTASTIC video of his that I would love to share but it is on a case we aren't allowed to discuss for fear of being sued. You know the one I'm sure. Otherwise I would post it up for everyone to watch. It is AMAZING.

Wowser, I Googled him and a write up of an interview he did popped straight up. So many parallels with the way IS has been responding. Thanks Tortoise - that's me set for the rest of the afternoon, reading, digging and watching .

 

[Tiny]

Thanks so much Torty. I hadn't heard of Peter Hyatt but am definitely going to find out more about him and his methods.

 

[Tortoise]

icemaiden and tiny check your letter boxes. Anyone else interested just say.

Ooh thought I caused the servers to crash for a moment :nerves:

 

[neteditor]

Well, it is used in some parts of the US by police, the guy I watch is called Peter Hyatt and he does training wherever it is requested. Also by insurance companies and employers who wish to weed out job applicants who may not be what they present themselves as, and private firms who want to find out which employee has committed theft against them etc.

There is a FANTASTIC video of his that I would love to share but it is on a case we aren't allowed to discuss for fear of being sued. You know the one I'm sure. Otherwise I would post it up for everyone to watch. It is AMAZING.

Found it in 5 seconds with Google. Thank you. Watching now.

 

[neteditor]

icemaiden and tiny check your letter boxes. Anyone else interested just say.

Ooh thought I caused the servers to crash for a moment :nerves:

Oh that was your fault was it? :slap:

 

[jessie]

Well, it is used in some parts of the US by police, the guy I watch is called Peter Hyatt and he does training wherever it is requested. Also by insurance companies and employers who wish to weed out job applicants who may not be what they present themselves as, and private firms who want to find out which employee has committed theft against them etc.

There is a FANTASTIC video of his that I would love to share but it is on a case we aren't allowed to discuss for fear of being sued. You know the one I'm sure. Otherwise I would post it up for everyone to watch. It is AMAZING.

Great post Tortoise. I have found Peter Hyatt fascinating, been following him for a while now (not 'literally' of course ! )
Lot to be learned there I believe and his posts on different cases are eye opening. Anyone that hasn't investigated this aspect certainly should imo.