GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #10

[Beesknees]

It should be really straightforward, just make sure you create a specific folder for all the docs you have created and only share that folder.

If you are struggling <modsnip> I will try and help you.

Saw your post only now. Thank you! I'll contact if needed. I'll do it tomorrow morning before the court session begins. Have no way tonight. I'll sort it out...

 

[bos]

Hey Cherwell - I've been on a mega shop at Ikea today so not been around.

Have we been told by anyone other than hearsay from a friend of JI that the man and woman friend says Jamie told about was definitely Shauna and Nathan and not
perhaps Karl and Jaydene?


I'd be more concerned if Jamie himself told the court that the arguing was from Shauna and Nathan.

No, we haven't. In his testimony JI's friend claimed JI had stated that a woman was shouting at the man. Because he said "the man", the interpretation by many has been that it was NM that was being referred to as JI didn't know him whereas he did know KD. Whilst the inference being drawn is fairly logical, it can't be taken as gospel, especially when you consider one of JI's friends testified that JI said he'd dropped bags at Southmead IMO

 

[bos]

Deposit for a house I believe she said. Not sure if it's the same sister who gave evidence but surely if it is she shouldn't be spouting off on social media..

Agreed. Ironically, I think she changed her surname to be less likely to be identified as JP's sister (on facebook and maybe in life) prior to being mentioned as a witness in court. Seems she can't keep her mouth shut to preserve the anonymity the change in name may have given.

 

[Beesknees]

HOARE TOLD ME ABOUT CHILDHOOD KIDNAP PLAN, MATTHEWS SAYS


Becky Watts's stepbrother Nathan Matthews told the court how his girlfriend Shauna Hoare once told him of a plan in her childhood to kidnap a boy to scare him, so he would not run away from home.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...onfessed-killing-family-bury-say-goodbye.html


Ohhh he even was trying to copy an idea from her. But she knew nothing!! This poor excuse is dying to tell the truth but he goes on faithful to 'the plan'. I wonder if he will crash or not. I didn't know about he saying it was SH who once told him she too had this plan. Lol they are indeed like two twin souls in everything and now also in the 'faken kidnaps' only to scare. Disgusting vile pair.

Oh, but she knew nothing, heard nothing, saw nothing...thought nothing, asked nothing, smelled nothing and aparently feels nothing.

 

[Cherwell]

Hey Cherwell - I've been on a mega shop at Ikea today so not been around.

Have we been told by anyone other than hearsay from a friend of JI that the man and woman friend says Jamie told about was definitely Shauna and Nathan and not perhaps Karl and Jaydene?

I'd be more concerned if Jamie himself told the court that the arguing was from Shauna and Nathan.

No, but it seems more plausible to me that it was S and N.
A pity that the prosecution is apparently unable to clarify this point, but if JI won't give evidence, so be it.

 

[Kaly99]

No, we haven't. In his testimony JI's friend claimed JI had stated that a woman was shouting at the man. Because he said "the man", the interpretation by many has been that it was NM that was being referred to as JI didn't know him whereas he did know KD. Whilst the inference being drawn is fairly logical, it can't be taken as gospel, especially when you consider one of JI's friends testified that JI said he'd dropped bags at Southmead IMO

Personally I'm waiting for this to be confirmed by JI before drawing any conclusions from it - it could be that, for example, JI said "my mate and a woman were arguing" and that became "a man and a woman were arguing".

Come to think of it, I wonder if it could be DD and JP who were arguing? It sounded as if JI got to the house (whichever one it was) and a man and a woman who were already in the house were arguing, in which case it can't be either NM or KD because they were with him.

 

[Beesknees]

Personally I'm waiting for this to be confirmed by JI before drawing any conclusions from it - it could be that, for example, JI said "my mate and a woman were arguing" and that became "a man and a woman were arguing".

Come to think of it, I wonder if it could be DD and JP who were arguing? It sounded as if JI got to the house (whichever one it was) and a man and a woman who were already in the house were arguing, in which case it can't be either NM or KD because they were with him.

At the time I inferred it was S and N. But no doubt it could also be J and D. If J didn't agree with things being moved to their house for example.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

So..... what's happening tomorrow? I've missed all of today, are we expecting NM to take the stand again?

 

[Beesknees]

So..... what's happening tomorrow? I've missed all of today, are we expecting NM to take the stand again?

Yes, I have been reading he will take the stand again and I think it will be to go on with the prosecution as it was 'cut short' this afternoon.

 

[e-sherlockholmes]

Sorry if any of this has been mentioned- have not had time to catch up- just thoughts- and if anyone wants to catch me up- much appreciated...
Things that hit me today...

3rd interview with SH- how do we know you are not involved etc? Her first response is about DNA- not horror and recoil- not OMG I could not kill and cut up a child or a family (extended kinda) member- DNA

NM is apparently in so much pain he can sneeze and be incapacitated... but in 20 minutes he can 'accidently' kill a child who put up some fight and carry that 9 stone dead weight down the stairs with no issues and he is NOT a big guy....

The bedroom window looks out over the hutch- SH hears nothing?

Who does without a bathroom for three days with a toddler and doesn't question why their partner is there all the time sawing stuff? I am no plumber but I know you do not normally saw a toilet if it is blocked without water (at best) everywhere!

She is abused? Ok so she can give him the marching orders over his hoarding habit and looking at her fb- sorry now- she does not fit the idea I have of a woman intending to leave or even fear her partner. Fat jokes yes- believe that bit- lots of ref to people spending money owed to you etc.

The searches- she had no idea according to her interview (2nd one) - she posted DG status from DAYS before mentioning searches! She knew, I knew, everyone knew- she was in no bubble.

There are two newly released police interrogation clips with the female suspect, which were conducted after the male suspect had been officially charged. They are revealing as these were moments the police were deciding themselves whether to charge her as well.

The third interrogation clip is interesting. The moment where she snaps out of displaying "sorrow" to suddenly being authoritative and making jokes/sarcastic statements is chilling (the part about "killing him [male suspect]" for what he allegedly did to Becky). Then, she snaps back to crying and displaying sorrow. If you've been around psychopaths long enough, you'd recognize these are classic clinical hallmarks of a psychopath. If I had to put money on a bet, maybe a 25 on the PCL-R, but you'd have to officially test to know.

The third interrogation clip also revealed the suspect outright lied to investigators about knowledge of any sexual deviancy of the male suspect.

Things I observed are a clear change of appearance. Was she held in jail at the time of both interviews? The video quality obviously is shoddy, so its hard to gauge whether there were any genuine tears shed, but there are some parts where her nose is blushed, and so those moments might be genuine emotions.

 

[e-sherlockholmes]

I think the female suspect is guilty from a criminology perspective, but I agree from the legal perspective the evidence appears very circumstantial against her. The prosecution seems to have put together a weak case.

Is there something similar to "felony murder" in the UK, wherein a suspect in the commission of a felony results in the death of victims, can be charged with murder under the "felony murder" definition?

I ask because then this would be an easier case to win against the female suspect. I think it is much easier to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she might have planned and executed the attempted kidnapping of Becky. This act is a felony. Becky died, so everyone gets charged with at least felony murder. You only need to prove the suspects had intent on kidnapping to get felony murder to stick. In the case of kidnapping, we know that the suspect talked about kidnapping people from the texts, there are two stun guns, she was on scene, etc.

The other charges might be hard to prove when the male suspect is taking all the blame for it and the evidence isn't shaping up as strongly as it could in the ideal world. But the attempted kidnapping charge I can foresee might stick.

 

[jessie]

I was reading about "Circumstantial Evidence" and how acceptable it is the judge and jury. Thought others might be interested:


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284166/Evidencev3_0EXT.pdf


Circumstantial evidence allows a conclusion to be drawn from a set of circumstances or
information. To do this the court and the jury must:
&#61623; accept the evidence before them, and
&#61623; reach a conclusion from it, for example:
o the defendant is accused of theft from an art shop, and
o a witness saw the defendant running from the art shop holding a painting.
What the witness saw is direct evidence. The conclusion that the defendant committed the
theft based on what the witness saw is circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is not necessarily weaker than direct evidence if there are number
of circumstances that together can lead the court or a jury to a guilty verdict. R v Exall
(1866) states that:
&#8216;One strand of a cord might be insufficient to sustain the weight, but three stranded together
may be quite sufficient of strength. Thus, it may be circumstantial evidence &#8211; there may be a
combination of circumstances no one of which would raise a reasonable conviction, or more
than a mere suspicion; but the whole, taken together, may create a strong conclusion of
guilty, that is, with as much certainty as human affairs can require or admit of&#8217;.
This means that, even though you may only have circumstantial evidence, if there is enough
of it, then altogether, it may be enough to prove guilt.

 

[Tealgrove]

MOO......

I have long suspected that Shauna is in far deeper than the evidence has shown.

I find NM's behaviour so strange especially in one of the videos wherein he doesn't want Shauna's name spoken. His body language and "breakdown" at that moment is telling, except I don't know what it tells us. He closes his eyes in court and looks down. He cut up a body but wasn't watching what he was doing and can't explain it. Maybe because he did close his eyes while it was happening and someone else took the lead in the whole procedure. He's taking the whole rap and adamantly refuting any suggestion that Shauna had ANY knowledge and we know that cannot be true. Logistically it can't be true. I think they were in on it together, it went wrong and maybe, just maybe, it was SH that caused Becky's death and not NM.

I would love for someone with a psych background to chime in because I think this may be the missing piece of the puzzle. NM's emotional state, his panic, his mannerisms, the fact he was sexually frustrated, the preparation, planning and then disorganization have to tell us something.

Where are those Criminal Minds profilers when you need them? LOL

 

[Kaly99]

At the time I inferred it was S and N. But no doubt it could also be J and D. If J didn't agree with things being moved to their house for example.

I meant Donovan rather than Karl, the brother who was apparently living at the Barton Court house at the time but who had been asked to move out, and who presumably had no say in whether the stuff could be taken there. The way JI's friend explained it (not that I think he's very reliable) JI went to the house, saw a man and a woman, then when he went back to the house the man and the woman were arguing. Shauna and Nathan were in the car with JI to begin with and then Nathan travelled with him in both the car and the van, so the description doesn't really fit them. That only leaves DD and JP.

We really need to hear from JI himself, though.

 

[Crazy Mama]

I think SH found out that it was BW's body being transferred that night and that's why she was screaming at NM (if it was SH). I think NM made up an excuse about BW dying by accident. Then later SH found out that he had actually killed her and chopped her up. SH is not a totally innocent party here, but he is determined to cover for her, I think mostly for their daughter I would imagine and to show everyone what a martyr he is (!).

 

[Kaly99]

Is there something similar to "felony murder" in the UK, wherein a suspect in the commission of a felony results in the death of victims, can be charged with murder under the "felony murder" definition?

I ask because then this would be an easier case to win against the female suspect. I think it is much easier to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she might have planned and executed the attempted kidnapping of Becky. This act is a felony. Becky died, so everyone gets charged with at least felony murder. You only need to prove the suspects had intent on kidnapping to get felony murder to stick. In the case of kidnapping, we know that the suspect talked about kidnapping people from the texts, there are two stun guns, she was on scene, etc.

The other charges might be hard to prove when the male suspect is taking all the blame for it and the evidence isn't shaping up as strongly as it could in the ideal world. But the attempted kidnapping charge I can foresee might stick.

There is joint enterprise in the UK, which is basically the same thing. I suspect this is why SH has been charged: the prosecution doesn't believe SH was involved in the murder itself, necessarily - they might believe she actually was outside in the garden at the time - but they're arguing she knew about and was involved in the kidnap plot, and knew it might result in serious injury or death to Becky. It was mentioned on the Crimes Against Children page that the charges against SH are a little different to those against NM, and I think this is why - she's been charged as the secondary offender, NM as the principal offender.

I don't think I'd agree that the conspiracy to kidnap charge is especially easy to prove against SH - in fact, by far the strongest evidence of the kidnap plan is NM's own statements. Without those, I doubt there'd be enough to charge either of them with kidnapping; for example if he'd claimed it was an argument which got out of hand, there'd be nothing to prove otherwise.

The problem for the jury is that to convict SH, they need to believe NM on the kidnapping plot but disbelieve him when he says SH didn't know about it, which will be tricky.

 

[edgedweller]

I meant Donovan rather than Karl, the brother who was apparently living at the Barton Court house at the time but who had been asked to move out, and who presumably had no say in whether the stuff could be taken there. The way JI's friend explained it (not that I think he's very reliable) JI went to the house, saw a man and a woman, then when he went back to the house the man and the woman were arguing. Shauna and Nathan were in the car with JI to begin with and then Nathan travelled with him in both the car and the van, so the description doesn't really fit them. That only leaves DD and JP.

We really need to hear from JI himself, though.

I think this is possible - could JP have been shouting at DD to get out, if he was just a guest? Totally unrelated argument?

I must say that my faith in the prosecution wasn't strong before yesterday, but since I heard "your masterful disguise" (was that the phrase?!) I think the QC might just turn it around. I think NM's intelligence will be no match. Even yesterday after those few questions, I felt he had deftly reminded the jury how horrific Becky's death was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bathsheba]

I've just rewatched the SH police video from after NM's confession. I am not an expert in psychology or body language but to me SH comes across as cold and devoid of real empathy. I can't explain why I think this. She looks to me like she is lying or at least holding a lot of information back. She glances at the policewoman interviewing her as if to check if she is believing what she has told her. Anyway, just MOO.

 

[LBB]

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]Morning all,[/COLOR][COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]I was at a work thing all day yesterday so although I managed to keep track via the UK and Eire Facebook page, I haven't been able to catch up on here.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]Just MOO but I think NM may be telling the truth about his motive. I don't think there was anything sexual. I'm not sure what I think about the kidnap. It all seems so irrational and if it is true I'm sure that something will come out after about mental health/learning difficulties because to the vast majority of people his reaction/plan would not be considered 'normal'. Note: I'm not implying that all people with learning difficulties/mental health issues would do this! There is something that made him think this was acceptable behaviour. [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]I don't think SH was involved in the murder or a kidnap plan. I don't think the evidence is strong enough for either. I do think she found out about what was going on and through a misguided loyalty/not knowing what to do/confusion/shock over the whole thing, panicked and didn't tell anyone and for some reason has maintained this stance. I wonder if the shouting that JI heard was at the time she found out what was happening or started to suspect, or perhaps it was her freaking out because NM had illegal stuff in the house that she hadn't known about and he police had been there/were due to search the home. Perhaps it was the moment the penny dropped. [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]I think the texts about kidnapping a teenage girl are a red herring. I think this was a sick and highly inappropriate joke based upon NM's sexual fantasies but don't think it constitutes a plan or a conspiracy to kidnap anyone. [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]Re, JI and DD, l can't remember what the charge was against them. Was it assisting an offender? I think they may be found guilty of this (especially JI) but in sentencing the judge will bear in mind that they didn't have a clue what it was they were hiding. I think he'll use it as an opportunity to give a stark warning about the fact that all crime is illegal and you can never trust a criminal and know what it is you are helping out with, so just don't! [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]I'm still not sure what to make about the bathroom. How can there be no DNA? I'm just not sure the clean up could be that thorough and wonder if there is a huge hole in this part of the investigation. Perhaps NM isn't being honest here and the police never figured out where the body was dismembered.It would strangely strengthen SH's case if they had though. [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]But then SH says she heard the saw. This is the bit that sticks with me most and makes me doubt SH a little. But then i don't think that I can say 100% if my husband told me he was using a saw to cut pipes, that I wouldn't believe him. He's the DIY expert not me. But if NM did do all this in the bathroom then why was there no DNA - how on earth could he be so thorough with a clean?! [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.701961)]Just MOO.[/COLOR]

 

[LBB]

Don't know what's happened to my last post! I copied and pasted it from my phone. I will try and fix now...then read back to see what I missed!