GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #11

[cottonweaver]

BIB Couldn't have been noises between 11am and 2pm if NM was back at CH by the time AG got back from hospital at 12:45pm

It's not even certain that the argument and the noises were on consecutive days. It might even be that the argument was in the evening of the 18th and the "noises" were on the 20th

BIB - Aha I see where you're coming from. You are interpreting the Webb testimony of 19th as covering the entire 11-2pm period.
I am interpreting it as sometime between the period covered by 11-2! ie. Webb is giving a range estimate

"There was lots of running up and down the stairs very, very quickly, banging, slamming doors, scraping, furniture being moved, a suitcase being rolled across a wooden floor which was upstairs," she told the court.
"I remember thinking it was annoying because

I wanted to put my little one down for a nap

and with the banging she was finding it difficult to sleep.
"There was one voice at one point, a man's voice. He said one single word, I couldn't work out what it was.
"It sounded like the bed was being lifted across the floor,*like something heavy was being dragged.
"It was unusual, we never heard anything from them."
Mrs Webb said she believed the noises happened between 11am and 2pm on February 19.

This could entirely be my wishful thinking! Wish we had clearer testimony on this as it could have been a clincher for SH's direct involvement.
If SW means noises start at 11 and continue approx all way to 2pm then my faith in the Bristol cops is restored! ( Which is a good thing)

 

[Clio]

I don't think she's saying there was constant noise between 11 and 2. I understood her to mean that she's not sure what time she heard the noises but she knows it would have been between 11 and 2, she was trying to put her little one down for a nap so maybe she knows the time frame he'd normally go down for a nap.

If that's the case then 11-12.45 would fall in those times.

Possible. I was looking at this from ITV who we know have a journo in the court.

She also told the court she heard banging, people running up the stairs and "what sounded like a suitcase" on a wooden floor at some time between 11am and 2pm the next day.

"It was pretty constant" - she told the jury.

http://www.itv.com/news/west/update...what-sounded-like-a-suitcase-on-wooden-floor/

 

[ColourPurple]

I tried to post this last night but it wouldn't deliver. This is regarding the discussions yesterday about the pair possibly moving junk around ( eg garden to the lounge) either to put off a police search and the posts about the bathroom and bath being clearer of objects post the killing of Becky enabling something sinister ( even if not the sawing itself) to occur in the tub.

Police first visit to CML- This is PC's account of CML before the photographs of their home that were taken .Photos were taken after the arrest .
( Those photos are here:
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/pictures/beccky/pictures-27974874-detail/pictures.html


So since 24th of PC visit and arrest on kidnap charges on the 28th Feb, the shampoo bottles etc are now all back around the bathtub rim. It is also intersting that PC above says bath floor had bags. Does this mean that by time of 28th Feb they have moved a cooker, micro and all the other junk INTO the bathroom? How come the PC does not mention the cooker plus micro etc but mentions the bags?! A cooker is a particularly strange thing to have in a bathroom of that size. So was it not there on 24th? ( as seen in photos linked of CML bathroom) Can't imagine PC doesn't see them neither, she noted window was open and was observant etc.

Possible he just didn't mention the cooker as he also doesn't mention the other odd things like the mattress on the stairs or the fridge-freezer at the bottom of the stairs and he'd have had to have passed both, if they were there.

 

[Alyce]

On a side note

Just searching for more stuff from the neighbours at CML, I re read a snippet from early in the trial when CM was giving evidence. I had not realised, or not noticed, that CM is NMs step grandfather. And it is CM who states that NM lived with CM and MM ( his grandmother ) for about 15 years until he was 23. So working back, from the age of 7.
But, if CM is a step grandparent, is it possible then that NM actually lived with his grandmother from a much earlier age ? Perhaps CM was only around from when NM was age 7.

Made me think that NMs resentment might be even worse against Becky, being as she was raised from age 3 by AG.

 

[ColourPurple]

Possible. I was looking at this from ITV who we know have a journo in the court.

She also told the court she heard banging, people running up the stairs and "what sounded like a suitcase" on a wooden floor at some time between 11am and 2pm the next day.

"It was pretty constant" - she told the jury.

http://www.itv.com/news/west/update...what-sounded-like-a-suitcase-on-wooden-floor/

It also says "at some time between" though. So though it might have been constant when it was happening, I'm not convinced she means it happend for all the time between 11-2.

 

[Tortoise]

Was that when a neighbour reported hearing a male voice say one single word but they didn't catch what it was?

If he cut himself I imagine it was 'FLUFF' ... or ... something like it

could have been a loud swear word as you say but I doubt it was when he cut himself - the cut on his hand was the next day (Friday) probably when he was there using the saw alone. He bought the saw on the Friday.

 

[Clio]

Possible he just didn't mention the cooker as he also doesn't mention the other odd things like the mattress on the stairs or the fridge-freezer at the bottom of the stairs and he'd have had to have passed both, if they were there. This part stood out to me though

"She told the jury: 'There were all manner of items and stuff piled around. There was a smell I attributed to cat faeces. I noticed there was a cat.
'He invited us in and immediately invited my colleague and I upstairs. It was in a similar condition - piled high with all manner of clutter."

I assume this is when the bodyparts were in the blue box in the lounge and a freezer, I'm assuming in the kitchen but maybe it's the one at the bottom of the stairs... either way he immediately directs them up the stairs away from where the body parts are. Clever!

I think this is describing the police visit on the morning of the 24th after the blue box etc had been moved

 

[cottonweaver]

I don't think there ever was a planned killing/ kidnap. I believe this was pure invention. I do however believe that raised voices were heard that night, and that it was a very heated argument about Becky resulting in agreeing they would see her alone the next day.

I wonder what occurred to cause this argument the night prior? What had been discovered by NM or SH and what was the link to Becky? I don't believe they snapped because of a growing resentment towards Becky's attitude, but a sudden highly dangerous/ emotive discovery.

Yes, that's plausible, what could it be? The discovery?
( Sorry I can only read load half a screen of posts easily, so time lag in responding and following the discussion is difficult for me again)

 

[Alyce]

BIB - Aha I see where you're coming from. You are interpreting the Webb testimony of 19th as covering the entire 11-2pm period.
I am interpreting it as sometime between the period covered by 11-2! ie. Webb is giving a range estimate



This could entirely be my wishful thinking! Wish we had clearer testimony on this as it could have been a clincher for SH's direct involvement.
If SW means noises start at 11 and continue approx all way to 2pm then my faith in the Bristol cops is restored! ( Which is a good thing)

BIB I would also think SW was giving a time range - there was some noise, at some time between 11 and 2pm. I got the impression ( and it is only an impression ) that her comment was, there was some noise, for a short period of time, and it was annoying because she was trying to get her child down for a nap.
If it really had gone on for 3 hours, non stop, or almost continuously, I would think SW might have phrased things differently, along the lines of hours of noise, and how her child never got to sleep etc.

 

[Clio]

I am thinking of CCTV directly outside the house at CML which may have been written over by the time police got round to checking.

The other clip we have, that of NM and SH in the car ( or rather the car, to be precise ! )going to Crown Hill, is in a different area of Bristol isnt it, so could be that CCTV is kept longer in the system

There doesn't seem to be any CCTV from CML at all. Point is, if they have NM's car on CCTV in the CH area on the way there on 19th, wouldn't that CCTV also have caught NM going back to CML then back again to CH? Unless, as I said, he took another route

 

[ColourPurple]

I think this is describing the police visit on the morning of the 24th after the blue box etc had been moved

Ah yes. I've edited that bit out now. Thanks

 

[Clio]

could have been a loud swear word as you say but I doubt it was when he cut himself - the cut on his hand was the next day (Friday) probably when he was there using the saw alone. He bought the saw on the Friday.

We only have SH's word for when the cut happened. This is one of the points she got confused over as to whether the cut was Friday or Saturday

 

[ColourPurple]

There doesn't seem to be any CCTV from CML at all. Point is, if they have NM's car on CCTV in the CH area on the way there on 19th, wouldn't that CCTV also have caught NM going back to CML then back again to CH? Unless, as I said, he took another route

Could be the tesco detour on the way there took him via CCTV that he wouldn't normally pass. Has CCTV of their return been mentioned?

 

[Tortoise]

well acc to WDP, VOICES are previous day before BW disappears


The following day is 11-2 and one man's voice and the urgency.
I am having to look at 3 papers per day as all the reports are different.
I think clever Shauna stays at CL!

I don't think that would be clever to stay behind at CH.

If AG had come back and found SH there with child and no NM or BW, the later discovery of BW missing at the same time that NM wasn't there would raise immediate suspicions when she was eventually reported missing to police. The police probably would have made it a bigger priority to search CML.

If AG had got back before they returned (together), they could say it was the first time they had come round that day to return the tin. As it was, they managed to get back before AG and make it seem entirely innocent that BW had gone out and it had nothing to do with them.

Thinking further about the door slam and their story of being in the kitchen together when they heard it, shows their way of thinking at the time. I tried to put myself in their shoes. If SH had said to Anjie she was in the kitchen alone, then it would have raised the possibility that SH might not think straight off that it was BW going out, she would have had to logically consider that it was BW or NM and not be certain it was 'BW in one of her moods'. If they say they are together when they heard it, as well as the invented stomping, she doesn't have to consider it was anything else (except afterwards that it could have been the wind of course ).

Neither of them was smart enough to look further ahead and consider that if they were ever caught, the 'innocent' one who agreed they were together at the time would have to have been complicit in the lie about them being together.

ETA All my opinions of course - not proven yet

 

[cottonweaver]

Possible. I was looking at this from ITV who we know have a journo in the court.



http://www.itv.com/news/west/update...what-sounded-like-a-suitcase-on-wooden-floor/

mmm - the press reports are definitely a problem.
I was starting to focus more on Bristol Post and WesternDP as they also have their own press in there combined with UK & Eire tweets.
TBH I am not finding any exhaustive and reliable which is a real shame which it comes to a critical issue such as this. There are no shorthand typists in journalism any more !?

We also know that Defence said in court, that Webb had added to her initial statement.

My doubts:
For the life of me, ( mindful that Pros is trying to get a strong conviction against SH) is it realistic they have not already discounted that NM nips back with the body by doing exhaustive CCTV checks and neighbour accounts for 11-2 on 19th?

Otherwise this nipping back is a very risky thing to do ( one might be seen) , but then so is waiting for hours with a body in a boot at the house of the vanished person! ( It was my OH who said he thought there was no way someone waits all day with the body in the boot on the drive and he has zero interest/knowledge in this or any other case LOL)

TBH none of the participants appear pretty smart when it comes to CCTV, using cash, whether in-store or roads etc etc.

 

[Clio]

Could be the tesco detour on the way there took him via CCTV that he wouldn't normally pass. Has CCTV of their return been mentioned?

True. AFAIK only CCTV that has been released is of the car on the way to CH in the morning

 

[ColourPurple]

We only have SH's word for when the cut happened. This is one of the points she got confused over as to whether the cut was Friday or Saturday

And only her word that it happened at all. Wonder if anybdy else saw the cut.

 

[Tortoise]

I think it was to control the situation, preventing AG or DG making calls to the police or questioning neighbours or Becky's friends. Basically playing for time. NM and SH are 'witnesses' to Becky leaving, so whatever happened to Becky, must have happened 'out there' by a 'stranger'. DG and AG have to be convinced that Becky will walk through their front door at any moment.
No one reportedly said that NM or SH acted differently than usual. Becky was dead and in the boot of the car, even if they went home, she couldn't be taken out in broad daylight, better off staying at the scene and aware of the conversation between everyone present or whoever turned up later. JMO

no point in going home if they wanted to leave BW in the boot. I'd say that is when NM put her in the suitcase in the boot, so no-one would suspect anything if they were seen and used the trolley to wheel it into the house.

MOO

 

[Clio]

And only her word that it happened at all. Wonder if anybdy else saw the cut.

Saw it reported somewhere, but need to dig out the link, that NM had a cut on hand when arrested

 

[Clio]

no point in going home if they wanted to leave BW in the boot. I'd say that is when NM put her in the suitcase in the boot, so no-one would suspect anything if they were seen and used the trolley to wheel it into the house.

MOO

BIB I posted earlier re body in suitcase, rigor, timeline not adding up. Either she wasn't put in a suitcase before dismemberment or dismemberment probably happened later than 20th