GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #12

[Clio]

'I was asleep and did not hear Becky's body being moved in suitcases'

Hoare said when the couple returned home later that night she went to sleep and Matthews went outside to talk to the two people who gave them a lift.
She was asleep and did not hear any noises during the 40 minutes when Matthews says he and others moved Becky’s body out of the house in suitcases.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6750182

 

[Clio]

Nope. Though I still couldn't legally find her guilty of the murder itself.

Me neither. What about conspiracy to kidnap?

 

[Alyce]

OK, so court has finished for the day.

At this stage of play, does anyone believe what SH says, that she's entirely innocent of everything?

Nope, dont believe her at all. She would have done better to admit to a few parts of the story - this total denial about everything is showing up all her lies, as she changes her story this way and that.
End result, for me, I dont believe anything that she says.

I do hope JI will testify.

 

[ColourPurple]

Me neither. What about conspiracy to kidnap?

Probably not TBH

 

[YidArmyRach]

OK, so court has finished for the day.

At this stage of play, does anyone believe what SH says, that she's entirely innocent of everything?

No. I don't think there is the proof to convict her of murder. Not sure about the kidnap charges if they still stand as the texts are rather incriminating. But I think she has lied enough and contradicted herself enough for anyone to doubt her story of not noticing a single thing. If JI testifies that she was awake in the house, then I think she is done for. Strangely though, if she was telling NM to get out, it suggests she wasn't happy with what was going on. Had she said that from the start, things would look a lot better for her.

 

[babame]

I don't believe anything SH says, however I don't think there is enough concrete evidence for a conviction. I wouldn't like to be a member of the jury, what a difficult task they have. moo

 

[Clio]

Nope, dont believe her at all. She would have done better to admit to a few parts of the story - this total denial about everything is showing up all her lies, as she changes her story this way and that.
End result, for me, I dont believe anything that she says.

I do hope JI will testify.

That's not going to add anything to the Kidnap & murder charges though

 

[ColourPurple]

No. I don't think there is the proof to convict her of murder. Not sure about the kidnap charges if they still stand as the texts are rather incriminating. But I think she has lied enough and contradicted herself enough for anyone to doubt her story of not noticing a single thing. If JI testifies that she was awake in the house, then I think she is done for. Strangely though, if she was telling NM to get out, it suggests she wasn't happy with what was going on. Had she said that from the start, things would look a lot better for her.

What part wasn't she happy about though? The whole thing? The involving others? Letting them into the house?

 

[YidArmyRach]

That's not going to add anything to the Kidnap & murder charges though

Maybe NM will find a fit of conscience and tell the truth ....

 

[jessie]

The cross examination seemed quite gentle to me. Is there a chance he is almost lulling her into a false sense of security allowing her yes/no replies?
I wonder if tomorrow his questioning will be more precise and picking apart her ridiculous alibis?

Thanks for the updates all - had a lot of computer problems today myself, so very glad of them.

 

[YidArmyRach]

What part wasn't she happy about though? The whole thing? The involving others? Letting them into the house?

Not happy as she had just discovered what was being moved perhaps?

 

[Tortoise]

[h=3]It might seem slightly unlikely - but it's completely plausible'[/h]Hoare said her version of events was true.
She said: “It might seem slightly unlikely to people but it is completely plausible”.
Hoare said: “Most people don’t understand the concept of Nathan and my relationship.
“Things that seem normal to us wouldn’t seem normal to others.”
Hoare she lied to police about text messages she sent to Matthews about teenage girls and kidnapping because they looked “sinister and suspicious”.
Prosecutor Mr Mousley said: “Isn’t it the case that you and Nathan were in this together from start to finish?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “That you went there together with the clear intention of taking her away to use for your purposes in which you were both so interested?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “And you helped Nathan in the house to do that?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “You knew what he was like and you knew Becky wouldn’t come quietly?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “And you took an equal part with Nathan in trying to cover it all up?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “You are not suggesting Nathan made you do things are you?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “And you thought you could get away with it didn’t you?”
Hoare: “I didn’t have anything to get away with.”
Mr Mousley: “But in the end there were just too many bits of evidence against you?”
Hoare: “No.”
Mr Mousley: “Are you just very unlucky?”
Hoare: “Yes.”
The trial has been adjourned until tomorrow.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6750182

 

[Tortoise]

thanks for doing the mirror updates Clio, I had to pop out

 

[Alyce]

That's not going to add anything to the Kidnap & murder charges though

Shows up another lie by SH

 

[PrimeSuspect]

No. I don't think there is the proof to convict her of murder. Not sure about the kidnap charges if they still stand as the texts are rather incriminating. But I think she has lied enough and contradicted herself enough for anyone to doubt her story of not noticing a single thing. If JI testifies that she was awake in the house, then I think she is done for. Strangely though, if she was telling NM to get out, it suggests she wasn't happy with what was going on. Had she said that from the start, things would look a lot better for her.

I'm sort of leaning that way too, but wondering if the dismemberment that she probably didn't agree with was happening right under her nose, the disruptions to her normal routine, no easy access to the bathroom, revisiting her mother which imo, was NM's idea, and people traipsing through the house made her irritable.

 

[Clio]

thanks for doing the mirror updates Clio, I had to pop out

No probs, hope I got them all

 

[Clio]

Shows up another lie by SH

Yes but the question is can they find her guilty of murder on the basis that she covered up for him? I think a lot will depend on the judges instructions to the jury at the end.

 

[Tortoise]

[FONT=open_sans]Hoare's mum Lisa asked if she was involved in Becky's disappearance during a conversation on February 28 - hours before she was arrested. [/FONT]

[FONT=open_sans]Giving evidence at Bristol Crown Court today, Hoare said: "She said to me that she knows why we were over there. [/FONT]

[FONT=open_sans]"I asked why. She said because I had something to do with the girl that went missing. [/FONT]

[FONT=open_sans]"I said 'what girl?' and she said Becky. [/FONT]

[FONT=open_sans]"I said how did she know that I knew Becky. She explained that my brother Paul has seen a picture on Facebook about the wedding. [/FONT]

[FONT=open_sans]"I exclaimed 'no'. I think we both giggled because it was ridiculous." [/FONT][FONT=open_sans]

...

The jury has already heard Hoare was the youngest of four children taken into care and
she lived with a string of foster families.

She lost contact with mum Lisa and step-dad Kevin Stone after an argument when she was aged around 17.

But today she told the court she got back in touch with her family and visited them on February 23 - four days after Becky's killing.

Hoare said she was prompted to get back in touch with her family because Becky's disappearance made her realise if she went missing "nobody would worry".

While her and Matthews were on their way to the reunion, police called asking if they could visit their home - but the pair said they had "plans" and refused, the court heard.

She said: "Because of the situation that was going on I kind of just felt with everyone so worried and concerned Becky-wise, what was going on, I realised that if I had gone, there would be nobody to worry where I was and be concerned.

"I don't know, even though the family (Becky's) didn't always get on extremely well, the situation just brought them all together. I wanted that."

....

Shauna searched online for ''do you want to hide a body?' the day after Becky was allegedly murdered - but only to find a parody of Disney's FROZEN, she told the court.

She searched on YouTube for the question on February 20 from her bedroom.

But she says she was looking for an internet parody of the movie Frozen about a body being "in more than one piece".

Hoare claims it was an ''unhappy coincidence'' that Becky's dismembered body was a few feet away, the court heard.

Hoare said it was to "cheer up" Matthews, who the prosecution allege had already started dismembering his sister in the bathtub, as part of a joint plot.

But she said they only watched it for about 30 seconds, because they had already seen it before.


....

It comes after Matthews left Hoare at his mum's to "help a friend" and the pair returned to the home which she said smelled strongly of bleach.

She said: "I was on my phone looking at films then the film Frozen came up and the video [parody] popped into my head. He found it funny."

Mr Mousley QC asked if it was the one with the "reference to a body being in more than one piece" and Hoare said "yes".

He asked: "What affect did it have on Nathan?"

She answered: "He kind of laughed."

Mr Mousley asked: "It cheered him up?

She said: "Yes."

Asked if she watched it all the way through, she said: "No, we rarely did because we knew what it was.

"It wasn't funny all the way through anymore."

Mr Mousley asked: "It is an unhappy coincidence that Becky was lying, probably to some extent cut up, in the bathroom a few feet away?"

Hoare answered: "Yes."

Read more: http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/...tory-28099028-detail/story.html#ixzz3qLiTbUhx
Follow us: @WesternDaily on Twitter | WesternDaily on Facebook[/FONT]

 

[Alyce]

It would be interesting to know ( though perhaps we never will ) who actually suggested putting the body parts into KD/JPs shed - NM or KD ?

If a mate called me up and asked me to store some stuff for them, then I would likely store the stuff in the house. It was February, it was cold, putting stuff outside in a shed - depending on what it was - might not be the best place, unless the shed is very well built - there's looked quite flimsy from memory .

So if NM was saying, store this stuff for me, it's worth a 10K storage fee but it's ok to put it outside, in the shed, then I would find this odd and definately want to know what it was -well I would want to know anyway, would never store stuff without knowing .

Likewise, I would find it odd if it was KD who said, I can do the storage, but it has to be in my shed. Wouldnt he be a bit more careful and want to protect items that were going to earn him 10K ?

 

[MamaJoJo]

I know, it does feel like they're giving her the opportunity to just give yes/no answers. I would rather she had to explain things in a bit more detail.

Seeing SH deflect every question from the prosecutor with a definitive "No", "Not me", "Nope, I had no clue" is getting a bit tiresome. I feel that more probative questions need to be asked so that she can explain herself and all of her inactions from 19/2 to 2/3.

Is the prosecutor bound by anything to simply ask yes/no questions or is this just his style? Maybe more pointed question will be asked of SH tomorrow.