GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #13

[Gigi-G]

Marking my spot for tomorrow.. hi Dee14. N welcome 😀

 

[YidArmyRach]

Marking mine too.

 

[Beesknees]

Marking my spot for tomorrow.. hi Dee14. N welcome ��

YidArmyRach Marking mine too.

I was to ask what does it mean and now it was bang on as you both posted it. What´s to mark ones spot here? Ohhh, so many things still to learn...

 

[skibaboo]

I was to ask what does it mean and now it was bang on as you both posted it. What´s to mark ones spot here? Ohhh, so many things still to learn...

It just means to make a mark of where you are up to on the thread, also in a new thread posting subscribes you to the thread too, so it can have a duel purpose. But generally marking your spot is like a bookmark, where you left it and where to catch up from.

 

[skibaboo]

I didn't do a very good job of explaining that lol Hope I made some sense beesknees!

 

[LookingForClues]

Mark one's spot: they can do a quick search tomorrow for their last post and it will bring them to the last post they made, so they don't have to skim old posts to find out where they left off.

Personally, I just use the tool at the top of the thread "go to first unread post" (or it might say "find first unread post"...I can't remember exact wording).

Edit: just looked and it says "view first unread." Sorry skibaboo, didn't see your answer before I posted!

 

[Beesknees]

Oh I understood what you both meant (skibaboo and LookingForClues)!

I too do it but in a diferente way from you, as I add the page to the favourites each time I finish reading it and next time when it opens it is in the very place I left. May be it is not as easy as marking here the spot as I have to delet always the previous page from the favourites before I add the new one. lol I too don't know if it made sense the way I explained it...Sometimes I also send a shortcut to my desktop and it also means I must delete the previous one and leave only the 'fresh' one. Could you understand my gibberish? lol

 

[Jinkasaurus]

Oh I understood what you both meant (skibaboo and LookingForClues)!

I too do it but in a diferente way from you, as I add the page to the favourites each time I finish reading it and next time when it opens it is in the very place I left. May be it is not as easy as marking here the spot as I have to delet always the previous page from the favourites before I add the new one. lol I too don't know if it made sense the way I explained it...Sometimes I also send a shortcut to my desktop and it also means I must delete the previous one and leave only the 'fresh' one. Could you understand my gibberish? lol

This is essentially how I do it too. I found that even when I have been subscribed to threads, it often won't take me to the first unread post. That is what led me to just start using my own bookmarks.

 

[Beesknees]

It is passing just now here the news about Oscar Pistorius trial and I am thinking that his excuses to get away with the murder of Reeva are as ridiculous as the ones from SH and NM. I think OP knew it was Reeva that was behind that door as well as SH and NM knew that on the19th February they would go to Becky's house to cause her serious harm. Was it to kidnap her or to abuse her... they had a plan. The Plan as NM 'obviously' calls it in a pompous mode.

Was Becky to be convinced to participate in a threesome with them? And if it was so, she would always be to kill. They couldn't think would do it and then free her as if it was nothing. Could they be thinking that they would blackmail her to keep her their 'prisoner', threatning her with exposing pics or vídeos from the threesome(if they went on with it) and this way they not only would keep her shut up by shame of being exposed and at the same time would make her available under threat for more abuses?

It is difficult and painful to walk along the obscure paths of these dark evil minds.

I don't know what to make of this.


ETA - But at least OP would say in a fake tearful voice 'yes m'lady, no m'lady' and he would puke to a buket. It was not a red one though lol

 

[Tealgrove]

I have to wonder if there is evidence that has been suppressed that we will find out about later. The trial is all so "tame". Nothing jumps out at us and there really haven't been those Aha moments that we have seen in other trials. Quite the cast of characters for sure. I'm back on the fence again about some of the accomplices. Clearly NM is guilty - that's a no brainer. I don't believe a word that SH utters and her demeanour as reported leaves me cold. I have no sympathy for her so she's not winning any points with me. She was involved for sure but when and how? That's still murky and her story doesn't hold up. To be honest I find her story offensive. I'm offended that she thinks we're so stupid that we can't see through it. LOL

I sure hope someone writes a book about Becky's murder and can fill in some gaps and connect the dots.

As an aside to my musings, I read up on hoarding and the level of ANXIETY associated with it. In one article it was explained that the anxiety surrounding even the thought of throwing something away can be debilitating. I wonder if NM's behaviour towards SH, i.e., can't hear her name, doesn't want to see her, don't talk about her etc. etc. is nothing more than a manifestation of anxiety because he's had to GIVE HER UP or THROW HER AWAY. Hmmm???

 

[MissyLDT]

Just catching up.

Really don't know what to make of JI. Wanted to like him and believe that he has really just been unfortunate to get caught up in this mess? However, like many of you have mentioned, this £5k payment that his friend talked of seems too much of a coincidence. I'm now leaning to believe that he knew it was something criminal but had no idea it was Becky and doesn't want to plead guilty to his charge as it would suggest he was complicit in her murder. It's one thing to be known as assisting an offender by hiding drugs but a completely different ball game when you're known as assisting an offender who murdered and dismembered a 16 year old girl. As we know though, in the eyes of the law, assisting an offender is assisting an offender - doesn't matter of the crime. I think he would have been better off pleading guilty. I'm still not convinced that he actually 'squished' any parcels. I'm not sure if this is information that perhaps KD has passed on to him as we know he helped pack some things and may have moved them to the shed. We have heard JI was a bit of a story teller so maybe this squishing was second hand information that he has passed off as his own to make his story seem more valid down the pub.

Someone posted a link in the last thread about KD's previous cannabis charge - I find it hard to believe that if he was under the impression that in this instance he was storing cannabis for someone that he wouldn't sneak a peek at the product. Cannabis smokers tend to be enthusiasts for different strains and qualities. I think he knew it wasn't stolen goods judging by the stuff they were moving unless he thought there was a couple of diamonds in amongst all the other stuff that was used to cover Becky. So I have no idea what to believe? Unless £10k is the going rate for helping your mate out when they've been kicked out the house by their partner!

Can't even place where DD fits in other than being at the house, unless he helped
move the bags/boxes into the shed. There must be something on him since SD was released without charge after questioning yet DD's charge stuck.

So this far into the trial and the only thing we are certain on is that Nathan was involved in killing Becky... Or are we? It saddens me to say, on the information we have seen so far, I don't think Becky is going to get the full justice that she deserves.

Also, has anything ever came out about the 'who would miss me if I disappeared' text that Becky allegedly sent the day before her killing? Just wondered if this was actually factual or maybe a ruse created by NM and/or SH. I know it said friend in the media but since we didn't know who was in the house in the morning until a later date, the 'friend' bit may be a loose term.

Apologies if this is a disjointed ramble, it's very late and feeling very frustrated for Becky and her family.

 

[Beesknees]

I have to wonder if there is evidence that has been suppressed that we will find out about later. The trial is all so "tame". Nothing jumps out at us and there really haven't been those Aha moments that we have seen in other trials. Quite the cast of characters for sure. I'm back on the fence again about some of the accomplices. Clearly NM is guilty - that's a no brainer. I don't believe a word that SH utters and her demeanour as reported leaves me cold. I have no sympathy for her so she's not winning any points with me. She was involved for sure but when and how? That's still murky and her story doesn't hold up. To be honest I find her story offensive. I'm offended that she thinks we're so stupid that we can't see through it. LOL

I sure hope someone writes a book about Becky's murder and can fill in some gaps and connect the dots.

As an aside to my musings, I read up on hoarding and the level of ANXIETY associated with it. In one article it was explained that the anxiety surrounding even the thought of throwing something away can be debilitating. I wonder if NM's behaviour towards SH, i.e., can't hear her name, doesn't want to see her, don't talk about her etc. etc. is nothing more than a manifestation of anxiety because he's had to GIVE HER UP or THROW HER AWAY. Hmmm???

Bolded by me (only the sentences above)

Yes, just what I think and feel! From the moment I learned about the details of their almost siamese relation, about how she was always phisically presente in the crime buildings/houses/car/scenes, passing along the ridiculous excuses saying she doesn't use the loo too much, she went to Becky's house without needing to enter the toilet at all, etc, etc, etc All this is an assault to our thinking brains.

It is totally impossible this to have happened in reality the way she says it happened. Nothing makes sense in their story though amongst all the lies there are truth mixed as well.

But to prove it is another story.

So, I think the same. Guilty but don't know from what moment.

But, when I think of it deeply, reminding her coldness, reminding how it is all about her and believing she is manipulative, I can accept she may even be the one who incentivated the plan. Oh yes, she might even be the killer. I think she has the profile for it.

Many times I also think she helped NM restraining and helding Becky. But, of course, I can't have an idea about this as clear as I have about her knowledge of the crime and participation in the cover up.

Did she have full knowledge about the plan to harm Becky? I believe so...

Did she help Nathan since the 19th February to cover up the crime? I believe so...

Did she instigate or was hers the idea to harm Becky? I don't know but it could be possible...

Did she help in the killing or was she the killer? I don't know but it could be possible. Mainly helping restraining her.

SH appears to me much more clever than NM and unlike him she is very well able to hide her emotions.

And she shows no empathy at all. Her answer that she was 'angry' mainly because NM lied is apalling. And also when she said that she didn't tell her mother about Becky because it was Nathan's problem, not hers'. What a wich!!

Even JI that is not as close to the crime as she is, had a more dignified and real answer when asked about the repercussions of the crime saying he felt 'disgusted and sick with what happened to Becky' and his life was 'ruined by this case'

As for the others, I believe they all thought it had to be something 'out of the law' that NM needed to hide but in all honesty I accept they didn't know it was... what it was but also don't know if they were in complet ignorance til the end. May be they suspected or even went to find but were too scared and shocked to cal the police. Anyway if they suspected, it had to be not long before they were arrested.

Imo JI is lying to try to appear that he really thought it was NM moving after kicked out of the house when I think he thought it was drugs or stollen goods.

As for KD this one I am not sure... I still have to make my mind up about his knowledge of something or not. I have doubts in relation to him. May be when he hear from him I can have an idea... or not.

 

[Beesknees]

Just catching up.

Really don't know what to make of JI. Wanted to like him and believe that he has really just been unfortunate to get caught up in this mess? However, like many of you have mentioned, this £5k payment that his friend talked of seems too much of a coincidence. I'm now leaning to believe that he knew it was something criminal but had no idea it was Becky and doesn't want to plead guilty to his charge as it would suggest he was complicit in her murder. It's one thing to be known as assisting an offender by hiding drugs but a completely different ball game when you're known as assisting an offender who murdered and dismembered a 16 year old girl. As we know though, in the eyes of the law, assisting an offender is assisting an offender - doesn't matter of the crime. I think he would have been better off pleading guilty. I'm still not convinced that he actually 'squished' any parcels. I'm not sure if this is information that perhaps KD has passed on to him as we know he helped pack some things and may have moved them to the shed. We have heard JI was a bit of a story teller so maybe this squishing was second hand information that he has passed off as his own to make his story seem more valid down the pub.

Someone posted a link in the last thread about KD's previous cannabis charge - I find it hard to believe that if he was under the impression that in this instance he was storing cannabis for someone that he wouldn't sneak a peek at the product. Cannabis smokers tend to be enthusiasts for different strains and qualities. I think he knew it wasn't stolen goods judging by the stuff they were moving unless he thought there was a couple of diamonds in amongst all the other stuff that was used to cover Becky. So I have no idea what to believe? Unless £10k is the going rate for helping your mate out when they've been kicked out the house by their partner!

Can't even place where DD fits in other than being at the house, unless he helped
move the bags/boxes into the shed. There must be something on him since SD was released without charge after questioning yet DD's charge stuck.

So this far into the trial and the only thing we are certain on is that Nathan was involved in killing Becky... Or are we? It saddens me to say, on the information we have seen so far, I don't think Becky is going to get the full justice that she deserves.

Also, has anything ever came out about the 'who would miss me if I disappeared' text that Becky allegedly sent the day before her killing? Just wondered if this was actually factual or maybe a ruse created by NM and/or SH. I know it said friend in the media but since we didn't know who was in the house in the morning until a later date, the 'friend' bit may be a loose term.

Apologies if this is a disjointed ramble, it's very late and feeling very frustrated for Becky and her family.

I can understand you so well, as I feel very similar as I just wrote in a post finished some seconds ago.

Yes, my frustration is because it appears that Justice is not being deeply sought for this crime or better for the victim of this heinious crime - Becky.

We all keep referring to 'the packages', 'the stuff', 'the parcels', 'the blue box and the cases' trying to contour, trying to make believe (even for our own pshichological defense), trying to escape from the horror of it. It was a body that was being moved. A human body cut in 8 pieces, surely a shadow of the fresh, pretty, young and lively person of before. And it had a name - Rebecca Watts, 16 years old :cry:

 

[Orange Tabby]

From the UK and Eire Database account of yesterday’s proceedings in court:

Ireland said the first he had heard the Matthews had taken items from the freezer was when he had given evidence in court.

That’s when we put the bags and the box into the van, and I said where are we going? - The court heard Ireland suggested Demetrius’ home, just a few metres away, and the trio set off there.

We then took the bags and the box out of the van and took it into 9 Barton Court. Ireland said the box had clothing on top, and he never looked underneath to see what else was in the box.​

Does anyone else think it’s odd that James Ireland should claim to be the one to suggest that the packages be stored at the Demetrius home?

With the clock ticking and the cops scheduled to arrive at Cotton Mill Lane in the morning, it is surely the case that the Demetrius home was already selected much earlier that evening. Presumably this choice of storage place was discussed in the six phone conversations between Matthews and Karl Demetrius that took place while Matthews was at the home of Hoare's mother and Karl was at work. Moreover, the court has heard that before the van collected from Airbus arrived at Cotton Mill Lane, Karl and his girlfriend Jaydene Parsons had specifically discussed accepting the items for storage at their place. Again from yesterday’s account of the court proceedings, according to the UK and Eire Database:

After agreeing to help move Matthews' things, Ireland and Karl Demetrius headed back to work to pick up a van.

The trio dropped Matthews off on Gloucester Road - so they could enter work - before collecting the vehicle and picking him back up.

The jury was told during this time Karl and girlfriend Jaydene Parsons were exchanging text messages, where she said “are you going to store it for him, we could do with the money”.

A little later on she sent another message which read, “cool that’s a deposit on a house”.​

Why does Ireland say it was his idea to stash the material at the Demetius place on Barton Court?

--Is he trying to deflect attention from an established plan of which he had clear knowledge of something wrong (i.e.,the police raid story, which admits wrongdoing on the part of Matthews and thereby makes anyone who knows that story complicit to at least some degree) in order to bolster his position that he had no idea what was going on?

--Was the original plan for Matthews and Karl Demetrius to explicitly lie to Ireland and offer the “poor bloke tossed out by his girlfriend” story? This to be supported by Shauna yelling "get out!" at Matthews in the presence of Ireland? Such a plan would benefit Matthews and Hoare; by NOT offering Ireland guilt money they don't signal that the transaction is dodgy. Could Ireland have become suspicious later and only then was offered money? Could Ireland have learned later that Karl Demetrius was offered big money and then insisted he get a cut? (From Matthews or even Karl Demetrius? If something goes wrong, Demetrius loses all the money and so might thereby feel he needs to share to keep from losing everything.) Regretting his greedy and illegal participation, Ireland now lies and pretends he knew nothing?

These are feeble reasons for Ireland to say it was his idea to store the packages at the Demetrius home. It can’t possibly be true and I can’t see how it would help him to testify that it was true.

What’s going on?

 

[edgedweller]

From the UK and Eire Database account of yesterday’s proceedings in court:

Ireland said the first he had heard the Matthews had taken items from the freezer was when he had given evidence in court.

That’s when we put the bags and the box into the van, and I said where are we going? - The court heard Ireland suggested Demetrius’ home, just a few metres away, and the trio set off there.

We then took the bags and the box out of the van and took it into 9 Barton Court. Ireland said the box had clothing on top, and he never looked underneath to see what else was in the box.​

Does anyone else think it’s odd that James Ireland should claim to be the one to suggest that the packages be stored at the Demetrius home?

With the clock ticking and the cops scheduled to arrive at Cotton Mill Lane in the morning, it is surely the case that the Demetrius home was already selected much earlier that evening. Presumably this choice of storage place was discussed in the six phone conversations between Matthews and Karl Demetrius that took place while Matthews was at the home of Hoare's mother and Karl was at work. Moreover, the court has heard that before the van collected from Airbus arrived at Cotton Mill Lane, Karl and his girlfriend Jaydene Parsons had specifically discussed accepting the items for storage at their place. Again from yesterday’s account of the court proceedings, according to the UK and Eire Database:

After agreeing to help move Matthews' things, Ireland and Karl Demetrius headed back to work to pick up a van.

The trio dropped Matthews off on Gloucester Road - so they could enter work - before collecting the vehicle and picking him back up.

The jury was told during this time Karl and girlfriend Jaydene Parsons were exchanging text messages, where she said “are you going to store it for him, we could do with the money”.

A little later on she sent another message which read, “cool that’s a deposit on a house”.​

Why does Ireland say it was his idea to stash the material at the Demetius place on Barton Court?

--Is he trying to deflect attention from an established plan of which he had clear knowledge of something wrong (i.e.,the police raid story, which admits wrongdoing on the part of Matthews and thereby makes anyone who knows that story complicit to at least some degree) in order to bolster his position that he had no idea what was going on?

--Was the original plan for Matthews and Karl Demetrius to explicitly lie to Ireland and offer the “poor bloke tossed out by his girlfriend” story? This to be supported by Shauna yelling "get out!" at Matthews in the presence of Ireland? Such a plan would benefit Matthews and Hoare; by NOT offering Ireland guilt money they don't signal that the transaction is dodgy. Could Ireland have become suspicious later and only then was offered money? Could Ireland have learned later that Karl Demetrius was offered big money and then insisted he get a cut? (From Matthews or even Karl Demetrius? If something goes wrong, Demetrius loses all the money and so might thereby feel he needs to share to keep from losing everything.) Regretting his greedy and illegal participation, Ireland now lies and pretends he knew nothing?

These are feeble reasons for Ireland to say it was his idea to store the packages at the Demetrius home. It can’t possibly be true and I can’t see how it would help him to testify that it was true.

What’s going on?

Well spotted! I cannot keep track of all the lies and various stories...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Alyce]

Morning all, just marking my spot and hoping we get some good evidence today and Justice for Becky x

 

[YidArmyRach]

I have to wonder if there is evidence that has been suppressed that we will find out about later. The trial is all so "tame". Nothing jumps out at us and there really haven't been those Aha moments that we have seen in other trials. Quite the cast of characters for sure. I'm back on the fence again about some of the accomplices. Clearly NM is guilty - that's a no brainer. I don't believe a word that SH utters and her demeanour as reported leaves me cold. I have no sympathy for her so she's not winning any points with me. She was involved for sure but when and how? That's still murky and her story doesn't hold up. To be honest I find her story offensive. I'm offended that she thinks we're so stupid that we can't see through it. LOL

I sure hope someone writes a book about Becky's murder and can fill in some gaps and connect the dots.

As an aside to my musings, I read up on hoarding and the level of ANXIETY associated with it. In one article it was explained that the anxiety surrounding even the thought of throwing something away can be debilitating. I wonder if NM's behaviour towards SH, i.e., can't hear her name, doesn't want to see her, don't talk about her etc. etc. is nothing more than a manifestation of anxiety because he's had to GIVE HER UP or THROW HER AWAY. Hmmm???

Would that explain why he took Becky's body home with him and why he kept it for so many days? He only removed it from his house when he knew the police were coming round to search. Had that not happened, who knows how long he would have kept her there?

As for the 'tame' trial, I agree.

What I find interesting is that the majority of WS posters think SH was involved either in the aftermath or even in the murder itself. Only a couple think she could be innocent.

On the FB page for UK & Eire database, as far as I can tell, every poster thinks SH is involved.

And, for me the most telling, on the FB accounts of members of Becky's family, everyone thinks SH is involved - family and all the friends commenting. They obviously know SH, and know the relationship of NM and SH, so they have actual experience to base their opinions on.

So, surely the jury - made up of ordinary members of the public - won't be totally, 100%, removed from the opinions of everyone else. If we can see the contradictions, surely they can too. If we can think SH's explanations are unbelievable, surely they can too. If we can disbelieve NM's account of events, surely they will too.

Its interesting that every comment made on this page, is being made at the same time on the UK & EIRE page.

So despite the trial being tame and despite us thinking that the most important questions are not being asked, and the contradictions not being pointed out, people are still all forming the same opinion - that SH had to be involved. So, maybe the prosecution think that they don't need to do much, as the story being told is enough for anyone to believe SH is lying, and therefore guilty of something.

 

[Alyce]

Re the comment by JI - suggesting to take the packages to KDs home - outlined so well by Orange Tabby above.

This makes no sense to me. Surely, as has been said, during the telecons between NM and KD earlier that evening, they must have discussed where to take the packages. And this is further confirmed by JPs text to KD, saying are we going to store it for him, which is before the pick up from CML.

If it were not so tragic, it would be like a kind of bumbling comedy. Three men with stolen goods, who suddenly realise they have nowhere to stash them - then one of them ( the least involved ) comes up with a clever plan to go round the corner to the other one's house. I dont buy it for one minute.

 

[mrazda71]

From the UK and Eire Database account of yesterday’s proceedings in court:

Ireland said the first he had heard the Matthews had taken items from the freezer was when he had given evidence in court.

That’s when we put the bags and the box into the van, and I said where are we going? - The court heard Ireland suggested Demetrius’ home, just a few metres away, and the trio set off there.

We then took the bags and the box out of the van and took it into 9 Barton Court. Ireland said the box had clothing on top, and he never looked underneath to see what else was in the box.​

Does anyone else think it’s odd that James Ireland should claim to be the one to suggest that the packages be stored at the Demetrius home?

With the clock ticking and the cops scheduled to arrive at Cotton Mill Lane in the morning, it is surely the case that the Demetrius home was already selected much earlier that evening. Presumably this choice of storage place was discussed in the six phone conversations between Matthews and Karl Demetrius that took place while Matthews was at the home of Hoare's mother and Karl was at work. Moreover, the court has heard that before the van collected from Airbus arrived at Cotton Mill Lane, Karl and his girlfriend Jaydene Parsons had specifically discussed accepting the items for storage at their place. Again from yesterday’s account of the court proceedings, according to the UK and Eire Database:

After agreeing to help move Matthews' things, Ireland and Karl Demetrius headed back to work to pick up a van.

The trio dropped Matthews off on Gloucester Road - so they could enter work - before collecting the vehicle and picking him back up.

The jury was told during this time Karl and girlfriend Jaydene Parsons were exchanging text messages, where she said “are you going to store it for him, we could do with the money”.

A little later on she sent another message which read, “cool that’s a deposit on a house”.​

Why does Ireland say it was his idea to stash the material at the Demetius place on Barton Court?

--Is he trying to deflect attention from an established plan of which he had clear knowledge of something wrong (i.e.,the police raid story, which admits wrongdoing on the part of Matthews and thereby makes anyone who knows that story complicit to at least some degree) in order to bolster his position that he had no idea what was going on?

--Was the original plan for Matthews and Karl Demetrius to explicitly lie to Ireland and offer the “poor bloke tossed out by his girlfriend” story? This to be supported by Shauna yelling "get out!" at Matthews in the presence of Ireland? Such a plan would benefit Matthews and Hoare; by NOT offering Ireland guilt money they don't signal that the transaction is dodgy. Could Ireland have become suspicious later and only then was offered money? Could Ireland have learned later that Karl Demetrius was offered big money and then insisted he get a cut? (From Matthews or even Karl Demetrius? If something goes wrong, Demetrius loses all the money and so might thereby feel he needs to share to keep from losing everything.) Regretting his greedy and illegal participation, Ireland now lies and pretends he knew nothing?

These are feeble reasons for Ireland to say it was his idea to store the packages at the Demetrius home. It can’t possibly be true and I can’t see how it would help him to testify that it was true.

What’s going on?

If we hadn't heard from other witnesses early on in the trial then I would be inclined to agree with you BUT we've heard from a work mate that Karl AND Ireland were discussing it at work and both then gave him the cold shoulder ... we then heard from 2 separate friends of Mr Ireland, one talking of the good looking woman shouting and telling someone to get out which hasn't been said in court by Ireland yesterday and then a different friend telling us that Ireland told him he was getting a big pay out from helping in a dodgy deal ... We've been told by one of his friends that Ireland is prone to story telling and I think yesterday he was telling his biggest story ever with a dose of 'mean prisoner governor won't let me have my meds' thrown in for sympathy!

 

[Alyce]

Would that explain why he took Becky's body home with him and why he kept it for so many days? He only removed it from his house when he knew the police were coming round to search. Had that not happened, who knows how long he would have kept her there?

As for the 'tame' trial, I agree.

What I find interesting is that the majority of WS posters think SH was involved either in the aftermath or even in the murder itself. Only a couple think she could be innocent.

On the FB page for UK & Eire database, as far as I can tell, every poster thinks SH is involved.

And, for me the most telling, on the FB accounts of members of Becky's family, everyone thinks SH is involved - family and all the friends commenting. They obviously know SH, and know the relationship of NM and SH, so they have actual experience to base their opinions on.

So, surely the jury - made up of ordinary members of the public - won't be totally, 100%, removed from the opinions of everyone else. If we can see the contradictions, surely they can too. If we can think SH's explanations are unbelievable, surely they can too. If we can disbelieve NM's account of events, surely they will too.

Its interesting that every comment made on this page, is being made at the same time on the UK & EIRE page.

So despite the trial being tame and despite us thinking that the most important questions are not being asked, and the contradictions not being pointed out, people are still all forming the same opinion - that SH had to be involved. So, maybe the prosecution think that they don't need to do much, as the story being told is enough for anyone to believe SH is lying, and therefore guilty of something.

Oh good grief ! that is such a good point which I had not thought of. The hoarder who cannot give up anything , no matter what. Yes, it is so true, I have seen exactly that action so many times with hoarders.

Re the opinions being formed. It is interesting ( encouraging ) to read on the UK and Eire site, and see the mirror comments being posted there and, as you say, Becky's family who surely knew SH far better than any of us.

I can only hope, based on this, that the Jury will be of like mind and able to see through all the lies and contradictions and find true justice for Becky. And, as we have said, we get snippets, they are getting the full outline, with exhibits etc.

I also have to place faith in the Prosecuting Barrister that he knows the best way to put the case to the Jury and despite my thinking oh why didnt you ask this, or that, he will know the right way to convince them of the facts.