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

[ColourPurple]

Ah, but playing devil's advocate for a second, then Mr M claimed that NM couldn't possibly have done that without SH, and she had been at CH all day...

Perhaps NM had just taped the bathroom off to prevent DNA splatter, tried with the saw and quickly realised he couldn't do it alone. 4hrs is not a long time esp as he had to go to B&Q as well.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think he planned to do it all alone at that point , then either realised he couldn't physically do it, or realised that mentally he couldnt do it.

 

[cottonweaver]

cottonweaver - I'm interested to know whether the posters here who have followed this case for many months, are disappointed by the Prosecutions cross exams at all /disappointed that the Pros case closed today?

Thanks for those interesting reflections on my post above. ( Naturally wont reply in quote to them all becaus eit would get long and repetitive for the rest on here. )

I know what it is like to invest a lot of time and research into a case and you collectively have done a lot of work, meticulous work, considering it is piecing together fragments ( as opposed to say a US trial.) so was interested in your conclusions/satisfaction levels at this point of the trial.

It is certainly a heavily followed thread, when I log in there are sometimes 80/90 people browsing .

Now the trial is over for today it'd be great to hear from some of those who generally browse- instead -of- posting as there are.I'm sure, some interesting contributions out there - for example, I can recall ( not verbatim ) a poster last week making connections between details of when their benefit might have been paid in, in relation to SH NM purchases.
(Daytime when the trial is on, it's easier for those types of posts - little details etc - to get lost .)

And my guess is there are a whole lot more Bristolians out there browsing, who would have many valuable contributions to make.

 

[Alyce]

Omg, do you think she was actually asking "what time will you have finished dismembering Becky?" That was the 'work' he was doing - and she wanted to know when the coast was clear for her to come home - hence why she was so confident her DNA wouldn't be found there, as he was doing it whilst she was out.

That thought did cross my mind, the first time I heard the comment. I immediately thought, no, she couldn't be that callous.

Having now followed the trial, I can believe that this could have been what she meant.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

you have more than one husband? :naughty:


Yay I found the smilies!!!

One missing apostrophe, Tortoise, and you accuse me of bigamy haha!

 

[CoverMeCagney]

A couple more of the things we discussed previously , were summed up well today by pros:


Mr Mousley then questioned why Matthews chose to carry out the plan on a day he went to the family’s home in Crown Hill with Hoare.He told the court

“why take the risk” of having the 21-year-old in the house, who he claims would tell the police of what he did.

Mr Mousley questioned how Hoare's version of events, and her claim that Matthews was 'normal' when she saw him after he had killed Becky.

"Even Nathan would have been visibly affected and overwrought after, whether out of excitement, whether out of fear afterwards.The signs would have been clear to see, yet Shauna says nothing at all, he was on his phone and watching the television."– MR MOUSLEY, PROSECUTING


www.itv.com/news/west/2015-11-05/becky-watts-trial-shauna-hoare-was-a-confident-calculating-woman/

I talked about the risk factor a lot in previous posts, and it's the reason I can't accept SH is innocent. There's no way he'd risk kidnapping someone when his Mrs could walk back in at any second, hence I truly believe it was arranged she'd make herself scarce. And he couldn't risk storing a body in his car/house, without the chance SH could find it. And he certainly wouldn't risk cutting up a body in their bath when she could have opened the door at any time - imagine that for a scene. Too many ridiculous risks for her NOT to have known about it.

 

[Alyce]

I'm hoping that after all is said and done. That BW'S family can believe that Justice was done. As they'll never know the truth behind the abismal grotesque murder of their Angel. But if I were a family member. I'd want to know the whys and wherefores who and why took 'that started out as a game' to ' teach a lesson' ended up so grisly. By a close family member(s)
It beggars belief. Even Fred & Rose West eventually spilled the beans.
So we can only hope that given time and the cold light of what they've done lays heavy on their hearts. That they feel the need to vent some truths. To put to bed all the unknown unsaid answers in black and white. For the family to understand ..... WHY?

This is the saddest part. Every day we follow the trial, we debate, we reveal our thoughts and we fervently hope that the Jury will deliver Justice for Becky.

But, in the end, we are only concerned spectators. We can never know the total pain and despair that Becky's family must feel every day, made a thousand times worse by the knowledge that the perpetrators were family members.

When everything is over, we will all look back and remember the investigation, the trial and the verdicts.

But for Becky's family, there is no ending, no real closure, even if the verdicts are the ones they hope for. There will only be the difficult future to cope with and the enormous gaping hole in their family, from the loss of their beautiful Becky.

It reduces me to tears when I think of how the actions of these two self centered, cold creatures have destroyed so many lives.

R.I.P. Becky , you deserved so much more from this world x

 

[Tortoise]

well said Alyce

 

[CoverMeCagney]

More about the man:

William (Bill) Mousley Q.C. is predominantly a criminal practitioner, specialising in homicide, fraud, road death, serious sexual assault, serious violence, drug importation and supply, including confiscation. He prosecutes and defends in equal measure.



http://www.2kbw.com/barristers/william-mousley

 

[Tortoise]

a few more snippets about today's proceedings here -

Mr Mousley said the process of dismembering Becky and wrapping her body parts in bags, cling film and tape would have taken “hours and hours”.
The court heard Hoare was present or close by when Matthews killed Becky, dismembered and moved her body parts on February 24.
A post mortem examination of Becky’s body found she died in a violent struggle and was suffocated on her back on a hard floor.
Matthews insists Becky died when he put his hands around her neck during a botched kidnap plot to scare her.
Mr Mousley told the jury that if Becky’s death was a “terrible accident”, Matthews could have called 999 or attempted to save her.
“What he did was to take her pulse and that confirmed she was dead,” he said.
“That rather suggests someone who is making sure he has achieved what he wanted to do.”
Mr Mousley said the lack of injuries on Matthews – a minor scratch to his knuckle – suggested Hoare was involved in the killing or kidnap plan.
Matthews’s account that he acted alone is designed to exonerate his partner of six years due to his “love or affection” for her, he said.
The former TA soldier showed “no remorse or sorrow for what he did” during his time in the witness box, Mr Mousley added.
Hoare presented herself as “confident and calculating” while giving her evidence, the prosecutor said.
“Again, not a flicker of emotion in the whole time she was in the witness box. A very cool, one might say very cold individual,” he said.
“For those of you who like Shakespeare did she take the words of Lady Macbeth and apply them to this case?
“Lady Macbeth sending her husband before he was to go on and kill the King of Scotland.
“Be like an innocent flower but a serpent beneath it.”
Mr Mousley said Hoare was linked to the Becky’s death and dismemberment forensically, by text messages and her presence.
“She was involved in this from the start to the finish,” he added.
Messages between Hoare and Matthews in the lead up to Becky’s death demonstrated their shared interest in teenage girls, the jury heard.
This was further demonstrated by on the laptop they used and bookmarks on their mobile phones, it was said.
The couple disliked Becky, were jealous of her and perceived her as attention seeking and manipulative, Mr Mousley added.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/ju...-prosecution-in-becky-watts-trial-704224.html

 

[TupeloMz]

I was on the fence about just how involved SH was in the murder but when MM brought out that SH looked up the "do you want to hide a body" parody on that Friday and poor Becky lay in pieces in their bathroom sealed her guilt with me. I hope it did with the jury too.

 

[Tortoise]

Something else just occurred to me - there are the odd cases where juries convict for murder where the body has never been found.

I wonder if people are thinking you need more than purely circumstantial evidence and inference to draw a conclusion on SH's guilt.

 

[Tortoise]

I wonder if NM has had a psychiatric assessment since March.

If he has, I would have expected it to be presented in his defence? or would that just be mitigation for sentencing?

And when he claimed to be metrosexual neanderthal blah blah, I wonder why no mention has been made of it in the trial. was it all an act? needing an appropriate adult? he must have been deemed fit to stand trial.

 

[TupeloMz]

Something else just occurred to me - there are the odd cases where juries convict for murder where the body has never been found.

I wonder if people are thinking you need more than purely circumstantial evidence and inference to draw a conclusion on SH's guilt.

Normally probably so but for me in this case the circumstantial evidence against SH is too much for me to overlook. Jmo

 

[Tortoise]

Normally probably so but for me in this case the circumstantial evidence against SH is too much for me to overlook. Jmo

me too. I haven't really got a gauge on the opinion here, at a guess I'd say I've read about 70:30 for guilt maybe higher? some haven't said yet.

 

[Finkleyalex]

I'd eat my hat if SH gets done for murder, there's just not enough evidence to overcome the required burden of proof. My own take on the matter is that NM killed BW as a spur of the moment rage (so lingering somewhere between with intent and accidentally), tried to fix the mess himself and at some point had a total and utter breakdown and confessed to SH. At this point I think SH out of overwhelming compassion to this man damaged by a relationship he always wanted with his mother but never got (which she could relate to with her upbringing) and having been fed tunnel vision opinions of BW by NM couldn't bear to turn him in over it. So her tactic was to do nothing, let him fix the mess whilst mentally feeling innocent because she wasn't a real part of it. I don't believe she helped dismember BW, or has any part of the murder or clean up after. I think she has full knowledge of what he did though.

 

[Orange Tabby]

Siobhan Robbins Verified account  ‏@SiobhanRobbins · 3 hrs3 hours ago
SH says knew nothing of plan to cut Becky up.WM questions that saying SH claims no problem with bathroom 20th AM -that night out of order.

Siobhan Robbins Verified account  ‏@SiobhanRobbins · 3 hrs3 hours ago
WM says that doesn't make sense as NM wasn't meant to have been there that day but with a friend

yes- maybe someone who has a better grasp on some of these details can elaborate on the point WM was making here....

Others have already addressed this, but I have a slightly different understanding of what Mousley was trying to get at.

Two adults leave their house together when the toilet is in perfect working order. Later, they return together, both of them supposedly away from home for the day, although not always together. But the toilet is now not working.

Mousley, I think, is saying that Shauna Hoare's casual acceptance of the "broken toilet" is more of her unbelievable fantasy world -- just another of her lies. In the real world, if you genuinely believed your boyfriend had been off innocently helping a friend while he was parted from you, you'd ask, "How could the toilet not be working? Nothing was wrong when we left. My God, has someone been in the house?"

So Mousley is saying that her easy acceptance of the broken toilet story is because she knew full well the toilet wasn't broken and she knew full well what Nathan Matthews had really been doing and she made up an unbelievable lie to cover up for her guilty knowledge. (This lie becomes more and more absurd as she later speaks of using a bucket to pee in for days and days as if that's perfectly normal, pretends to believe one can fix a broken toilet by employing a circular saw to cut the thing to smithereens, and bizarrely claims she hardly ever uses the loo anyway.)

 

[epiphany]

First trial outside of US I have ever closely followed.

As such, I was relieved by the less antagonistic aspect, the less adversarial nature, of your judicial process. I respect your system.

While not implying one system is superior to the other, I welcomed the Pros having respect for the jurors' collective intellects being able to piece it all together (mounds of circumstantial evid, imo) and Pros not going overboard in attacking SH, in particular...jurors can usually figure it out. Sometimes pounding away at a defendant can backfire (ie. Casey Anthony trial), esp in primarily circumstantial cases.

Course, I appreciated Pros use of sarcasm at times as well>their explanations are not bordering on being "ridiculous," removed from "reality," and "fantasy-based": Add them up, they ARE collectively incredibly ridiculous, not at all believable imo. I would have to suspend all logic, all reality, all common sense, in order to find SH not guilty of Murder charge, etc.

SH is more than an Ice Queen. She is a young and continuing-to-develop, hone-her-skills Sociopath imo. Most, would be terrified to having been in her position during those interviews and/or on the stand. I loved the Pros references to Sleeping Beauty, as well as to Lady Macbeth. She not only believes in hand-washing, but sleeps well and very deeply.

Pros nailed the motive: primarily, sexual combined with jealousy, hatred, etc. Who the hell offers up, when asked by police (particularly at only 21 years of age and having been sexually active with other females), as part of the Missing Person's Profile, an opinion of the 16 yo's MP's virginity or lack thereof of sexual experience? It's 2015. SH may think she can hide a sexual interest in females from the jurors in 2015, but her text messages & threesomes suggest otherwise. The bells were clanging during those police interviews.

SH and NM will both be convicted of all charges.

I am unsure of the others and have mixed feelings due to feeling empathetic towards both JI (Not the ADD piece, but the Autism piece), as well as DD, though for other reasons. However, I have worked with young adults with emotional and/or mental health labels. DD is 29 yo (a reminder) and clearly no longer a young adult. That reminder (his age) startled me for a second. He appears to have a bit of charisma.

 

[Beesknees]

I wonder if NM has had a psychiatric assessment since March.

If he has, I would have expected it to be presented in his defence? or would that just be mitigation for sentencing?

And when he claimed to be metrosexual neanderthal blah blah, I wonder why no mention has been made of it in the trial. was it all an act? needing an appropriate adult? he must have been deemed fit to stand trial.

Of course it was an act!

The Neanderthal to go with what he said was a joke of going near a girl and drag her by the hair to take her home (aye, what he did with Becky. I believe he also dragged her by the hair...)

The metrosexual to go accordingly to what both he and SH said about him using concealer.

Do you believe that 'porky pig' man is someone to use concealer?!

This was invented from the moment they learned about the make up on the mask...

 

[Beesknees]

More about the man:

William (Bill) Mousley Q.C. is predominantly a criminal practitioner, specialising in homicide, fraud, road death, serious sexual assault, serious violence, drug importation and supply, including confiscation. He prosecutes and defends in equal measure.

View attachment 83922

http://www.2kbw.com/barristers/william-mousley

Only as a joke...

Don't you think Mr. Mous (e) ley has a bit of mouse's eyes? :innocent:

 

[Beesknees]

First trial outside of US I have ever closely followed.

As such, I was relieved by the less antagonistic aspect, the less adversarial nature, of your judicial process. I respect your system.

While not implying one system is superior to the other, I welcomed the Pros having respect for the jurors' collective intellects being able to piece it all together (mounds of circumstantial evid, imo) and Pros not going overboard in attacking SH, in particular...jurors can usually figure it out. Sometimes pounding away at a defendant can backfire (ie. Casey Anthony trial), esp in primarily circumstantial cases.

Course, I appreciated Pros use of sarcasm at times as well>their explanations are not bordering on being "ridiculous," removed from "reality," and "fantasy-based": Add them up, they ARE collectively incredibly ridiculous, not at all believable imo. I would have to suspend all logic, all reality, all common sense, in order to find SH not guilty of Murder charge, etc.

SH is more than an Ice Queen. She is a young and continuing-to-develop, hone-her-skills Sociopath imo. Most, would be terrified to having been in her position during those interviews and/or on the stand. I loved the Pros references to Sleeping Beauty, as well as to Lady Macbeth. She not only believes in hand-washing, but sleeps well and very deeply.

Pros nailed the motive: primarily, sexual combined with jealousy, hatred, etc. Who the hell offers up, when asked by police (particularly at only 21 years of age and having been sexually active with other females), as part of the Missing Person's Profile, an opinion of the 16 yo's MP's virginity or lack thereof of sexual experience? It's 2015. SH may think she can hide a sexual interest in females from the jurors in 2015, but her text messages & threesomes suggest otherwise. The bells were clanging during those police interviews.

SH and NM will both be convicted of all charges.

I am unsure of the others and have mixed feelings due to feeling empathetic towards both JI (Not the ADD piece, but the Autism piece), as well as DD, though for other reasons. However, I have worked with young adults with emotional and/or mental health labels. DD is 29 yo (a reminder) and clearly no longer a young adult. That reminder (his age) startled me for a second. He appears to have a bit of charisma.

:goodpost: