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

[epiphany]

Using DG's statement only cements the idea for me that NM (and SH) must have been masterful at making Becky the family scapegoat, and had been at it for quite some time

 

[Tortoise]

[h=3]Jury now rewatching Matthews' police interview[/h]The jury are once again now watching Nathan Matthews’ interview with police after he confessed to killing Becky.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6780397

 

[YidArmyRach]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins 20s21 seconds ago
AV"He will not be the first or the last man to admit he finds young women sexually attractive"Says is a sideshow not relevant to case.

 

[YidArmyRach]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins 55s55 seconds ago
Now talking of rape video found on NM laptop, says no evidence that it's been viewed or access after May 2014

 

[Tortoise]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins 55s55 seconds ago
Now talking of rape video found on NM laptop, says no evidence that it's been viewed or access after May 2014

how low are they going to stoop? (imagine angry face here)

iirc this video was downloaded onto the laptop from another older device. specially saved as it were.

 

[cottonweaver]

its read out at the sentencing hearing, before sentencing - how she was as a person, and how their lives have been affected. yes, it isn't their witness statement.

No worries. Crossed wires between us Tortoise - I mean the statements that DG AG have already written will not form part of the later written sep impact statements ( ie impact statement won't have "i asked her to leave for a month, she was disrespectful to her mum" in them etc)

Like all of you I would have liked to have heard the original statements re circumstances of crime, relationships etc.

 

[YidArmyRach]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins 35s35 seconds ago
NM says he had a mask,stun gun,suitcase,handcuffs.Pros says he didn't have stun gun/suitcase

 

[Tortoise]

I'm glad his QC is having to revisit all this murky stuff even if it is to say it's not relevant. it's reminding the jury that it is depraved to search for a rape video in the first place, let alone save it for re-viewing.

 

[skibaboo]

UK & Eire database for all crimes against children Says the video was a "deeply deeply unpleasant piece of evidence" but says agreed facts say there was no evidence it had been viewed, and no evidence the computer had been used since May 2014



I don't know about anyone else, but all that that shows to me, is in May 2014 that computer was replaced by another device. Which possibly was disposed of after Becky was killed. Possibly used to view 'darker' , possibly, who knows? But the main point for me was the rape video WAS on there, it HAD been viewed, it DOES show NM has sick sexual interests. JMO!

 

[Bathsheba]

The defence are actually going to help put NM away for good by highlighting what a despicable person he is and what an evil abhorrent act he committed. IMO of course.

 

[Tortoise]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins 35s35 seconds ago
NM says he had a mask,stun gun,suitcase,handcuffs.Pros says he didn't have stun gun/suitcase

I don't think that is true. ??

 

[Tortoise]

[h=3]Defence: Texts about kidnapping schoolgirls were 'silly'[/h]Matthews’ defence lawyer is now laying out to the jury how texts between him and Hoare discussing kidnapping schoolgirls were ‘a bit silly’.
Adam Vaitilingam QC said the texts are not to be taken seriously.
He labelled them “flimsy evidence”.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-murder-trial-live-6780397

 

[Alyce]

No worries. Crossed wires between us Tortoise - I mean the statements that DG AG have already written will not form part of the later written sep impact statements ( ie impact statement won't have "i asked her to leave for a month, she was disrespectful to her mum" in them etc)

Like all of you I would have liked to have heard the original statements re circumstances of crime, relationships etc.

I still wonder why we heard nothing from AG. although to be fair, perhaps the Jury did, or it is in the documents, but I thought her evidence would have been crucial for February 19. Not just when she departed ( which we do know ) but also her thoughts when she returned home and Becky was not there.
The fact that she wanted to contact police almost immediately on that day is interesting and I would have liked to know her input on the day.

 

[cottonweaver]

Says the video was a "deeply deeply unpleasant piece of evidence" but says agreed facts say there was no evidence it had been viewed, and no evidence the computer had been used since May 2014"

This is the only strong point as far as I can see ,so far in his closing
I have never heard this May 2014 point before. I hope jury will not dwell too much on this !

 

[Tortoise]

OMG!!!!!!!!!

it wouldn't even enter the minds of normal people to think of kidnapping for sex.

he is sounding as ridiculous as his client.

 

[edgedweller]

I still wonder why we heard nothing from AG. although to be fair, perhaps the Jury did, or it is in the documents, but I thought her evidence would have been crucial for February 19. Not just when she departed ( which we do know ) but also her thoughts when she returned home and Becky was not there.
The fact that she wanted to contact police almost immediately on that day is interesting and I would have liked to know her input on the day.

Yes, I really want to know her version of the day. She must have made a police statement at some point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jessie]

Siobhan Robbins ‏@SiobhanRobbins 3m3 minutes ago
AV says prosecution ignoring the background & that NM found it very upsetting way BW treated his mum

Some disgusting Victim Blaming here imo.

 

[Alyce]

I'm glad his QC is having to revisit all this murky stuff even if it is to say it's not relevant. it's reminding the jury that it is depraved to search for a rape video in the first place, let alone save it for re-viewing.

Im actually wondering why the Defence mentioned it, it isnt doing NM any favours imo. But then I suppose if he did not cover it, it would look worse - if that's possible !

 

[Tortoise]

Says the video was a "deeply deeply unpleasant piece of evidence" but says agreed facts say there was no evidence it had been viewed, and no evidence the computer had been used since May 2014"

This is the only strong point as far as I can see ,so far in his closing
I have never heard this May 2014 point before. I hope jury will not dwell too much on this !

I remember hearing something about it having been downloaded onto his phone at that point. something along those lines.

 

[Alyce]

Says the video was a "deeply deeply unpleasant piece of evidence" but says agreed facts say there was no evidence it had been viewed, and no evidence the computer had been used since May 2014"

This is the only strong point as far as I can see ,so far in his closing
I have never heard this May 2014 point before. I hope jury will not dwell too much on this !

But as Skibaboo said, it only means it was not viewed on that computer since May 2014 ........ could have been uploaded elsewhere and watched many times.