GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #14

[ColourPurple]

I think more will come out after the trial. Remember in Jo Yeates' case, it all came out afterwards that Vincent Tabak had downloaded of petite blond girls with short hair being strangled during sex. Perhaps there is stuff like this that has been deemed inadmissible. I'm sure what actually happened will become clearer when the trial is over. People will go to the press with stories.

I'd forgotten about that.

Does anyone have any idea why they'd allow mention of the rape video on a laptop that hadn't been accessed since 2014 in this trial but not allow Tabak's involving strangling blonde women during sex to be mentioned in his trial?

 

[Wallace]

I'd forgotten about that.

Does anyone have any idea why they'd allow mention of the rape video on a laptop that hadn't been accessed since 2014 in this trial but not allow Tabak's involving strangling blonde women during sex to be mentioned in his trial?

I can't recall if an exact reason was given for the exclusion of VT's browsing history.

If I had to guess at a reason it would probably be that it was one video scene amongst very many that were viewed. To single out one video scene which happened to bear some resemblance to the alleged crime could be considered prejudicial. It would be hard to prove that it was significant to VT.

The download on the laptop is however significant. By downloading the video it indicates it was important to keep it. Which is why I would suggest it was allowed to be submitted as evidence.

 

[Insp.Dots]

Certainly is.

Funny how, prior to this, everyone thought she was capable enough to raise a child and be the registered carer of someone with MS - but all of a sudden we are supposed to believe she is some tragic product of abuse and control and isn't responsible for any of her actions or thoughts and somehow 'the system' is to blame.

To blame for what, I don't know, as this is the defence who are claiming she is completely innocent of everything!!

This is SO true.......It has just struck me......the old you need a license to keep a dog (though not anymore) but anyone can keep a child. It has been said that SH had contact with a Social Worker, did she/he have a missed opportunity. I am in no way making excuses for SH but she clearly didn't have a great childhood or background, was she doomed to fail as a Mother and Partner too?
How many youngsters have babies just cos they can? Almost like a status symbol that makes them 'grown-up'. When I look around my town I see Mum's who have babies/toddlers and they are 'failing', some have had bad role models, others are just too selfish.
I truly hope SH's little girl has a good life from here on.
I am assuming that if her Mum is found Guilty on the Murder charge her child will go into permanent care. But IF on the otherhand SH gets a NOT Guilty on the Murder and only convicted on other charges she will get to keep her Daughter?
I only hope if that happens Social Services keep a very close eye on that child.
IMO They haven't proven Murder for SH, but think she will possibly be found guilty on one of the other charges, purely due to there being too many coincidences in her version. IF she had shown shock and horror during this trial she may have got not guilty on ALL charges.
I also am unsure if they have proven Murder for NM and think he may just get his Manslaughter wish. As for the others, all guilty in assisting in varying degrees but think DD may get a Not Guilty due to his compassion for BW & Family on the stand. I don't think ANY if the 'Assistors' realized it was anything to do with BW until the night they were arrested.
I AM disappointed that the Prosecution didn't go harder on NM or SH, I think she would/could have cracked!

Thanks for ALL updates/posts, had 2 days in Hospital so am miles behind on the thread but looking forward to reading through today!
ALL MOO

 

[ColourPurple]

I can't recall if an exact reason was given for the exclusion of VT's browsing history.

If I had to guess at a reason it would probably be that it was one video scene amongst very many that were viewed. To single out one video scene which happened to bear some resemblance to the alleged crime could be considered prejudicial. It would be hard to prove that it was significant to VT.

The download on the laptop is however significant. By downloading the video it indicates it was important to keep it. Which is why I would suggest it was allowed to be submitted as evidence.

Could be, although I think it was said that it had been transferred over with everything else from another hard drive. Thinking back, in the Tia Sharpe case didn't Hazell have child on a memory card found on the top of a door frame and they allowed mention of that too.

 

[Wallace]

Interesting that a lot of people believe that DD should or will be found Not Guilty after his compassionate speech on the stand.

In reality that compassion should only be taken into account when sentencing, not deciding if he is guilty or not.

In my mind he is guilty, but played such a minor role that he should probably not serve any further custodial sentence. 2 years suspended would be a good starting point.

 

[Tealgrove]

I think I've mentioned before that the first case I ever posted about was the Ipswich murders and I think it was the feeling of utter helplessnes that led me to discuss it online. It differed from many other cases in that it involved a suspected serial killer who was continuing to kill, whilst operating in a very localised area without getting caught. I found it so hard to accept that despite police knowing who was being targeted(women working as prostitutes) and where(Ipswich's red light district), he was still able to carry on killing. So as we were discussing it there would be news that another body had been found. Then there was the utter sadness that women, through desperation linked to drug addiction, were still having to work in the area where they knew he was operating, knowing they could be the next victim. It was such a sad situation and because I couldn't physically help I think I needed to at least try to make sense of it all. He ended up killing five women in total, all were working as prostitutes due to drug addiction. Just incredibly sad.

Madeleine went missing a few months later so I discussed that too but withdrew from that in the end because it became a ridiculous battleground that still continues to this day,a battle between "pros" and "antis" that seems to have little to do with Madeleine anymore and has already resulted in one person committing suicide after being doorstepped on national TV for expressing an opinion online. Madness.

So Becky's case is the first case where I've got involved with discussions since Madeleine. I tended to just follow the online debates rather than join in. At the moment I check in to see if there's updates on William Tyrrell (Aus) and Claudia Lawrence(UK), and followed Joanna Yates(UK), Hannah Graham (US)and Haleigh Cummings (US) here too.

BBM

I think, Becky's thread has flowed extremely well with a committed group of people who kept on track and worked the evidence to the best of their ability. Very rarely has it gone OT and when it did, it came back very quickly. I really dislike when threads become a battleground for this side or that side. I think the dedication shown by the posters on this thread to work the evidence and the respect that most showed for all opinions and thoughts is how I've managed to stay from beginning to end.

I typically leave threads when they become about posters' egos vs. the greater good.

 

[Wallace]

Could be, although I think it was said that it had been transferred over with everything else from another hard drive. Thinking back, in the Tia Sharpe case didn't Hazell have child on a memory card found on the top of a door frame and they allowed mention of that too.

Didn't that card have pictures of the victim on it?

 

[MamaJoJo]

:getwell: Insp.Dots

 

[Beesknees]

Thank you Tortoise, jessie and ColourPurple for the links. I read it now...

Ohhh how SH was SO INTO Becky's intimacy, Becky's image, Becky's boyfriends, Becky's confidence, Becky's bras, Becky's behaviour ... ... ... ...

For someone who had the nerve to say 'I don't know her very well' she was so 'concerned' about Becky!!

EVIL LIAR!! :bricks:

 

[Wallace]

Thank you Tortoise, jessie and ColourPurple for the links. I read it now...

Ohhh how SH was SO INTO Becky's intimacy, Becky's image, Becky's boyfriends, Becky's confidence, Becky's bras, Becky's behaviour ... ... ... ...

For someone who had the nerve to say 'I don't know her very well' she was so 'concerned' about Becky!!

EVIL LIAR!! :bricks:

I think there is little doubt which way you would be voting if you were on the jury.

 

[MamaJoJo]

Could be, although I think it was said that it had been transferred over with everything else from another hard drive. Thinking back, in the Tia Sharpe case didn't Hazell have child on a memory card found on the top of a door frame and they allowed mention of that too.

Didn't that card have pictures of the victim on it?

Yes, Hazell had a memory card with pictures of TS in her bedroom (possibly deceased). The card was found in the rafters of the attic, if I remember correctly. This was the first thing I thought of when the text from SH was released which said that the memory cards arrived. I certainly hope there aren't any pictures of BW on a memory card somewhere at SH's house.

 

[Wallace]

Yes, Hazell had a memory card with pictures of TS in her bedroom (possibly deceased). The card was found in the rafters of the attic, if I remember correctly. This was the first thing I thought of when the text from SH was released which said that the memory cards arrived. I certainly there aren't any pictures of BW on a memory card somewhere at SH's house.

If SH and NM did have anything incriminating on a memory card it would have been burnt and or flushed.

Ah perhaps that's how the toilet got blocked.

NM spent two days unclogging* a toilet that was being used to flush other evidence.



* I don't believe that the toilet was ever clogged.

 

[Alyce]

Interesting that a lot of people believe that DD should or will be found Not Guilty after his compassionate speech on the stand.

In reality that compassion should only be taken into account when sentencing, not deciding if he is guilty or not.

In my mind he is guilty, but played such a minor role that he should probably not serve any further custodial sentence. 2 years suspended would be a good starting point.

Agree with you re the compassionate speech - should only be taken into account for the sentencing not the actual verdict.
If NM and SH had shown any signs of sorrow and repentance for their actions, it may have been different. But DD stood out, for those few minutes in the witness box, as being the voice of every normal, caring person who has been shocked and appalled by what happened to Becky.

I also think there is zero evidence against DD. Not saying that he didn't know a bit more than he is admitting to, but nothing can be proven, so I would have to find him not guilty.

 

[Beesknees]

BBM

I think, Becky's thread has flowed extremely well with a committed group of people who kept on track and worked the evidence to the best of their ability. Very rarely has it gone OT and when it did, it came back very quickly. I really dislike when threads become a battleground for this side or that side. I think the dedication shown by the posters on this thread to work the evidence and the respect that most showed for all opinions and thoughts is how I've managed to stay from beginning to end.

I typically leave threads when they become about posters' egos vs. the greater good.

Every so often I behaved a bit badly :blushing: had even a post deleted by the mods.

Not because the persons had antagonic opinions from mine. They were as valid as mine or any other's. Were their opinions. But what put me off the rails was the 'blind' defense of SH and the sarcasm towards all that would criticise her.

It was almost hilarious because we would say - 'Oh, SH says she didn't pee' or 'SH says she saw nothing', etc, etc and the person would say 'I too wouldn't pee', 'I too had sickeness in all the pregnancies in the moring, night and afternoon but, like SH never vomited', 'I too wouldn't see' etc, etc, etc

I recognise you all have perhaps more patience or tolerance or coolness, whatever it is when facing plonkerness but I tend to say clearly when I get my head full. Perhaps it is a cultural thing...

 

[Alyce]

I recognise you all have perhaps more patience or tolerance or coolness, whatever it is when facing plonkerness but I tend to say clearly when I get my head full. Perhaps it is a cultural thing...

BeesKnees I didnt want to copy over your whole post again, as it is just above mine anyway, for everyone to read.
But I had to highlight this part..... I just love that word you have created

plonkerness - it is absolutely fabulous !!

 

[Alyce]

:getwell: Insp.Dots

Seconded, hope you're on the mend :wave:

 

[jessie]

Every so often I behaved a bit badly :blushing: had even a post deleted by the mods.

I recognise you all have perhaps more patience or tolerance or coolness, whatever it is when facing plonkerness but I tend to say clearly when I get my head full. Perhaps it is a cultural thing...

Portugal has great Laws allowing free speech, so maybe it is cultural.

Best just to scroll on by though I think to prevent comments getting too personal.

 

[Beesknees]

I think there is little doubt which way you would be voting if you were on the jury.

Yes indeed!

As the pros said, only in a world of fantasy, only in an unreal world could SH not be aware of evrything. In my head it is completely impossible. So, the fact tha she assumed nothing and pleaded not guilty to everythink in my mind was like a mockery of the intelligence of everyone and it put me even more against her and in the believe of her culpability from start to end.

 

[Cherwell]

Every so often I behaved a bit badly :blushing: had even a post deleted by the mods.

I was just so fed up of seeing someone here jumping over each and everyone who criticised

SH's behaviour or who was convinced she was guilty. Not because the person had antagonic

opinions from mine. They were as valid as mine or any other's. Were their opinions. But what

put me off the rails was the 'blind' defense of SH and the sarcasm towards all that would

criticise her.

It was almost hilarious because we would say - 'Oh, SH says she didn't pee' or 'SH says she saw nothing', etc, etc and the person would say 'I too wouldn't pee', 'I too had sickeness in all the pregnancies in the moring, night and afternoon but, like SH never vomited', 'I too wouldn't see' etc, etc, etc

I recognise you all have perhaps more patience or tolerance or coolness, whatever it is when facing plonkerness but I tend to say clearly when I get my head full. Perhaps it is a cultural thing...

I haven't noticed any "blind defence" of SH. Posters will often weigh a piece of evidence, to see if it could reasonably possibly be true. It doesn't mean that they are defending her. I think it was a good point that morning sickness in pregnancy can take the form of nausea without actually vomiting, because that hadn't occurred to me. We all need to look at the other side.

We have a saying "play the devil's advocate" which means putting forward the opposite point of view to test if it has any validity.

 

[sar2them1984]

Will the judge instructions be allowed to be posted online as were all the proccedings in court until now? In previous cases they did it? TY.


Another thing - I discovered (only now) that Becky has a much older sister, by her Dad's side. Don't know if she has more sisters/brothers or not. Does anyone know? I only knew about Dan Watts...

I think there are a couple of siblings some of which only emerged following Beckys death. Not sure of details but I remember at the time one sister was posting on Bristol Post FB asking Becky to get in touch as she was her sister, they'd never met etc and I know from lurking on various fb profiles that this sister is now in contact with the family

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk