GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #8

[Clio]

<rsbm>
Re the body .......AG was only out of the house from 11.15am to 12.45 pm

Sure it's just a typo but AG was out from 10:15am to 12:45pm

 

[Tortoise]

It seems most odd that SH was 'Anjie's carer', went round three days a week usually to help out with housework, yet stayed away from the house completely the whole week of Mon 23rd to Fri 27th. I know Darren was probably at home though, so perhaps they said they didn't need the extra help. If it was my family though I would still be there to give moral support, in such a time of need. The bigger picture is not looking good for SH, hiding away at her Mum's for a week.

 

[Gigi-G]

Cadaver dogs can sniff out a corpse or a death. In anything from 2 to 10 mins of the body been left there....
http://dogsdontlie.com/main

 

[mrazda71]

I'd be interested to see everyone's version of events for that night. NM might have a reason to cover up for SH if he wants her free to care for their child but the other men don't even know her, so have nothing to gain from lying about her involvement - if she was involved.

Although there hasn't been the forensic evidence to link her with a lot of the crime so far, evidence does seem to come in bits ........... like NM saying he used the saw when she was out, but she said she heard him using it to cut pipe for the toilet; and now her saying she was asleep when one of the other people there at the time says she was awake and arguing.

I don't believe she was asleep that quickly. If their child was with them, then she would have needed to have been got ready for bed presumably - clothes off, washed, teeth done, pyjamas on and settled into bed. After doing all that, SH would have done the same. They way its worded, it sounds like SH woke up in bed the next morning, rather than having dropped off on a sofa. Didn't one of the men claim to have gone in the bedroom, or at least seen her in there?

I know I must sound like a broken record but - if we were told the whole story, transcript of entire interview, trial we could better decide.

It may be that the little one was already asleep for instance and was carried in from the car and just put into bed.

Is there an assumption that Shauna went in and was asleep within minutes?

I'm not reading too much into what we've heard yet regarding woman heard shouting/crying - didn't this some second hand from a friend of one of the accused? Could wires be crossed and it was Jaydene and Karl arguing?

 

[jessie]

It seems most odd that SH was 'Anjie's carer', went round three days a week usually to help out with housework, yet stayed away from the house completely the whole week of Mon 23rd to Fri 27th. I know Darren was probably at home though, so perhaps they said they didn't need the extra help. If it was my family though I would still be there to give moral support, in such a time of need. The bigger picture is not looking good for SH, hiding away at her Mum's for a week.

So many things they said or did seem most odd to me. NM apparently very concerned about how his mother was treated by Becky, yet when his mum would need support they both keep away.

Keeping out of the way of the police more like, as I expect Darren and Anjie had a Family Liaison Officer there most of the time.
I wonder if the police considered it odd at the time that NM and SH kept away?

 

[Lady Demelza]

Hi KatieLH and Welcome ...

From me, an especially big welcome as until reading your post I've felt like I am the only person who is even considering the prospect that Shauna is innocent until PROVEN guilty and for me, I haven't had definitive proof that she's guilty of anything yet.

That's not to say that I think conclusively that she's completely innocent and if in the coming weeks we hear of evidence from court that proves beyond reasonable doubt that Shauna was involved then, my opinion will change ...
We are only hearing the edited sound bites of days worth of interviews, snippets of quotes from the courtroom and not the full picture.

Like you, my curiosity is in the intricacies of their relationship ...

I completely agree, 14, however mature IS a child and there's NO way any of my 3 daughters at 14 would've been allowed to begin a relationship with a 21 year old!! But of course, from what we do know, I don't think Shauna had a great upbringing ... 14! *I'm shaking my head at this*
Agreeing with you again - 21 is still SO young! and such formative years in-between where the not only are you developing physically but your brain too ... I'm just going to stop now and say I agree with everything you've said

Mrazda, I wanted you to know you are not the only one and I have been standing with you, albeit silently. ( i have been following this on my phone this week and thought I had been hitting the Thanks button, when actually I was hitting the quote button oops) I am in complete agreement with 100% of your posts so far, and also those of KatieLH.

 

[Tortoise]

So many things they said or did seem most odd to me. NM apparently very concerned about how his mother was treated by Becky, yet when his mum would need support they both keep away.

Keeping out of the way of the police more like, as I expect Darren and Anjie had a Family Liaison Officer there most of the time.
I wonder if the police considered it odd at the time that NM and SH kept away?

I think they were very sharp with their questions of SH about her movements that week, in her second interview. They also queried whether she and NM had been involved in the community searches. And they also picked up on the unusual trip there the day following Becky's disappearance, which is why SH said they went back because they hadn't done what they went there to do the day before. Makes you wonder why they hadn't done those things the day before. Becky's disappearance wasn't that much of a problem for anyone for several hours at least. And then again they only went round 'to return a cake tin'! Then NM said he wanted to wash his car (even though it was raining), and never explained why he had not done it.

 

[epiphany]

My O My, but isn't Shauna just totally wrapped up in Becky's emerging, developing sexuality...my guess is that the bells were ringing for the police during this early interview:

When asked to provide a profile of Becky, Shauna contributes the following:

<snip>

Hoare said when Becky started getting boyfriends Becky asked Hoare about sex, if it hurt and was it boring?

She said: "Apart from that she didn't really mention boys at all..."

But, Ah, Shauna goes on:

She said that, having gone on the birth control pill but fearing it would make her gain weight, Becky had a contraceptive implant installed.

She told police: "As far as I was concerned she was still a virgin."


Re Becky's anorexia, Shauna incl the following:

<snip>

"She lost weight and got more attention off boys.

"She wore make up and padded bras. It made her feel more womanly. I think she felt more appealing to people.

www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-Watts-Shauna-Hoare-throw-light-teen-s/story-28035053-detail/story.html


When discussing that no clothes appear to be missing, Shauna focuses on Becky's hygiene. This out of the mouth of a pregnant female who is using a Lego bucket for her own hygienic needs, not allowed in her own bathroom for 2-3 days and is not overly concerned enough to ask her partner too many questions about what's going on with her own bathroom:

<snip>

"That's not like Becky. She doesn't wear the same clothes over and over again, she's very hygienic. She changes her clothes twice a day and has two showers a day.

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-...light-teen-s/story-28035053-detail/story.html


But it's the bolded part ^^, that is mind blowing imo. She's not her Mum, not her BFF, nor is she her psychologist or counselor and yet she feels the need to incl all of that, rather than something along the lines of:

She has a BF now, but I don't think she's sexually active yet...I could accept that. Shauna felt the need to offer her personal opinion on Becky's sexual "status."

It's downright bizarre imo.


This ^^ contributes to my opinion that there was a sexual motive, one Shauna was a part of & had an interest in, to Becky's kidnap & murder.

Speculation: Both needed to move in on Becky before she became completely sexually active. Certainly, they were both aware of the status of her relationship w/her BF and felt they would be running out of time pretty soon

 

[skibaboo]

I had a vague recollection of dogs at Crown Hill (Becky's/DG's/AG's home) I remember the discussion about what type of dog they were, I don't think we found out. I went and looked at The Case Map, I had added several images and links. I found this A lot of photos at link, including number 53 which shows a handler and dog at Crown Hill. Is it a cadaver dog?

Quoting my own post from from earlier, link to the map in it

Does anyone know if there are any maps showing the various locations in this case? If so, would you post a link?? TIA!

 

[Hexenb]

Is the 23rd Feb the night that KD & JI moved the boxes etc? JI said when he went back to Cotton Mill after taking boxes he went in for a and a woman was shouting at the man (NM). Sorry I can't find where in court that bit was said. But, I would think that the fact SH was shouting had some kind of knowledge regarding these boxes/suitcases. SH claimed she was asleep and left them in the car talking?? Is this 'catching her out' or did they go to the house twice? Confused

If this was SH shouting at NM and JI is truthful then SH is not as timid and scared of NM as she makes out imo

 

[Tortoise]

If this was SH shouting at NM and JI is truthful then SH is not as timid and scared of NM as she makes out imo

I can't think of any reason for JI to have made this up, can anyone else? It's not proof that either one of them killed Becky, it is just a neutral observation of an argument between SH and NM as far as I can see, and it implied nothing to JI about whether the upset between them was related to the contents of the cases.

 

[Gigi-G]

There are so many places in this twisted turn of events that need i's dotted and t's crossed.
I do hope the Jury get a comprehensive summing up of events for their perusal.
By that stage in another few weeks of course I wonder how many of us will be left in disbelief.?
I've sat in on a couple of cases. And none have been as erratic as this one has. I'm sure the Judge has reasons for why it's being led in this manner.
But I'm eagerly awaiting Monday. I'm sleeping. N eating this case at moment.

 

[Clio]

I can't think of any reason for JI to have made this up, can anyone else? It's not proof that either one of them killed Becky, it is just a neutral observation of an argument between SH and NM as far as I can see, and it implied nothing to JI about whether the upset between them was related to the contents of the cases.

JI probably didn't make it up but the testimony was second hand and vague. JI's friends talked about "Barton Hill" which could refer to Cotton Mill Lane or Barton Court. Then they talked about JI seeing "a man" and "a woman" arguing. One friend said JI was drunk at the time he was recounting what happened, the other admitted he may have got some details wrong.

ETA One friend also recounted JI saying he took the people and the bags to Southmead. I would be surprised if that's true. We have heard nothing at all to suggest the bags went to Southmead before ending up at Barton Court. And if one piece of a story is wrong, it casts doubt upon the credibility of the rest of it.

 

[Hexenb]

No I can't think of a reason for JI making it up, Its just there seems to be so much emphasis about SH being frightened of NM and how controlling he is I'm not so sure she is frightened although it doesn't prove she hurt or helped with Beckys murder, I am just not convinced she is this little doting wallflower.

 

[Tortoise]

JI probably didn't make it up but the testimony was second hand and vague. JI's friends talked about "Barton Hill" which could refer to Cotton Mill Lane or Barton Court. Then they talked about JI seeing "a man" and "a woman" arguing. One friend said JI was drunk at the time he was recounting what happened, the other admitted he may have got some details wrong.

I thought it was more clear than you did that it related to NM and SH. It will only become useful however when JI's testimony is made available to the court, whether through a police statement and plea explanation , or by him taking to the stand.

 

[Clio]

I thought it was more clear than you did that it related to NM and SH. It will only become useful however when JI's testimony is made available to the court, whether through a police statement and plea explanation , or by him taking to the stand.

Absolutely and I hope JI does testify to clarify. As it stands at the moment though, I imagine that SH's defence could pull the testimony of JI's friends to pieces.

 

[Tortoise]

No I can't think of a reason for JI making it up, Its just there seems to be so much emphasis about SH being frightened of NM and how controlling he is I'm not so sure she is frightened although it doesn't prove she hurt or helped with Beckys murder, I am just not convinced she is this little doting wallflower.

You're not convinced, I'm certain she isn't

I know exactly what game she has played. Yesterday I would have said I was 60:40 for her being guilty, today I'm 100%. I've done a lot of thinking about the way this case developed and before anyone jumps down my throat about not keeping an open mind and not having seen conclusive proof, I know it when I see it and I am not on the jury so I am not going to be held to account for the verdict or sentence. I may change my mind however, if anything happens to cast doubt on what we've already heard.

 

[Gigi-G]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/ne...ts-latest-Body-parts-crime-scene-footage.html

Here's a great link to read up on. Plus it mentioned other names that were linked and investigated and more properties.

 

[Tortoise]

JI probably didn't make it up but the testimony was second hand and vague. JI's friends talked about "Barton Hill" which could refer to Cotton Mill Lane or Barton Court. Then they talked about JI seeing "a man" and "a woman" arguing. One friend said JI was drunk at the time he was recounting what happened, the other admitted he may have got some details wrong.

ETA One friend also recounted JI saying he took the people and the bags to Southmead. I would be surprised if that's true. We have heard nothing at all to suggest the bags went to Southmead before ending up at Barton Court. And if one piece of a story is wrong, it casts doubt upon the credibility of the rest of it.

Mmm, sometimes. I think it really does depend on the context of the errors. In this particular instance I would say the names of the places weren't really that important because we know where the van actually went and it's easy for a witness to mix up the names of places if they are not personally familiar with them and didn't go there themselves. I was more interested in the interactions between the 'players' in the events - that was what was key in this piece of evidence.

 

[Hexenb]

You're not convinced, I'm certain she isn't

I know exactly what game she has played. Yesterday I would have said I was 60:40 for her being guilty, today I'm 100%. I've done a lot of thinking about the way this case developed and before anyone jumps down my throat about not keeping an open mind and not having seen conclusive proof, I know it when I see it and I am not on the jury so I am not going to be held to account for the verdict or sentence. I may change my mind however, if anything happens to cast doubt on what we've already heard.

Agree 100%