Fordy62 Posted November 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2015 3 minutes ago, BigTone said: I'm not sure that breaking out is the worry but somebody breaking in to get at them is more likely Yes of course, there's that too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handsofclay Posted November 6, 2015 Report Share Posted November 6, 2015 The pathetic defences these two have put up deserve an extra punishment for their audacity. Matthews saying he had to kill Becky when his mask slipped and she would then know it was him when he had spoken to her through the door of her bedroom to get her to open it. Even had he disguised his voice as he said he might've, then surely Becky wouldn't have opened her door to a stranger!!!! However, to echo something Dolly said, I cannot help but think that had Shauna, who sounds vulnerable, not become reliant on such a creep as Matthews, she would never have become a murderer. Maybe that is the one decent thing Matthews is trying to do by endeavoring to distance her from it, knowing he is truly to blame. I cannot help but think too that had Myra Hindley not met Brady she would've lived a normal, crime free existence in Lancs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 On 11/3/2015, 10:59:22, Dollymarie said: Please before I say anything else, I want to make it clear I am not sticking up for Shauna at all. If you read this article though, it shows you what a shite upbringing she had had, and how controlled she was by him. I fully agree that she was involved in Becky's death and don't believe her version of events that she didn't help him at all, but having gone through what she had before she met him, you can see why she has ended up in the situation she has. It was an abusive relationship which she should have sought help for, but probably didn't think she deserved any better given her life before she met him. http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Becky-Watts-Shauna-Hoare-takes-stand-evidence/story-28084545-detail/story.html Hi Dolly, I imagine that, like you, I can only follow this case via the media so have no real idea as to whether any or all of the accused are guilty as charged. I am astonished, however, that your highlighted comment has been allowed to remain for several days. No doubt Fordy and others better acquainted than me with the UK legal system can advise further, but it occurs to me that members of the jury (obviously avid readers of OTIB) might read your post and assume, rightly or wrongly, that Shauna is guilty, regardless of the evidence they have heard during the trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 I am merely agreeing with other people's general view that her defence is make believe. That's the general consensus of opinion is it not? I said I agree with the comments about her guilt, not that she is guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 (Not specific to this trial, general question) Still curious on legal position of defendants charged but found not guilty at trial-ie legally innocent person and police interview recordings. When prior to courtroom verdicts during a trial police release for general public viewing their taped interview recordings of suspects and as a result the whole World witness these video recordings... Potentially millions of people see what is probably the most stressful, emotional, embarassing situation anyone could find themselves in - being questioned by police as a suspect in an awful crime - IF that suspect goes through the whole legal process, charged, court, jury verdict etc and is found to be Not Guilty, totally innocent and released (with what should be not a stain on their character) ... Has that innocent person then got a human rights/invasion of privacy or some such thing case against the authorities who have publically shamed them via release of said interview tapes? ... We all know that in peoples minds the 'no smoke without fire' thing exists, those released and innocent suspects will be recognised wherever they go and a cloud of suspicion will forever follow them- regardless of official innocence, the tape recordings will remain in the minds of the viewer. (Situation has been highlighted during this trial - but my question is of a general nature, is it fair on someone who is subsequently found not guilty to have their police interview tapes shared publically(outside of court) and in such cases (when not guilty) have they got legal recourse against the authorities responsible for the release of this potentially damaging personal material? - seems odd that during trials only artists impressions are permissible in the media yet actual audio/visual recordings of as yet innocent til proven guilty suspects recorded under police caution are allowed 'out there' for all to see forever. (Regardless of all the above, I hope justice will be done for Becky, her family, friends and loved ones, R I P Becky) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northsomersetred Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 50 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said: (Not specific to this trial, general question) Still curious on legal position of defendants charged but found not guilty at trial-ie legally innocent person and police interview recordings. When prior to courtroom verdicts during a trial police release for general public viewing their taped interview recordings of suspects and as a result the whole World witness these video recordings... Potentially millions of people see what is probably the most stressful, emotional, embarassing situation anyone could find themselves in - being questioned by police as a suspect in an awful crime - IF that suspect goes through the whole legal process, charged, court, jury verdict etc and is found to be Not Guilty, totally innocent and released (with what should be not a stain on their character) ... Has that innocent person then got a human rights/invasion of privacy or some such thing case against the authorities who have publically shamed them via release of said interview tapes? ... We all know that in peoples minds the 'no smoke without fire' thing exists, those released and innocent suspects will be recognised wherever they go and a cloud of suspicion will forever follow them- regardless of official innocence, the tape recordings will remain in the minds of the viewer. (Situation has been highlighted during this trial - but my question is of a general nature, is it fair on someone who is subsequently found not guilty to have their police interview tapes shared publically(outside of court) and in such cases (when not guilty) have they got legal recourse against the authorities responsible for the release of this potentially damaging personal material? - seems odd that during trials only artists impressions are permissible in the media yet actual audio/visual recordings of as yet innocent til proven guilty suspects recorded under police caution are allowed 'out there' for all to see forever. (Regardless of all the above, I hope justice will be done for Becky, her family, friends and loved ones, R I P Becky) Unfortunately once it's shown in a public court as evidence it enters the public domain and hence can be shown, i think something along the lines of those charged with sex offences proceedings should be held in camera and once the verdict if found guilty is reached then reporting restrictions lifted and everything released into the public domain. Just look at Christopher Jeffries and the complete nightmare he went through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Didn't take the jury long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 11, 2015 Admin Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 4 minutes ago, Tomarse said: Didn't take the jury long. Agree - must be some pretty nailed on evidence that hasn't been released to the public yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 11, 2015 Admin Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Here are the routes to verdict given by Mr Justice Dingemans to jurors trying the four defendants charged in connection with the death of Becky Watts: Conspiracy to kidnap - Count 1 (Nathan Matthews and Shauna Hoare) 1. Are you sure that both Matthews and Hoare agreed that they should kidnap Ms Watts and each intended to play some part in it? If yes: Guilty of conspiracy to kidnap If no: Not guilty of conspiracy to kidnap Murder - Count 2 (Matthews) 2 - Are you sure that Matthews unlawfully killed Miss Watts? Admitted - go to question 3. 3 - Are you sure that when Matthews unlawfully killed Miss Watts he intended to kill Ms Watts or to cause her really serious bodily harm? If yes: Guilty of murder If no: Not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter. Murder - Count 2 (Hoare) 4 - Have you convicted Hoare of conspiracy to kidnap? If yes: Go to question 5 If no: Not guilty of murder or manslaughter 5 - Have you convicted Matthews of murder? If yes: Go to question 6 If no: Go to question 7 6 - Are you sure that Hoare participated or continued to participate in the kidnapping of Miss Watts intending to kill her or to cause her really serious bodily harm and that in the course of that attack Matthews suffocated or strangled Miss Watts while intending to kill her to cause her really serious bodily harm? If yes: Guilty of murder. If no: Not guilty of murder, but go to question 7. 7 - Are you sure that Hoare participated or continued to participate in a kidnap of Miss Watts and that all sober and reasonable people would inevitably realise that some harm might be caused to Miss Watts and that during the course of the kidnap Miss Watts was suffocated or strangled by Matthews and was killed? If yes: Guilty of manslaughter. If no: Not guilty of manslaughter. Perverting the course of justice - Count 3 (Hoare) 8 - Are you sure that Hoare knew that Miss Watts’ body had been hidden, dismembered and hidden again and lied to the police about it? If yes: Go to question 9. If no: Not guilty of perverting the course of justice. 9 - Are you sure that these acts had a tendency to pervert the course of justice because it prevented the police for investigating the unlawful killing of Miss Watts? If yes: Go to question 10. If no: Not guilty of perverting the course of justice. 10 - Are you sure that Hoare did these acts intending to pervert the course of justice? If yes: Guilty of perverting the course of justice. If no: Not guilty of perverting the course of justice. Preventing a lawful burial - Count 4 (Hoare) 11 - Are you sure that Hoare prevented the burial of Miss Watts by taking part in the dismemberment and hiding of Miss Watts’ body? If yes: Guilty of preventing a lawful burial. If no: Not guilty of preventing a lawful burial. Assisting an offender - Count 5 (Jamie Ireland) 12 - Are you sure that Ireland transported various bags containing the body of Miss Watts? Admitted - go to question 13. 13 - Are you sure that at the time Ireland transported the body parts he knew or believed that Matthews was guilty of robbery or handling stolen goods? If yes: Go to question 14. If no: Not guilty of assisting an offender. 14 - Are you sure that Ireland had no lawful authority or reasonable excuse for transporting or storing the various bags containing the body of Miss Watts? Admitted - go to question 15. 15 - Are you sure that the defendant whose case you are considering intended to impede the apprehension or prosecution of Matthews by transporting or storing the various bags containing the body of Miss Watts? If yes: Guilty of assisting an offender. If no: Not guilty of assisting an offender. Assisting an offender - Count 5 (Donovan Demetrius) 16 - Are you sure that Donovan Demetrius transported or stored the various bags containing the body of Miss Watts? If yes: Go to question 17. If no: Not guilty of assisting an offender. 17 - Are you sure that at the time Donovan Demetrius transported or stored the various bags he knew or believed that Matthews had committed either a robbery, or was handling stolen goods or was possessing illegal drugs with intent to supply to another. (You will have to all agreed on whether it was a robbery, or was handling stolen goods or was possessing illegal drugs with intent to supply to another). If yes: Go to question 18. If no: Not guilty of assisting an offender. 18 - Are you sure that Donovan Demetrius had no lawful authority or reasonable excuse for transporting or storing the various bags containing the body of Miss Watts? Admitted - go to question 19. 19 - Are you sure that Donovan Demetrius intended to impede the apprehension or prosecution of Matthews by transporting or storing the various bags containing the body of Miss Watts? If yes: Guilty of assisting an offender. If no: Not guilty of assisting an offender. Possession of a prohibited weapon - Count 6 (Hoare) 20 - Are you sure that Hoare knew that the stun guns were not torches? If yes: Go to question 21. If no: Not guilty of possession of a prohibited weapon. 21 - Are you sure that Hoare had the same rights as Matthews to use the stun guns? If yes: Guilty of possession of a prohibited weapon. If no: Not guilty of possession of a prohibited weapon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 11, 2015 Admin Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 The jury have just returned unanimous verdicts on all charges. There were gasps in court as they gave their verdicts: Nathan Matthews guilty to the murder of Becky Watts Matthews guilty to plotting to kidnap Becky. Shauna Hoare not guilty of Becky’s murder, guilty of manslaughter. Hoare guilty of plotting to kidnap Becky. Hoare guilty to perverting justice. Hoare guilty of preventing Becky’s burial. Hoare guilty to possession of a stun gun. James Ireland not guilty of assisting an offender by helping to dispose of Becky’s body.. Donovan Demetrius not guilty of assisting an offender by helping to dispose of Becky’s body. Matthews has admitted perverting justice, preventing Becky’s burial and possession of a stun gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 10 women and one man jury found Nathan Matthews guilty of murder and kidnap. Shauna Hoare guilty of manslaughter and kidnap. 2 others already admitted assisting an offender. 2 acquitted of all charges. not sure if sentencing will be today. legal people I know amazed by swiftness of verdicts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Just now, RedM said: 10 women and one man jury found Nathan Matthews guilty of murder and kidnap. Shauna hi are guilty of manslaughter and kidnap. 2 others already admitted assisting an offender. 2 acquitted of all charges. legal people I know amazed by swiftness of verdicts. Sometimes the evidence is overwhelming and of course if they all pled guilty, how would the poor old barrister be able to afford to live in the style to which he has become accustomed at the expense of the tax payer?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 The verdict took just 3 hours to reach, that is quick as they had to consider 4 people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Wait for the background of them to come out now. Already seeing police interviews on sky news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 3 minutes ago, Tomarse said: Wait for the background of them to come out now. Already seeing police interviews on sky news Exactly. I don't think all the legal dealings have finished perhaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sheene Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 My thoughts are with Becky's family. We lost my brother-in-law and had to sit through a Murder trial and it is just hell and the worst thing that i have ever been through We did it without the national press coverage her family have had to endure so her family will needs lots of support now. RIP Becky and I hope her family can find peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Wow the morticians sowed her back together for the parents to get a final look. That's some incredible work by them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 11 minutes ago, Barry Sheene said: My thoughts are with Becky's family. We lost my brother-in-law and had to sit through a Murder trial and it is just hell and the worst thing that i have ever been through We did it without the national press coverage her family have had to endure so her family will needs lots of support now. RIP Becky and I hope her family can find peace. I've stayed away this thread quite a lot for similar reasons. If I'm lucky it's that the murderer of my best friend pleaded guilty sparing a trial and having to listen to exactly what happened. One thing that's always annoyed me with the media is when they say the family and friends can have closure. No. No you don't. It only opens up the wounds once more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 11 minutes ago, Barry Sheene said: My thoughts are with Becky's family. We lost my brother-in-law and had to sit through a Murder trial and it is just hell and the worst thing that i have ever been through We did it without the national press coverage her family have had to endure so her family will needs lots of support now. RIP Becky and I hope her family can find peace. I can't imagine what that must be like, especially when you have to listen to arrogant overpaid defence barristers invent the most outrageous excuses, lies and even try to trash the victim on behalf of their clients. RIP Becky and your brother in law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 4 minutes ago, Tomarse said: Wow the morticians sowed her back together for the parents to get a final look. That's some incredible work by them. Yes they did. Family and friends were encouraged to see her that one last time so they could get the image of her having being so brutally savaged out of their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cider head Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 RIP Becky. Guilty was the correct verdict and i hope the family can get some closure now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Sentencing Friday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sheene Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 25 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said: I can't imagine what that must be like, especially when you have to listen to arrogant overpaid defence barristers invent the most outrageous excuses, lies and even try to trash the victim on behalf of their clients. RIP Becky and your brother in law. Thank You Mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 @phantom interesting post earlier with the route to verdicts. Cheers for that. I'm glad that (what I would consider to be) the correct verdicts have been returned. Although I would say that I've seen people convicted of murder on lesser evidence that Hoare was acquitted on (on a joint enterprise basis). Sentencing will be interesting on Friday. Of course the only sentence Matthews can receive is life imprisonment, but I'll guess his minimum tariff will be 30 years. Hoare is a little more difficult to attempt to predict. In fact it's more difficult the more I think about it. I'm going to suggest she'll get 18 years imprisonment to serve half. if ever I come across as insensitive I'd like to apologise, I suppose in a way I'm desensitised to crime. My sincere condolences go out to Becky's family and indeed anyone who has to suffer anything half as tragic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Can't believe Hare got off with manslaughter Hooe she gets the full sentence at the very least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cottsciderarmy Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 I imagine he'll get life and she'll get 8 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lew-T Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 I'd be very surprised if it wasn't a life sentence for Matthews. As for Hoare, I reckon around 10 years! RIP Becky and thoughts go out to her family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 At least it will be 30 years for him I should think. And that will be thirty years either in solitary or in with the paedos and rapists so that won`t be a lot of fun. RIP Becky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 I genuinely think he might get a whole life term. Here's hoping anyway. The judge is within his/her rights to give life for Manslaughter if they want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 16 minutes ago, Tomarse said: I genuinely think he might get a whole life term. Here's hoping anyway. The judge is within his/her rights to give life for Manslaughter if they want? I'm afraid he won't/can't get a whole life term. I can't remember the criteria but he doesn't fit. Think it's serial killers/terrorists only if I remember correctly. It might also have something to do with the home secretary too perhaps. And yes, if I remember my studies, the maximum tariff for manslaughter is life (as is pervert the course of justice). I doubt she'll get it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.