GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #9

[Tiny]

Did IS or the Defense offer anything on the otherwise glaring piece of theatrical track-covering quoted above, to explain how it could (in any way) fit with the J&N narrative?
Similarly: was any explanation offered for texting Helen's phone?
Sorry to have missed both points at the time.

With regards to the Hurley quote the judge said this
Mr Hurley told him that if she had turned up on his doorstep, he would’ve told her to contact the police. “The prosecution ask why if the defendant knew Helen had been kidnapped by Joe and Nick, why didn’t he confide in Tony Hurley, rather than ask him if Helen was with him, which he knew not to be true?”

 

[janeh]

Nope disability ones aren't. It sounds like he probably started claiming Disability Living Allowance years ago when he was seriously ill and then just never stopped and slipped through the net. Or it's possible he was awarded a lifetime award and didn't need to be reassessed. It was mentioned before that DLA is in the process of being replaced by PIP Personal Independence Payments and that everybody on DLA, including those with lifetime awards are receiving letters to be reasessed for PIP. It's possible he'd received a letter like that and that any DLA income was under threat. We haven't heard that though in court.

On top of that he seems to have some kind of work based pension from having to stop working due to ill health.

Even lifetime or in indefinate awards are being reassessed when moving from DLA to PIP.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[icemaiden65]

I was wondering how Judge Bright will deal with all those overstated and distorted defence claims of doubt - some of which, such as the witnesses who 'saw' Helen, he has already dealt with simply by saying the jury will have to decide whether they think they're believable.

In the course of this wondering I came upon this blog, which is actually advice for barristers giving closing speeches, not judges, but interesting.
http://barristerblogger.com/advocacy-tips/the-beginners-guide-to-the-closing-speech/

What jumped straight out at me was this little gem:

Never, ever misquote the evidence
Nothing will lower your credibility with the jury more quickly and more certainly.

Gotcha Mr Flint!

 

[Duchy]

Not caught up yet but have read Judge Bright's summing up this morning. Isn't it wonderful!

Can't wait for the documentary!

:happydance:

Aw Helen Bless you xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

[Moll]

What jumped straight out at me was this little gem:

Never, ever misquote the evidence
Nothing will lower your credibility with the jury more quickly and more certainly.

Gotcha Mr Flint!

Yes! That jumped out at me too!

 

[peter010101]

With regards to the Hurley quote the judge said this
Mr Hurley told him that if she had turned up on his doorstep, he would’ve told her to contact the police. “The prosecution ask why if the defendant knew Helen had been kidnapped by Joe and Nick, why didn’t he confide in Tony Hurley, rather than ask him if Helen was with him, which he knew not to be true?”

Thanks. So there's another right-on-the-money matter being pointed out by the judge.
In the absence of explanation, it's pretty much a conclusive piece of evidence on its own.
(The only conceivable explanation would have been to claim he was 'told to do it' by the alleged abductors.)

 

[icemaiden65]

Yes! That jumped out at me too!

And on that we are unanimous Moll! There's emphasis and there's just plain old overkill. :giggle:

 

[Tiny]

Re: Peter 010101 and the texts I don't believe the defence offered an explanation. It was telling that IS did not "address " a text to NiJo but kept texting Helen on her phone.

 

[Tiny]

Absolutely Peter. I think Judge has been brilliant in his sum up so far as he has ignored any deviation from what ACTUALLY took place.

 

[Alyce]

Absolutely Peter. I think Judge has been brilliant in his sum up so far as he has ignored any deviation from what ACTUALLY took place.

So true..... as someone said in an earlier thread

IS is the gift that keeps on giving

 

[DollyDiamond]

If it's true, then all that's come out about his assets during the trial might have been an eye opener for family.

I think this is a really perceptive and fascinating point. As a sociopath, IS has spent his whole life manipulating everyone's perceptions of him, and especially close relatives such as his parents, sons and (obviously) partners.

He will have led a compartmentalised life, keeping many aspects of his true nature hidden from the view of third parties. A sociopath fears scrutiny more than anything else - we saw this in his mounting agitation when he realised police interest in him was increasing and that many aspects of his life would be looked at. Sitting in court, having every last detail of his life and nature publicly assessed (including his haemorrhoids) will be pure torture for him!

The love of money is obviously a huge sickness in IS and part of the driving force for his psychopathy. So I think your comment was bang on the money - pun intended. I bet no one knew about his finances - not Helen, not his parents or sons, no one.

Money was far more important to him than anything or anyone. He's a hoarder a miser, and a scrounger, a collector of cold hard cash who literally couldn't get enough of it. I bet this 56 year old, only child made a habit of pleading poverty and going to mum and dad for hand outs. I feel sure they'll have been gobsmacked to hear in court he had a six figure sum salted away! It's good to know he'll have been squirming under all this court room scrutiny of everything from his health to his finances for the last few weeks.

One of my favourite moments was during Trimmer's cross examination, when IS talked about Helen's flat up north as 'ours'. Trimmer immediately corrected him - it's not yours, it belonged to Helen. It was a revealing glimpse of his overweening sense of entitlement. Where Helen, and probably everyone else in his life is concerned, he holds fast to the old adage: 'What's yours is mine, and what's mine's my own'.

I can't wait to see this vile excuse for a man get what's clearly been coming to him for many, many years!

 

[jessie]

Some aren't like severe disability. Not sure what it's called now but it was the one where you can get a mobility car. It wasn't means tested


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Disability benefits aren't means tested - nor are they liable for tax. !! No idea of the highest amount awarded though.

 

[snoopydog]

What I don't get is if he really has that much cash in the bank why did he have an old mondeo. Wonder what the score is with the MG he bought as well. I find it hard to believe he has all this money tbh.

Wonder if there were some accounts juggling done with his finances to make I look like he has more than he has thus giving him a reason not to kill her for the money....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[BatFace]

What I don't get is if he really has that much cash in the bank why did he have an old mondeo. Wonder what the score is with the MG he bought as well. I find it hard to believe he has all this money tbh.

Wonder if there were some accounts juggling done with his finances to make I look like he has more than he has thus giving him a reason not to kill her for the money....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think he's just a tight-wad, to be honest.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[hayaletcatcher]

Whoa you guys. There is four or five more threads since last time I was following. I am going to skim thru but can anyone point me to a summary of what I've missed in the last two weeks?

Sorry to be "that person" and thanks in advance.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

 

[peter010101]

I came upon this blog, which is actually advice for barristers giving closing speeches, not judges, but interesting.
http://barristerblogger.com/advocacy-tips/the-beginners-guide-to-the-closing-speech/

Thanks for that, which also has remarks on the reasonable doubt issue.

 

[BatFace]

Oh, and regarding disability benefits, under the DLA scheme, he would not be eligible for the higher rate of personal care, nor the mobility element (unless he fiddled it). So they wouldn't comprise more than about £180 per month from my reading of his condition.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[hayaletcatcher]

I'm guessing he didn't take the stand?

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

 

[janeh]

Disability benefits aren't means tested - nor are they liable for tax. !! No idea of the highest amount awarded though.

They are means tested and liable for tax. DLA now PIP isn't but ESA is. If you have only limited savings ESA isn't awarded either. With ESA which is at the most £110 per week, if you have a private pension or other form of income, around £80 a week or above ESA payments are affected. It is on a sliding scale and I would think that IS should not have been entitled to esa at all with his level of savings. DLA/PIP is different and the amount paid is based on level of need. The greater the disability/need the higher the amount paid. This is also questionable in I'S's case given that we now know his need isn't that great.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Alyce]

Whoa you guys. There is four or five more threads since last time I was following. I am going to skim thru but can anyone point me to a summary of what I've missed in the last two weeks?

Sorry to be "that person" and thanks in advance.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

Quickest way might be to read the closings of Pros and Defence and Judges remarks

I will find the links for you