Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #24

[MsBetsy]

Don't know where my response went but I had said he would have to have claimed to piling all three in the truck if we are to believe his story. Jmo

 

[NuttMegg]

View attachment 147405 View attachment 147406
Credit to @The Saint

thanks then to @The Saint. I was thinking you posted those. Look, he has to go within a couple of feet of Bella's room and just a few feet more where SW is supposedly murdering his kid. Bogus!

 

[Allabouttrial]

The investigators know a lot more than we do. They have seen the bruises and hand prints on those little necks. I think they know how big the hands were that strangled those babies.

That's not fact though, that's speculation. Who knows what they've found?

 

[Tippy Lynn]

The investigators know a lot more than we do. They have seen the bruises and hand prints on those little necks. I think they know how big the hands were that strangled those babies.

I'm sure they know a lot more than we do.

 

[Jennifer17]

ITA. If CW promised to tell the truth after he spoke to his dad, he would have changed his story about seeing SW strangling CeCe if it was a lie. His PD is treating it as the truth so I'm doing that as well. JMO

I think that it is a given that when you have three dead people, you will speak the truth to LE too without speaking to your father.
Charles Manson had a defence lawyer too. Did you believe his defence lawyer because he said he believed him?

 

[Jennifer17]

That's not fact though, that's speculation. Who knows what they've found?

They found enough to charge him.

 

[Best of What's Around]

With what little facts we know I'm NOT willing to accept guilt for neither SW nor CW. I don't know who's responsible. I NEED FACTS!!!

There will likely be more facts and evidence to come. But sadly, sometimes there is not a lot of physical evidence and juries still convict. May I ask if you believe Scott Peterson should have been found not guilty? I actually think there is more evidence already in this case pointing to guilt than in that case. It does not mean that new facts would not come into play and be considered by all. I am just stating that what we know right now would likely be enough to convict. If there is evidence lacking on the children’s bodies, it is because they were moved and submerged in crude oil for days by one person. That person destroyed evidence by doing so.

 

[MassGuy]

We have the fact that he lied and lied and lied about everything until he was cornered. Even about having an affair.
I just cannot understand how anyone can think that he could be telling the truth about how the children died.

True. I think it’s correct to assume that everything he says is a lie, until proven otherwise.

 

[Best of What's Around]

ITA. If CW promised to tell the truth after he spoke to his dad, he would have changed his story about seeing SW strangling CeCe if it was a lie. His PD is treating it as the truth so I'm doing that as well. JMO

Does not every attorney for any defendant have to act as though they believe their defense? No one would ever be convicted if we had to take the defense attorney’s word.

 

[ReckoningDay]

I have a theoretical question/scenario. This is for those of you who do not believe we have evidence of CW's guilt. What would it take?

Let's say you have a roommate. (Or spouse, sibling, child...it doesn't matter, really....another human with whom you share a home.)
His name is Bob. One day you come home to find Bob dead and bloody in the floor, and another human (We will call her Sally) with a bloody knife is standing over him. As Sally is questioned, lie after lie comes out....that are in fact even proven to be lies. But Sally insists that although every other thing she said is a lie, she didn't stab Bob. Do you believe Sally? (Let's not pretend this is an Agatha Christie novel, please.) In the real , realistic world, do you have evidence in front of your eyes? You did not see Sally swinging the knife. There is no video footage of it. Do you assume Sally is being truthful, until after the trial?

 

[Jennifer17]

Which could also be said for CW. They also had no indication from friends and family that CW was capable of taking a life.

But he did, by his own admission, take a life. We are not talking about what family and friends think he is capable of.

 

[Tippy Lynn]

They found enough to charge him.

Yes, they had enough to charge him, but he is innocent until proven guilty.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

I can think of three cases right off the bat that don't fit within the guidelines of any of these examples (C Coleman, J List, C Longo). As far as I can see, these men were just dead from the rear end, both ways. They wanted nothing but to wipe out their past and everyone included in it and start all over with a slate they had wiped clean. They didn't seem to particularly hate their wives, they were just totally selfish, souless men who didn't love anyone but themselves. JMO. MOO

But were the motivations not similar, regardless of what order they were killed in?

Those men killed because they, theoretically, could “no longer provide for their family.” They buried their families in debt. At least one had a mistress.

The family got in their way, they only thought of themselves, and the quickest and “only” way to start over was to annihilate their family. There was no recognition of innocent children, or thought of saving them. They all had to go.

The family could expose these men’s schemes and irresponsibility. It would be the mother’s and children’s faults if the men were caught. Killing them, in these men’s minds, fixed their problems.

Ergo, these men blamed their families for their problems, and killed them in cold blood.

From the link:

The children are killed because the husband blames the wife and kills everything associated with her ... everything associated with the person is considered evil.​

 

[katydid23]

I agree - it doesn't look good for him. But, like I've said, we don't have enough FACTS to convict him of murdering his 2 daughters. That's a fact and it's your choice if you want to ignore it.

I don't believe I am ignoring it. WE don't have the facts. But the investigators do have the facts.

Except, of course, for the 'facts' that the defense is trying to block right now. The State wants CW's handprints and the defense is trying to prevent these 'facts' from being revealed.

Why would CW want to keep his handprints secret, if he is claiming that he wasn't the one who strangled those babies. Wouldn't he want them to be compared, to exonerate him?

 

[NuttMegg]

ITA. If CW promised to tell the truth after he spoke to his dad, he would have changed his story about seeing SW strangling CeCe if it was a lie. His PD is treating it as the truth so I'm doing that as well. JMO

According to one of the VIs he had face time with his father twice, once when he picked him up from the airport, and secondly when he stopped the interrogation to say he would tell the truth if he could be alone with his father. (again). I don't read where he admitted strangling SW and Nico before talking to his Dad.

 

[MassGuy]

ITA. If CW promised to tell the truth after he spoke to his dad, he would have changed his story about seeing SW strangling CeCe if it was a lie. His PD is treating it as the truth so I'm doing that as well. JMO

It was only after speaking to his dad the second time, that he told the fantastical tale of Shanann doing this. Of course LE didn’t believe him, nor did the DA, hence the first degree murder charges.

 

[Jennifer17]

Yes, they had enough to charge him, but he is innocent until proven guilty.

And so is she, but she is not around to defend herself. He took that away from her.

 

[katydid23]

Yes, they had enough to charge him, but he is innocent until proven guilty.

If I was on the jury, I'd have to hold to that. But I am not on the jury. So I can believe in his guilt at this point if thats where the facts lead me.

 

[Mrspratcher]

It's a good question. You're right. It hasn't truly been confirmed. And I have often thought that by repeating he didn't try to revive them, we might be giving ideas to the defense. But there's no evidence he tried. What would his wife have been doing as she is trying to revive the kids? Standing there? Trying to stop him? Trying to kill him or herself?

And here's the thing, the theory that he might have tried to revive the kids before killing her does two things that hurt him:

1. That would erase the "defense of others" defense.

Because if he strangled her to stop her from strangling the kids, that could theoretically fit. But if he did so after making sure the kids were dead, he could not use that defense.
CO 18-1-704. Use of physical force in defense of a person

2. It could erode the heat of passion mitigator. If he spent time trying to revive the kids before he suddenly acted and killed SW, it could be argued that that means he had "time to reflect" between the time he saw her engaged in the act, as the affidavit states, and the time he strangled her in rage. And the affidavit doesn't state: "He says he saw her strangling the kids. He ran and tried to get her off the kids. He checked their pulses. He spent 20 minutes doing CPR. When he realized it was hopeless, he burst into a rage and strangled his wife." Instead it says he saw her strangling one child and "he went into a rage and ultimately strangled Shanann to death."

And if he claims he used CPR while in that rage, (which doesn't make much sense to me), before "ultimately" strangling her to death, he erodes the heat of passion mitigator:

"[M]urder in the second degree is a class 3 felony where the act causing the death was performed upon a sudden heat of passion, caused by a serious and highly provoking act of the intended victim, affecting the defendant sufficiently to excite an irresistible passion in a reasonable person; but, if between the provocation and the killing there is an interval sufficient for the voice of reason and humanity to be heard, the killing is a class 2 felony."
2016 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 18 - :: Criminal Code :: Article 3 - :: Offenses Against the Person :: Part 1 - :: Homicide and Related Offenses :: § 18-3-103. Murder in the second degree

It would seem that the time it takes to check vitals, use CPR and determine it is not working, would allow "an interval sufficient for the voice of reason and humanity to be heard."

But this is all academic. Because as most assume, they have much more than what's in the affidavit, which is not more than a summary. I think it is reasonable to assume they have hours of taped interrogation and a statement by CW that is much fuller than the summary presented in the affidavit. That will be compelling and horrifying to watch I think. But it will tell us exactly what he said about that morning and if he attempted to revive his kids, he would have said that during his "confession."

Either way, the DA heard everything he stated in those tapes and charged him anyways, with five counts of first degree murder.

5 Stars!!!!!!!

 

[ReckoningDay]

But he did, by his own admission, take a life. We are not talking about what family and friends think he is capable of.

Yep! TWO lives in fact. One of whom could have never, ever done one thing to "emasculate" him.