Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #28

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey Everyone,

A bit of clarification.

Please, no more discussion on the viability of Shanann's company or whether her company was or wasn't a pyramid scheme. No more digging up documents or complaints or anything to do with the function of the company. The fact is Shanann's company is not what we are discussing.

If want to discuss if job stress may have contributed to Shanann and Chris' relationship problems please make sure it is in the realm of reality and not the Twilight Zone.

Thank you,
Tricia
 
I am posting the evidence we know of again as some have asked. If anyone has other evidence to add please copy and add.

Evidence of triple murder:

1. Dad claims he saw a blue child on a baby monitor at night.

2. The coincidence of two people, unrelated by blood, both reacting to something in a short span of time by losing their minds and committing homicide, defies reason.

3. The coincidence of those same people both committing homicide in the exact same manner -strangulation- is unlikely.

4. A father passionate enough with love for his children, to kill at the sight of them being harmed, would be desperate beyond reason to save them. But:
a. Dad failed to call 911 to try to save his children. Even if he thought they were beyond help, a parentslove is so intense they will desperately and irrationally try for help that will never come.
b. There is no account of him throwing off the mother and working desperately to revive them or resuscitate them. Hell, total strangers have performed CPR on a child's corpse in rigor. (Cooper Harris case). But a passionately loving dad didn't even try in this case?

5. The dad failed to call 911 after killing his wife in a supposed fury of emotion.

6. Dad also failed to run screaming onto the lawn for help or in anguish.
In cases of such Greek tragedy magnitude either 5 or 6 usually comes into play.

7. This entire scene - the "emotional argument", the vicious strangulation of two children, the father witnessing the incomprehensible and reacting with murderous fury and anguish - all of it was totally silent. Except for the poor dog howling that night. How do we know? Because the houses are in close proximity and neighbors mentioned hearing nothing but the dog the next day IIRC.

8. CW did not scream or wail in anguish so great that it caused him to murder his wife. Not one report of such sounds.

9. CW supposedly lost his mind in grief and anguish. However he regained it in moments in a manner that does not comport with a true mental break. In cases we have seen where people lose it and commit murder, they are typically either wailing on the lawn and to 911 operators or they are in an apparent psychotic state- not lying about what happened, not covering it up, not able to function normally at all. See thumbnail of Julie Schenecker as an example of what this looks like. Police interview Julie Schenecker after kids found dead

10. CW, after such an insanely, horrific Greek tragedy of a scene, calmly loaded up the bodies of his wife and children in order to conceal their deaths and dispose of them. We know this because a neighbor stated she witnessed him leaving. (No reports of wailing and she said, IIRC, the truck drove normally. So no veering, spinning of tires or other signs of lack of composure). And it's apparently on video.

11. CW, a man passionately in love enough with his kids to erupt in murderous rage when they're harmed, did not attempt to give them a burial that comports psychologically with the love and bond parents have with their kids. Death Rituals Reported by White, Black, and Hispanic Parents Following the ICU Death of an Infant or Child
A Global History of Child Death

12. Instead he dumps them in two separate vats of oil. Not together. No way to commemorate their lives. Concealed. Discarded. In a manner that veers from any known traditional burial rite of any kind.

13. CW went to work and monitored the ring video of his house. After the horrific Greek tragedy he just endured. He went to work. And monitored the video of his front door.

14. CW left a few voice messages and sent some texts to the wife he knew was dead, thus calmly concealing what happened.

15. CW calmly called SW's friend after she came to the door and he saw her on the ring video. He asked what was going on. We know this because he stated as much and this is corroborated by the friend.

16. CW rushed home - blowing stop signs and with beating heart, according to him- when CW came to the house and expressed alarm. The first time we have heard of a hint of emotion on his part since the horrific murders of his kids supposedly by his wife and his heat of passion killing of her, occurs when he the authorities are about to get involved.

17. CW cooly lied to the friend about where SW was supposed to be that day and why she wasn't at home. After he lost his mind the night before. He is calm and able to work to conceal those events.

18. There is not one hint of brief reactive psychosis or drug induced psychosis in CW's demeanor and behavior since 5:15 am the morning of the deaths, nor the next day as he gives calm and detailed interviews to the media. His pupils are normal. He is not slurring speech. He does not have a vacant stare. He exhibits no delusions or paranoia. He is not showing emotional lability. (I'm no expert in psychology but have seen a few psychotic people due to psychotic breaks or drugs and it's easy to research).

19. CW shows no anguish, depression, grief, concern, sadness or despair during his stoic media interviews, despite having supposedly been so deranged by his passionate love for his kids that he killed their attacker. His eyes are dry. Not red. No signs of puffiness from weeping. His face is smooth and calm. He looks well rested. No bags under his eyes. He smiles. He grins. He smirks. All with the knowledge that his insane wife savagely murdered his precious babies causing him to lose his mind with anguish. And with the knowledge that the people he loved so fiercely it caused him to kill, are rotting in separate vats of oil.

20. CW calmly and continuously lies to the media about the whereabouts of his dead wife and dead children.

21. CW systematically works with LE to track down his wife and kids. Brainstorming. Supplying numbers and addresses. Calling people. All the while knowing they are dead and decomposing.

22. CW is questioned and lies about having an affair. A motive in many murders of wives.

23. SW was pregnant. (A circumstance present in vast numbers of murders of spouses or parents by men).

24. Some people and report that CW seemed distant with his wife and kids in the weeks leading up to this monstrous event.

25. CW was not hospitalized for any reason after this tragedy.

A couple of things from the CO model jury instructions:

D:01 DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE—NO DISTINCTION

A fact may be proven by either direct or circumstantial evidence. Under the law, both are acceptable ways to prove something. Neither is necessarily more reliable than the other.


E:03 PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, BURDEN OF PROOF, AND REASONABLE DOUBT

Reasonable doubt means a doubt based upon reason and common sense which arises from a fair and rational consideration of all of the evidence, or the lack of evidence, in the case. It is a doubt which is not a vague, speculative or imaginary doubt, but such a doubt as would cause reasonable people to hesitate to act in matters of importance to themselves.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Committees/Criminal_Jury_Instructions/2017/COLJI-Crim 2017 - Final.pdf
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9693.JPG
    IMG_9693.JPG
    329.6 KB · Views: 5
  • IMG_9697.JPG
    IMG_9697.JPG
    76 KB · Views: 5
Here are the verified posters in the Watts Case,

Isalybra - verified friend of Shanann

Trinket78 - verified insider

Colorado303 - verified insider

Amandaa - verified lawyer

Mrspratcher. - verified lawyer

Amandaa and Mrspratcher are posting on the Watts thread, however, anywhere they would like to post as verified lawyers on Websleuths is perfectly fine.


You must treat all verified members on Websleuths with respect. If you don't believe them please scroll past. It is not OK for you to call out a verified member and challenge them as to whether or not they are telling the truth. This includes anything passive aggressive or posting in a way where you tapdance around what you really mean but we can all tell you are questioning the truthfulness of the verified member.
 
PUTTING THE ISSUE OF THE ICE CREAM DRAMA TO REST!!!!!

I have been in touch with a person who was there the day that you all are talking about. Here is what this person told me:

. It was not Bella or Cece that ate any ice cream. It was another grandchild There were NO NUTS of any kind on the ice cream It was a plain individual cup of vanilla ice cream Package said it may have been processed in a tree nut factory There was NO bowl of any nuts laying around


If you don't believe my source then let me tell you I have seen Shanann's social media where she discussed the other grandchild eating the ice cream. She was very clear that her daughter, the one with the allergy, was not offered the ice cream nor did she eat the ice cream.

If I see one more post about ice cream I am leaving you all and going to Outer Mongolia where there is no ice cream.

Thank you.
 
I don't think we're supposed to be discussing the incident with the mother in law and the pistachios since the posts were in a private facebook group. Maybe I'm wrong, but I could swear the mods said something about this several threads ago.

From an insider who was there the day it happened. Here is what they said:

There was an unopened bag of pistachios on top of the kitchen island. She saw them, Laughed and said "Mimi, we can't have these" and put them on top of the fridge. I guess most importantly.. They were unopened and not on the bottom shelf

Pistachio story cleared up. No need to discuss this any further.

Tricia
 
Here are the verified posters in the Watts Case,

Isalybra - verified friend of Shanann

Trinket78 - verified insider

Colorado303 - verified insider

Amandaa - verified lawyer

Mrspratcher. - verified lawyer

Amandaa and Mrspratcher are posting on the Watts thread, however, anywhere they would like to post as verified lawyers on Websleuths is perfectly fine.


You must treat all verified members on Websleuths with respect. If you don't believe them please scroll past. It is not OK for you to call out a verified member and challenge them as to whether or not they are telling the truth. This includes anything passive aggressive or posting in a way where you tapdance around what you really mean but we can all tell you are questioning the truthfulness of the verified member.

...and of course our illustrious verified attorney and long time member Gitana1.
 
Good morning! Thread is open...

800px_COLOURBOX3966683.jpg


link for graphic
 

In watching CW's interview again, I get the feeling CW HATED SW. Absolutely hated her, and that the MLM business was a huge annoyance to him. When he says that it's normal for SW to ignore phone calls from him but not "her people", I feel like that bothered him quite a bit.

I also notice, when he speaks of doing things for the girls like telling them what not to eat, or seeing them watch Bubble Guppies, he says "I miss that". It hasn't even been 24 hours at this point, but he talks as if a substantial amount of time has passed since the girls disappeared. IMO, that suggests he knew he was going to kill them for days, even weeks before he actually did, and they were already dead in his eyes.

Also, he never shut down the interview. He waited for the next question until the reporter was done. No urgency to wrap it up, to check his phone or to hop in his car and start searching. The interview almost seemed like a "test run" to see if he could get through it without cracking.

Bringing this over from the previous thread.

I just re-watched the interview and wow, you are correct. It's like he's thinking back to old memories of them as opposed to a series of things that theoretically would have happened the previous day.

I think I missed it because I was so focused on the gobbledygook that he says right before that part. First he says he hopes SW is safe and with the kids, as if they may have gone missing separately. That sounds really nuts until we find out she actually was not with the kids. He then does this whole series of "ifs". If they are safe, they will come back. Well they aren't, so they won't. If they are not safe AND someone has them, I want them back. They are not safe but no one has them, so you don't want them back. There were several posters yesterday who pointed out just how much he was revealing and it's quite chilling.
 
He may have had trouble looking at his family when they were dead. I think that is where the bags and sheet came in. In addition to the transportation of the bodies. I hope it was not anything more gruesome than strangulation's that has not been released?
 
He may have had trouble looking at his family when they were dead. I think that is where the bags and sheet came in. In addition to the transportation of the bodies. I hope it was not anything more gruesome than strangulation's that has not been released?
In a way no, but in another yes to maybe get a clearer picture of what happened.

ETA: I don't mean more gruesome though!
 
Bringing this over from the previous thread.

I just re-watched the interview and wow, you are correct. It's like he's thinking back to old memories of them as opposed to a series of things that theoretically would have happened the previous day.

I think I missed it because I was so focused on the gobbledygook that he says right before that part. First he says he hopes SW is safe and with the kids, as if they may have gone missing separately. That sounds really nuts until we find out she actually was not with the kids. He then does this whole series of "ifs". If they are safe, they will come back. Well they aren't, so they won't. If they are not safe AND someone has them, I want them back. They are not safe but no one has them, so you don't want them back. There were several posters yesterday who pointed out just how much he was revealing and it's quite chilling.

Wow! I didn't even realize this and the logic makes total sense. I'm sure LE took notice and was really evaluating everything he said during those interviews very closely.
 
The security cameras are turning us all into voyeurs. Interesting thought---we always feared "big brother," thinking that the government would be spying on us, or the police, or big corporations, when actually the biggest invasion of privacy comes from our own neighbors, each other. People used to know how to mind their own business, but now society has devolved to the lowest common denominator, so we spy and snitch on those around us. I don't know how you can have a free society under those circumstances.

With the advent of so many types of inexpensive security systems and virtual assistants like Siri, Cortana and Alexa, I think we have become very comfortable and complicit with our privacy being invaded. In fact, we expect all of these devices to take care of everything for us from music to recipes and some spying on the side. These devices are a huge convenience. I can see investigators asking immediately if any such devices are used in the area. Capturing time stamped data (as we have seen here) makes the timeline much more straightforward with fewer "I think it was 0:00" remembrances.
 
Bringing this over from the previous thread.

I just re-watched the interview and wow, you are correct. It's like he's thinking back to old memories of them as opposed to a series of things that theoretically would have happened the previous day.

I think I missed it because I was so focused on the gobbledygook that he says right before that part. First he says he hopes SW is safe and with the kids, as if they may have gone missing separately. That sounds really nuts until we find out she actually was not with the kids. He then does this whole series of "ifs". If they are safe, they will come back. Well they aren't, so they won't. If they are not safe AND someone has them, I want them back. They are not safe but no one has them, so you don't want them back. There were several posters yesterday who pointed out just how much he was revealing and it's quite chilling.

Sooo much of what he said didn't make sense. In hindsight it's proably because he was tripping over his words since he knew where they were. The whole "safe" spiel was weird.
 
Wow! I didn't even realize this and the logic makes total sense. I'm sure LE took notice and was really evaluating everything he said during those interviews very closely.
I think LE were totally onto him before he even did the interviews. From the sounds of what the 9News journalist was saying in that interview, CW was expressing concern to the journalist pre-interview (on the phone) about possibly having the finger pointed at him. To me, the journalist sounds skeptical about what CW's real concerns are.
It's hard to hear as the audio on the journo isn't great and apologies if I haven't transcribed it 100% accurately but this is what I hear the journalist saying around 2.55mins in.

"I wanted to ask you a little bit about the hard part. Your first thought is: 'Where are they? I want them back.' Your second thought is, you know, your friends were telling me, you've got some... and we kind of heard from you a little over the phone... You're also... your second thought is that you're afraid people think you may have done something."

 

I notice the reporter asks him if she could have taken off. His response to the reporter, at 2:18, "Could she have van,, (vanished is what he was about to say and he stops abruptly), could she has just taken off?..."
I think the vanished is what he wanted from what he did... people to think she just vanished. Then he realized he was getting ahead of himself and not answering the specific question from the reporter. He was thinking the end result of what he wanted people to think and then realizes he was back in the present where people are still just wondering if she had taken off and would be returning. He knew she wasn't returning. So to him, he knew she had not taken off so could she has just vanished?? That is where he intended the public to go in due time. His family just vanished...
 
Good morning.

I have some questions for the attorneys on here, particularly @Amandaaa , our trial lawyer.

I know we on WS are allowed to presume someone guilty, but under the US Constitution, everyone should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

In your opinion, does the fact that LE is just now trying to get DNA/prints from CW mean they did not have enough evidence to arrest him in the first place? I am wondering what evidence they actually have.

I also wonder if he would be in jail right now if he had not confessed (without legal counsel) to killing his wife in defense of his children and leading them to the bodies?

In your legal opinion (from what we know and are now seeing), does it seem they may have rushed to judgment in presuming guilt?

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions.
 

I notice the reporter asks him if she could have taken off. His response to the reporter, at 2:18, "Could she have van,, (vanished is what he was about to say and he stops abruptly), could she has just taken off?..."
I think the vanished is what he wanted from what he did... people to think she just vanished. Then he realized he was getting ahead of himself and not answering the specific question from the reporter. He was thinking the end result of what he wanted people to think and then realizes he was back in the present where people are still just wondering if she had taken off and would be returning. He knew she wasn't returning. So to him, he knew she had not taken off so could she has just vanished?? That is where he intended the public to go in due time. His family just vanished...
That was such a strange interview. I think he wanted people to believe they had had an emotional discussion and more than likely she was pulling a power play on him by just leaving with the girls while he was at work, to make him think about things and give him a little scare. It may have worked had SW's friend not stopped by when she did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
227
Guests online
4,865
Total visitors
5,092

Forum statistics

Threads
592,332
Messages
17,967,563
Members
228,748
Latest member
renenoelle
Back
Top