GUILTY CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *CW LWOP* #65

[MassGuy]

Reminder that ABC’s 20/20 will feature this case tomorrow night.

10pm Eastern.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnew...ring-family-man-chris-watts/story?id=59635945

 

[kittycat3]

Wow, thanks for posting. The Christina call was fascinating to hear. She did say SW had said the girls didn't even want to be near Chris when they saw him. I'm so impressed with SW's friends. These ladies knew her so well and were on the ball.

It’s even scarier to think that until this year, people reported CW as a loving, involved, doting father and husband. I want there to be a logical and traceable
evolution to cold blooded killer so we can all spot these types before we or our friends marry them and have kids with them. Poor Christina must be horrified to think of leaving her kids with CW, as well as the fate SW and those little sweet kids faced. Ugh

 

[riolove77]

What about the assurances LE gave NK that they had no use for her raunchy material? Are they allowed to misrepresent their intentions to witnesses? I’m also thinking about characterizing her laughter as creepy. Can she sue them? And don’t you think LE’s betrayal will discourage future witnesses from coming forward?

LE really DIDN'T have any use for her raunchy material...that doesn't mean they lied. Even if they had, they had a right to. Ultimately, they cannot control what comes out at trial and/or post-sentencing in a plea deal. And no, she cannot sue them for their opinion that her laughter was creepy. Ultimately, I do not think a witness who has nothing to hide, and has a legitimate moral compass, will feel discouraged coming forward in a case such as this. But each case is different. I can't speak for everyone, obviously. The fact that they told NK she wasn't in trouble was because she hadn't committed or taken any part in the murders. It wasn't to say "hey, go ahead and lie to us about what we're going to ask."

 

[BingoBongo]

Brought over from previous thread:

The second part you noted specifically states at discretion of custodian. The DA being the custodian of this discovery, it is clear he chose to release the records of his investigation.

So he chose to, but wasn't required to by law?

 

[BingoBongo]

Ultimately, I do not think a witness who has nothing to hide, and has a legitimate moral compass, will feel discouraged coming forward in a case such as this.

Ummm, I beg to differ!!

Note, I am NOT defending NK, IMO, she is an immature twit with nor values or morals to speak of.

But, even though a person may have nothing to hide legally, they may have MUCH to hide personally. Abuse victims as a prime example.

Can you honestly say that everything you have ever texted, or emailed, you'd not have any problem sharing w/the world? Especially knowing that there are a multitude of nut jobs out there who are just salivating for a reason to hate someone, both on-line and in real life. If it helped solve a case, I'd be MORE than happy to be completely transparent with LE - but NOT the entire world!!!

 

[riolove77]

Brought over from previous thread:



So he chose to, but wasn't required to by law?

It appears that CO's open records law says that the specific category of investigation records is at his discretion.

 

[riolove77]

Ummm, I beg to differ!!

Note, I am NOT defending NK, IMO, she is an immature twit with nor values or morals to speak of.

But, even though a person may have nothing to hide legally, they may have MUCH to hide personally. Abuse victims as a prime example.

Can you honestly say that everything you have ever texted, or emailed, you'd not have any problem sharing w/the world? Especially knowing that there are a multitude of nut jobs out there who are just salivating for a reason to hate someone, both on-line and in real life. If it helped solve a case, I'd be MORE than happy to be completely transparent with LE - but NOT the entire world!!!

Personally, yes, I would be cringing about it every step of the way, but if someone I was involved with KILLED four people, I would turn it over. Does not mean I would not have a problem with it. Just means I have the ability to see what is obviously FAR more important in the situation at hand. The fact that open records law meant a lot of the transparency with LE might end up in the hands of the public is not LE's fault. The fact that people think everything in the investigation has been released is inaccurate. There is SO MUCH, I guarantee you, that has not made its way out.

 

[Annicade]

LE really DIDN'T have any use for her raunchy material...that doesn't mean they lied. Even if they had, they had a right to. Ultimately, they cannot control what comes out at trial and/or post-sentencing in a plea deal. And no, she cannot sue them for their opinion that her laughter was creepy. Ultimately, I do not think a witness who has nothing to hide, and has a legitimate moral compass, will feel discouraged coming forward in a case such as this. But each case is different. I can't speak for everyone, obviously. The fact that they told NK she wasn't in trouble was because she hadn't committed or taken any part in the murders. It wasn't to say "hey, go ahead and lie to us about what we're going to ask."

Ummm, I beg to differ!!

Note, I am NOT defending NK, IMO, she is an immature twit with nor values or morals to speak of.

But, even though a person may have nothing to hide legally, they may have MUCH to hide personally. Abuse victims as a prime example.

Can you honestly say that everything you have ever texted, or emailed, you'd not have any problem sharing w/the world? Especially knowing that there are a multitude of nut jobs out there who are just salivating for a reason to hate someone, both on-line and in real life. If it helped solve a case, I'd be MORE than happy to be completely transparent with LE - but NOT the entire world!!!

The crime unit investigators did their job well and wisely. She was being questioned in a triple murder case in which they were deciding if she was a suspect, motive, accomplice. ..they owe her nothing. To be concerned only if her records would go "viral" is showing her true colors. Do the investigators know or care that her info goes public. .. .not their concern.. .. .it is their state law. It was NK's stupidity to not have an attorney present to let her aware of the law. It is not the police's jobto let her know it would be part of evidence... LE didnt know at that time CW would plead guilty and all the documents would be available in a few months in the discovery! ! Sometimes karma is a .. .. you mess with married men, your lies are exposed. She is the motive. I think she and CW were a deadly concocotion. She 100 percent knew they were still together and chose to mask her knowledge of really knowing they were never intending to split. It is apparent NK started making demands of if he didn't leave, she was going to be gone....she knew how to control and manipulate CW.....they were a deadly concoction for each other and NK earned every bit of this...as I said a few weeks ago, you reap what you sew.

 

[Layla123]

@gitana1 Hi Gitana, I’ve got a hypothetical question for you. If you were NK’s attorney going into those interviews, what advice would you have given her that would have enabled her to give LE everything they needed and protect her job and reputation at the same time? Or do you think she deserved to pay that great a price for having an affair? I know you’ve said SW and the kids were missing, and NK impeded the investigation, but from the first taped interview on, they already knew they were all dead. I think.

 

[Gardener1850]

She absolutely said it. "She's so retaaardddiiiiddddd."

I cannot abide by her lazy, bored and rude attitude. It's stunning that anyone excuses her at this point. She's horrible. Two kids died and she was the trigger for the monster who did it. But she acts like some mediocre fast food worker doing the bare minimum to get through a monotnonous shift at work!

Have some dignity! Be respectful of the situation! I would be horrified and weeping and shocked if I was in her shoes. Instead she sounds like a rotten, spoiled teenager trying to get her parents off her back. How is this woman 30?

The 15 year old son of Shanann's best friend showed vastly more concern, alertness, desire to help, interest, politeness, and empathy than this woman ever did in her interviews.

Ugh I cannot stand her attitude. She's got a rotten personality. Nothing explains her rude disinterest, her lack of manners, her slouching, arrogant apathy, and dismissive behavior toward the investigator and the case.

Wow.

I had to turn that off.

Agree completely. I couldn't hear her say it at first because of the sound quality but her use of that word seems to match with her nasty attitude about everything else. Disgusting people use that word as a slur. You have to be pretty low to use it to insult a woman you call your best friend. And there was just no need for that at all. The investigator didn't care about NK's personal friend drama. I don't understand why she was trying to make it seem like she hadn't even told her friend about CW after the crime. The friend's texts make it obvious they had talked about it. It seemed like NK thought she was going to get in trouble for something and was throwing her friend under the bus as a preemptive strike. But no where did LE say she was in trouble nor did they treat her like a suspect. Her behavior makes no sense.
MOO.

 

[book-thinker]

This one's for Gitana 1,
What are the legal rights of Shannon's family, to file suit against Inmates CW mistress, for intentional infliction emotional distress and indirectly being responsibility for the family murders.

Is there a Colorado law similar to North Carolina's, Alienation of affection?

Thank You,
Bookthinker

 

[Annicade]

If NK didnt turn over her records, they would have NO issue with obtaining a search warrant and would NOT need to worry about NK's feelings of being embarrassed. .. .. a pregnant wife/ mother, and 3 beautiful children were murdered. NK was the motive.

 

[MollyDDD]

Agree completely. I couldn't hear her say it at first because of the sound quality but her use of that word seems to match with her nasty attitude about everything else. Disgusting people use that word as a slur. You have to be pretty low to use it to insult a woman you call your best friend. And there was just no need for that at all. The investigator didn't care about NK's personal friend drama. I don't understand why she was trying to make it seem like she hadn't even told her friend about CW after the crime. The friend's texts make it obvious they had talked about it. It seemed like NK thought she was going to get in trouble for something and was throwing her friend under the bus as a preemptive strike. But no where did LE say she was in trouble nor did they treat her like a suspect. Her behavior makes no sense.
MOO.

Perhaps she had a guilty conscience about something.

 

[BingoBongo]

It appears that CO's open records law says that the specific category of investigation records is at his discretion.

So, he chose to release it? Interesting. I am, for the most part, happy he did...and yet, it bothers me to no end (obviously, based on the # of posts I've made about it! LOL) that witnesses personal data (phone numbers) is being made public to the world. But, not only witnesses, but those they have some connection to.

That is just wrong, IMO.

 

[riolove77]

So, he chose to release it? Interesting. I am, for the most part, happy he did...and yet, it bothers me to no end (obviously, based on the # of posts I've made about it! LOL) that witnesses personal data (phone numbers) is being made public to the world. But, not only witnesses, but those they have some connection to.

That is just wrong, IMO.

I'm not him, nor do I work for his office, but it would appear he chose to release it. Perhaps if the victim wasn't ruthlessly raked over the coals for months beforehand, and those associated with the killer hadn't tried so hard to portray themselves as victims, he wouldn't have felt it was necessary to release as much as he did. Or perhaps he doesn't feel he's released enough.

 

[Paulette]

Just listen to him chatting with the lie-detector woman! She's putting him at ease and he's falling for it!! He doesn't know that the police are on the other side listening to him. This is going to be the last conversation where he can be at ease & chat for the rest of his life. I haven't reached the point where he's confronted with the results - it's going to put a kink in his conversation. He totally thinks he can pass the LDT. He's so naïve.

 

[BingoBongo]

This one's for Gitana 1,
What are the legal rights of Shannon's family, to file suit against Inmates CW mistress, for intentional infliction emotional distress and indirectly being responsibility for the family murders.

Is there a Colorado law similar to North Carolina's, Alienation of affection?

Thank You,
Bookthinker

I doubt it, based on the way the law is written. They'd probably have a tough time, in this case, proving that the marriage was peaceful and intact. Plus, they are a third party, not the spouse.

"In North Carolina, you may sue an individual who has caused a married person to suffer the loss of affection of their spouse, so long as the marriage was peaceful and intact at the time of the affair. ... The wrongful and malicious acts of the defendant produced the alienation of affection."

 

[ElleJaycee]

Any time anyone uses social media, there is always a risk of that information being shared. There is no such thing as privacy in 2018. Big Brother is always watching. Any time you use the internet, your IP address is there along with your Google search history.

NK and CW apparently don't know how the internet works. NK is an adult who should have had the foresight that any pics sent to CW could potentially come back to bite her. As for releasing the documents to the public, it's State law. As long as they are in compliance with the State law, there is nothing anyone can do about it. It's a public matter. The cat is already out of the bag. Privacy doesn't exist anymore.

 

[GoneGoldfishin']

Personally, yes, I would be cringing about it every step of the way, but if someone I was involved with KILLED four people, I would turn it over. Does not mean I would not have a problem with it. Just means I have the ability to see what is obviously FAR more important in the situation at hand. The fact that open records law meant a lot of the transparency with LE might end up in the hands of the public is not LE's fault. The fact that people think everything in the investigation has been released is inaccurate. There is SO MUCH, I guarantee you, that has not made its way out.

I am just going to use your post as a jump off for this topic, because there were many many posts that had my blood pressure rising towards the end of the last thread (not yours, riolove).
I am absolutely floored that someone would suggest that records should not be released to the "general public" or to someone without the "proper credentials". WHO THE HE** DO YOU THINK PUBLIC RECORDS BELONG TO? Do you not realize that all government works for *US*, the PUBLIC? They are accountable to us, not the other way around. From the President, to the House and Senate, to Governors, DAs, police officers, FBI agents, Postal workers and everyone else in a government job, they are our employees, and we pay them. The FOIA, CORA and other state legislation, etc. all exist so that we are able to hold those agencies and employees accountable and to make sure they are doing a thorough job, within legal parameters. Transparency is an important part of having confidence and trust in those who work for us. It is a form of elitism to say that only certain members of the public should have access to the records that belong to all of us. MOO.

 

[MassGuy]

I doubt it, based on the way the law is written. They'd probably have a tough time, in this case, proving that the marriage was peaceful and intact. Plus, they are a third party, not the spouse.

"In North Carolina, you may sue an individual who has caused a married person to suffer the loss of affection of their spouse, so long as the marriage was peaceful and intact at the time of the affair. ... The wrongful and malicious acts of the defendant produced the alienation of affection."

Viability of any potential lawsuit aside, it certainly appears from the discovery documents that this deterioration in their relationship was both sudden, and coincided with his affair with NK.

Things went south, and fast.