Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #29

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't really respond to that without bringing my own daughter into this. When she was around 3, she was in a public swimming pool when she suddenly noticed the power of the water jets. "Look, Mommy! This feels GOOD!" After that, we had to have a long conversation about what is appropriate public behavior and what isn't. On the one hand, you don't want to shame your child for a very real biological reaction but, on the other hand, you can't have your kid straddling water sprouts everywhere they go.

The fact is, there are lots of nerves down there. The right kind of pressure on that area does feel good; we're partially built that way so that intercourse is enjoyable for us. It is weird seeing a young girl inadvertently discovering that certain things feel "nice"? Yes. It's icky. Does it mean that she is being sexually abused at home or has any kind of disorder? Absolutely not. We talked about this repeatedly with our pediatrician who assured us that this is normal-some female children just "discover" it far earlier than others. I have also spent quite a bit of time on the internet, perusing parenting forums and looking up parents with similar questions. It happens. A lot. Sometimes it's with hot tub jets, other times it's discovered while straddling the armrest of a couch while they're playing "cowgirl." But it happens.

Also...we have a season pass to a public swimming pool on the island in which we own a vacation home. We go several times a week. The pool has a splashpad like this. I see this kind of behavior at least once a day. Seriously, it's pretty normal.

It IS kind of weird, though, even for the parent. Since that first day we had to have that conversation with her, we've had to have a lot more. Now that she's 7 she is finally old enough to really start grasping what we're saying. Now she's totally embarassed by it. To be honest, I kind of miss the toddler "her" who was just innocently playing and didn't realize that she was doing something that others might think of as weird.

I just see two happy kids having fun
 
Yes. It’s odd to me. I don’t know these people. None of us do with the exception of three people on this board. Obviously there was big trouble in the home. Those girls are dead. SW is dead. I’m looking at eveything. And that looks like sexualized play to me. Even SW tells CW to stop them.
I don't recall seeing evidence of "big trouble in the home" until he committed, IMO, mass murder on his family. What "big trouble" was obvious in the home before the mass murder?
 
Reading your paraphrasing about the shirt (which IIRC is darn close), it is really weird to me that the interviewer would even ask such a stupid, and quite frankly, insensitive question considering the circumstances at that moment o_Oo_O. Makes me wonder if LE spoke to the interviewer prior to, and told to him ask a question like that in order to judge CW's reaction! If I was being interviewed about missing family members, I'd smack a person that asked about my shirt:mad:

I have no doubt it was deliberate!
 
I think that's exactly what LE implored the interviewer to do. Maybe not specifically about the shirt, but I think they encouraged the interviewer to change the subject to something mundane, to something he may not have rehearsed, to see if any of his body movements or inflections changed.
Exactly what I was thinking. I'm convinced that CW "himself" was LE's first solid piece of evidence and the dominos just started falling from there!
 
Yes. If someone asks me how long it has been since I saw a grandchild, I would not answer with the last time I saw them on a screen. It would be the last time they were physically in my presence.
To leave for work, to follow his lie, he would have passed right by their rooms on the way down the stairs. Could have taken a peak in to reassure himself they were fine, and give himself a nice Daddy feeling of contentment, blowing a kiss to the sleeping babies. Unfortunately he had already slaughtered them. IMO
 
No. They wouldn't be risking a darn thing. And yes, it is my opinion that it is very likely the public defender's office is acting unethically when it comes to spreading vicious nasty gossip or insinuations about Shanann, or more probably encouraging others to do so.

This is my suspicion.

But it's not like they would type a letter instructing people to lie. It would be much more subtle. First just listen to him or his family bash Shanann. Then, "It's terrible. The public has already condemned Chris. I wish the public could know the truth."

And suddenly we see posts on FB about needing to tell the "truth" about Shanann.

I can also see staff members intentionally posting things. Yup. I firmly believe such tactics occur in these high profile cases.
John Walsh is the attorney who signed the motions for the defense. He seems to have a pristine reputation upon what I could find googling him. He was US attorney general and has served on the National level as leader for the Department of Justice and so much more . It was that accreditidation that would ensure me quite the contrary . This is not IMO someone who would risk a career so prestigious on back handed tactics. We have not seen any “leaks” from the mainstream media reporting either that it any way would benefit CW.
 
Exactly what I was thinking. I'm convinced that CW "himself" was LE's first solid piece of evidence and the dominos just started falling from there!
I agree. Arrest affidavit (dated August 16) says: "A two day investigation revealed Chris was actively involved in an affair with a co-worker which he denied in previous interviews."
He was arrested late night Aug 15 so to me that means they were onto the affair angle and investigating that all day Aug 14 and 15. The TV interviews IIRC were Aug 14 so yes I think LE may well have suggested that reporters throw him a couple of odd questions to perhaps wrongfoot him or get a telling reaction out of him.
 
In the last thread there were a number of references to the birthday party being held on Sunday night. This is incorrect.

Speaking to Denver7, the man who hosted Chris Watts and his little girls for a kid’s birthday party just days before they vanished, said Thursday he is still trying to process everything that's happened since.

Murder suspect Chris Watts and his two little girls, 4-year-old Bella and 3-year-old Celste, were just at Lindstrom's home for Jeremy’s little boy's birthday party.

[Link removed to avoid breaching TOS]

The playdate occurred on the 12th and the murders took place that night. This video includes a very brief clip (2:23 – 2:50) of an interview with the Lindstroms who were with CW, Bella and CeCe just hours before the murders. Jeremy is now listed as a potential witness in the case.

[Link removed to avoid breaching TOS]
 
Last edited:
Me too. I used to love sitting on those water sprouts. I'd sit all the way on the ground and then, whenever my cousin came near, I'd quickly roll to the side so that the water would squirt up and get him in the face.
We used to put the hose down the top of our bathing suits, which in the olden days were all 1 piece. And watch the water pool up until it found a way out. Laughing hysterically at how funny it felt. I just don't think you run out when little kids are playing in the water to make them feel like they are doing something immoral.
 
I think all arguments and accusations of character assassination come from the fact that there is a certain dichotomy between the SW as she comes across on her videos, when she is alive, and horrendous, scary, tragic death of her and the kids.

I might admit - watching her videos, I was sometimes thinking, "good teaching material about how not to do family videos". SW comes across as sometimes naive, and sometimes there is too much of her. But I see nothing in them that might warrant such an assault.

OK, CW fell out of love with her and found another woman. But - all this drama is happening in XXI century, in CO, a liberal state. In CO, where divorce is not a problem, and contraception, if you feel trapped in a loveless marriage, is readily available. Likewise, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or preference won't fly. And, first consultation with the attorney might even be free.

So no matter what people say about SW, it does not minimize CW's guilt at all. He had options.

This statement is built on the premise that he felt trapped.
 
I don't recall seeing evidence of "big trouble in the home" until he committed, IMO, mass murder on his family. What "big trouble" was obvious in the home before the mass murder?

I agree with you. While it's pretty clear that the Watts' marriage was in trouble, I think that is often the consequence of infidelity. I have not seen any evidence that there was secret physical or sexual abuse going on. I think most of what we have seen appears to be two parents who loved their children and two little girls who loved and trusted their parents.
 
We used to put the hose down the top of our bathing suits, which in the olden days were all 1 piece. And watch the water pool up until it found a way out. Laughing hysterically at how funny it felt. I just don't think you run out when little kids are playing in the water to make them feel like they are doing something immoral.

I agree. If mine do something like that in public then I gently try to redirect them. I grew up feeling ashamed of my body and my sexuality so I am hypersensitive about my kids doing the same. I never tell them that it's "wrong" or that they are in trouble. We just occasionally have conversations like, "Yes, dear, I know it feels good but our bodies are private so we do those kinds of things in private." And then we all move on.
 
I agree with you. While it's pretty clear that the Watts' marriage was in trouble, I think that is often the consequence of infidelity. I have not seen any evidence that there was secret physical or sexual abuse going on. I think most of what we have seen appears to be two parents who loved their children and two little girls who loved and trusted their parents.
So, they had financial problems, (who doesn't?), and yes he was fooling around, which is "big trouble", eventually, but not "big trouble in the home" which has a very different, sinister, connotation, IMO.
 
@gitana1

“That, and the lack of serious girlfriends prior to this. And I have seen no evidence of close friendships outside husbands of his wife's friends".

This was the exact same situation in the Henri van Breda case. He axed to death his mother, father, brother and came within a hair’s breadth of killing his sister. The wounds were absolutely horrific as he hit all of them on the head with tremendous force multiple times.

His elder brother was studying towards his Masters degree at university, played in many team sports, had lots of friends, a very pretty girlfriend and was well-liked by everyone. Henri on the other hand had been a loner since early childhood. He decided to have a “gap” year from uni half way through the year, seemingly had no friends at all, and didn’t have a girlfriend until after he’d been charged with the murders, although she was unaware of the charges when they met. During the trial he claimed he had a girlfriend at the time of the murders but she denied this at the trial. The first officer at the scene said Henri had been emotional, but not crying. He showed no emotions after the murders, during the trial or during sentencing when he received 3 life sentences, 15 for attempted murder and 1 for obstructing the course of justice.

As @gitana1 said, “Sort of a shadow personality, subsumed by stronger ones around him, since childhood”. This sounds like a classic case of a family annihilator, a term I’d never heard of until the Watts case.
 
So was there a birthday party AND a playdate? Two different things on different days?

I'm confused, too. On Denver 7's FB post about the disappearance, Jeremy Lindstrom commented and said that the girls were at his house for the birthday party on Sunday. Where we are running into trouble with this is that we can't link to that post because it's against TOS. And I realize that even by typing this, I am straddling that line. However, without bringing it up, it makes the timeline off. I feel like this hinders the discussion. IMO it's important to note that CW had them out in public, around people they knew, earlier on that day. I keep hoping that Lindstrom will do a MSM interview and give the exact date and time in it so that we will have something to link to but, so far, he's only mentioned it on SM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
171
Guests online
1,342
Total visitors
1,513

Forum statistics

Threads
591,780
Messages
17,958,715
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top