GUILTY UK - Rebecca Watts, 16, Bristol, 19 Feb 2015 #14

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clio said:
I don't know for sure but it sounds like it to me. I am guessing here but I think, that because NM has admitted that there was a kidnap plan (albeit a stupid sounding one) it may have to be taken as a given. Therefore as far as conspiracy to kidnap is concerned, all that needs to be decided is whether it was a joint plan or not
Click to expand...

To me, it seems like this entire defence/case has been run along the lines of whatever NM said happened, is a given.
 
Some detail of the judge's directions in the Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...al-jury-told-to-reach-verdict-without-emotion
Of the alleged plot, the judge said: “There is no direct evidence of an agreement to kidnap Ms Watts. That is not unusual. Those who commit crime do not always disclose to those who are not parties to the conspiracy what they [are] doing.

“You will need to examine all the evidence to determine whether the crown have made you sure that Mr Matthews and Ms Hoare were parties to an agreement to kidnap Ms Watts.”
Click to expand...
 
BIB surprises me

"Dingemans told the jurors they must not undertake any independent research as they try to reach their conclusions, nor can they carry out any experiments – for example with the red suitcase Matthews alleges he crammed Becky’s body into after killing her."

I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to test something like that, as it speaks to the credibility of the defendant.
 
Cherwell said:
Some detail of the judge's directions in the Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...al-jury-told-to-reach-verdict-without-emotion
Click to expand...

Ah , that almost made me despair, until I read the next bit...

The agreement to act together need not have been expressed in words. It may be the result of planning or it may be a tacit understanding reached between them on the spur of the moment. The agreement can be inferred from the circumstances.


BIB by me ...... I do hope they all see the huge relevance of this comment.
 
From Cherwell's link

"Detailing the concept of “joint enterprise”, Dingemans explained: “An offence may be committed by one person acting alone or by more than one person acting together with the same criminal purpose or with knowledge of what the others might do."

“The agreement to act together need not have been expressed in words. It may be the result of planning or it may be a tacit understanding reached between them on the spur of the moment. The agreement can be inferred from the circumstances.”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...al-jury-told-to-reach-verdict-without-emotion

ETA Snap Alyce
 
Cherwell said:
BIB surprises me

"Dingemans told the jurors they must not undertake any independent research as they try to reach their conclusions, nor can they carry out any experiments – for example with the red suitcase Matthews alleges he crammed Becky’s body into after killing her."

I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to test something like that, as it speaks to the credibility of the defendant.
Click to expand...

all they'd have to do is get one of them closest in size to Becky (10 women on this jury) to curl up on the floor next to the suitcase, and judge for themselves how credible it is. they don't even have to believe a suitcase was used, as a lot of us don't.
 
Cherwell said:
BIB surprises me

"Dingemans told the jurors they must not undertake any independent research as they try to reach their conclusions, nor can they carry out any experiments – for example with the red suitcase Matthews alleges he crammed Becky’s body into after killing her."

I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to test something like that, as it speaks to the credibility of the defendant.
Click to expand...


totally silly imo. Surely that is the point of having the exhibits with them ?

- unless it is so blatantly obvious that Becky could not have been put into such a small suitcase ( I am going by the pics, which make it seem small to me )
 
Judge re Joint Enterprise:

“The agreement to act together need not have been expressed in words. It may be the result of planning or it may be a tacit understanding reached between them on the spur of the moment. The agreement can be inferred from the circumstances.”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...al-jury-told-to-reach-verdict-without-emotion

Ah, sorry for the repeat (Alyce & Clio).

Judge made that quite clear...Buh Bye, SH
 
They might have something else on her but we are not allowed to know, perhaps pertaining to her child.
 
Cherwell said:
BIB surprises me

"Dingemans told the jurors they must not undertake any independent research as they try to reach their conclusions, nor can they carry out any experiments – for example with the red suitcase Matthews alleges he crammed Becky’s body into after killing her."

I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to test something like that, as it speaks to the credibility of the defendant.
Click to expand...

I wonder if any of them, before being told that, had tried to make a cigarette last for 22 - 25 minutes, to see if it is possible.

I'm actually surprised the defence hadn't already tried to fit someone into that suitcase - to show either how difficult it would be, or impossible. When there was the investigation into the "spy in the holdall" case, I'm sure that was recreated (by that I mean - didn't a lady demonstrate that it was possible to lock herself into the bag?).

I would have like NM to have proven in court that he could lift a 9 stone suitcase and carry it some distance, lift it up and even take it down some stairs. I'd have like to have seen him use the saw single handedly with such precision too.
 
Cherwell said:
BIB surprises me

"Dingemans told the jurors they must not undertake any independent research as they try to reach their conclusions, nor can they carry out any experiments – for example with the red suitcase Matthews alleges he crammed Becky’s body into after killing her."

I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to test something like that, as it speaks to the credibility of the defendant.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I can't help thinking this Red Suitcase really is the 'elephant in the room'. Don't believe it was used until AFTER NM dismembered Becky, There was evidence in the boot and on a duvet cover yet nothing in the suitcase? Just doesn't make any sense! IMO
 
YidArmyRach said:
I wonder if any of them, before being told that, had tried to make a cigarette last for 22 - 25 minutes, to see if it is possible.

I'm actually surprised the defence hadn't already tried to fit someone into that suitcase - to show either how difficult it would be, or impossible. When there was the investigation into the "spy in the holdall" case, I'm sure that was recreated (by that I mean - didn't a lady demonstrate that it was possible to lock herself into the bag?).

I would have like NM to have proven in court that he could lift a 9 stone suitcase and carry it some distance, lift it up and even take it down some stairs. I'd have like to have seen him use the saw single handedly with such precision too.
Click to expand...



I've been reading up on Vincent Tabak, and he is 6' 4". I thought interestingly he, VT, said he couldn't lift Joanna Yeates (who was 5'4" and 9 stone so similar to Becky) over the 4 foot high wall = that was why he had to leave her on the ground.

A 4 foot high wall isn't much to a strapping 6'4" lad, full of adrenaline too I suppose considering what he's doing.

Just comparing weight and sizes to NM and BW.
 
jessie said:
I've been reading up on Vincent Tabak, and he is 6' 4". I thought interestingly he, VT, said he couldn't lift Joanna Yeates (who was 5'4" and 9 stone so similar to Becky) over the 4 foot high wall = that was why he had to leave her on the ground.

A 4 foot high wall isn't much to a strapping 6'4" lad, full of adrenaline too I suppose considering what he's doing.

Just comparing weight and sizes to NM and BW.
Click to expand...
Re Physical strength, it honestly doesn't necessarily follow that a broad tall person is stronger that a short slim person.
 
YidArmyRach said:
I wonder if any of them, before being told that, had tried to make a cigarette last for 22 - 25 minutes, to see if it is possible.

I'm actually surprised the defence hadn't already tried to fit someone into that suitcase - to show either how difficult it would be, or impossible. When there was the investigation into the "spy in the holdall" case, I'm sure that was recreated (by that I mean - didn't a lady demonstrate that it was possible to lock herself into the bag?).

I would have like NM to have proven in court that he could lift a 9 stone suitcase and carry it some distance, lift it up and even take it down some stairs. I'd have like to have seen him use the saw single handedly with such precision too.
Click to expand...

BBM

I am reminded of a very famous quote in an extraordinary trial in the US regarding a pair of gloves.....hmhm... "if the gloves don't fit, you must acquit!" I believe it was Johnny Cochrane who voiced those words after OJ tried on the gloves at the insistence of the Prosecution. Probably one of the biggest all time gaffs in a courtroom.

Maybe one can fit maybe one can't. It could go either way.
 
jessie said:
I've been reading up on Vincent Tabak, and he is 6' 4". I thought interestingly he, VT, said he couldn't lift Joanna Yeates (who was 5'4" and 9 stone so similar to Becky) over the 4 foot high wall = that was why he had to leave her on the ground.

A 4 foot high wall isn't much to a strapping 6'4" lad, full of adrenaline too I suppose considering what he's doing.

Just comparing weight and sizes to NM and BW.
Click to expand...

I think the weather was a factor there, wasn't it freezing and slippery underfoot?
 
Cherwell said:
I think the weather was a factor there, wasn't it freezing and slippery underfoot?
Click to expand...

I think so, and I think he may well have been disturbed by passing cars, which made it harder for him as he had to keep stopping and starting.
 
Cherwell said:
I think the weather was a factor there, wasn't it freezing and slippery underfoot?
Click to expand...


May well have been, but VT said in court he just didn't have the strength.

The other side of the wall was a quarry, and quite possibly JY wouldn't have been found if VT had managed to lift her over the wall.
 
sar2them1984 said:
Can anyone say why murder/manslaughter has been lumped with the kidnapping? I'm confused

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't know much about joint enterprise but there is an offence of constructive manslaughter (manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act). If a person intends to commit an unlawful act and this would lead a reasonable person to realise some other person is at risk of harm, and in fact death is caused, the person is guilty. The prosecution does not need to show the defendant foresaw the risk of serious harm, nor that they intended it. The unlawful act in this case would be the kidnapping.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 202 more.
Total: 3,669 (members: 203, guests: 3,466)

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
3,466
Total visitors
3,669
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,306
Messages
17,967,093
Members
228,739
Latest member
eagerhuntress
Back
Top