Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by ColoGirl, Aug 16, 2018.
Good points and I agree. Adrenaline was his friend and time was his enemy.
I think this is a very good question and I've pondered the same thing myself. There is not much available online about the subject of collateral intimate partner homicide (CIPH), unfortunately. I did read what I could find and it might explain some things about the Watts case. JMO.
The focal victim is the intimate partner or former intimate partner of the perpetrator. Collateral victims are connected to the focal victim and can be members of the focal victim's family, their friends, and their children. There are documented cases where the collateral victims were also the biological child or children of the perpetrator.
In CIPH, it appears that in a large percentage of the cases, there was a previous incident or incidents of domestic violence.
Upon reading this, I recalled seeing pictures SW posted on SM of Celeste with a huge bump and scrapes on her forehead. SW also took a picture of her own hand that was badly bruised. I'll try to find those pictures and post the link.
I'm not saying these injuries were the result of domestic violence, but in light of what has happened, I'm not ruling it out. JMO.
I think it’s possible that SW and CW got into a fight, and SW said something that absolutely infuriated him, and he lost it and strangled her. Then afterwards, realizing that he’d just committed murder, he came up with a plan to turn it on her to make it her fault. But People Mag said they have his phone, his texts, and his Internet searches, it was premeditated, so I’d rather believe that!
You may very well be right about that sound, but I hope you are not. It hurts my heart to think of her suffering that kind of grief. If that is what happened, she may not have fought back that much since she would feel she had nothing to live for.
I think you're spot on. Here's what I have a really hard time understanding, though. If daddyhood/drudgery issues were so getting him down (and presumably they must have been for quite some time), then why on earth add to your pressures/unhappiness/precarious financial situation by trying for a third baby? More commitment, more cost, less sleep, etc. She was only 15 weeks pregnant. Surely his resentment of his domestic life had started long before that? I just don't understand what was going on in his head.
My issue is that there has been no evidence (police calls, accounts from friends, etc.) that there was ever any domestic violence, atleast until that night. This does strike me as odd, but that doesn’t mean that this wasn’t a horrific
one-off physical interaction.
Unless there is other evidence, photos of banged up kids doesn’t mean a lot to me. Kids injure themselves all the time, I still have the scars to prove it.
Is it a fact that they were “trying?”
Yes, according to Shanann and her friends. The baby was planned. In fact, SW said it was his idea. There's been some debate if that's true but she did say he suggested trying for a third. And if not, I mean, it takes two to tango. He could have said no...
Absolutely. And I do wonder if this pregnancy had something to do with the motive. If their financial troubles played a role, the prospect of another child may have factored in.
My recollection is the beds were unmade. Though I assume CW was not making up the beds daily when he watched the kids, he could have.
It can't have helped matters. Which is why I am so baffled by it.
Here, I found the sources:
“Chris, we are so incredibly blessed to have you!” [Shanann] wrote on Facebook on Father’s Day. “You do so much everyday for us and take such great care of us. You are the reason I was brave enough to agree to number 3!” Huffington Post
Amanda Thayer (from the longer version of the Thayers' interview with 9News): "Shanann and I were going to get our nails done or something one day and she told me that Chris that night before told her that he wanted another child and she was all on board."
Thanks. This just doesn’t make a ton of sense, atleast from a distance. This would be yet another financial burden, and he was all about it, despite that.
I have been thinking this too (about an argument leading to murder of SW) . But I disagree with the 2nd part (planned to pin the child murders on SW). Yes, it's easy to pin murder on someone who is already dead. But I don't believe he came up with that on his own. Everyone knew how much SW adored her babies. This was a sorry/failed attempt to get lesser charges and possibly make bail. JMO
I’m inclined to agree with you. I do think that this idea to pin the crime on Shanann, came after the fact. Whether he came up with it, or someone else did, I’m not sure.
Some thoughts from the last thread. Life insurance for children is not uncommon. It can build to a huge sum when they're older. We don't know what kind. Many are annuities. Perhaps about a third of my clients with steady, middle class incomes have life insurance policies to their kids. Many jobs offer them.
@MyBelle asked about family killers hiding the bodies after the murders. Several family annihilators have hidden their families' bodies after murdering them.
Someone else mentioned the sentence for the tamper with bodies charges. Tampering with bodies charges carry a maximum of 12 years. They are unlikely to stack them on top of one another. They often are concurrent.
Colorado Felonies and Sentencing Guidelines
Finally, dixiegirl1035 asked:
Post #875 of thread 18.
Colorado has the option of including lesser includeds in the charges. But they didn't. I think they feel confident. And this was after the "confession" BTW.
However, it appears to me that per Colorado law, lesser includeds like second degree murder, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide are an inherent part of first degree murder charges and the jury will undoubtedly be instructed as such:
FindLaw's Supreme Court of Colorado case and opinions.
And if it's a capital murder (death penalty) case, the US Supreme Court has held that lesser includeds MUST be allowed per jury instructions:
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (1980)
Yeah I'm always hearing about overcharging. Unless it's a state that doesn't have lesser includeds in a non-death penalty case, (are there any?) it sounds like b.s. In the casey anthony case the jury was instructed on various lesser includeds including second degree murder, manslaughter, even child neglect.
I don't think it's a matter of overcharging typically. I think it's a matter of juries doing what they want to do.
Well if you look at his old "lecture" on how to rescue a failing relationship, having a baby was on his list.
She was 15 weeks pregnant. I guess he changed his mind.
Oh God, I forgot about that weird presentation thing. He took his own terrible advice...
I agree the camera across the street was THE problem. It provided LE with absolute proof that CW was the only one who left the house that day.
In one of CW's media interviews, he was talking about his doorbell cam, and then he flung up his hand and arm and said something to the effect of "cameras over there". The way he did it was like cameras, cameras, cameras everywhere, dammit!
That was my impression, anyway.
Signs of disorganization come into play in the very first act after the crime. No rational person plans to kill their entire family inside the home knowing the best plan they have is to dump the bodies hastily on a work property....in a work truck that presumably had GPS tracking....while carrying your cell phone....and leaving items behind that directly connect to your home.
If there had been any planning at all the dump site would've been somewhere on those desolate lands nearby and certainly not on a work-site of his employer.