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

Status
Not open for further replies.
The thing is from our view now, knowing who he is and what he did, it's really hard to be objective about how he was before. I think we want there to be clues because the idea this came out of nowhere by someone no one would ever suspect is freaking terrifying. How can any of us know and feel safe?
I appreciate the honesty of your post. It strikes a chord.

Everyone is looking for an answer to how or why a seemingly passive guy from SM videos would or could strangle his babies and pregnant wife, load them into his truck, dump his precious baby girls Bella and CeCe in oil and throw dirt over a seemingly loving wife and mother Shanann and unborn Nico.

It strikes the chord of how do we know? That fear button. But we may never know the why, or comprehend the how.

That doesn't mean that we find a way to blame the woman, question the woman, make the woman a villain, over and over again, to justify the behavior of a man because we can't find another way to explain his behavior.

I said before I can't wait til the time women are believed. Whether it's the friend knowing and feeling strongly enough that something was wrong to call the police and perhaps foil CW's cover up plan, or the evidence left by a tired loving mama who came home from a weekend trip to support her family and left her shoes at the door, purse on the counter, and suitcase at the stairs probably headed up to in her mind, a safe nights sleep with her family.
I hope we start believing women, even when they are victims who cannot defend themselves in death, soon.

moo moo moo
 
Yes this I'm very curious about. Wouldn't the state and the defense have equal right to receive it at the same time?

Haven't read through the whole thread, but I suspect that the State is being very (!!!) thorough with the investigation and the autopsy report. They want it to be as air tight as possible, and they want the scientific conclusions to be unimpeachable. They may even be having outside experts in the field review the report or the test results or findings to ensure accuracy before they sign off on the final version of the reports.

Also, they may be waiting for some test results.
 
Ur728,
"Here in CO autopsy reports are public, it doesn't matter what age.

My thoughts on why they are keeping them quiet is to keep things air tight as far as a fair trial. Avoiding a mistrial. I also had the thought that maybe they are really horrific and it would really upset things? It's going to be hard enough to pick a jury with as much media coverage as this case has received".

I have often thought, there may be something horrid found in the examination of the bodies of the young girls: not only strangulation.
The oil did not hide the evidence.
So best to 'not make public'.
These are my thoughts as well. We don't want another Casey Anthony case.
 
Here's the thing: In general, men have a power position over women. There is a looooong history of men having property rights over women's property, and women having none, the power to vote while women did not, the ability to put a woman in a mental hospital without justification, take her children from her, leave her penniless, control her daily life and be supported in that by his family, her family, the churches and the courts, and even to commit domestic violence against her repeatedly, and just be told to take a walk to "cool down", or to have the wife be told not to anger him and to simply be sweet.

Those attitudes continue in many subcultures in the US today.

As a result of this long history and the resultant feminist movement, there was a shift in social attitudes that deemed certain things appropriate while others were not.

Popular culture evidences the shift. Especially t.v. and film.

So we go from the early to mid-fifties I Love Lucy episodes where she says "yes sir" to her husband, he threatens her with physical violence, and actually uses it, spanking her in at least on episode.

Then we see the slight change to the late 60's, the Brady Bunch. The couple represents more of a team now, working on decisions together (with that happening more strongly toward the middle and end of the series).

Go to the 70's and you see single, working women for really the first time (Mary Tyler Moore).

This changes again in the late 90's, early 00's. As with many things, the shift, in order to definitively and decisively divorce itself from a history of a male-dominated patriarchy in which wife beating was not great but not criminalized, etc., went the other way a bit.

So you get programs like 7th heaven, where the wife is constantly scolding and lecturing her husband, and King of Queens, in which Leah Remini's character is described as: "Doug's sardonic wife. She has a quick-temper and is occasionally physically abusive to Doug. She has been characterized as scary by Holly and Doug, particularly when she is angry. During a flashback, Carrie concludes that she is happier (she describes herself as never being truly happy) when others are miserable. She never finished college and is employed as a hard-working legal secretary. Her constant attempts to make her relationship with Doug more romantic and meaningful cause Doug frustration, as he prefers a simple life with as few restrictions as possible. The more quick-witted and adventurous of the couple, Carrie often pushes Doug to make more of himself and improve his morals, but she can be just as immoral as he is. Although Carrie scolds Doug for his selfish behavior, she has proven to be selfish as well at times, with little patience for others' problems or tolerance for their quirks."
The King of Queens - Wikipedia

This is all part of attempts to stabilize roles and sort of fix certain historic and social imbalances of power between the sexes.

(My BA is in American Studies BTW, so I happen to know a bit about American social history, etc.).

I represent a lot of men for some reason. Dads love me. So I am well aware that men are also victims of domestic violence and can be manipulated and victimized by women. I was particularly disgusted by the idea, during the jodi arias trial, that Travis was not a victim of domestic violence.

But it remains true that women continue to suffer more of DV than men, and that men cause more damage, statistically, when they commit it, than women. Women continue to represent 94% of all the intimate partner homicides in the nation.

So there is a more visceral, instinctive reaction when people hear a man badgering a woman, teasing her, or publicly criticizing her, than when a woman does so. It tends, socially, to represent something more profound - an imbalance of power that continues to exist, despite the attempts society has made to repair that imbalance.

In the past, like the Victorian era, a woman who disagreed with her husband in public, just an opinion about literature or politics, was seen as way out of line, unfeminine and shrewish. Today, it is frankly socially acceptable for the most part for women to complain publicly about hapless husbands, husbands who won't pick up after themselves, don't know how to shop, allow the kids to eat forbidden things and make a mess and do "dangerous" things, who fart, and don't groom enough, etc. It's part of popular culture.

So no, it is not the same. The whole history of the imbalance of power between men and women make that so. (Even though some in society continue to cling to notions of femininity from the past - A woman must always be sweet and nurturing and protective and babying of her kids, for example, and must never criticize or tease her husband, etc).

Finally, man or woman - I will never and have never accepted the defense that a parent was controlled and abused by another parent and thus was unable to protect their children from harm, unless they are actually chained or a firearm is used. Casting CW as "subservient" and "passive" is a way of excusing his potential perceived inadequacies as a parent - his inaction or participation in events on video that many here apparently feel evidence child neglect or abuse - and absolve him from his responsibility as a parent, while continuing to enable SW to be eviscerated as an abusive, neglectful and cruel parent, for the events HE also participated in, IMO.
*crack* Another home run for gitana1!!!!
 
Question for the attorneys out there (@gitana1), during the funeral mass for SW/BW/CW, it was mentioned the family does not wish to seek death & punishment but life and justice ( something to that effect). Since the services were held in a Roman Catholic Church I'm assuming that is their religion. Again, assuming only, that SW's family does not believe in the DP, due to religious or personal beliefs, in your opinion, how much do you think that would weigh in on the DA's decision? Would he have to NOT go for it if they asked.... or have to GO for it even though the family is against it? I know that may be a loaded question and differs in each case, but I've been curious since I heard it during the service! TIA ( you have been amazing in not only in your wealth of information, but also the time you have taken to answer so many! BIG thanks!)

In CO victims or in this case their family have the right to provide input. The decision, however, is the DA'S. IMO...
 
sun16
"Seriously—SW would want to get up at 4am after just going to bed (maybe) at 2am? Why not sleep in later just that one day, since plane was late, not feeling well, Dr appointment, etc. 2 hours of sleep seems silly. I had mentioned yesterday I am torn 50/50 on who died where and when in the house. I am also torn 50/50 if ... SW and CW ever even went to sleep at all Sunday night / Monday early AM. Or, if there was even “a conversation”. Maybe there was no conversation that night and there was only a killing. I don’t know what to make of the dog wailing — how sure is the person who heard the noise, what time EXACTLY, and could it have been a person versus a dog. Digitally, it will also be interesting to see the activity from SW’s phone, the exact times, and if they can find out if she spoke to the girls after, say, 3pm on Sunday—after the party but before 7 or 8pm."

Knowing the last time, via SW's phone, when she spoke to the girls, after the party: before bedtime, would help enormously.
?? where were girls during CW's barbecue effort.
Were they using electronic devices, to show last time, these were used????
I guess, anyone, can use them anytime, to 'cover their tracks'.o_O
 
Ur728,
"Here in CO autopsy reports are public, it doesn't matter what age.

My thoughts on why they are keeping them quiet is to keep things air tight as far as a fair trial. Avoiding a mistrial. I also had the thought that maybe they are really horrific and it would really upset things? It's going to be hard enough to pick a jury with as much media coverage as this case has received".

I have often thought, there may be something horrid found in the examination of the bodies of the young girls: not only strangulation.
The oil did not hide the evidence.
So best to 'not make public'.
Or maybe he used two different methods to kill the girls. One method was strangulation most likely. (on CeCe, and he couldn't stand doing it as he did once love her). So on Bella, he could have used a quicker method.

I'm thinking of one possibility but don't even want to put it in writing or google to find out if it's really quicker.
 
Haven't read through the whole thread, but I suspect that the State is being very (!!!) thorough with the investigation and the autopsy report. They want it to be as air tight as possible, and they want the scientific conclusions to be unimpeachable. They may even be having outside experts in the field review the report or the test results or findings to ensure accuracy before they sign off on the final version of the reports.

Also, they may be waiting for some test results.
@Bill Carson, that is reassuring that they are being thorough and diligent but why would the defense team let an error of "she" versus "he" in a document? I guess I am questioning too much.
 
Or maybe he used two different methods to kill the girls. One method was strangulation most likely. (on CeCe, and he couldn't stand doing it as he did once love her). So on Bella, he could have used a quicker method.

I'm thinking of one possibility but don't even want to put it in writing or google to find out if it's really quicker.

I am also wondering, if there are other signs/evidence/markings on the girls.
 
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. After I posted that that is one of the hallmarks of some of these family annihilators, I noticed there was a post about how he had friends. And yet, so far, the only people who have come forward either publicly or even just on social media, or wherever, were the Thayers, a neighborhood friend, and a couple acquaintances.

Of those, Nick Thayer seemed the closest, often working out and spending tons of time with Chris. he seemed gobsmacked by the allegations but after having Chris in his home overnight when the family was "missing", it is clear he totally believes Chris is guilty of murdering them all.

The rest were people from Colorado who seemed to be friends with the family/couple and not separately with CW, and then a couple acquaintances from high/school college (roommate) who did not seem particularly close.

I get this picture in my head of his family members desperately trying to track down "friends" and asking them to speak up about how great CW was, and how close they were, and those guys kind of saying, "Yeah, I'd rather not get involved."

I'm pretty certain he fits the pattern - nice guy, good family man, normal, but not a lot of super close relationships. Sort of a shadow personality, subsumed by stronger ones around him, since childhood.

IMO, what seems to be CW's lack of genuine and deep relationships with close friends would have been another factor in CW being confident that he could truly start over with a fresh new life. He wouldn't have any ties left. Other than his wife and children, what other ties would he have?

Even more interesting, is in his 9 News interview (at :10), where CW says, "I have exhausted, like, every friend that I know of, and every friend that I have has called friends that [SW] has that maybe I didn't know about."

So if we really break that sentence down, essentially he is saying that every friend he has also apparently has a friend of SW that he doesn't know about. As if all his friends are really SW's friends.

I would have expected him to gradually fade away from contact with any of SW's friends had he actually gotten away with her murder. Those were SW's friends. Any interest he had in them was likely another example of just going with the flow.

JMO.
 
Here's the thing: In general, men have a power position over women. There is a looooong history of men having property rights over women's property, and women having none, the power to vote while women did not, the ability to put a woman in a mental hospital without justification, take her children from her, leave her penniless, control her daily life and be supported in that by his family, her family, the churches and the courts, and even to commit domestic violence against her repeatedly, and just be told to take a walk to "cool down", or to have the wife be told not to anger him and to simply be sweet.

Those attitudes continue in many subcultures in the US today.

As a result of this long history and the resultant feminist movement, there was a shift in social attitudes that deemed certain things appropriate while others were not.

Popular culture evidences the shift. Especially t.v. and film.

So we go from the early to mid-fifties I Love Lucy episodes where she says "yes sir" to her husband, he threatens her with physical violence, and actually uses it, spanking her in at least on episode.

Then we see the slight change to the late 60's, the Brady Bunch. The couple represents more of a team now, working on decisions together (with that happening more strongly toward the middle and end of the series).

Go to the 70's and you see single, working women for really the first time (Mary Tyler Moore).

This changes again in the late 90's, early 00's. As with many things, the shift, in order to definitively and decisively divorce itself from a history of a male-dominated patriarchy in which wife beating was not great but not criminalized, etc., went the other way a bit.

So you get programs like 7th heaven, where the wife is constantly scolding and lecturing her husband, and King of Queens, in which Leah Remini's character is described as: "Doug's sardonic wife. She has a quick-temper and is occasionally physically abusive to Doug. She has been characterized as scary by Holly and Doug, particularly when she is angry. During a flashback, Carrie concludes that she is happier (she describes herself as never being truly happy) when others are miserable. She never finished college and is employed as a hard-working legal secretary. Her constant attempts to make her relationship with Doug more romantic and meaningful cause Doug frustration, as he prefers a simple life with as few restrictions as possible. The more quick-witted and adventurous of the couple, Carrie often pushes Doug to make more of himself and improve his morals, but she can be just as immoral as he is. Although Carrie scolds Doug for his selfish behavior, she has proven to be selfish as well at times, with little patience for others' problems or tolerance for their quirks."
The King of Queens - Wikipedia

This is all part of attempts to stabilize roles and sort of fix certain historic and social imbalances of power between the sexes.

(My BA is in American Studies BTW, so I happen to know a bit about American social history, etc.).

I represent a lot of men for some reason. Dads love me. So I am well aware that men are also victims of domestic violence and can be manipulated and victimized by women. I was particularly disgusted by the idea, during the jodi arias trial, that Travis was not a victim of domestic violence.

But it remains true that women continue to suffer more of DV than men, and that men cause more damage, statistically, when they commit it, than women. Women continue to represent 94% of all the intimate partner homicides in the nation.

So there is a more visceral, instinctive reaction when people hear a man badgering a woman, teasing her, or publicly criticizing her, than when a woman does so. It tends, socially, to represent something more profound - an imbalance of power that continues to exist, despite the attempts society has made to repair that imbalance.

In the past, like the Victorian era, a woman who disagreed with her husband in public, just an opinion about literature or politics, was seen as way out of line, unfeminine and shrewish. Today, it is frankly socially acceptable for the most part for women to complain publicly about hapless husbands, husbands who won't pick up after themselves, don't know how to shop, allow the kids to eat forbidden things and make a mess and do "dangerous" things, who fart, and don't groom enough, etc. It's part of popular culture.

So no, it is not the same. The whole history of the imbalance of power between men and women make that so. (Even though some in society continue to cling to notions of femininity from the past - A woman must always be sweet and nurturing and protective and babying of her kids, for example, and must never criticize or tease her husband, etc).

Finally, man or woman - I will never and have never accepted the defense that a parent was controlled and abused by another parent and thus was unable to protect their children from harm, unless they are actually chained or a firearm is used. Casting CW as "subservient" and "passive" is a way of excusing his potential perceived inadequacies as a parent - his inaction or participation in events on video that many here apparently feel evidence child neglect or abuse - and absolve him from his responsibility as a parent, while continuing to enable SW to be eviscerated as an abusive, neglectful and cruel parent, for the events HE also participated in, IMO.

Mic drop.
 
I appreciate the honesty of your post. It strikes a chord.

Everyone is looking for an answer to how or why a seemingly passive guy from SM videos would or could strangle his babies and pregnant wife, load them into his truck, dump his precious baby girls Bella and CeCe in oil and throw dirt over a seemingly loving wife and mother Shanann and unborn Nico.

It strikes the chord of how do we know? That fear button. But we may never know the why, or comprehend the how.

That doesn't mean that we find a way to blame the woman, question the woman, make the woman a villain, over and over again, to justify the behavior of a man because we can't find another way to explain his behavior.

I said before I can't wait til the time women are believed. Whether it's the friend knowing and feeling strongly enough that something was wrong to call the police and perhaps foil CW's cover up plan, or the evidence left by a tired loving mama who came home from a weekend trip to support her family and left her shoes at the door, purse on the counter, and suitcase at the stairs probably headed up to in her mind, a safe nights sleep with her family.
I hope we start believing women, even when they are victims who cannot defend themselves in death, soon.

moo moo moo

I agree woman of dv or abuse in any form shouldn't be blamed or victimized and nobody who commits these acts should have their behavior justified. However, the accusations need to be investigated. We can't just go around criminalizing the accused without the accusations being investigated . Men are abused too, not as often as woman are, but they are and that shouldn't be dismissed or ignored either. jmo
 
I agree woman of dv or abuse in any form shouldn't be blamed or victimized and nobody who commits these acts should have their behavior justified. However, the accusations need to be investigated. We can't just go around criminalizing the accused without the accusations being investigated . Men are abused too, not as often as woman are, but they are and that shouldn't be dismissed or ignored either. jmo
I think that LE would not have charged him with the murders if they did not have evidence.
The only person accusing her is her murderer who lied and lied to LE and the public.
 
I appreciate the honesty of your post. It strikes a chord.

Everyone is looking for an answer to how or why a seemingly passive guy from SM videos would or could strangle his babies and pregnant wife, load them into his truck, dump his precious baby girls Bella and CeCe in oil and throw dirt over a seemingly loving wife and mother Shanann and unborn Nico.

It strikes the chord of how do we know? That fear button. But we may never know the why, or comprehend the how.

That doesn't mean that we find a way to blame the woman, question the woman, make the woman a villain, over and over again, to justify the behavior of a man because we can't find another way to explain his behavior.

I said before I can't wait til the time women are believed. Whether it's the friend knowing and feeling strongly enough that something was wrong to call the police and perhaps foil CW's cover up plan, or the evidence left by a tired loving mama who came home from a weekend trip to support her family and left her shoes at the door, purse on the counter, and suitcase at the stairs probably headed up to in her mind, a safe nights sleep with her family.
I hope we start believing women, even when they are victims who cannot defend themselves in death, soon.

moo moo moo
If CW hadn't accused SW of killing the kids then I guess we wouldn't be looking into and exploring if this is at all possible. So while not victim blaming it's about looking at their life together as a couple and as parents.

While you may find it difficult to hear we are allowed to discuss the possibility.

I'm not sure what you mean about women not being believed? Do you mean in general or this case?.

Edited for grammar!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
256
Guests online
3,925
Total visitors
4,181

Forum statistics

Threads
593,321
Messages
17,984,736
Members
229,092
Latest member
rosegold45
Back
Top