GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #3

[ZaZara]

She didn't give up teenage writing as such and she didn't want to do a book on bereavement. She suffered complete writer's block after JS died and the blog of Planet Grief grew from that. She turned down two publisher's offers before making it into the book. I think she was at a crossroads in her career, and waiting to see what happened next. She did write 22 books in total, w

IMHO it would be next to impossible to focus on teenage writing after such a terrible shock. It was a good thing that she managed to write at all, and I suppose that did not happen overnight either.

So sad.

:sigh:

 

[Cherwell]

She didn't give up teenage writing as such and she didn't want to do a book on bereavement. She suffered complete writer's block after JS died and the blog of Planet Grief grew from that. She turned down two publisher's offers before making it into the book. I think she was at a crossroads in her career, and waiting to see what happened next. She did write 22 books in total

Thank you, Pips. I didn't realise that she hadn't written any fiction since she was widowed. So it wasn't that she didn't want to, as he said? it was just not coming to her.

Sorry, still trying to work out the technicalities! Have answered on next page by mistake. Mea culpa!

It's fine, doesn't make any difference if you reply directly to a post, or at the bottom of the page - it will still be in the same place for me to read.

 

[Lit Up]

Sorry, still trying to work out the technicalities! Have answered on next page by mistake. Mea culpa!

Pip, have the Stewart sons disowned their father? Have they been testifying for the prosecution?

 

[icemaiden65]

Puzzling that - I was baffled too. Did he manage to change the standing order to £4,000 in the end?

Catching up here so this may have been answered below - he must have been successful at third attempt as he'd have been kicked off the bank's system trying to use a wrong password and they wouldn't know what he was trying to amend and to what amount until he was properly logged in, I would hope. The first two goes seem like wild tries and probably the third one was when he sat down more calmly and carefully keyed in the details.

 

[icemaiden65]

Pip, have the Stewart sons disowned their father? Have they been testifying for the prosecution?

Both have testified/acted as witnesses so far and my guess is they are in a state of shock and disbelief until a verdict is reached. Presumably they may be called again when defence gets going.

 

[ZaZara]

Yes that would be very interesting. Some people suffer only from lid lag but most go on to develop full blown MG. Not all patients suffer the same degree of weakness but it does seem he has not worked for years. During this time, if he claimed any sort of sickness benefit, he would have been examined a number of times and he would have been under the care of a Neurologist. No doubt the Defence will use his lack of strength as an excuse that he was not strong enough to lug a body across the yard. However, that would soon be seen as overkill (ouch). Some patients can even stretch their medication intervals to 6 hours. It does depend how badly one is affected.

MG patients often suffer from sleep apnoea due to the nasal musculature collapsing. Another reason for being tired in the morning.

BBM

Hmmm .... Claiming that IS was not strong enough to lug a body across a yard suggests knowledge of the location where HB was killed. So far, the alleged location has not been made public.
And how will they prove this in view of all his actions during the afternoon and evening?

IMHO with help of a duvet, a bedcover and two plastic bags it is possible for a person with little strength to move a body from the first floor into a wheelie bin without ever having to lift or carry it.
It would take some planning but then, this entire crime oozes lengthy and detailed preparation with a focus on a very limited use of force. A woman might do this - use of poison ! - but also someone who could not rely on his or her physical health.

 

[ZaZara]

I should have gone to bed, but I cannot stop thinking that

she was preparing to marry him, while he was preparing to murder her
........
and she was busy with their wedding up to the moment when he ended her life.


fftobed:

 

[Mayfly.Aus]

A bit off topic, but apparently the commonly held concept of poison as a 'woman's weapon' is a myth. An American study of modern poisoning murders showed they were often committed by men (in a reasonably higher percentage). I think the article did acknowledge that perhaps female poisoners were just better at getting away with it so didn't show up in the statistics....

Sorry I don't want to google "murder by poison" at work so I don't have the link to provide, but it was easily searched. In following this case I started getting interested in the criminal psychology of poisoners (if IS is guilty of the extended drugging then this seems to be what he is) to try and understand IS's potential personality profile - some interesting reading.

 

[Cherwell]

Both have testified/acted as witnesses so far and my guess is they are in a state of shock and disbelief until a verdict is reached. Presumably they may be called again when defence gets going.

They have already appeared as witnesses for the prosecution, so they cannot now appear as witnesses for the defence.

 

[icemaiden65]

They have already appeared as witnesses for the prosecution, so they cannot now appear as witnesses for the defence.

Really? That shows how little I know then - I honestly thought they could be cross examined. So in effect, whoever grabs witnesses first keeps a tight hold with no further questions asked. Sheesh!

Learned something new there.

:thinking:

 

[Lit Up]

They have already appeared as witnesses for the prosecution, so they cannot now appear as witnesses for the defence.

Why not? I thought the prosecution and the defence could call whoever they wanted. Also when I was in court the other day, the defence and prosecution took it in turns to ask questions of witnesses.

I presume they have disowned his father; anything else would not seem to be compatible with going to Helen's memorial and staying on good terms with the Bailey clan. But I don't know, hence why I ask Pip.

 

[BatFace]

I got the impression that Jamie (the elder one) hadn't been in touch since his arrest, but Oliver had been visiting him every weekend, and was treated to his Nick and Joe fantasy.

 

[Cherwell]

Really? That shows how little I know then - I honestly thought they could be cross examined. So in effect, whoever grabs witnesses first keeps a tight hold with no further questions asked. Sheesh!

Learned something new there.

They were cross-examined by the defence after the prosecution had questioned them.

Why not? I thought the prosecution and the defence could call whoever they wanted. Also when I was in court the other day, the defence and prosecution took it in turns to ask questions of witnesses.

Trials always begin with the case for the prosecution, starting with an opening speech in which the prosecution barrister outlines their case.
After that, the prosecution calls its first witness and questions them. Then the defence can cross-examine the witness. After that, the prosecution can question the witness again to clarify points if necessary.

When all the prosecution witnesses have been called, the defence barrister makes an opening speech after which the defence witnesses are called.
This follows the same pattern, with the defence questioning them first. Then the prosecution will cross-examine the witness. The defence can then re-examine their witness.

In this trial we are still going through the prosecution witnesses stage. The defence case hasn't begun yet, apart from cross-examination of prosecution witnesses.

 

[DollyDiamond]

I should have gone to bed, but I cannot stop thinking that

she was preparing to marry him, while he was preparing to murder her
........
and she was busy with their wedding up to the moment when he ended her life.


fftobed:

ZaZara - You summed up my overwhelming feeling on this case, with your powerful post! The cruelty of Helen's murder by the man who professed to love her is just breathtaking. I hope that evil excuse for a man is destined to die in prison. I keep wondering - was there a moment of realisation, however brief, when Helen knew the truth? Questions like this must haunt her loved ones, it is too awful to contemplate their pain. IS has given them a life sentence of suffering - murderers create many victims.

 

[Squamous]

Thanks for the info about the witnesses, Cherwell. So if both sides try to call a witness, does the witness choose a side? Can they choose not to testify or is it effectively a summons?

I can't work out IS at all. I find it so frustrating that we will (presumably) never know the truth and the full story, and I have lots of questions about his wife's death too (which others have rightly said that he is not on trial for).

 

[neteditor]

Squamous

Thanks for the info about the witnesses, Cherwell. So if both sides try to call a witness, does the witness choose a side? Can they choose not to testify or is it effectively a summons?​

The Prosecution puts the case together and calls all the witnesses that they perceive will support the facts in the case. The witnesses do not have any choice. If you are called to be a witness and do not turn up you can be charged with contempt of court. (A defendant's spouse can only be forced to give evidence in limited cases).

As a matter of interest, the reason the defence always goes last is so the jury has the defence's case uppermost in their minds, and is a fairer trial because of it.

*********

On another note, I haven't seen this concept mentioned as yet but I may have missed it as I have been forced to skim a lot of posts in the evenings while tired some nights (got flu as well ugh).

What if HB discovered IS was drugging her on that fateful Monday?​

 

[Squamous]

Thanks for that neteditor I understand.

I personally can't think that Helen was on her guard on the day she died. I know her body had been there a while but it was well preserved and the pathologist found no significant injuries at all (nor any post-mortem injuries that would indicate how she was transported, either).

 

[LozDa]

Continuing the discussion regarding who the sons were witnesses for:

If both the defence and the prosecution have the same interest in a witness, how is it decided if they are brought in as a witness for the prosecution or for the defence? Does the prosecution have priority?

I'm just wondering how it was decided that the sons would be witnesses brought in by the prosecution, rather than than defence?

What I assume is that the prosecution choose their witnesses and they are cross examined by the defence. Then, when the prosecution are done, the defence compiles their witnesses, excluding those they have already cross examined from the prosecution's case. Is that correct?

Or are all witnesses decided on in totality pre-trial? In which case, how is that arranged between the two sides...?

 

[Interested Bystander]

The Prosecution puts the case together and calls all the witnesses that they perceive will support the facts in the case. The witnesses do not have any choice. If you are called to be a witness and do not turn up you can be charged with contempt of court. (A defendant's spouse can only be forced to give evidence in limited cases).

As a matter of interest, the reason the defence always goes last is so the jury has the defence's case uppermost in their minds, and is a fairer trial because of it.

*********

On another note, I haven't seen this concept mentioned as yet but I may have missed it as I have been forced to skim a lot of posts in the evenings while tired some nights (got flu as well ugh).

What if HB discovered IS was drugging her on that fateful Monday?​

Good point and very likely IMO. That would have been devastating for HB as I think she was more into the idea of the "forever after" story than IS. Like the prosecution (and probably most of us) I think he was after the money.​

 

[Interested Bystander]

Here is a link for the court proceedings today. Jury being called in.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-more-12512651