GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #4

[icemaiden65]

I bow to your superior wit Cottonweaver but I do wonder if implicating Boris in some way could be part of his defence? As in:

"Boris had developed a terrible online bingo habit, I worship that dog so I deleted the browsing history to protect him. He'd started slipping out to a seedy casino after hours, he got there on a minature scooter, disguised in a tiny burka. He developed a taste for jagerbombs and ended up owing gambling debts to a couple of gangsters called Nick and Joe. The little fella begged me not to tell anyone and I agreed (cos I loved him so much), on condition he get help - I researched gamblers anonymous online and obviously I had to delete that to respect his confidentiality... One night Nick and Joe followed him home from the casino, the ****s burst in and threatened me and Helen (after I'd told them to remove their shoes).

I know it sounds like a shaggy dog story Your Honour but I swear every word is true" (gets out concealed Jif lemon again and double squirts eyes).

So how do I now hop into bed shaking with laughter and not have to explain myself? And why 2 trips to the tip - don't tell me, to wave a second fond farewell to the duvet/quilt/ bed cover!

 

[DollyDiamond]

Hello everyone. Does the trial continue tommrow? Id like to head down if so. I checked on courtserve and it says:

The Crown Court
at St Albans
Daily List for Tuesday 7 February 2017 at BRICKET ROAD ST ALBANS
Court 1 - sitting at 10:00 AM
HIS HONOUR JUDGE BRIGHT QC
For Mention
U20170046 PRODUCTION ORDER (DM)
Link to Hatfield Police Station
Trial (Part Heard)
T20167121 STEWART Ian
41E12190616
PAPER FILE


What does link to Hatfield mean? A video link?

OMG - Could IS be giving evidence by video link from a police station? That would be just like the despicable coward!

 

[Joely 123]

Joely ... is this it ?

[video=youtube;jM0uYIw3m7o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM0uYIw3m7o[/video]

Oh Alyce - thank you .. Helen loved this and shared it as her favourite .. you are brilliant! xx

 

[Matthewitt]

Oh I guess that might be it. Can I still attend court to watch the video evidence?

 

[icemaiden65]

OMG - Could IS be giving evidence by video link from a police station? That would be just like the despicable coward!

It's possible, Hatfield was the first 'video court' in the region where video evidence etc. from defendants is streamed into a court room from the police station via a secure link. If that's the case it wouldn't surprise me - the sniveling, evil coward.

 

[Tortoise]

Oh I guess that might be it. Can I still attend court to watch the video evidence?

Yes, but rest assured he won't be giving evidence by video. He'll be in the witness box.

I think that link is something to do with summoning police attendance at the trial. Or, there might be a final police witness giving evidence by video link before the crown closes its case.

 

[DollyDiamond]

It's possible, Hatfield was the first 'video court' in the region where video evidence etc. from defendants is streamed into a court room from the police station via a secure link. If that's the case it wouldn't surprise me - the sniveling, evil coward.

Yep, that would figure wouldn't it? He'll be citing medical reasons for it - more manipulation! I hope the jury take note, this is not the conduct of an innocent man desperate to take the stand and clear his name!

 

[pinklilies]

Bet he was detached, all that money 'wasted' on a ring! I've not caught up (7 hours behind [emoji30]) I can imagine the more I read, the more this ring never materialises....

You're absolutely right pinklillies - IS was 'unwell' on the day that he was to visit Sophia Hersh - Jeweller - and, according to her statement, he didn't respond to her email to Helen of 21st April - or have the decency, nor the confidence to be in touch with Sophia H. IF he thought Helen was missing - wouldn't he have wished to have the ring SHE chose waiting for her on her return. (Piglets flying across the sky).

So true Joely, if he loved her and thought she was just having a break because everything had got on top of her like he'd have everyone else believe, then he'd have made sure he had that ring ready and waiting for her when she walked back through the door.
And feigning illness on the day they were to go back, well, he never had any intentions of going back.

 

[DollyDiamond]

Yes, but rest assured he won't be giving evidence by video. He'll be in the witness box.

I think that link is something to do with summoning police attendance at the trial. Or, there might be a final police witness giving evidence by video link before the crown closes its case.

Oh phew that's a relief, thanks! I was worried that it might be an accused man's 'human right' to give evidence via video link or some such nonsense. Glad the will have to lumber to the stand and face his interrogation in person. I'd say like a cornered rat, but that's an insult to rodents.

 

[Tortoise]

I think we can expect a good turn out from the press. That seems to be the trend, they don't bother after the first few days and then come back for the defendant's evidence.

 

[DollyDiamond]

I think we can expect a good turn out from the press. That seems to be the trend, they don't bother after the first few days and then come back for the defendant's evidence.

I pray it's a packed courtroom with loads of press & public throughout IS' evidence - I think that will really pile the pressure on. That bar steward needs to be sweaty and flustered under questioning and get caught out in his lies. Stupid people are too stupid to know they're stupid and I reckon he will quickly find himself out of his depth. I have to say, from the evidence so far I'm not convinced Helen and Boris weren't the most intelligent members of that household!

 

[Mayfly.Aus]

Hard to jump in on conversations with my time difference, but thanks again for all the postings.

The link to helen's blog prompted me to read some entries again. Reading this one prompted a few thoughts:- http://planetgrief.com/2012/02/02/facebook-friend-or-foe/

Firstly, in the comments Helen refers to how sheltered she was in her marriage to JS, both emotionally and practically - "I was so looked after, so cherished that it did make me feel vulnerable both on a practical and emotional level."
For me, this is perhaps some explanation as to why a smart woman with good observation skills about people was so trusting and didn't see through IS. Since she was 23 or so, she'd never had experience of being with a man who didn't cherish her - it wouldn't take so much effort from IS for her to believe he was the same, when it was what she was used to... It just struck me again how predatory it was of IS to jump in with her when he did - she didn't even get to date anyone else! and realise not every guy would love her like JS... it's one thing to know something logically (which I'm sure she did), but much harder to know something emotionally when you haven't experienced it.

Secondly, and on the same theme, reading this post as a window onto her head-space at that time, I can't believe IS proposed marriage soon after (if I'm getting my dates right, ie he proposed around the one-year anniversary of JS's death), even if how she felt when writing this blog was a moment in time, rather than how she was on a daily basis, it's so obvious she was in no fit mental state to make a decision about how she wanted to spend the rest of her life. We know IS read these posts as he comments on them. Surely a normal man (without the narcissists' childlike impulsiveness or the sociopath's deliberate plan, whichever it was) would see that about her, and give her more time before proposing - if not for compassionate reasons, so he could be sure that her saying 'yes' to him was a real decision...

 

[DollyDiamond]

Hard to jump in on conversations with my time difference, but thanks again for all the postings.

The link to helen's blog prompted me to read some entries again. Reading this one prompted a few thoughts:- http://planetgrief.com/2012/02/02/facebook-friend-or-foe/

Firstly, in the comments Helen refers to how sheltered she was in her marriage to JS, both emotionally and practically - "I was so looked after, so cherished that it did make me feel vulnerable both on a practical and emotional level."
For me, this is perhaps some explanation as to why a smart woman with good observation skills about people was so trusting and didn't see through IS. Since she was 23 or so, she'd never had experience of being with a man who didn't cherish her - it wouldn't take so much effort from IS for her to believe he was the same, when it was what she was used to... It just struck me again how predatory it was of IS to jump in with her when he did - she didn't even get to date anyone else! and realise not every guy would love her like JS... it's one thing to know something logically (which I'm sure she did), but much harder to know something emotionally when you haven't experienced it.

Secondly, and on the same theme, reading this post as a window onto her head-space at that time, I can't believe IS proposed marriage soon after (if I'm getting my dates right, ie he proposed around the one-year anniversary of JS's death), even if how she felt when writing this blog was a moment in time, rather than how she was on a daily basis, it's so obvious she was in no fit mental state to make a decision about how she wanted to spend the rest of her life. We know IS read these posts as he comments on them. Surely a normal man (without the narcissists' childlike impulsiveness or the sociopath's deliberate plan, whichever it was) would see that about her, and give her more time before proposing - if not for compassionate reasons, so he could be sure that her saying 'yes' to him was a real decision...

Thanks for a fascinating post Mayfly, and the link to that very revealing blog entry. You hit the nail on the head, when Helen states she was ...'so looked after, so cherished' in her marriage to JS, it gives us a huge clue as to her vulnerability and neediness when IS targeted her (and I will always believe he is a ruthless predator who picked her out as his victim from Day One).

I think you are right, Helen was probably emotionally inexperienced, she had only known the love of a man who (for all his faults) was clearly totally devoted to her and genuinely in love with her. She had been secure in his love from her early twenties. So when IS promised her the same devotion she assumed, as the human heart tends to do, that he too was genuine and offering her the real thing. How could she have known he was a wolf in sheep's clothing?

I am struck again reading her blog by her breathtaking honesty. She was so brave, open and real. She lived her life with her heart on her sleeve, straight down the line, a person who would only ever tell a white lie to save someone's feelings, and looked you in the eye when she spoke to you. Someone who was kind, empathetic and had integrity running through her like a stick of rock. She thought IS was like her: He was the polar opposite.

Helen's blog entries on incredibly personal subjects, (which IS was privy to), shows she sadly left herself wide open to manipulation and he exploited that literally without mercy. But I feel, her Planet Grief blog and book are a wonderful legacy that reveal to us what a special human being Helen was, and allow those of us who never met her to feel we know her pretty well and admire and like her hugely. Helen's writing lives on and she will continue to inspire affection and positively touch the lives of so many people who will never meet her. I reckon that's pretty amazing and an achievement of which her loved ones can be justly proud.

 

[Duchy]

I was only there for the first three witnesses today. I did not notice any discernable difference in IS demeanor. As I've said previously he is a lot less fat now especially in the face than he was in the photos. Bizarrely he also looks less grey-haired although I'm not sure why that was. He was clean shaven today. He was eagerly looking over to the public gallery at both of his sons who were in attendance (thus far I've only seen Jamie the younger attend, and even then only on two days). Most of the time IS just stays quiet in the dock. He makes notes, cautiously smiles when the opportunity presents itself (usually incidentally during the breaks, when talking to either the prison guard or his counsel). When I mentioned to one of Helen's family that I couldn't believe IS was putting them through a trial, the family member said that they just didn't think that IS had the same empathy as normal people; and probably also thought that he might get away with it.

I'll be going again tomorrow and I hope that we finally get to hear IS account for himself, rather than a string of nurses talking about "how they found IS" and what his demeanour was like etc.

Thank you for your input Litup. It certainly helps us have a different perspective of court goings on. We were so excited and impressed with the psych. nurse and psychiatrist lol. Gosh, wish I could be there.

 

[Duchy]

I bow to your superior wit Cottonweaver but I do wonder if implicating Boris in some way could be part of his defence? As in:

"Boris had developed a terrible online bingo habit, I worship that dog so I deleted the browsing history to protect him. He'd started slipping out to a seedy casino after hours, he got there on a minature scooter, disguised in a tiny burka. He developed a taste for jagerbombs and ended up owing gambling debts to a couple of gangsters called Nick and Joe. The little fella begged me not to tell anyone and I agreed (cos I loved him so much), on condition he get help - I researched gamblers anonymous online and obviously I had to delete that to respect his confidentiality... One night Nick and Joe followed him home from the casino, the ****s burst in and threatened me and Helen (after I'd told them to remove their shoes).

I know it sounds like a shaggy dog story Your Honour but I swear every word is true" (gets out concealed Jif lemon again and double squirts eyes).

LOL oh my goodness. HA HA.

 

[Duchy]

Ah you two are wasted in here. Thanks for the laughs cotton and dolly.

Here here. So funny!

 

[MillyM]

Not related, but watched this earlier tonight. Very interesting to see the solicitor putting her defense together, and how they were planning to handle the prosecution. You saw her from start to trial, no courtroom but left you wondering how jury would go. Worth catching if you can.

The Accused viewers blast a mother found GUILTY of child cruelty http://dailym.ai/2kkFP14


GT Stewart (@GTStewartSols) tweeted at 5:43 PM on Mon, Feb 06, 2017:
See the Criminal Justice System through the eyes of a defendant & their lawyers-we're featured in The Accused,tonight @ 9pm on @channel5_tv

GT Stewart (@GTStewartSols) tweeted at 11:17 PM on Mon, Feb 06, 2017:
Hope everyone enjoyed the insight into the criminal justice system and don't miss the next episode of #theaccused

 

[MillyM]

"Ian Stewart, the man accused of killing his partner, author Helen Bailey, will be giving evidence at St Albans Crown Court tomorrow."

http://m.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk...nce-tomorrow/story-30115644-detail/story.html

 

[MillyM]

^ that's now today of course.

 

[Powertool]

The witnesses today have all provided a patchwork of clues pointing strongly to IS' guilt. For me it has also answered a lingering question about why he was so keen to leave the scene of the crime/cess pit unguarded, and hop on a plane to Spain - he had a crucial job to do dumping incriminating phones and perhaps other evidence, in Palma (a shame it doesn't seem he was shadowed by plain clothes police over there, it could have been fruitful).

But I have to be honest and say I am disappointed we didn't get a big fat smoking gun today - ideally a computer mention of cess pits. That would have been 100% damning. Yes he wiped computer history, looked at stuff online about power of attorney, wasn't too interested in engagement rings and talked about Helen and Boris in the past tense. But for me, none of it was a big AH HA! moment. Sorry to be negative - at the end of the day it is crystal clear he's guilty, just wish something really strong and unequivocal had been revealed against him today.

As for the family photo of him from (ten?) years ago. He has definitely improved with age, the grey hair and beard have softened him. In this photo I think you see more of the real man - a big, fat self centred, entitled baby, posing front and centre before his pretty, sweet looking wife and healthy sons. A man who has got what he wanted without too much effort throughout his life (he receives £24,000 pa in his mid-fifties without doing a day's work!) An only child, he never had to compromise with siblings, didn't date too much at school (according to a former fellow pupil), was lucky enough to meet an attractive, eligible woman and gain the status and respectability of marriage and children. He has a huge and quite unrealistic sense of entitlement - so extreme, he will kill someone who stands between him and the lifestyle he craves.

When he is sentenced to life in prison I hope society will take advantage of his incarceration to study him like an animal in a zoo. Psychiatrists should study dangerous men like IS If we are to pay for his bed and board for the next however many decades, let's get our money's worth. Let's find out how the IS's of this world are created. Maybe lessons can be learned? In my view it's a mistake to just shrug our shoulders when we hear of another ruthless killer like him, as if we accept its inevitable, chuck them in jail and forget about them. That's a wasted opportunity in my view. Let's make them earn their bed and board.

And a shame LE didn't follow him to Luton Airport and search his luggage in the baggage hall after he'd checked it in, and whilst there, stood behind the x-ray machine operator when his carry on luggage traveled down the security machine conveyor belt.