Becky Watts murder

[Elendon]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34790804

It seems to me that Matthews was found guilty of murdering Becky and Hoare was found guilty of manslaughter.

Hoare was not present at the killing by all accounts (the killing was within the woods, whilst Hoare was still back at Becky's family home. She was guilty of covering up the murder, but she said that she was controlled by Matthews, and that part of her evidence is also awful.

And what society says that they were a a couple by all accounts when she was 14/15 when they met and he was 22?

Why should women be associated as a murderer just because they happen to be in a dysfunctional relationship with a man who murders?

She not only conspired with him to kidnap her but then assisted him in dismembering and hiding her body.

I would say that's reason enough to be considered an associate to a murderer regardless of whether he was controlling her or not.

Have you read the article? What you are writing and what the article says are completely different.

She was involved in the murder (indirectly perhaps?), dismemberment and cover - up. She deserves to be convicted.

Becky was killed in the family home not in woods. Shauna has been convicted because no one believes that she didn't know what was going on as she was in the house when it happened, in the house she shared with Matthews when he dismembered her body, with him when he bought all kinds of paraphernalia used to wrap the parts of her body and her name was on the order for the stun guns.

It's not really known which of the pair was most abusive, I don't think. Rose West was considered to be the submissive wife for quite some time wasn't she?

Sillybilly said it all, really.

We only get snippets the press chose to share, the police collect evidence, the barrister presents, the jury decide. Nobody other than three people know what went on and one I hope is resting in peace.

She looked pregnant and they had a toddler.

Doesn't sound like you know anything about the case.

She was there in the house when Becky was killed. They had swapped text messages in the run-up to the murder about kidnapping teenage girls which she claimed was just 'banter' to keep him happy.

While Becky was lying dead in the bathroom in their house she looked up the Frozen parody 'Do you want to hide a body' on her phone which she claimed was just an unfortunate coincidence.

They both have unfortunate childhoods - but so do lots of other people. Doesn't excuse kidnap, murder, dismemberment.

So you would be all happy to let your 14/15 year old have a relationship with a 22 year old man?

It does look like she was vulnerable and groomed. As I said previously we will never know, we just go on information given to us.

she's not a victim. Whether she was in a relationship with him at fifteen is irrelevant, she's not fifteen any more, she's an adult capable of making her own decisions and knowing right from wrong.

Sick of women being excused of all manner of awful crimes on the basis they must have been victims and under the control of the evil man. poor loves.

The jury took all the evidence into consideration, which is why she was convicted with manslaughter.

Matthews murdered her, bought the circular saw. Hoare looks at the cameras whilst being questioned, Matthews bows his head. But surely we must consider the wider implications here.

Hoare is going to be seen as just a 'monster' as Matthews. Why would this be so?

The house was described as filthy but it was due to Matthews' obsessive hoarding. He was the one who cleaned the bathroom.

You'd have to be a 'monster' (hate that choice of word) to be party to that.

Sick of women being excused of all manner of awful crimes on the basis they must have been victims and under the control of the evil man. poor loves.

Care to elucidate, with actual evidence? That list better be a long one!

Are you supportive of poor downtrodden Myra Hindley and Rose West too op? The men in their lives were abusers.
Face it, women can be as despicable as men.

Hoare looks at the cameras whilst being questioned, Matthews bows his head. But surely we must consider the wider implications here.

What on earth is the relevance of that?

I'm a lawyer - albeit not a criminal one - if there was any mileage in arguing in mitigation that SH was or had been abused, then her solicitors would have done that

Problem for her is that her defence always was that she didn't have a clue what was going on so her relationship with her partner was irrelevant

she was convicted of manslaughter on the basis she wasn't actually there at the time of the murder. So essentially an accessory.

If you compare her to say, maxine Carr, she wasn't there either but merely perverted the course of justice by providing a false alibi whereas Hoar was texting him about murder and hiding bodies and the equipment to dismember the body was bought in her name.

So yep, I am quite comfortable with the idea of her being a monster. Evil bitch, hope they both wrot in hell.

How is there a legal basis for convicting someone of manslaughter when she wasn't actually there during the murder? (It would be different if she had hired the murderer, but that is obviously not the case)
Sure, she should be charged with perverting the course of justice, but manslaughter? That seems a bit off.

That reminds me of the problem that women's prisons frequently lack proper therapy opportunities. Most female offenders are in need of therapy, because of trauma, drug problems, etc., but because there are so few of them, all the resocialisation efforts concentrate on males.

So, we have a woman who got into a relationship with a murderer at age 15 and might not get decent therapy in prison.

Oh for goodness sake. This argument that women are poor vulnerable easily manipulated snowflakes is wearing thin. Either, as adults, we are equal to men and have equal responsibility to behave as normal human beings or we are not. Stop making excuses for her.

Of course the jury took into account Hoares relationship with Matthews. Her defence said she had to drop out of college because Matthews was attending classes with her and had accused her of talking to other men.

Regarding Hindley and West. Their men were abusers and murderers. Both men admitted to being so.

Women can be as 'despicable' as men. But that doesn't mean they go around as serial killers - 99% men or murdering their partners, family members.

presumably if they planned the murder together and she wasn't there but he carried it out then she would be guilty of manslaughter. The jury have the evidence and didn't seem to need much time to reach a verdict, so presumably the conviction has a basis.

grimbletart, maybe you haven't noticed, but the promised equal rights aren't there yet, so ... we get to have both: We get to be oppressed AND judged as harshly as men.

Isn't that just perfect and shows just how strong women are?

wannaBe: Presuming that people are behaving in a sensible way is dangerous. Because often, they don't.

If we assume that women can be just as despicable as men, then there still is the question what a woman who is in a relationship with a man gets out of this man murdering a girl to satisfy his perverted sexual fantasies (whatever they may be, I don't really want to know).

People who murder usually have a motive. And if this woman actively participated in murdering a girl just to keep her man happy, then I strongly doubt that she is this strong, independent woman that grimbletart wants her to be.

"presumably if they planned the murder together and she wasn't there but he carried it out then she would be guilty of manslaughter"

If they'd planned the murder together then she'd be guilty of murder. The manslaughter verdict suggests that the jury believed that Hoare was a co-conspirator in the kidnapping but hadn't intended murder.

WannaBe It was obvious that Matthews killed Becky but he insisted it go to trial because he pleaded not guilty, despite his confessions.

I would have given him 5 minutes top as a member of the jury. Guilty of murder as charged.

well, fred and rose west murdered people together, as did myra Hindley and Ian Brady, and it was Brady who ended up in broadmoor while she went to prison.

There are many, many couples who live out sexual fantasies of varying degrees, and as long as they're legal we uphold their right to do so on the basis they are adults and capable of consent.

But when those fantasies end up in crimes such as the one above, all the blame is placed on the man while the woman is pitied and assumed to be a poor innocent victim, incapable of her own thoughts because she was being controlled by the man.

If women are such weak individuals then maybe we're not ready for women's equality yet then eh? no, thought not.