Rebecca Watts

There is a photograph of the stepbrother and girlfriend on McCann twitter.

Thanks will try and find it ,does he look like that one in the video. Photo of Shauna Phillips in press but not him yet.

Markus 2 wrote:Thanks will try and find it ,does he look like that one in the video.

It seems to have been taken down now it was there at 5am this morning. It may be him, although in the photograph he was dressed in a (wait for it) prison outfit complete with cap and she was dressed in a saucy xmas outfit. Someone must have taken the photograph over the festive period.

Yes I saw that too.

If it's him, I don't think he's the person on the video with Rebecca's dad.

Guinea Pig wrote:Yes I saw that too.

If it's him, I don't think he's the person on the video with Rebecca's dad.

Yes I think you are correct.

Yeah I saw that rather ironic picture first thing this morning also.

Can't see it now so must of been wiped as you say.

A different person to the lad in the video. I think.

Also not the same forename as her brother.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2977132/Police-announce-significant-development-hunt-missing-Becky-Watts-16-continue-question-pair-suspicion-murder.html

The photo is here on this link.

It won't take much detective work to realise who are the other five people in their 20s who have been arrested.

Just read on twitter Police have been given another 24 hours to question the five suspects that were arrested yesterday. Also Police have taken away a Land Rover that was parked in Rebecca's fathers driveway.

The Crown Prosecution Service have authorised charges on Nathan Matthews and Shauna Hoare:
"Having carried out a detailed review of the evidence gathered by Avon and Somerset Police, my conclusion is that there is sufficient evidence to charge Nathan Matthews with the murder of Becky Watts.

"I have also concluded that there is sufficient evidence to charge Shauna Hoare with attempting to pervert the course of justice.

"I have therefore today authorised Avon and Somerset police to charge them with these offences and they will appear before Bristol Magistrates' Court tomorrow morning.

"Proceedings are now ongoing and the defendants have the right to a fair trial. It is very important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings."

– CPS SPOKESPERSON

Andrew wrote:The Crown Prosecution Service have authorised charges on Nathan Matthews and Shauna Hoare:
"Having carried out a detailed review of the evidence gathered by Avon and Somerset Police, my conclusion is that there is sufficient evidence to charge Nathan Matthews with the murder of Becky Watts.

"I have also concluded that there is sufficient evidence to charge Shauna Hoare with attempting to pervert the course of justice.

"I have therefore today authorised Avon and Somerset police to charge them with these offences and they will appear before Bristol Magistrates' Court tomorrow morning.

"Proceedings are now ongoing and the defendants have the right to a fair trial. It is very important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings."

– CPS SPOKESPERSON

Thanks Andrew, you are doing a great job of keeping us up to date.

Could everyone now please note the last paragraph above, we must now be very careful what we say here as there have now been charges. I hope everyone will understand and not write anything which could prejudice proceedings.

candyfloss, when it says "commentary" above could you explain exactly what they mean?

I can remember a lot of forum discussions about the man charged with April Jones' murder.
They were mostly discussions on what was being reported in the press, chewing the fat only, maybe opinions on his past, the type of person he was.

I thought that was acceptable, but could that influence a trial?
I doubt there will be much info to discuss anyway, but I was wondering.

Strictly speaking, the moment someone is charged, the matter becomes sub judice and no public discussion is allowed until the reporting of the court case begins, but even that must be done in a formal and factual manner (note: tabloids usually ignore this and seem to get away with it)

Reading this link: http://www.out-law.com/page-9742 And sub judice starts at the point of arrest? In this case Saturday. How do we explain the Sun naming them and the Mail and Mirror articles that followed?

Chop Suey on Toast wrote:Strictly speaking, the moment someone is charged, the matter becomes sub judice and no public discussion is allowed until the reporting of the court case begins, but even that must be done in a formal and factual manner (note: tabloids usually ignore this and seem to get away with it)

So best to say nothing CSoT ? You know how it is, the press start investigating his past, his schooldays, his relationships
and so on and 'forumites' comment on this.

No comment then. Thank you for your post.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:Reading this link: http://www.out-law.com/page-9742 And sub judice starts at the point of arrest? In this case Saturday. How do we explain the Sun naming them and the Mail and Mirror articles that followed?

I didn't know that. At the point of arrest - yet one can be arrested and then released with no charge?

I can see that as a great protection for innocent, uninvolved people, but always thought being charged was what brought a whole new situation into play.

One can never forget the villification of Christopher Jeffries.

At the point of arrest the matter can still be discussed but great care must be taken not to libel anyone (eg Jefferies). But after the charge has been made, the media should stick to the bare facts - who has been charged, and what for. No trimmings. In recent years the media has become very lax re this

The safest thing is to say nothing because you could be in contempt of court. I can only assume that some newspapers get away with much more than they should because it's bound to be discussed on social media to some extent anyway, but one day they will overstep the mark and find themselves in court too. Same goes for the forums/Twitter etc

On a different matter, re the Adam Johnson story, some branches of social media have been in breach of the law during the last 48 hours by apparently showing photographs of the girl allegedly concerned. However 99 per cent of them have got the wrong photo - it's a picture of his girlfriend. This in turn has provoked much ill-informed discussion. Oh dear, but much of the stuff written on social media about that case has been both idiotic and potentially libellous

Just don't believe everything you see on the internet, and respect the law - it's there for a reason

I have no problem with the law CSoT, but I do have a problem with Avon and Somerset police threatening individuals on Facebook about possibly being prosecuted and yet say nothing about MSM.

Pisses me right off.

In my opinion much of the modern-day MSM push well beyond the traditional (and acceptable) limits on this issue. They will make the case that they don't want to be at a disadvantage compared to social media, but I don't know how they are allowed to get away with it because the guidelines are very clear

Anyway, back to the case..

This Mirror article talks about an alleged text sent by Becky the day before (18th Feb) and I think it could hold the key to this case if it was sent. Don't really want to post my thoughts just yet, though.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rebecca-watts-missing-friends-claim-5237904

Police have refused to comment on allegations that missing schoolgirl Becky Watts sent a text message stating "who would miss me if I disappeared" the day before she was last seen.

Friends had said the 16-year-old had sent the text before she disappeared.

Asked to confirm whether the text was being considered, Detective Inspector Richard Ocone, leading the investigation, said: "I can't comment on that at this stage."

Do you get the feeling there is a lot more to this case then just those arrests. Latest from the Mirror. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/becky-watts-stepbrother-nathan-matthews-5276234

The wife seemed to have gone down hill in two years.  Quote It was just 19 months ago that Nathan Matthews laughed and joked with Becky Watts as her dad got married to his mother.

Rachael Scott, of the Crown Prosecution Service, said: “Proceedings are now ongoing and the defendants have the right to a fair trial. It is very important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/04/becky-watts-stepbrother-charged-murder-nathan-matthews