The Moment Kessinger Finds out about the Pregnancy: Do you believe Lifetime Movie’s Dramatization?

52.25 into the Lifetime movie we see a dramatization of Kessinger finding out Shan’ann was pregnant. After cutting to a close-up of Kessinger’s eyes peering at a computer screen we hear a voiceover from a reporter saying:

“Shan’ann is fifteen weeks pregnant. I know this may be a tough question, but did you guys get into an argument before she left or anything…?”

Watts answers:

“It wasn’t like an argument or anything. It was like an emotioonal conversation…”

The actual moment a similar question was asked was at the very end of the Sermon on the Porch, basically 15 minutes into it.

Listen a clip of that moment here.

In the dramatization Kessinger is shocked. Scene cuts to her calling Watts that night and him saying the child isn’t his.

A few obvious problems with this scene:

1. Kessinger was likely at work when the news footage first aired, whereas the zoomed-in scene suggests she’s at home. Although the TCRS position was initially that Kessinger had to have known about the pregnancy all along, this position changed in late 2018 to one where she found out about the pregnancy on Monday afternoon or Monday night [when Watts told her the baby was not his], or very early on Tuesday morning after additional internet searches. Fullscreen capture 20200201 190516

2. More likely Kessinger found out online about the pregnancy, rather than from television footage or from Watts. It’s unlikely the clip where a baby is mentioned actually even made it into the news reporting. It’s an open question whether Kessinger ultimately found out the truth about the pregnancy via Facebook or on the news. One good reason to believe she didn’t find out via Facebook is because Kessinger herself wasn’t on Facebook. The first report of Shan’ann missing – and that she was pregnant – was this one on Facebook.

Fullscreen capture 20200201 191141

The first online news report was from KDVR[Fox Denver] published late Tuesday morning:

Fullscreen capture 20200201 191705

This timeline corresponds to Kessinger’s marathon internet search starting at Tuesday noon for news.Fullscreen capture 20200201 185607

3. In a recent documentary, Agent Tammy Lee said law enforcement watched the Sermon on the Porch at approximately 17:00 on Tuesday afternoon. It’s unlikely Kessinger – who was at the center of things – would have found out was going on when everyone else did, including law enforcement.

4. Kessinger was already actively Googling for news about Shan’ann starting at midnight  on Monday and – as mentioned – around noon on Tuesday. It’s likely during these searches she would have discovered news of the “pregnant mother” missing as early as Monday afternoon or as late as Tuesday at around noon.

Fullscreen capture 20200201 185554

Clearly by 17:00 on Tuesday the penny began to drop for Kessinger that Shan’ann and the kids were in real trouble, and if they were, she was because she suspected – rightly – that Watts was involved, and why he was involved.

Fullscreen capture 20200201 185617

Fullscreen capture 20200201 185617-001

The moment dramatized of the adulterers discussing the pregnancy likely didn’t happen on Ceecee’s bed, nor the bed in the basement, but the bed in the main bedroom. We know that by Tuesday Watts had put new sheets and pillow covers on the bed in the main bedroom, and also laid on that bed.

The conversation with Kessinger on the matress probably took place late on Monday night, and lasted 51 minutes, but there was also a second call at 02:07 early on Tuesday morning.Fullscreen capture 20200201 192916

Six of the Darker Aspects the Lifetime Movie Got Right  – Patreon

Another YouTuber implicating Nichol Kessinger

At 14:34 in the clip below the creator says, “This is a decision I will leave in your hands.” A few seconds later she’s adamant that her channel is all about the facts. The video’s title image is WOW FINALLY PROOF.

Proof of what?

She never explicitly says it, but by comparing Nichol Kessinger walking in and out of the interrogation cubicle to the indistinct figure walking out onto the driveway, the creator is trying to “prove” that Nichol Kessinger was a physical accessory to the Watts Family Murders not after, but during the fact.

Fullscreen capture 20200119 083048

During the clip of Kessinger, the background music is ominous and hollow, like something from a horror movie.

It’s quite clever. Kessinger is wearing jeans and white shoes. In the first clip of the figure walking out, Chris Watts is also wearing jeans and what appear to be white sneakers. That seems to be enough “facts” for this creator. It doesn’t seem to matter how skinny Kessinger’s legs and butt are compared to the figure walking out. It doesn’t seem to matter that you never see Watts and “Kessinger” at the same time on the driveway, nor do you see her long hair.

The ruler “measuring” the length of the respective figures is even more ridiculous. In one image the figure is closer to the camera and the trees than the other, an obvious fact based on the changing angle of the roof of the vehicle in the foreground relative to the figure behind it.  One image is zoomed in slightly more than the other.

The same creator emphasizes the “ping” off a tower in Frederick at 06:16 [about 30 minutes after Watts left his home on Saratoga Trail] as absolute evidence of Kessinger being an accessory. She was there! A single ping 30 minutes too late on a tower that she passes on the way to work is more than sufficient evidence for this creator.

What this creator and others seem to miss, is if Kessinger was an accessory [and she wasn’t] then she had to be very committed to Chris Watts. She had to be so committed to the relationship, according to these crazies, she helped him commit triple murder. But then a day later she had zero commitment to him.

Why would she be committed enough to commit murder, but show absolutely no interest in trying to help cover it up, to protect him and herself? Didn’t she just murder out of love? Why does she call the cops? Why does she talk to them for hours? What does she come back, again and again, to talk to them?

For the most part, we don’t see Kessinger in tears. We don’t see her distraught over her boyfriend having been caught, or passionately trying to defend him. Instead she appears resigned and deflated, betrayed and embarrassed.

The creator referred to above also provides what she describes as “scientific advice” on how to use Thrive/Le-Vel, and shares her “My Thrive Experience.” She models herself wearing Thrive patches and refers to the spiel of women needing to be at their best for their families and children. Underneath her video she asks those interested to message her on Facebook so she can mail samples.

Fullscreen capture 20200119 084204

The reason the Thrive promos are relevant is it goes to the standards, and motives, of the creator when it comes to truth telling. MLM companies, their products and their promoters, are hardly credible. They’re notoriously tricksy and iffy on the facts. If you want to be educated by the facts on MLMs, watch John Oliver’s take on it which has been viewed almost 20 million times and liked more than 230 000 times.

But let’s get back to this creator trying to implicate Kessinger in a triple homicide.

Finding a single fragment and turning that into a scenario is dangerous.

In the Frazee case we know his mistress was an accessory because she admitted it, and so through the Frazee case we see an example of what that looks and feels like. Krystal Kenney made a plea deal, testified in court and Patrick Frazee was convicted as a result. Kenney still has to stand trial for tampering with evidence. Besides that there is a heck of a lot of evidence proving Kenney was not only with Frazee, but moving with Kelsey Berreth’s handset after her death. She was also present when Berreth’s body was burned. Kenney also destroyed other evidence of Berreth’s, and participated in staging messages to Berreth’s employer. Kenney never called the cops, and when the cops came knocking, she initially lied, then got a lawyer, then signed a plea deal, and she’s still facing charges.

The phone records between Frazee and his mistress show a huge uptick in texts and calls back and forth, and synchronised, movement right around the time of the murder. Kenney also made several trips alone to Berreth’s home. Kenney took off work to clean up the crime scene. CCTV footage also confirms where she was, and where Frazee was, at particular times. None of this is present in the Watts case.

The main difference between Kenney and Kessinger was the length of time Kenney had been involved with Frazee – about 12 years. In that time she fell pregnant with his child, had an abortion and left her husband to be with Frazee. In Kessinger’s case, none of that happened. In a relationship of less than six weeks, where Kessinger wasn’t even aware of the pregnancy, there wasn’t time to develop that kind of I-will-kill-for-you commitment. As soon as Kessinger found out Watts was a diabolical douchebag, which was virtually immediately, she dropped him and she’s never been in contact since.

But these YouTubers don’t care about that. They care about taking a fragment of information and weaving it into a single, titillating scenario, and calling that facts. These aren’t facts, they’re fuzzy images and fuzzy logic, just as MLMs and their dodgy potions and overpriced powders shouldn’t be trusted. Creators like this one, who simply won’t stop trying to implicate Nichol Kessinger as a murder accessory, ought to have the videos that do taken down, and if they persist prosecuted for malicious defamation.

Chris Watts may have met his mistress at a Health & Safety Meeting

It’s just a hunch, but since Kessinger was employed in the capacity of Safety contractor, and Anadarko had a roster of regular safety briefings at the Platteville hub, wasn’t it likely they’d rub shoulders at one of these briefings?

Fullscreen capture 20190702 005323

Fullscreen capture 20190702 211736

Significantly, Watts initially stored Kessinger’s number [on June 22nd when he and Shan’ann travelled together to San Diego] under the bogus contact name of APC Health Safety Environmental.

Fullscreen capture 20190702 213611

Also worth noting – Watts’ spiel to visit the CERVI 319 site first thing Monday morning was to prevent a safety issue from coming up.

Fullscreen capture 20190702 212707

According to the Discovery Documents, mandatory safety briefings at Anadarko’s Platteville hub are done:

  • 2 days a week
  • twice a day
  • 3-4 times per month

Reading into the briefings a little further, we know for certain Watts attended a briefing on CPR safety on May 16th, 2017. The subcontractor charged with some of the safety briefings [Raymond Gibson from SRP Environmental] is obtuse in describing [or failing to describe] the details and the people attending his classes. He mentions 300-400 employees “blending together in his mind.”

If Kessinger Googled Shan’ann Watts in September 2017, then is it really so unlikely that they encountered one another casually for the first time a couple of months prior to that search.

It’s also conceivable that given her position, Kessinger might have given advice or possibly lectured during these classes, which would have attracted everyone’s attention, including Watts’. It’s a theory. Strangely on so simple a question as when Kessinger started working at Anadarko we don’t have a straightforward answer.  What we do know is everyone in the industry was preoccupied with safety and so under the rallying call of safety briefings, Watts and Kessinger likely made first contact.

Fullscreen capture 20190604 013931

Fullscreen capture 20190702 004639Fullscreen capture 20190702 005041Fullscreen capture 20190702 004738Fullscreen capture 20190702 004807Fullscreen capture 20190702 004827Fullscreen capture 20190702 004846Fullscreen capture 20190702 004907Fullscreen capture 20190702 004912Fullscreen capture 20190702 005002

Fullscreen capture 20190604 013807Fullscreen capture 20190604 013809Fullscreen capture 20190604 013824Fullscreen capture 20190604 013827

Scott Reisch’s Video on Nichol Kessinger Removed from YouTube – let’s talk about it

On May 23rd, criminal defense lawyer and Chris Watts YouTuber Scott Reisch posted a video about Nichol Kessinger. I was in the Netherlands at the time, and not paying the usual amount of attention to the Watts case [or Crime Rocket for that matter]. But this particular video did blip on my radar, sufficiently so that I passed it along to another Watts case follower via WhatsApp.

Screenshot_2019-05-29-19-37-35-1-1

The video has since been completely removed from YouTube.

I’m not surprised. In the video, Reisch [I can never remember how to spell his name] records himself in his vehicle doing a little undercover detective work. If I recall correctly Reisch – sporting dark glasses – also flashes briefly to the brand of his vehicle on the steering consol. I won’t repeat the brand here, but it’s not a VW beetle, let’s put it that way.

While driving he suggests he has the address of Kessinger and is simply going to see – firsthand – whether she’s home, whether she answers the door and what she has to say.

Reisch records himself knocking on a door, and soon after, driving away. The apartment complex can be imputed from the rear view behind Reisch as he drives slowly away.

Now it’s possible Reisch himself subsequently removed the video from YouTube. It’s also possible that Kessinger’s legal machinery kicked in because of a perceived violation of her privacy. Whether or not Kessinger is under witness protection, and whether or not she lodged an objection to the video, the video did feel like it crossed an invisible ethical boundary. That was my perception. Irrespective of Kessinger’s role in the Watts case, she has every right to want to protect her privacy.

When I covered the Van Breda case, I praised a tabloid reporter who had snuck into a complex and done the same thing Reisch did, except someone [I won’t say who] opened the door, saw it was a reporter and slammed the door. The reporter then wrote an article not only identifying the complex but providing a glimpse of who and what she saw when the door opened, and even what she smelled – if you can believe that. Someone related to the Van Breda case later contacted me [I won’t say who] and complained about me praising the mischief of the tabloid reporter.

I explained that as a journalist, I have respect for those who go the extra mile as it were. On a recent trip through Europe I jumped off the train platform to take a photo at track level of some poppies while a train was slowly approaching [and while a station policeman was hollering at me].

So that’s really what I’m getting at. When a journalist exercises the courage of his convictions it resonates with me, because I know how much it has cost me.

At the same time, speaking to this person directly, I felt ashamed. I could see how such behavior [the tabloid journo spiel] was a total violation of privacy. In true crime there is a sort of consensus that everyone involved is fair game. While that is true to an extent in terms of investigating the situation, it doesn’t mean there are no boundaries whatsoever. It’s not a case that the innocent have total rights and that the guilty [and those related to them] have no rights.

Personally I was surprised by Reisch’s video before it was taken down. Going to the premises and finding someone not there is hardly content. It’s what journalists and editors call a “non-story”. Although Reisch never gave the details of the address, he did seem to hint that it was in Colorado and near to where someone he knew [I won’t repeat specifically who] was based. This potentially opened the door for others to figure out the address and possibly harass Kessinger.

ph6a0qvsgs2qbwe

There have been many lines crossed in the Watts case, none more so than the line crossed by Watts himself. Kessinger also crossed a line, but infidelity is hardly a face melting misdemeanor. It’s not classified as a crime, although certain legal and financial obligations can follow as a result. The point is it’s not behaviour exclusive to or monopolized by Kessinger, in fact it’s disturbingly common. When we talk about rights to privacy, and the way Facebook penetrates into the home, and onto a spouses’ phone for example, we can see how Facebook can ruin marriages. Ironically, Facebook seemed to play little role in the machinery or chicanery of the Watts case, certainly at face value.

fullscreen-capture-20181021-232052

What Watts did  plunged many into a nightmare, including Watts himself.  He soon saw his own privacy literally evaporate, and found himself completely out of his depth in trying to deal with it. But as troubling as Watts is a character [a man doomed by his own weaknesses and failures] what’s even more troubling is the Watts spiel as a whole. When we start to see the whole theater and all the players, something doesn’t sit well with us.

2540076170001_5978142006001_5978143955001-vs

While I was in Europe, Anadarko started sewing up major merger talks with Occidental.  The Chris Watts case had simmered down just in time for billion dollar deal-making. Was that accidental? Coincidence? Or is this whole strange, suffocated legal procedure – the hushed, rushed plea deal – part of much larger shenanigans?

The Watts murders, diabolical as they are, is it simply the tip of an enormous glistening black asteroid, invisible and unseen, but nevertheless hurtling towards us?

I find the social-cultural aspect of true crime interesting, because as tempting as it is to believe, Watts didn’t emerge in a vacuum. He also didn’t cross those ethical lines when he committed this crime, in a vacuum.

When we explore these ideas, they invariably reflect back at us, and our approach to ethics, often in areas we know about but don’t particularly care about. Like privacy. Like industry, and the approach of corporates to the protection of information and their casual if not reckless attitudes to society and ethics.

Although we don’t particularly care about these aspects, they seem to care about us as a voting bloc, or a portion of the marketing pie. They affect us. So maybe we should care.

While in Europe I did some research during intervals of leisure reading. The subject matter had to do with the source of man’s alienation.

Is it from other individuals that alienation springs, or from society? Who is to blame? Another way of putting the question is:

Who is to blame for crime? 

It may seem a ridiculous question. Obviously the individual [the criminal] who commits a crime is responsible for it. While that’s certainly true, what’s underappreciated is the impact, or perhaps influence is a better word, of culture in who individuals ultimately become in our society.  Do we simply let the chips fall where they may, and if Chris Wattses are part of that equation, so be it…? Or should we have a hand, some kind of say, some kind of sway, in the kind of society that we’re part of?

At the same time that we raise this question, we can also ask a slightly more targeted inquiry.

What impact does the culture of the workplace have on people, and their attitudes to other people?

In effect, what impact does the attitude of corporates have on society – on people, on us – and how does that trickle down to the workers who work there? Is it mostly harmless? Is it worth caring about or only worth caring about when there’s an annihilation?

What we’re really addressing in this Reisch scenario is the idea of privacy. How much should we care about it? Do we expect our privacy to be respected? Should the privacy of others be respected too?

Privacy laws while necessary can also be used to nefarious ends – to protect those who have something to hide. Just think about the Mueller report and Trump’s financial statements [protected because he was supposedly under audit]. Privacy is a real issue of our time, and social media and true crime provide a fascinating fulcrum, a nexus, in which to examine it.

download

What does it mean exactly to respect privacy?

When someone is involved in some way in a crime, especially a high-profile crime like this, do the same standards of privacy apply? For my part, I thought Nichol Kessinger was treated very mildly by investigators, given the time-sensitive circumstances and scale and scope of what happened [a triple murder, adultery, the pregnancy etc]. Even when she appeared to be less than completely forthcoming, there didn’t seem to be any threat attached to either withholding critical information, or – arguably – delaying the release of it. So privacy does work both ways.

By the same token, if we look at Shan’ann’s Facebook profile [which is still public], should the victim’s privacy be treated in a special way, perhaps even counter to their own wishes [in terms of social media]?

Are our modern laws – especially those pertaining to the online space – up to date in terms of the rational and reasonable rights citizens ought to have in terms of privacy?

51a3484b747c4b2340fa7891d8e79c02

In general, our obsession with cases presupposes a level of access to the information particular to criminal cases, but how much access is in the public interest and how much is intrusion?

The first “incident” with Nichol Kessinger happened on July 4th, just 4 days into their rollercoaster summer romance

When Chris Watts was asked if he and Kessinger ever fought, and about what, Watts cuts to the bone. They argued about her always being “second”, and this just four days into their dalliance.

Fullscreen capture 20190308 183847

Now imagine how that had to feel five weeks later into their summer romance, with Shan’ann hours away from returning to end it all. Isn’t that what their 111 minute conversation was about on the night of August 12th…?

Fullscreen capture 20190213 154729

What we also see here is when Kessinger doesn’t get her way, there’s a consequence. A punishment.

Fullscreen capture 20190308 183524

July 4th was also the day Kessinger went to Watts’ home for the first time.

In his Second Confession Watts’ claimed Kessinger  went to his house once. Kessinger said she went to his house twice, the second time on July 14th or 15th.

Fullscreen capture 20190308 183928

“It only matters what God thinks of me now” – Chris Watts [Preliminary Analysis of “Second Confession”]

A few things that have stood out reading through the release are Nichol Kessinger being bi-pilor [according to Watts] and her “getting pissed” when he left her to go home. Watts also acknowledges it was possible Kessinger knew Shan’ann was pregnant [via Facebook], but says if she knew she didn’t say.

According to Watts his relationship with Kessinger “contributed” to the murders, but she never asked him to do anything.

Also:

-Watts denies knowing Trent Bolte

-Watts indirectly denies knowing Amanda McMahon

-Watts doesn’t want either of them charged for making false claims against him

-According to Watts he met Nichol Kessinger on June 1st 2018

-Kessinger saw a picture of his family on his computer at work [according to Watts] and so she knew he was married…

-Kessinger talked about meeting after his trip with Shan’ann to San Diego [in late June]

-He wished he’d worked more in the field so he’d never gotten close to Kessinger

-He felt like Kessinger pursued him, which was unusual…

watts-and-girlfirend-copy

-Watts seems to regret his relationship with Kessinger, and now has pictures of his wife and daughters in his cell [and talks to them every day]

-He stayed at Kessinger’s home almost every night while Shan’ann and the kids were in North Carolina

– He slept over at Kessinger’s house almost the entire month of July

-Being away from home made him entertain the notion of not being a father and husband

-He never had a girlfriend during high-school

-The longest relationship he had before Shan’ann was about 6 months

REGARDING SHAN’ANN’S MURDER

-Shan’ann lay face down. She turned onto her back. He straddled her [sitting on top of her] and spoke to her for 20 minutes. She initially thought he wanted to have sex with her.

-She said he was hurting the baby

-He asked if they could cancel their trip to Aspen

-He asked if they could move to Brighton

-He told Shan’ann he didn’t think their marriage was going to work

-He also felt like when he used their credit card with Kessinger on Saturday night, this was “the last straw”

-Shan’ann hadn’t taken off her bra and had mascara running down her face. She asked him “what about last night?”

-He still couldn’t bring himself to tell her about Kessinger

-He told Shan’ann he didn’t love her

-Shan’ann told him:

“You’re never going to see the kids again…get off me…don’t hurt the baby…”

dr-phil-5

-He immediately put both hands around Shan’ann’s neck and strangled her.

Doesn’t exactly resonate with truth, does it?

Fullscreen capture 20190307 184224

3766dd458b845f11fdc253cd7254962d