True Crime Analysis, Breakthroughs, Insights & Discussions Hosted by Bestselling Author Nick van der Leek

Tag: rage

Chris Watts claims “Rage” was the operative emotion that made him wipe out his family. But this is what a genuine “Rage” Annihilation looks like…

The word “rage” appears only twice in the 29-page CBI Report documenting Chris Watts’ Second Confession. The first instance is at the top of page 8:

Fullscreen capture 20190414 213346

The second instance is at the bottom of page 12:

Fullscreen capture 20190414 213621

I won’t be doing any long lectures explaining why the “just snapped” scenario is bogus and bullshit, because that would be repeating tired arguments fielded months ago. If you haven’t read them yet, be my guest.

“Chris Watts Just Snapped”

Chris Watts describes the reason he killed Shan’ann Watts: “I just snapped” [AUDIO Part 1+2]

In the Discovery Documents there are a couple of additional instances of “snapping”, “losing it” and “rage”:

Fullscreen capture 20190414 214326Fullscreen capture 20190414 213957Fullscreen capture 20190414 214301Fullscreen capture 20190414 214317

Although Watts tries to paint a portrait of himself as overcome with emotion, and the crime as a crime of passion, we had virtually zero evidence of anyone else – including Shan’ann – experiencing Watts’ rage. There’s no sign of it at work, nor in his background. There’s none of it in his marriage, and his mistress never mentions any anger issues either. On the contrary, if anyone is somewhat petulant or irritable it’s not Watts, it’s either Kessinger or his wife. That’s not necessarily a compliment to Watts, to say that he was extremely cool and even crushed in on himself. This may have made him seem suave and mild-mannered to Kessinger, but pathetic, and meek – at times – to Shan’ann, who was more extroverted than he was.

The Watts Family Murders weren’t committed in a fit of rage. Premeditation by definition takes the emotional dimension out of a crime and replaces it with cool, calculated, precise execution, disposal of bodies and covering up of the crime scene.

46667966_1171652959653867_6822995070879268864_n

If anything, both Shan’ann and Kessinger describe Watts as sweet-natured, Shan’ann realizing he was a “really nice guy” because he let her lay in his lap for 2.5 hours on a drive back from Myrtle Beach. Kessinger, in her exclusive with the Denver Post said although she barely knew him, he was a good listener. So the whole rage monster deal doesn’t work even if Watts would like it to. It’s just not who he is.

So what does an authentic ANNIHILATION driven by rage look and feel like?

Well, like this:

Phoenix man who suspected wife of an affair kills her and 2 kids, spares youngest: police – Fox News

Fullscreen capture 20190414 215726

Fox News describes the Smith Shooting appropriately as a murder rampage.

The Smith case involves the murder of his two children [while sparing the third] and two adults, one of them a random bystander who happened to be at his brother’s apartment when Smith arrived there. Two other people were shot at the apartment, but the 47-year-old woman and 33-year-old man both survived. Smith’s shooting arguably qualifies for the definition of a Mass Shooting since four people were killed indiscriminately and spontaneously.

Although the Smith Shooting more closely resembles the “He just snapped” scenario, it’s obvious he didn’t just snap out of the blue either. The trigger was the notion that his own brother had betrayed him with his wife, and vice versa. There also seems to be a religious aspect, with Smith feeling emasculated not only as man but by what he may have felt justified regarding as “forces of evil”. The point is, it’s reductionist to boil down in a crime like the Smith Shooting as motivated by rage and a man snapping. That said, the Smith Shooting more closely fits that definition [if one insists on applying it] than the Watts case does.

This begs the question – if rage wasn’t the operative emotion in the Chris Watts case, what was?

What was it?

I don’t want to argue that zero anger or zero frustration was at issue here. There had to have been. Murder itself is a violent, aggressive act. But we’re trying to make the case for some other emotion – far more significant than anger – being the operative feeling in Watts’ murderous and mendacious heart.

What was it?

SdUMki85r4wCGTuY5mjH5kFtKFrqJrn7VHlOCNNQGcD4Ao5fMvkgz4krYjBf1RvA

7/10 People Fooled By Chris Watts’ Version of Events [POLL]

Chris Watts told investigators he had an argument with his wife before killing her. Makes sense, right? And if he said he had an argument, that part must be true. If he also killed the children, did he have an argument with each of them too? Okay so maybe he did. So why did his argument/s then matter and not the hundreds of arguments they’d had on any other day?

Fullscreen capture 20181028 025923Fullscreen capture 20181028 025934

The question of argument basically addresses the issue of whether this was premeditated murder or not. 7/10 people say it wasn’t premeditated murder, that Chris Watts simply got into an argument and became emotional. He’s that kind of guy. In other words, 7/10 people believe Chris Watts’ version of events. If the Colorado jury that’s going to decide on this case is anything like the majority of people, the prosecution may have a difficult case on their hands.

Fullscreen capture 20181028 025207

What do you think? Argument or no argument?

Intuitively people are on the right track. There tend to be arguments precipitating murders, which is why true crime is chock-full of murder-accused who deny this. OJ Simpson. Scott PetersonCasey Anthony. Burke Ramsey. Amanda Knox. Oscar Pistorius. Henri van Breda.

The issue isn’t whether their were arguments, but when they happened. We know there were arguments.

Fullscreen capture 20181028 031402

But we should be cautious taking Chris Watts’ word – for anything. Here’s why.

In excerpts from the affidavit below, reading between the lines, Chris Watts is careful to describe a “quiet” argument. In other words, they’re confronting one another about separating and about his affair with his work colleague, but neither him nor Shan’ann are raising their voices at 02:00 or 04:00 or whenever this emotional conversation was supposed to have happened.

If it happened, did anyone hear it? The neighbor who heard how the tone of the dog’s bark changed in the day, could they not hear raised voices in the dead of a summer night?

When, in the history of confrontations between couples about cheating has the aggrieved party not raised their voice? And yet the affidavit uses words like “began talking” and “civil conversation”. It was “not an argument” because he “told” Shan’ann this and went to “speak” to her about that.Fullscreen capture 20181028 030600

What about Shan’ann? Did she respond to being told and his speaking by telling him things in return, and speaking in a civil tone in her response? There’s nothing here about how she’s speaking or responding to being told – in the wee hours of the morning after her business trip – sorry honey, I’ve been cheating on you, I’m done.

His first story in his Sermon on the Porch was that they had this quiet conversation and Shan’ann simply said, ‘Okay then, I think I’ll go visit a friend today.’ The affidavit is an adaptation of that ruse, and not a good one.

Knowing what we know about Shan’ann, that she was pregnant, that she was an extrovert, that she was the dominant factor in the relationship, that she was the more emotional of the couple, and what happened during her first marriage [see below] does this quiet, civil conversation nonsense ring true? It shouldn’t.

https://youtu.be/yIl3RLSgMMo

What Chris Watts is playing for in his affidavit is a credible excuse for why no neighbors heard arguing that night. Either they argued quietly, the first couple in history to do so, and the first family murder to take place after a polite conversation in history, or it was a premeditated murder and it was silent for that reason.