TRUE CRIME ROCKET SCIENCE

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

Tag: Statement Analysis

“And then, did you see her before she went to work?” – Watch and listen to Chris Watts’ Reaction

December 13, 2019 / / 6 Comments

At 5:30 in Oxygen’s clip, Officer Matthew James [the same officer who ultimately arrested Watts late on Wednesday night] asked Watts a series of questions. Oxygen did a great job here in Season 3, Episode 1 of Criminal Confessions, by providing two bodycam perspectives during this line of questioning, along with subtitles to the conversation.

JAMES: And what was the conversation this morning you guys had?

WATTS [Swaying]: It was about us selling the house and the separation.

Again, the priority in that answer is telling. First they talked about the house, then the separation. It’s the same exact way he expressed it to Coonrod on the loft landing.

Fullscreen capture 20191213 194544

JAMES: And how’d she take that?

WATTS [Still swaying, Officer Coonrod glances down at his phone beside Watts]: We were both very emotional. And…still crying.

Remember what Watts said during the Sermon on the Porch…

“It wasn’t like an argument, but we had an emotional conversation, let’s leave it at that.”

JAMES: And then, did you see her before you went to work?

WATTS: Mm-mmm?

JAMES: Did you say anything to her?

WATTS [Stuttering]: Uh…she went back…like, uh…she told me she was going to a friend’s house…[flaps out his hand]. 

This correction mid-sentence indicates Watts is giving a rehearsed answer. He was going to say she went back to bed, but decides on the latter version – going to a friend’s house – being more appropriate. The friend story line is supposed to deflect attention – investigative and otherwise – off him.

WATTS [Muttering]: …and…be with the kids. Take the kids over there. 

This is another slip, another self-correction. Be with the kids makes no sense, and he corrects it because it’s uncomfortably close to the truth – that he wanted Shan’ann to be with the kids, away, in a grave. And that’s where she is.

Think of the sequence and the subconscious psychology in “be with the kids” versus Shan’ann “taking the kids over there” which she didn’t do. He took them over there.

JAMES: Oh, she told you she’s taking the kids to a friend’s house?

WATTS: Yeah. 

JAMES: She didn’t say who though? 

WATTS: Yeah. Oh, no. No. [Shakes his head]. No, but she was still in bed when that happened. 

Fullscreen capture 20191213 195625

This hand gesture, with his hand in a sort of claw, matches his original role-playing gesture in the cubicle at 18:04:56.

fullscreen-capture-20181130-144931 (1)

Officer Matthew James’ Call to Chris Watts on the night of August 13th at 21:12 + Handwritten Notes on Yellow Pad Up Close [40th Tranche]

CBI Agent Tammy Lee says Coder’s Questions about the “Emotional Conversation” Frustrated Watts

December 9, 2019 / / 10 Comments

Two things stood out to me about Tammy Lee’s comments. One was her recognition that Watts’ facial expression changed when they started vilifying Shan’ann, and offering her as a scapegoat. Although Watts initially balked at this psychological carrot verbally, it turns out they could easily see – on his face – how much he was willing and able to run with it. And that’s exactly what he did do.

The other thing that stood out was Lee referring to the question that frustrated Watts the most. She’s says it was from Coder, but there were a couple from her where he got pretty angry, and started raising his voice too [related to Tammy not wanting Shan’ann to get a bum rap for a crime she didn’t commit].

TCRS has a particular theory why Watts would have been not only frustrated, but anxious around this idea of the “emotional conversation.” Any ideas what that theory may be?

© 2024 TRUE CRIME ROCKET SCIENCE

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑