Jump to content

Talk:Watts family murders

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Salopian (talk | contribs) at 18:19, 10 October 2020 (→‎Infobox discrepancy). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Motive

Noone knows his motive? uh yes we do. New hot spicy girlfriend he spent 5.5 weeks with, (while wife was out of town), who wanted to marry him and give him a son. His house was worth $510K on a loan on $350, and he had life insurance policies maxed out at 20K and $100K on the kids. She said he wouldn' t see the kids. He wanted to sell the house and get the equity and start a new life with the cool girlfriend instead of his wife that was doing MLM at a very high level of manipulation. He was a passive idiot who got swept up in a new relationship. Also a monster. So he would get $160K + $20K x2 + $100K and not have to pay child support and the $500/week daycare. It was be totally poor with his new girl, or be kind of well off with her. She wanted a wedding (she was googling wedding dresses) and told him she could give him a son.

Also, bought large house in 13, went bankrupt in 15, still live there at the time of the murders, posted $750,000 bail on September 1. Can anyone explain, how does private finance actually work in the US? Serious question. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:6CF3:6B77:D126:134F (talk) 07:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What does "MLM at a very high level of manipulation" mean, was she making good money or not? 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:6CF3:6B77:D126:134F (talk) 07:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Race Statistics

I restored the material with this edit. It provides context and has been included as such in the coverage of the case. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The cited source doesn't actually identify any research. It attributes those statements to a former FBI agent and news contributor “Garrett”. The phrasing here gives the illusion of science, when the source only provides a single expert's assertion. 24.5.94.142 (talk) 03:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So a country that is majority white will possibly have more cases that the criminal is also part of that same majority what a shocker, and where is the data showing what this fbi agent claims is true the article shows nothing but that statement from some random agent and not data, that opinion is of no value without proven factual data — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianjack1 (talkcontribs) 11:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relevance of adding the "white people tend to kill their families" statistic? What was the point of that? Do Wiki articles on cases involving a black male perpetrator mention that blacks tend to be, by far, the most likely to commit homicide? I've never seen it. I'm scanning through the Simpson/Nicole Brown trial wiki and I'm not seeing it. How many family-homicides even occur per year for it to be relevant to categorize this in a racial context and include it in this article? Let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.112.82.73 (talkcontribs) 01:27, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Affair

Why no reference to Chris Watts's mistress Nicole Kessinger?...especially since she very well (as several amateur-sleuth YouTubers are vigorously arguing) may have been in on it at some point--or perhaps even the "Double Indemnity"-style instigator!--of what she herself at one point during her own questioning phrased, quite oddly, "the event". [signed] FLORIDA BRYAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:588:C500:AA0:88B7:84A4:3810:5937 (talk) 06:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is mentioned as: "According to the [police] affidavit, Watts was having an affair..." For Wikipedia purposes, the mistress is considered to be a non-public figure; see: Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual. She's not committed any crime and there's no need to mention her by name. I also removed the father's name; same rationale applies to him. Their names are not essential to the article. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:15, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • His parents Cindy and Ronnie Watts have spoken up for their son in interviews. At that point they've become part of the story right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHMFQzyAAu8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.195.254 (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Four life sentences

He killed three people. But, he received four life sentences. The article should explain this "oddity". I believe that he received two life sentences for each child, for a total of four life sentences. (One life sentence for the murder of the child; plus, an additional life sentence because the child was under the age of 12; times two children = four life sentences.) I don't believe that he received a life sentence for the murder of the wife or for the murder of the unborn baby. In any event, the article should detail this a bit. I am not 100% sure, so I don't want to add anything in, incorrectly. Does anyone know for sure? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Info Box states that Watts was charged with five charges of first-degree murder (for killing three people). As in my post above, this "oddity" should also be clarified. It also seems to "line up" with my understading, posted immediately above (i.e., there were two murder counts for Bella; and two murder counts for Celeste). Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:12, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox discrepancy

The Infobox states that Watts received five life sentences. The article's lead states four life sentences. Which is correct? I believe the four is correct. But I am not 100% sure. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:14, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube video makes it clear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZPt3uvJZAU (skip to 41:20) This is exactly correct: "Watts pleaded guilty on November 6, 2018, to multiple counts of first-degree murder. He was sentenced to four life sentences without the possibility of parole, three to be served consecutively and two to be served concurrently." Tiptopper (talk)
OK. Thanks! I made some changes to the article, based on this. There were several instances in which the article stated "five life sentences"; I changed them all to "four". Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why? It is obviously five. Three dead people. Additional counts for the two minors that trusted him. Five sentences. Of which: Four without possibility of parole, three consecutive, two concurrent. Anyway, he is never getting out, no matter how many times he claims to have found Jesus. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:6CF3:6B77:D126:134F (talk) 07:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but what is 'clear' about "He was sentenced to four life sentences without the possibility of parole, three to be served consecutively and two to be served concurrently", i.e. 4 = 3 + 2? I didn't understand from the article and I am not much the wiser from the the talk page. If there is, as there seems to be, a law by which someone can receive two life sentences for the same murder, this is extremely counterintertuitive and thus needs to be explained very explicitly. The death of the unborn child confounds the whole situation, since that is mentioned in the same place as what I am taking to be the reason for the double life sentences. It's really, really unclear what crime led to what sentence. It needs to be obvious to the reader, not that they can just about work it out from the talk page.
This is the especially confusing sentence, in the 'Arrest and charges' section: "On August 21, Watts was charged with five counts of first-degree murder, including an additional one count per child cited as "death of a child who had not yet attained 12 years of age and the defendant was in a position of trust", unlawful termination of a pregnancy and three counts of tampering with a deceased human body." The "including" and the text following is the crux of it. It makes it sound as though the unlawful termination is one of the things included in the counts of murder. And further to what I said in the previous paragraph, it's especially confusing how it was five counts of murder, not just five life sentences for three counts of murder. I just can't understand how that can possibly be the law as one person cannot be murdered twice, ,but the point isn't that I am sceptical it's true -- it is that it is so strange and difficult to grasp that it really needs to be laid out clearly. Salopian (talk) 18:13, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

Is there any reason why this is entitled as "Watts family homicides"? Shouldn't it be "Watts family murders"? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no replies in these past 3 or 4 months ... so, I made the move today. To "Watts family murders". Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:28, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]