Shan’ann Watts: “I refuse to let anyone take over my body, or my life”

To be a MLM promoter means to be a Pollyanna. A Pollyanna is an excessively cheerful or optimistic person, but it goes further than that. A Pollyanna is overly expressive, overly extroverted, excessively [often annoyingly] optimistic. Think about that and contrast it with the idea of an introvert, and a strong silent type.

Personality clash?

Since the Watts story is the story of a fairy tale that turns into a family holocaust, let’s do our due diligence and briefly examine the fairy tale classic Pollyanna. Once done, have a look at the three videos posted below. All three are set to kick off at compelling moments that show real cracks in the Pollyanna performance.

From Wikipedia:

The title character is Pollyanna Whittier, a young orphan who goes to live in the fictional town of Beldingsville, Vermont, with her wealthy but stern and cold spinster Aunt Polly, who does not want to take in Pollyanna but feels it is her duty to her late sister.

Pollyanna’s philosophy of life centers on what she calls “The Glad Game,” an optimistic and positive attitude she learned from her father. The game consists of finding something to be glad about in every situation, no matter how bleak it may be. 

With this philosophy, and her own sunny personality and sincere, sympathetic soul, Pollyanna brings so much gladness to her aunt’s dispirited New England town that she transforms it into a pleasant place to live. The Glad Game shields her from her aunt’s stern attitude: when Aunt Polly puts her in a stuffy attic room without carpets or pictures, she exults at the beautiful view from the high window; when she tries to “punish” her niece for being late to dinner by sentencing her to a meal of bread and milk in the kitchen with the servant Nancy, Pollyanna thanks her rapturously because she likes bread and milk, and she likes Nancy.

Soon Pollyanna teaches some of Beldingsville’s most troubled inhabitants to “play the game” as well… Aunt Polly, too—finding herself helpless before Pollyanna’s buoyant refusal to be downcast—gradually begins to thaw, although she resists the glad game longer than anyone else.

Eventually, however, even Pollyanna’s robust optimism is put to the test when she is struck by a car and loses the use of her legs. At first she doesn’t realize the seriousness of her situation, but her spirits plummet when she is told what happened to her. After that, she lies in bed, unable to find anything to be glad about. Then the townspeople begin calling at Aunt Polly’s house, eager to let Pollyanna know how much her encouragement has improved their lives; and Pollyanna decides she can still be glad that she at least has had her legs.

The novel ends with Aunt Polly marrying her former lover Dr. Chilton and Pollyanna being sent to a hospital where she learns to walk again and is able to appreciate the use of her legs far more as a result of being temporarily disabled and unable to walk well.

There’s so much there that fits like a symbolic blueprint over the Watts case, isn’t there?

Fullscreen capture 20180912 155351

Now consider the import of the videos below, and Shan’ann’s attempt to Pollyanna-ize her self, her life and her family in the name of a MLM company and product.

Is Shan’ann a genuine Pollyanna? Is she genuinely optimistic? It’s too easy to simply dismiss the MLM aspect as fake. It’s too easy to dismiss Shan’ann’s personality, as the victim, as irrelevant.

What happens, what’s the emotional cost when someone in a marriage and a household isn’t happy but pretends to be, and more pertinently, how does it impact on someone else in the same household who has a different personality? What happens when the person you married becomes someone else, and even that someone isn’t real?

The irony is, if Shan’ann became that to him, a stranger in his own home, he also became that to her, with monstrous and devastating consequences.

Shan’ann Watts’ Facebook Profile is still Public – and what it could mean

45 days after her murder, Shan’ann’s Facebook page, which was completely open to the public, is still completely open. This is unprecedented in a high-profile true crime case. It means anyone who wants to poke around through her life, looking inside her home, looking at her family and friends, can still do so. And people have. One 31 minute video posted by Shan’ann has already been viewed over 140 000 times.

As part of my research into TWO FACE I started noticing comments alongside these videos, including from key figures in this case such as Nickole Atkinson, not from several weeks prior but posted in recent days.

Everything posted on Facebook, including photos and videos, are matters of public record. Anything you say alongside those photos and videos could be used in a court of law, especially accusations and allegations against Chris Watts.

There have already been suggestions [malicious and totally unfounded in my opinion] that he molested his children. Although it’s doubtful specific members of the public could be held liable, what could happen is Chris Watts’ defense may claim his rights to privacy have been violated continuously, indiscriminately and excessively. It’s an open legal question – have they?

Fullscreen capture 20180921 123110

We may not care about the rights of a murderer, but we ought to care about the issue in a general sense. How would Shan’ann feel if she was still alive, knowing her life was on display post mortem? How do you feel about giving up access to our online identity? Would you? If she could speak from the grave, would Shan’ann still want her social media open and exposed to the world? What rights does a deceased individual have to their social media? Should all privacy and privileges be relinquished when we die?

It also begs the question, who has authorized her page to remain public and why?

I know more than a little about these issues, because as it happens, the very first true crime book I wrote was borne out of my exclusive access to the murder victim on Facebook. At the time I wrestled with the ethics involved, as well as the legal aspect.

reeva steenkamp3

As time went by, Reeva Steenkamp’s story was simply not addressed, and so, I took it upon myself to counter that with Reeva in her own Words. It was an instant bestseller, and it’s even possible the momentum of that narrative carried over into the trial narrative and eventually overwhelmed Oscar Pistorius’ dubious narrative. That book not only took the narrative away from Reeva’s murderer, it did so in a way that was authentic, it allowed Reeva to speak for herself when virtually no one else did, would or could.

The Oscar Pistorius trial was extraordinary in terms of how the victim was reduced to a non-entity, so much so that officially today Oscar has been found guilty of murdering an unarmed intruder, not Reeva Steenkamp. In court, during the sentencing phase, her father Barry took the stand and begged the court to release photos of gunshot wounds to her head so people could see her again, see her wounds, see what had happened to her.

Barry went to far as to say he often agonized at night, driving sharp objects into his own flesh where Reeva had been shot, in order to feel her pain. This was because the media narrative, the court narrative and Oscar’s narrative had reduced her to nothing. A figment of the imagination.

Her Facebook narrative, and a few surviving WhatsApp messages, allowed her to have a voice. And after five years, Oscar was finally convicted of murder [albeit not of murdering her].

But Reeva’s Facebook profile was private, accessible only to those who were already her friends when she died. In hindsight, I believe that was one of my most important books, but not everyone on Facebook is going to do credit to your story. And not everyone’s lives online are – for the lack of a better word – innocent. Here’s an illustration from Moneyweb, an online investment magazine:

 …if someone consents to having their online assets retrieved by providing login details to heirs in their will, the heirs could be found guilty of hacking in terms of the service provider’s terms of service agreement.

Thus, in leaving digital assets to an heir, the first obstacle is access… A lot of service providers would inhibit a user from providing their login details and access to their accounts to other people. The second issue is the digital asset itself. There are various types of digital assets and the rights assigned to these assets differ…The rights assigned to an e-mail account varies greatly from the rights assigned to digital music for example. There may also be other difficulties: a user may not want their heirs to have access to all their digital data.

Booyens says she came across a case where a widow tried to access her husband’s e-mail accounts – purely to obtain records kept in the account. However, her late husband did not leave her any login details or consent to access the digital account. To overcome the issue, she hired someone to hack into the account and discovered that her husband was having an affair.

“Obviously her husband did not want her to get that much access.”

The same applies to this case.

But it also raises a much larger issue. Besides the public’s rights to their own online archive vis-a-vis Facebook’s almost automatic expropriation of it when we die, how does the law interrogate the labyrinth?

Back to  Moneyweb:

…what are users consenting to?

…Facebook and YouTube expressly state that the user remains the owner of the content that they post. Amazon and Apple on the other hand say that customers have a licence of use. This means that ownership does not vest in the user and therefore they do not have rights that can be transferred. Even where users own the content, service providers may still assign themselves a wide spectrum of rights to use the content royalty-free and worldwide or for sub-licensing and transfer.

But what happens to a user’s rights when they pass away?

Facebook gives users the option to decide whether they want their accounts to be memorialised, deleted upon death or whether they would like to appoint someone to administer their accounts. Similarly, Gmail (Google) offers an inactive account manager service which provides for the account to be deleted or for someone else to gain access. Users can specify how much access should be granted.

Where a user only has a licence of use of the digital asset, they don’t have the right to dispose of it, but what if they have ownership yet cannot access the digital asset?

Some authors argue that the Copyright Act has confirmed that the ownership of e-mails can be established, but access may still be a problem… In this regard, the definition of property may be wide enough to include digital assets in terms of the Administration of Estates Act, which means that the executor – which has temporary custody over the estate – can gain access to the digital assets.

But what about post-mortem privacy?

Booyens says that internationally, courts are having a really difficult time following one line of argument…legislation such as the Promotion of Access to Information Act could protect privacy after death and may deny heirs the right to access an account. However, the Protection of Personal Information Act only defines rights in terms of the personal information of a living person, suggesting that privacy shouldn’t be protected after death.

So here’s a prediction. The Chris Watts case when it comes to trial will likely set enormous precedents for how social media ought to be managed and maintained. It may well set the gold standard for how the law ought to treat the rights of victims online, when they are no longer around to defend their virtual lives.

Chris Watts: The crime scene at CERVI 319 just got a LOT more complicated

8 inches.  A petroleum engineer has told HLN that the access hatch in his expert opinion is too small to fit even the bodies of small children through. The crime scene at CERVI 319 just got a lot more complicated.

It makes an enormous difference whether the bodies of Bella and Celeste were dumped through the top of the drum or through the bottom. Much of that difference has to do with time, on the one hand, but if it required a lot of unfastening and fastening of bolts, and Chris Watts stepping inside the tanks, then the possibilities for getting his clothing covered in evidence [including oil] goes up significantly.

Was that why Chris Watts took off his shoes?

There’s also a remote possibility that one or both bodies of the children may have been altered in some way in order to force one or both of them through the narrow thief hatch at the top.

If the head could fit through, then a large amount of force and gruesome crunching of bones may have allowed him to dump the smaller child [Celeste] through the upper hatch.

What’s more, HLN‘s expert believes the opening of the manway hatches could have taken as long as an hour. That would be long, sweaty work that would have gone on until after sunrise. It may also account why Chris Watts effectively ran out of time when he was digging Shan’ann’s grave.

What’s also noticeable, and HLN didn’t comment on this aspect, are the clear residues of oil right outside the manway openings on the ground, especially below the tank on the far side.

Fullscreen capture 20180928 033629

The other tank also shows what appears to be a smaller black stain.

These stains could have been made by Watts, or by the cops, when they drained the tanks into order to gain access to them.

The amount of oil found in the drums when investigators arrived on the scene could also indicate whether they were completely or partially drained at the time, based on the rate of filling up over the course of four days.

Since it took a substantially longer period of time to locate/retrieve the bodies of the two girls after Shan’ann’s remains were discovered, it may be that there was a lot of oil in one or both tanks that had to be drained before the tanks could be properly accessed. This could indicate that at least one body may have been dumped through the thief hatch.

On the other hand, the time lapse could have been due to sourcing the appropriate technical assistance at Anadarko, and the red tape involved in getting permission to access a controlled site and system.

The autopsy results could shed some light on the question of whether there was forcing, processing or even dismembering in order to make use of the thief hatch. The continued reluctance of the district attorney to release the autopsy results is making this case more mysterious, compelling and disturbing than it already is.

Was Shan’ann a *genuine* person?

She looks attractive here, even sexy. She’s showing more cleavage than usual and what’s more, she’s aware that she is. She’s flaunting herself.  And as she starts off, there’s a smoldering quality about what she’s saying. As she tucks in her recently coiffed hair, the tone of her voice initially feels like this is going to be quite a deep session. The subject is:

“What if…”

But it’s: “What if you tried Thrive?”

And: “I didn’t believe in…feeling better.”

And: “I’ve never had something change everything…about how I looked at things…how I felt…um…getting up [early in the morning].”

We all feel terribly for Shan’ann and her children. But the more we get to know her, the more we’re discomforted by her absence in many of these videos. She’s there alright, but she’s also not there. She’s selling. She’s become a drone for a MLM company and the real Shan’ann is missing.

It makes one wonder what she’s like as a person. Is she a genuine person. Is she nice to live with? Or is she annoying, her own worst enemy?

She’s clearly very attached to Thrive, happy to attach herself hook, line and sinker to it. It’s Thrive that makes her happy, just as Chris is the best husband she could ever wish for.

We’ve criticized Chris Watts for his lack of credibility, but should we believe everything she says? And if we don’t, where does that leave us?

An example of “He Has No Game”

In this clip Shan’ann abruptly leaves the kitchen, leaving Chris Watts stuck for a few seconds in the front of camera. He clearly doesn’t want to be there. Notice also how he refers to Shan’ann only as his “wife”, and when she returns, he’ s sort of unceremoniously bumped out of picture.

There’s virtually no interaction here between husband and wife, is there.

Shan’ann, in contrast to Chris Watts, is a on-the-ball, but she’s so on-the-ball she has her husband dressed up in the Thrive uniform and reduced to a prop. If you don’t want to be prop, and you keep being foisted into these mini-productions, that’s got to cause resentment – both ways.

Analysis of the blinds of Chris Watts’ Home

A window into the Watts home – that’s what we’re looking for. A way of seeing inside, seeing what happened to this picture-perfect family. A window is what teams of lawyers, armies of reporters, legions of trial watchers and a handful of true crime writers are desperately trying to find. A way of looking in, penetrating through the lies and absent evidence, to see the truth.

The autopsy report provides one way to see back in time. It’s a sort of biological window. Forensics and fingerprints sketch additional aspects of the scene. But what about the ACTUAL windows of the Watts home?


As part of ongoing targeted research into this case, I’ve made a detailed study of the house, the house plans and the neighborhood. I wanted to see what the neighbors could see looking in, but also which windows in the Watts home made certain areas of the home less private than others. In effect, I was trying to fathom where in the house the three murders were executed.

In other true crime narratives, I’ve found this technique, this process of orientation within the civic design of the suburb, vital. My deepest insights into the difficult Zahau case came largely from understanding precisely how the prominent Spreckels Mansion fitted into Coronado’s Ocean Boulevard. My work into that case suggested Rebecca Zahau could easily have been seen from her position on the balcony she was supposed have committed suicide from. That may not seem to be a big deal, except she was naked when she was supposedly killed herself.  But if she was murdered, her murderer could have been seen too. 

Much of my analysis into the Zahau case was based on the idea of a murderer who was using the balcony to stage a suicide, but didn’t want to be seen doing so…and did the crime scene bear this theory out?

I’ve approached the Watts crime scene in much the same way. If the murders were committed inside by two different people, were they all committed at night? Were they all committed upstairs, downstairs,  in the same room or in different rooms? Were the lights on or off? Were the windows and blinds open or closed? Were any crimes committed in the basement? Did anything happen in the basement?

The Scott Peterson case also involves blinds that were opened on December 23rd by Margarita Lava, the Peterson’s maid, and yet remained closed throughout Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Not just the blinds facing the road, ALL the windows were covered.


Now, back to the Watts home.

What do we know for certain?

We know that the windows looking into the garage allowed Nickole Atkinson to confirm that Shan’ann’s car was there, and that the kids seats were in it too. This aspect alone may be the reason Chris Watts was confronted and caught as soon as he was. Had there been no windows into the garage, Nickole couldn’t have known anything was amiss, and critical time would have gone by in which more critical items of evidence could have been removed.

Interestingly, once the garage became part of the crime scene, the small square windows were covered up against prying media, revealing just how “transparent” the Watts home could be to prying eyes.

Fullscreen capture 20180922 003336

Looking closer, there are so many windows in the Watts house it’s almost a house of glass. This is the back view.

Fullscreen capture 20180923 211411

A view from the side with the Watts house on the right.

Fullscreen capture 20180923 211619

Notice the basement window below. Chris Watts’ man cave [as it’s marketed in the realty brochures] appears to be a kid’s cave, at least from the outside. Notice the Mickey Mouse window covering.

Fullscreen capture 20180923 211457

Fullscreen capture 20180923 211511

If the murders were premeditated, and if Chris Watts committed all of them, then he’d need to be very careful about windows wouldn’t he?

The subdivision is filled with other double story houses with excellent line of sight, and the houses alongside the Watts home are also RIGHT alongside.

Fullscreen capture 20180830 105440Fullscreen capture 20180923 211602Fullscreen capture 20180923 211606

An aspect that stood out from a cursory run through of the house was firstly how many windows had the blinds drawn, and secondly, the fact that three windows on the top floor facing the road that weren’t closed.

Fullscreen capture 20180924 030538Fullscreen capture 20180924 030913Fullscreen capture 20180924 031348Fullscreen capture 20180924 031523Fullscreen capture 20181208 182827Fullscreen capture 20181208 182758

I also examined the blind issues by looking at other images of the house, before it became a crime scene. What were the Watts’ in the habit of doing regarding the blinds?

In Shan’ann’s long monologue LIVE video on a Saturday morning in May, the blinds above the couch and behind her are down.

When Chris was mowing the lawn in May, the blinds look similar to every other picture, don’t they? Also, in a tightly backed subdivision, wouldn’t most people have the blinds drawn not so they can commit murder in private, but just  – ordinarily?


When Shan’ann told her children she had a baby in her belly, the blinds are drawn there too.

If all the blinds were always drawn, but the three windows on the upper floor were open, what if they’d been left open intentionally, so that neighbors could see Bella and Celeste moving inside. So that, until the last minute, Chris could show that they were still alive. It was potentially another version of taking them to a birthday party on Sunday. It gave Chris Watts plausible deniability.

It also suggested, if this line of inquiry was correct, that the one room where the children weren’t murdered was the upstairs room with the blinds open.

Neat theory, right?

The problem was those upstairs windows aren’t part of children’s bedrooms, or in fact ANY room. They’re lighting above the lounge. I wasn’t able to find clear pictures in the Watts home confirming these windows, but Shan’ann’s video in the lounge suggests a high ceiling like the one below.

This similar model home provides an idea where the three “upstairs” windows fit into the house as seen from the inside. We can also see why these blinds might be left open most of the time.

Fullscreen capture 20180922 000102

I also checked the moon stats for August 12th and 13th. I wondered whether, when Nickole dropped Shan’ann off, whether the lights inside the house were on. A bright Colorado moon might explain how many lights needed to be on, if moonlight was spooling through three open, upper windows.

Nickole will probably shed light [pun intended] on this question in due course. But for the time being, I wondered whether – if the lights inside were off – how the light of the new moon would shine through those three upper windows, and perhaps allow Shan’ann to go inside without turning lights on [and waking her family]. It also addressed whether Chris could be using moonlight through the top windows to illuminate his “kill scene”.

But that theory didn’t go anywhere either. The bright new moon set at around 21:00 on August 12th.

What the research does show, and I’ve taken this research a lot further in TWO FACE II, is where in the house the crime scene probably took place that assured some privacy. Privacy not only in terms of line of sight, but line of sound.

Strangling crimes can involve muffled sounds, and if the murderer isn’t careful, and hasn’t taken precautions, muffled screams that might be audible to nearby neighbors.

TWO FACE BENEATH THE OIL will be available soon.

Fullscreen capture 20180921 224552

Just a day in the life of Shan’ann Watts

It’s hard to say why Shan’ann’s portrait of herself, selling products from her kitchen, is so disturbing. With around three minutes remaining in the Live video, Josh Rosenberg, not unexpectedly as it turns out, breaks into the video.

Josh appears to be shopping, and tells Shan’ann he’s “lost his wife”. Shan’ann smiles and is at a loss for words for a few seconds. Then she seems to address someone else, Abbey Lund who’s just asked if the product can be used while pregnant.

Fullscreen capture 20180926 163317

Shan’ann tells Abbey: “I’ll message you.” And then tells Josh: “I’m eating a Pro-bar – on live…”

Fullscreen capture 20180926 162413

Shan’ann and Josh make small talk, but it’s not really small talk. It’s just two Thrive promotors chewing the fat about this product and that, flavors and favorites.

At one point there’s a genuine moment where Josh mentions getting up early and going to the hospital. The point is barely acknowledged as Shan’ann reaches for another box of product, and holds it to the camera. Cassandra Rosenberg, Josh’s wife can be seen moving in the background of the store. In the comments beside the broadcast, it appears she [also a Thrive promoter] has told Shan’ann she can’t go Live with her, ask Josh.

While he’s on Shan’ann holds up a box, tells him how excited she is, and how amazing these Pro-bars are “you have to have one”. The cinnamon roll is amazining…”

Josh answers: “I can’t wait for the lemon meringue or the cookies and cream…”

Fullscreen capture 20180926 161522

There’s just something anemic about the whole thing, isn’t there? Friends turning themselves and each other into online shopping  malls. Shan’ann turning her kitchen into a venue for selling product, while Deeter scampers quietly in the background.

Fullscreen capture 20180926 161032

There’s a tragic emptiness in it somehow. The lights are on but nobody’s home. Although it’s hard to put one’s finger on it, in the same series of comments alongside the video, there’s this from Kallie Turner, posted two weeks ago today.

Fullscreen capture 20180926 163317

Kallie writes: “I wish you were still here [still alive] so I could claim a sample [of Thrive product] from you….”

Josh Rosenberg is also the guy who, on August 18th, five days after her murder, told the Thrive cult not to assume anything or speculate online.

Fullscreen capture 20180926 164946

That may seem completely reasonable, except what they’re doing online seemingly all day, everyday is “speculating” online. Speculating in the sense of engaging in business and trying to draw in consumers. But in matters of life and death, there should be no assumptions, no speculation, no afterthought, just an ongoing empty and cautious silence peppered with more product placements by the Thrivin’ survivors…

Chris Watts’ “photographic memory” provides a unique window into his mind, and his psychology

There’s something very unusual about Chris Watts. He has what a former teacher has described as “a photographic memory”. What criminal psychology teaches is not to look at the thing itself, but at the things surrounding it. So although we ought to understand and make sure whether the terminology is accurate, what we can say broadly is that photographic memory is often associated with introversion, and social dysfunction.

Think Sheldon Cooper. Smart, but badly out of whack in ordinary social settings, and even worse at engaging with the opposite sex.

The “photographic memory” [also known as eidetic memory] tends to involve shared traits, including lefthandedness. Was Chris Watts left-handed?

More interesting in terms of this case is the psychological connection between “photographic memory” and the inverted personality. It may explain why Shan’ann said Chris Watts “has no game”. If it was a real problem, it may have irritated Shan’ann and she may have felt her husband was weak, when it was more a question of wiring than his attitude to her or to her marriage.

Watts arraignment hearing

GREELEY, CO – AUGUST 21: Christopher Watts is in court for his arraignment hearing at the Weld County Courthouse on August 21, 2018 in Roggen, Colorado. Watts faces nine charges, including several counts of first-degree murder of his wife and his two young daughters. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)

TWO FACE is available exclusively on

Chris Watts: Voted most likely to succeed in the Class of 2003

“This was one of the smartest students I ever had. The guy had a photographic memory. His biggest passion outside of automotive was NASCAR. He knew chapter and verse, everything you could ask about NASCAR. Anything. In fact, I told him before he graduated, I said, ‘Chris, if I ever had a student who was going to be tremendously successful, it’s you.’ He wanted to work his way up and be on a NASCAR team. Probably a crew chief.”

Those who know Watts described him as a remarkably intelligent youth. In 2003, he and another senior at Pine Forest placed third at the N.C. Automobile Dealers Association competition in Winston-Salem, receiving a certificate and a $1,000 scholarship to Universal Technical Institute and NASCAR Technical Institute in Mooresville.

A remarkably intelligent mechanic?

A genius multiple murderer who was caught and arrested within hours of committing his perfect murder?


Now that’s a glowing endorsement. Of course everything is relative. “Smartest” student? Compared to whom?


PICK OF THE CROP: Chris Watts’ sophomore picture. That’s him in the middle row, two thumbs right of the central black line.

Joe Duty remembered his former student as extremely introverted and quiet. Watts would sit in class and hardly say a word, Duty said. Others who remember Watts from high school described him as a boy that every girl had a crush on, but shy and awkward.

Most of the above info is sourced at this link. The more we find out about Chris Watts, the more he seems to fade from view.

Which makes one wonder [hit play below]…


The #1 Clue That Proves Premeditation?

Since the trial is still pending, it requires the title to have a question mark rather than an exclamation mark.  There appears to be plenty of debate springing up now around whether Shan’ann could have committed a crime, but no matter who committed what, it seems the general consensus is that the crime happened spontaneously.

They had an argument – that night or early morning – because Chris Watts said they did.

There are many, many obvious reasons why this isn’t a signature case for a crime of passion  which is an act committed impulsively during an explosive venting of rage.  It happens when the perpetrator feels themselves pushed over an emotional cliff. Chris Watts classifies this crime as precisely that – that he killed Shan’ann in a rage as a reaction to her despicable crimes. That’s his excuse.

But is it true?

Well, this is what that passion looks, sounds and feels like.

So what’s the #1 clue that appears to show premeditation?

It’s Chris Watts’ stoicism on the morning of August 14. We now know that Shan’ann, Bella and Celeste were dead by then, but also that Chris Watts knew that then too. He didn’t look particularly bothered, in fact showed no signs of distress, grief or remorse. Part of his act was that he was innocently unmoved, even chuckling at times.

The defense will argue that all people process their grief differently. But actually that’s not true. When grief is genuine it can’t be held back. It creeps on you in its raw, unfiltered form and overwhelms you. When grief is absent, well, it’s difficult to fake and decent lie detectors and true crime buffs pick up on that immediately.

That’s why Chris Watts’ interview scorched the internet, and why this case remains so top of mind. People are still asking themselves:

Where’s the grief? Where’s the humanity? How can someone lie like that, to the whole world [and perhaps to themselves?]

Crimes of passion happen on impulse. The wave comes and just as quickly goes. When the perpetrator recovers himself, he’s quickly remorseful, regretful, reproachful and even apologetic.

When there’s premeditation there’s a much deeper sense of “plans have gone awry”. When there’s premeditation much more is happening in the head than in the heart, but that’s not to say the heart didn’t play a huge role in getting the ball rolling. And after the crime, the heart of a premeditator is still pulling the strings in his head, but from a distance and behind the scenes. Something in his heart is why he’s still continuing to kick the can down the road even though the game is up.

In his television interview is there a sense, perhaps, of disappointment following a momentary sense of triumphant, excitement and freedom?

What we fail to see in premeditated cases is that the murderer is turned on by the fantasy of getting rid of someone who they see as milestones around their necks. Casey Anthony’s partying during the first four weeks of Caylee’s death/disappearance is a classic example in true crime of the unadulterated joy in breaking free of one’s lot in life.

When it’s been a long, long time coming and he’s finally doing it,  strangling the life out of someone he despises, there’s satisfaction and relief in the deed. It’s not a question that he’s reluctant to commit murder, but irresistibly drawn to the idea, like a moth to flame.

The more interesting, sinister and terrifying question is the same one that haunts the Scott Peterson case:

When did he start day-dreaming about murdering his family, and what moment, what snide remark triggered the first impulsive homicidal thought?