Many of you may have heard about the case of Christopher Watts (CW) having killed his pregnant wife Shanann Watts (SW) and two daughters and put their bodies in oil tanks. CW claims SW killed the daughters, then he killed her in response, then covered up the crime to avoid going to prison.

​

Seems like an open and shut case.

​

However, there are many aspects of the investigation I feel were reckless and incomplete, and I feel like one of the reasons for that is the media caricature of the "wolf-in-sheeps-clothing male psychopath". It also makes this hard to discuss, because people are constantly saying "how can you defend that psychopath?" Or "you are scum for suggesting Shanann would hurt her babies" and other emotional appeals that completely ignore facts.

​

There is also the bias that "no loving father would do that". This is completely ignoring the situational aspects of the case.

It assumess that CW must not have loved his children, rather than fail in a time of extreme trauma. It plays on the suggestion that men must always react perfectly to even the most bizarre, traumatic situations, and when they don't, it must be because they are *bad people*.

​

In addition, where a woman might be looked at as a "survivor", CW was immediately looked at as the sole perpetrator of all the murders.

​

I am posting this here to raise some awareness of the actual details of this case.

​

Did Shanann Watts (SW) kill her children Bella and CeCe?

​

Evidence against: Mainly this comes down to the fact that really only one of two people could have murdered the children: SW and CW. CW covered up the murders and disposed of the bodies in a callous manner, strongly implicating his guilt over SW's.

​

Evidence for:

​

There really is not much evidence supporting SW killing the children, so much as a lack of damning evidence against CW. CW basically says the crime he was trying to cover up was his murder of the pregnant SW, as an immediately reaction to killing tbe kids. Not exactly believable, but possible. As much a I wish this was the open and shut case many think it is, there are some real issues:

​

​

No DNA testing was done, despite the **defense's request**. Swabs were taken of SW's hands and various places on the children, but were not actually tested.

​

Of course, who knows how much was lost due to the oil, but SW was not in oil. She was buried. Theoretically, officers could find the saliva of both children, and Bella's blood from her only wound, on SW's hands, which would at the very least place her in the room with a deceased Bella. In fact, it would suggest SW was the murderer. Right now half of you have read this and are frantically trying to change your narrative to fit the (theoretical) evidence, instead of letting the evidence direct the narrative.

​

Now let's go further- perhaps in addition they do find DNA on the children. Perhaps they find SW's DNA, but not CW's DNA, under the children's nails, SW's DNA, but not CW's DNA, in the children's faces.

​

Obviously my point isn't that this is some sort of certainty- far from it. My point is that when it comes down to it: Only one of the two possible murders of the children was investigated for it.

​

Investigators did something you see in a lot of false convictions: they said they were sure of who did it almost immediately. This has an effect where they tunnel vision- they look for only evidence against this person and tend to ignore evidence that doesn't fit their narrative.

​

​

They focus on trying to disprove any story the accused has, often stooping to some pretty ridiculous stories.

​

Such as:

​

CW had to have done it because the children were smothered, not strangled. This is bogus for many possible reasons, any of which disrupts investigators' claims:

​

-CW claimed, in general, that he saw SW strangling the children, but admitted he only saw the act from the monitor, which was grainy and dark, and from behind before he pulled her off. When asks to clarify he says he did not see SW's hands.

​

-It is possible that SW did have a hand on CeCe's neck at some point, and that is what CW saw.

​

-It happened quickly and CW's mind filled in the gaps.

​

-CW, his father, and tbe interrogators, use the words smother and strangle interchangeably, except when referring to smothering with a pillow.

​

-CW did not clarify because the interrogators told him they'd be able to use fingerprints and DNA to figure out what happened.

​

-The coroner was wrong in cause of death, and the wound on Bella's mouth wasn't from suffocating, it was from stifling a scream.

​

Keep in mind I'm not saying all of these are true or that I even think most of them are- only that one of them need be true for investigator's claims to be wrong.

​

Another claim would be that they know the mindset of the murderer based on forensics (cold/calculating, or in a "rage"). This is a blatant falsehood, as that is not possible to know based off the evidence.

​

​

There is no evidence that CW's story is true/ untrue or that the murders were planned in any way. Actions taken before the murders were not evidence of planning (work schedule texting, vacation planning, having an affair, fiddling with alarm settings). Those were normal things to do, as confirmed by his co-workers. Actions taken after the murders are simply not evidence of planning, no matter how odd they may seem. This includes the text he sent to work making sure he'd be alone, and using the work site to dump the bodies.

​

There is no evidence that CW's story is untrue. Details all line up, down to the flights of stairs and timing of them recorded by his exercise tracker.

​

​

The confession was extremely detailed and included many specifics. This is from a guy that couldn't put together a believable sentence the entire last 24 hours. He answered questions immediately, described how he felt at different times during the attacks, maintained story integrity through the entire confession, even when asked about specifics out of order.

​

**personal notes**: This is not the confession of someone who heard the investigator throw out an idea an ran with it, as some suggest. Many details would be unnecessary to put in were be lying, such as the baby monitor, being downstairs then going upstairs, seeing Bella and thinking she was hot. Think about that for a moment- he is describing a completely unnecessary detail- seeing Bella sprawled out, but is also describing what be was thinking at the time- that she was hot. Not only that, but he's describing it in a way I think most liars wouldn't- I think they would say that they were worried, etc.

​

CW also says things that make him look bad. He says he killed SW in a rage instead of just trying to defend the girls. He says he didn't perform CPR. If you're already lying, why not lie about those to reduce your prison sentence and make yourself more sympathetic?

​

​

Finally, let's look at two things: motives and numbers. We'll start with numbers:

​

The reality is, family annihilation is rare. Really really rare.

​

There are ~500 filicides/year in the US. There are ~5 family annihilations (they are so rare, I'm probably being generous here)

​

So filicides are roughly 100 times more common. We'll say 50 times more common since ~half of those were done by men. Men are more likely to commit filicide... If the child is a boy. Women are more likely if the child is female. Women also tend to kill younger children than older.

​

So from a statistical stand point, even if there's a 3% chance CW reacts the way he describes, his story is story is statistically more likely than him being a family annihilator. (Obviously I'm making sweeping generalizations here, but the point is mostly accurate).

​

​

Now for motives:

​

CW's motive per the DA: a fresh start. Personally I think this doesn't make of lick of sense. He was not a complete moron- he would have known he'd be investigated, etc, suspected of murder. He had a steady job, one mistress who he cares deeply about who knew about his family already. He had already talked of leaving SW.

​

Probably more realistic motive: CW snapped and killed either SW or one of the children, then killed the rest to hide the crime.

​

Motives for SW:

​

CW leaving her/ realizing he was cheating.

​

Texts show that she wanted to save the relationship. She even had a letter written out to read to CW upon her return, emphasizing her desire to fix the relationship.

​

**personal note**: She had also fostered an image of being the one in charge in the household, so being dumped for another woman would be a heavy blow not only emotionally, but to her perceived social status.

​

A cheating spouse/ being dumped is the number one motive of Spousal Revenge Filicide.

​

There is one more motive possible that I haven't seen discussed and it's the number one motive for filicide by mothers: perceived altruism.

​

There are numerous texts by SW talking about saving her children from the evils of the world. A lot. They seem extremely emotional in nature (obviously that's an opinion).

​

So when CW leaves her, perhaps this triggers SW to act on those thoughts.

​

**Personal note**: Many of SW's texts were extremely emotional. She seemed to be willing to use her children as objects in fights and was very vindictive. Peanutgate with the in-laws comes to mind. Her saying that if CW leaves, she'd go after full custody. It is my likely extremely biased opinion (not a diagnosis) that her texts were not the texts of a mentally healthy person.

​

On a side note, I realize I didn't bring up the guilty plea. I can discuss that in a different post if people would like, but what it comes down to is his public defender convincing him he'd be executed if he didn't plea.