Naresh Bhatt admits to dismembering, disposing of wife's body

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Let's go back to that breaking news in the Naresh Bhatt murder trial, a stunning admission from Naresh himself on the witness stand. I want to warn you, you are about to hear some gruesome testimony. We told you earlier in the hour that he testified that he woke up to find his wife Mumta dead on the floor, apparently from suicide. He says he didn't kill her, but admits that he got rid of her body. Take a listen to what he says happened when he came back home from taking their daughter to daycare. Again, a warning, this testimony is hard to hear. [00:00:34] Speaker 2: And what did you do when you came back home? [00:00:39] Naresh Bhatt: Put in the trash can. [00:00:41] Speaker 2: And how, what did you do before you put your body in the trash can? [00:00:47] Naresh Bhatt: Reduce the size and then put in a trash can with a, with a bat, in the bag. [00:00:51] Speaker 2: How did you do that, Mr. Bhatt? [00:00:53] Naresh Bhatt: With the, uh, I had a saw. We, I used the saw. [00:00:59] Speaker 2: Did you use knives? [00:01:01] Naresh Bhatt: A little bit, but not a lot. [00:01:03] Speaker 2: And you've seen the picture of the Ryobi saw saw. [00:01:08] Naresh Bhatt: Yes. [00:01:09] Speaker 2: Is that what you use? [00:01:10] Naresh Bhatt: Yes. [00:01:13] Speaker 1: This is a complete reversal of the story. And Arresh Bhatt has been telling up to this point, and it turns this case on its head. Our Northern Virginia Bureau Chief Drew Wilder joins us live now. He's stepped outside the Prince William County courtroom to bring us some perspective on this. Gobsmacked, Drew, when I heard that this was happening on the witness stand, you tell us that there were audible gasps in the courtroom at times this morning. I almost, I almost don't even know where to begin. Did his lawyers know this was coming today? Because I didn't get that sense or that signal from yesterday's testimony. [00:01:56] Drew Wilder: Definitely didn't get that sense or signal from yesterday's testimony, but they absolutely had to know this was coming, Erica. The question is, is why is this the first time, if this is what really happened, is Nuresh Bhatt saying it? Why didn't he call police? Why didn't he call 911? If we are to believe that he walked into his bedroom and found his wife, Mumtik Huffley, dead from apparent suicide. He testified on the witness stand today that on the night of July 29th, he went to bed with the baby in a room down the hallway. He says he didn't hear Mumtik come up to bed in the primary bedroom. He says he woke up with the baby a couple of times during the night. One of them was at 4 p.m. This now takes us into July 30th, 2024. He says he went to use the restroom. He walked down the hallway into the primary bedroom to use the ensuite bathroom that's in that, off of the bedroom there. And he says he discovered Mumtik lying on the floor with apparent vomit around her, on her, a bottle of pills next to her, and even what he described as like a pesticide that they kept around the house to keep bugs off. He says he found a couple of open cases of the pesticide, and it appeared that there was pesticide as well in her vomit. He says he then tried to revive her. He says he's not really sure how long he's working on her. He claims that it's anywhere from maybe 30 minutes to 45 minutes to an hour, and then he says he physically moves her body from the spot where she was lying on the floor into the bathroom and, again, is trying to revive her but says she's unresponsive. He's foggy on the time of how long this is taking, but at some point he says he knows he needs to take the baby to the babysitter's office, excuse me, to the babysitter's home. So he takes the daughter to the babysitter and returns home and then begins describing some of the most sinister, the most evil, the darkest details that you could ever possibly imagine in which he describes dismembering his wife to get rid of her. Why doesn't this man call 911 if we are to believe that he walked in and found his wife that way? He claims that he was nervous, he didn't know what to do, that he was worried he would be blamed for it, and then he describes over the next day, day and a half, disposing of her in the trash cans at the home. That's significant because, remember, we have all of this video evidence, surveillance video from various locations. It shows him dumping bags into various dumpsters and trash compactors. He testified today that Mumtah's remains were never in that, that Mumtah's remains were never placed into his car and taken anywhere. He says that those were their personal belongings, some of her personal effects. He says in his culture, you would not bury somebody or dispose of somebody if someone were to take their own life. He said the proper burial for someone in Nepal would be to incinerate them, to burn that body, and he did not do that. So he didn't want to put the belongings with her remains in the same bin, so he took them to other locations. It's all a lot, Erica. It's really a lot. Let me just kind of bring us back into focus here, because there's one piece of evidence that is going to be really, really critical as we move forward, and this is going to be something that prosecutors are going to need to drill home on, and the defense is going to make a big point on, too. What exactly was the DNA evidence that investigators recovered from the primary bedroom? And then we see the, remember, we had that, what was presumptive blood. It was presumptive blood evidence, and we had testimony from the Department of Forensic Science that they did confirm there was DNA in what was recovered in the primary bedroom. And then we saw that video of what appeared to show the streaking that takes us from that area with presumptive blood into the primary bathroom. Prosecutors have insinuated that that's where the murder took place and that he then dragged her body into the primary bathroom. There is a possibility, a theory, a scenario, where if this is, in fact, vomit, and then he pulls her into the primary bathroom, that that could explain that. And that DNA that was recovered from the carpet, Erica, we have not heard any evidence or any testimony that they actually confirmed it was blood. The defense on cross-examination of the Department of Forensic Science made a point of that. You did not send this off to confirm that the DNA you found was from blood. The DNA could have been from something else. That's going to be really, really significant moving forward. But it also weighs into whether or not you buy any of this story. Look, I've watched as many times as people in the courtroom today have gasped and their jaws have hit the floor at this testimony. I've also looked over at the jurors, and I can tell you there are at least a few that aren't buying half of this. Their eyes are rolling at moments. I actually heard a juror laugh out loud at one point at something Naresh said. It wasn't in this really graphic testimony. But jurors aren't buying half of what this guy is selling. Now that the tone has dramatically shifted, the question is whether or not they're going to believe this very crucial evidence. We've got a confession of defiling. We've got a question. We've got a confession of concealing a dead body. But he's claiming that he did not take his wife's life, that she, in fact, took her own life. So I don't know where we go from here. This is all a lot, Erica. We're on a lunch break right now of the trial. Naresh Botts' testimony is going to continue shortly after 1 o'clock. Defense attorneys told the judge that there's about another hour and a half or so, and then it will be time for cross-examination. Whether or not we go to cross-exam today, I think it's going to depend. I would anticipate the judge is going to ask prosecutors how long they anticipate their cross-examination of Naresh Botts to last, if it's going to be several hours. I could see a scenario where the judge maybe breaks today at 3.30, at 4 o'clock, just so all of that cross-examination is kind of happening, and without a three-day weekend break, we'll wait and see. But the train has left the station on this one, Erica. [00:08:46] Speaker 1: A couple of things here. You know, we played that soundbite. There's more of that similar testimony. He is saying these things emotionless, talking about saws and knives and body parts without effect. So to remind people, he had said that he was not guilty of murder. So I guess the mounting questions here are if they are going to ask for a lesser charge, that they would, you know, admit to this but not this other thing? And whether or not, like, as you say, the train has left the station, can they pivot like that on a dime? [00:09:31] Drew Wilder: They absolutely can. I think it's too early to maybe have that. It's a fair question to ask, Erica. You're absolutely right to ask that. It's probably too early for prosecutors to start thinking about that because they haven't even been able to do their cross-examination of him yet. But I think you're absolutely right. And it's some of the language he uses. And, look, I want to be fair and I want to be respectful and sensitive because there is a language barrier here. So some of the words that Naresh Bhatt is using to describe his actions, to describe himself, to describe things that are otherwise inconsequential, are maybe not the same way that a native, you know, a first language English speaker would say them. But when he used the words reduce size in talking about dismembering Monta's body, those words were so sinister and cold that, and, again, there's a language barrier here. But, yes, to your point, it's just. [00:10:28] Speaker 1: But it sounds like he's talking about a thing and not a person. [00:10:33] Drew Wilder: Yeah, absolutely, it does. And, look, you know, I think there's, I don't think it's unfair that I'm being overly sensitive to a guy who's just made this admission when I say this, but he has been in prison or in jail now for two years. You know, this was a guy who had a, you know, he talks about a really, you know, violent kind of childhood, a guy who's seen combat in the military, a guy who admits he dismembered his wife. This is a guy who has seen some stuff, right? Again, to your point, the words he's using and the way he's talking about it are cold and they're sinister. But he's been thinking about this for two years in a, you know, in an 8x8 cell or whatever he's in, in the adult detention center. So, you know, maybe there's a little caveat there, but the jury's not thinking about that, right, in the same way that we're not thinking about that, right, while we're listening to the word choice that he has, when we're watching this otherwise emotionless phase kind of describe these. I don't even know how to characterize it anymore, Erica. It's just sick. [00:11:40] Speaker 1: Drew, we're going to have to put a pin in it for right now. We're going to keep our coverage on this, give you a chance to get back into the courtroom, and the testimony will resume. We will have to see if cross-examination does, in fact, happen today. But this is, as we've mentioned, this is just a complete game changer in this case. Our Drew Wilder tracking every moment of it. Drew, thank you so much for bringing us up to speed. We appreciate you, and we will be following the latest breaking developments in this case. You've probably already gotten an alert. You can look for more of those in our NBC Washington app as this story develops from the witness stand today.