GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #2

MrZhivago said:

The Sunday thing has some problems for me. I can see it as a clean-up time, but some of the details make it very problematic as a kill time.

*BUT* I've always maintained that *if* she was killed on Sunday then the only thing that can explain the fact that she didn't contact anybody during that time, or was seen popping to the shops etc was that she was with a sexual partner. That's the only scenario that I can envisage her staying in like that and not communicating -- because basically she was in bed or on the sofa with the whole time.
However, if this were the case then there's no way he wouldn't 'fess up to the police that this was the cause of somebody's rage. Also, there are other things such as that they would not only have drunk the cider but also left a good few champagne bottles and so on lying around

Click to expand...

Sends text to CAG - no response because he's napping. He goes around to JY's place upon waking (very soon after) rather than replying to text. JY's cider is half drunk and she is about to cook pizza. CAG doesn't want to intrude on GR's patch so suggests the pizza is cooked at his place. Off they go. Some time later she returns home (maybe even as late as Sunday evening). GR gets angry.

jmo

jigzy said:

This text goes some way towards explaining the smile on her face at the liquor store, imo.

Click to expand...

I was wondering if she was smiling at someone she knew / recognised in the Bargin Booze store.

Someone who then caught up with her later - perhaps just before she reached Tescos and walked home with her or drove her home.

Maybe Jo didn't enter her flat alone.

Sgt Jones said:

I was wondering if she was smiling at someone she knew / recognised in the Bargin Booze store.

Someone who then caught up with her later - perhaps just before she reached Tescos and walked home with her or drove her home.

Maybe Jo didn't enter her flat alone.

Click to expand...

Interesting post. The building they lived in looks so substantial.Solid construction with thick walls. Would a scream or two really be audible to someone outside,on the other side of the street ? Or,is it more likely that Jo was at her doorstep, or had her front door open when she screamed ? Was she taken right away into a vehicle, maybe not actually killed in her flat ? Because the most baffling thing in this case,IMO, is the fact that Jo would be killed in her home, and then removed from her home after she was dead. That doesn't add up. Someone could have grabbed her after she answered their knock on her front door, and a struggle ensued at the flat's entry way. Which at least explains why LE took the front door for forensics... Strange case.MOO

What about the scream coming from the direction of her flat on the Friday night?

And the L/L seeing three people leaving the building around 9pm Friday night?

This looks like straight out murder but why?

Re: Greg

If he did do it then he was very clever and cunning and deliberately planned to leave a false "electronic footprint" for that evening and weekend.

As we all know, with the internet, CCTV, credit card transactions, ATM machines etc, we all leave an "electronic footprint" of our lives everyday.

I know full well that the police could choose any random day in my life and put together a pretty accurate picture of where I went, what I bought and when, who I phoned, texted, emailed, websites I visited etc.

To create a false "electronic footprint" therefore sounds easy to do in theory but unless you know exactly where all the CCTV cameras are, it will be nigh on impossible.

For example, if Greg did it with the assistance of an accomplice then Greg would need to make sure the accomplice used his bank cards in shops or petrol stations that did not have CCTV in them or in the vicinity. That's a lot of planning and one slip up blows his alibi.

So like with Jo purchasing her cider and pizza, the police would have looked at Greg's receipts / bank statements and found the CCTV for his purchases en route to Sheffield and in Sheffield just to make sure it was him.

If there was no CCTV, you can bet the police would be highly suspicious.

In the UK, I think I read somewhere you can be caught on CCTV upto 100 times a day. I would say therefore, it would be impossible for Greg to lay a false "electronic footprint" avoiding CCTV.

Why go to all that trouble? I could understand it if he was going to get financial gain but I can't see how he would.

The other thing is, if Greg did do it, why not dump Jo's bag, purse and keys with her body to make it conclusively look like a stranger killing? His DNA would be all over her belongings anyway as they lived together.

If he was so cunning as to be able to lay a false electronic trail, he would have known to dispose / destroy Jo's phone so the signal could not be traced.

I can't see it myself, and he certainly can't have planned it all between Jo ending their relationship ( as some have said she may have done) at a 12:30pm pub lunch and 9pm that night. He would have had to recruited his accomplice, get his bank cards and phone drive up to Sheffield in Greg's car and lay a false "electronic footprint" by using bank cards in shops and petrol stations whilst also making sure there was no CCTV!

Impossibe, IMHO

liz b. said:

Interesting post. The building they lived in looks so substantial.Solid construction with thick walls. Would a scream or two really be audible to someone outside,on the other side of the street ? Or,is it more likely that Jo was at her doorstep, or had her front door open when she screamed ? Was she taken right away into a vehicle, maybe not actually killed in her flat ? Because the most baffling thing in this case,IMO, is the fact that Jo would be killed in her home, and then removed from her home after she was dead. That doesn't add up. Someone could have grabbed her after she answered their knock on her front door, and a struggle ensued at the flat's entry way. Which at least explains why LE took the front door for forensics... Strange case.MOO

Click to expand...

Regarding removing the body - thinking about the recent UK spy in the bag murder perhaps that's how Jo's body was removed from the flat unseen.

She could have been put in a large holdall or a suitcase - they would need wheels and most these days have wheels.

That way, no car would be needed straight away and who is going to suspect someone at Holiday time wheeling a large holdall / suitcase?

Sgt Jones said:

Regarding removing the body - thinking about the recent UK spy in the bag murder perhaps that's how Jo's body was removed from the flat unseen.

She could have been put in a large holdall or a suitcase - they would need wheels and most these days have wheels.

That way, no car would be needed straight away and who is going to suspect someone at Holiday time wheeling a large holdall / suitcase?

Click to expand...

Surely possible. But it speaks to a lot of planning. I'm thinking more that she was hit (slapped or punched,probably in the face ) when she screamed by the front door. This would explain some kind of forensic evidence(blood,hair) being on the front door itself. I think she was taken some place else and strangled.Possibly in the vehicle itself. But.if there was a sexual motive,what stopped her killer from raping her ? IMO motive is what is making this case so difficult to understand...

all JMO

liz b. said:

Surely possible. But it speaks to a lot of planning. I'm thinking more that she was hit (slapped or punched,probably in the face ) when she screamed by the front door. This would explain some kind of forensic evidence(blood,hair) being on the front door itself. I think she was taken some place else and strangled.Possibly in the vehicle itself. But.if there was a sexual motive,what stopped her killer from raping her ? IMO motive is what is making this case so difficult to understand...

all JMO

Click to expand...

True - people don't tend to walk around with large holdalls or suitacases but it would depend on how close the perp lived to Jo.

The perp could also have used Jo's own suitcase and it's not been noticed missing.

I'm not sure why Jo would scream by the front door unless the perp had a knife or a weapon. It seems they didn't. Perhaps they did hit her and she then screamed.

Regarding motive, well it could be a failed rape attempt with Jo being too strong to overpower so with her screaming, the only thing to do is throttle her.

Yes you're right the motive is not clear and therefore the case is complicated.

I have always thought it was the LL but that perhaps is unlikely or at least there is not enough evidence to prove guilt.

The other suspect who has now entered the fray is Casual Aquaintance but that depends if Jo had told him where she lived.

Sgt Jones said:

True - people don't tend to walk around with large holdalls or suitacases but it would depend on how close the perp lived to Jo.

The perp could also have used Jo's own suitcase and it's not been noticed missing.

I'm not sure why Jo would scream by the front door unless the perp had a knife or a weapon. It seems they didn't. Perhaps they did hit her and she then screamed.

Regarding motive, well it could be a failed rape attempt with Jo being too strong to overpower so with her screaming, the only thing to do is throttle her.

Yes you're right the motive is not clear and therefore the case is complicated.

I have always thought it was the LL but that perhaps is unlikely or at least there is not enough evidence to prove guilt.

The other suspect who has now entered the fray is Casual Aquaintance but that depends if Jo had told him where she lived.

Click to expand...

Probably someone who had seen her, and had been watching her, IMO. I hope LE has questioned those guys who were working on the scaffolding...

All JMO

How is this for a possible scenario:

JY and BF have lunch together on Fri. It becomes apparent to BF that the relationship is ending. He is upset by this.

Having already made plans to visit Sheffield, BF proceeds to Sheffield, leaving around 7pm. During the drive he spends the entire time thinking about the ending of the relationship, and is worked up by the time he arrives at Sheffield (say around 10pm). BF decides to return to Clifton because he can't accept that the relationship is over. Travel time would put him back at Clifton around 1am.

When BF arrives the meeting doesn't go as he had planned (ie; JY isn't convinced of the error of her ways, and reversing her decision), an argument develops and he ends up strangling JY. BF panics and realises he needs to dispose of the body.

BF then does one of two things: 1) takes the body to Longwood Lane and dumps it, or 2) takes the body in his boot back to Sheffield (the cold temperatures mean there is no major decomp smell) and dumps it at Longwood Lane when he returns on Sunday evening.

This scenario accounts for:
BF's credit card receipts and mobile phone info (presuming it was turned off/battery removed for the intermediate return from Sheffield), BF's body language and verbal language before and after the body was discovered. BF's timeline on returning home Sunday night.

It does not account for:
Scream (unreliable IMO), report of three people at the flat (again, potentially unreliable).

BF's brother may also have assisted, even to the point of travelling with him from Sheffield.

Obviously this is pure speculation, but for me, explains quite a few of the things I have seen in the reporting (and in this thread). I guess ultimately I am saying that, even if the BF made it to Sheffield on the Friday there is nothing (reported/released) to say that he didn't turn right back around in between arriving and his return on Sunday night. Nor is there anything to specifically say that JY was murdered promptly when she returned home around 9pm.

500 known sex offenders living within a mile or so of the flat.....

apparently it is the same wherever you live in a town...scary...

I entirely agree with Sgt Jones that Greg cannot be the culprit unless the police have made a total pig's ear of checking his alibi. If he went to Sheffield then returned then went back to Sheffield, that too would be take him through many verifiable points - and makes him way too vulnerable if any tiny detail goes wrong.

But what he may have done in the four hours is to "sanitise" the scene of the crime for some quite different motive. In other words he might have removed relevant evidence in order to conceal some detail he didn't want to come out.

He might regret doing so later but decide to stick with his original story rather than face the music for misleading the police enquiry.

I'm not saying this is probable, but it seems possible. Sanitisation of the scene of a death by family members is not unusual.

On another issue, I'm wondering whether to take the "no evidence of sexual assault" with a grain of salt. The police are clearly giving us the minimum possible info and they could perfectly well claim that even if she had very recently had sexual intercourse, this might have been consensual.

The police are taking their time ruling out the landlord as a suspect even though he believes he is in the clear.

Some posters here have made a solid case for ruling out the boyfriend.

So where does that leave us?

Ex-boyfriends.
Stalkers.
Sex offenders.
Psychopath.

It would be interesting to know if this text was the ONLY one she sent that night. I wonder what the actual text said? I find it strange that after apparently not seeing her brothers friend for 18 months she text him when her bf was out of town. I think this could well be a new development and I am thinking that maybe the relationship between Greg and Jo wasn't as perfect as the media have portrayed. It seems to suggest that she was having a possible affair, or looking to? Lets not forget Jo was a 25 year old attractive female, she must have had a lot of attention and if she weren't totally happy with her bf then who could blame her for wanting to have some fun!

I think it's possible she came home in a happy mood, someone knocks on and asks if she's ok without boyfriend, she's invited for a Xmas drink in one of the flats and tells them she's about to eat. They say 'bring your dinner and have it here with me/us' She leaves her drink for later and goes to their flat for a drink ( hence no shoes) Things get heated, she's strangled and moved to shed/car boot/spare room. Pizza is disposed of by having been eaten and box gets moved out of building and binned elsewhere as they know she will be missed eventually. Her body is moved Xmas eve, early hours Xmas day morning by vehicle. I think the police know but can't prove it and are waiting more forensics.

Myserty64 said:

The police are taking their time ruling out the landlord as a suspect even though he believes he is in the clear.

Some posters here have made a solid case for ruling out the boyfriend.

So where does that leave us?

Ex-boyfriends.
Stalkers.
Sex offenders.
Psychopath.

Click to expand...

Let's keep neighbours in as a privileged category. I am one of those who have whiffed a rodent in what we know about some of those living nearby. It also occurs to me as a possibility that someone who knew of Greg's departure might have got hold of the wrong end of the stick and assumed that Joanna was away for the weekend too, leaving the coast clear for...I don't know what...that Joanna might have stumbled on.

Nausicaa said:

I entirely agree with Sgt Jones that Greg cannot be the culprit unless the police have made a total pig's ear of checking his alibi. If he went to Sheffield then returned then went back to Sheffield, that too would be take him through many verifiable points - and makes him way too vulnerable if any tiny detail goes wrong.

Click to expand...

The car Greg drove to Sheffield in needed a jump start before he could leave at around 7pm. If he arrived in Sheffield around 10pm, and having been thinking about his lunchtime discussion with Jo decided to return to Bristol to sort things out, he would most likely have used another car if one was available (his brother's) and left his own car with his brother to get a new battery for it. So his return journey could be made in anonymity, especially if he didn't need to buy fuel on the way.

teabreid said:

The car Greg drove to Sheffield in needed a jump start before he could leave at around 7pm. If he arrived in Sheffield around 10pm, and having been thinking about his lunchtime discussion with Jo decided to return to Bristol to sort things out, he would most likely have used another car if one was available (his brother's) and left his own car with his brother to get a new battery for it. So his return journey could be made in anonymity, especially if he didn't need to buy fuel on the way.

Click to expand...

OK let's take a closer look at the difficulties with this one :

1. It makes the brother an accomplice after the fact by silence about an extremely material fact.
2. It practically requires the murder to be pre-meditated at the time GR leaves Sheffield for his return journey as he would have not only to change cars but either leave his mobile behind or else take out the battery - otherwise he will have been picked up by antennæ on his return journey.
3. It requires a car to be available and enough cash to pay for fuel as he needs to do a round trip Sheffield-Bristol-Sheffield in the second car.
4. Anyone who knows the brother will know of the small number of potential cars that might have been used and the theory can be checked.
5. It requires the body to have been transported long distances in the boots of two different cars before dumping - one of which will have no good to contain any of Joanna's DNA.
6. It makes the decision to leave Joanna's personal effects in the flat very hard to explain. If Greg states that he found the flat with no sign of Joanna or of her keys, mobile, coat, shoes, etc, this will widen the field of potential supects considerably. (Potential answer is that the struggle left some ineffaceable signs in the flat, but even so...)
7. Greg would have known that he might not find Joanna at home - if she had had a reply to her text to the old acquaintance he wouldn't have - so he couldn't make detailed plans in advance.
8. I for one find it hard to see Greg planning to murder Joanna. If he did it, it needs to be quite unpremeditated...
9. It requires the body to be transferred between two car boots while probably in rigor mortis.

Do I dent your confidence yet ?

BTW do we know in what posture the body was found ? If it had first undergone rigor and then been frozen, all while in the boot of a car, it would presumably be permanently doubled over. If the body had been stored outside, not doubled over, but frozen before dumping, it would be very hard to fit it in an ordinary boot...

teabreid said:

The car Greg drove to Sheffield in needed a jump start before he could leave at around 7pm. If he arrived in Sheffield around 10pm, and having been thinking about his lunchtime discussion with Jo decided to return to Bristol to sort things out, he would most likely have used another car if one was available (his brother's) and left his own car with his brother to get a new battery for it. So his return journey could be made in anonymity, especially if he didn't need to buy fuel on the way.

Click to expand...

I'm drawn towards this kind of theory.
A problem with it, though, I think is that
-- if Jo gets home before 9pm and is still alive by 11pm, we wouldn't have a bottle and a half of cider still knocking around.

Nausicaa said:

OK let's take a closer look at the difficulties with this one :

1. It makes the brother an accomplice after the fact by silence about an extremely material fact.
2. It practically requires the murder to be pre-meditated at the time GR leaves Sheffield for his return journey as he would have not only to change cars but either leave his mobile behind or else take out the battery - otherwise he will have been picked up by antennæ on his return journey.
3. It requires a car to be available and enough cash to pay for fuel as he needs to do a round trip Sheffield-Bristol-Sheffield in the second car.
4. Anyone who knows the brother will know of the small number of potential cars that might have been used and the theory can be checked.
5. It requires the body to have been transported long distances in the boots of two different cars before dumping - one of which will have no good to contain any of Joanna's DNA.
6. It makes the decision to leave Joanna's personal effects in the flat very hard to explain. If Greg states that he found the flat with no sign of Joanna or of her keys, mobile, coat, shoes, etc, this will widen the field of potential supects considerably. (Potential answer is that the struggle left some ineffaceable signs in the flat, but even so...)
7. Greg would have known that he might not find Joanna at home - if she had had a reply to her text to the old acquaintance he wouldn't have - so he couldn't make detailed plans in advance.
8. I for one find it hard to see Greg planning to murder Joanna. If he did it, it needs to be quite unpremeditated...
9. It requires the body to be transferred between two car boots while probably in rigor mortis.

Do I dent your confidence yet ?

BTW do we know in what posture the body was found ? If it had first undergone rigor and then been frozen, all while in the boot of a car, it would presumably be permanently doubled over. If the body had been stored outside, not doubled over, but frozen before dumping, it would be very hard to fit it in an ordinary boot...

Click to expand...

I think those are good objections.

On the premeditation thing, though, I can imagine Greg stewing over things in the car and returning, not specifically to kill Jo, but just to "have it out".

The body posture has been described as "slumped", which some people have speculated might be in accord with a foetal position that could have been caused by being in a boot.
My guess would be that it takes long time for a body to freeze rigid. So I'd reckon there's a big gap between rigor loosening and the body being frozen stiff. But I've no idea.