GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #10

[essex63]

Hello all,

Amongst many questions in my mind, I'm wondering if the vehicle, which has been identified as significant from the Clifton Bridge CCTV, has been taken for forensic examination - especially after a charge has been brought.

I would have expected some photos or reports in the press, regarding the car (whoever owns it), but I've seen nothing. Maybe there's just no news of it, the tabloids having missed that particular 'scoop' despite being all over Canynge Road and Aberdeen Road after VT's arrest.

Were the vehicles that were taken from Canynge Road earlier in the enquiry ever returned?

 

[Journalist]

I wouldn't lend anyone my car, not if it was going to be sat in an airport car park while they were away over Christmas. The only way you could mould that into the scenario, is to suggest the person who lent the car, actually went with them to drive it back. But in so doing, you have to place them there to 'help dispose of the body' of course.

It didn't happen. No airport journey coincidence whatsoever.
Like I've said before, It has to be totally logical, otherwise it beomes completely farcical.

If the car wasn't registered to V.T and the Police questioned the owner (not the driver V.T)
Then someone must have lied somewhere.

Assuming the murder took place on 17th & VT had to find a method of disposing the body.. ie to get it where was eventually found, its highly likely he would want to dispose of it as quickly as possible.

I propose this scenario:

Imagine the position.. VT saw GR leave for weekend, but knows he could have travel problems and return since the weather was very cold & icy. (reports in media of CJ & VT having helped start the car, and therefore knew the plans of GR)

So mid-late evening after the murder on 17th VT probably wondered how to get the body out of the area without disturbing a. nosy neighbors (CJ known & others) to be aware of all goings-on in the immediate area. And b. general passers by inc. party goers on friday night week of xmas. Plus he has plans to go to Hollland on 18th, and looks like he did go on 18th since flights were not good on 19th. So this would lend weight of VT rushing to dispose & maintain normality .. ie not to attract suspicion.

He knows he cant do it too early at night mainly due to a. above so more likely is early in the morning 4-6am. VT may have used a large bag (perhaps a Surf board type one that supposedly went missing) in which he places the body and waits ( & then VT cleans up, eats and then burns pizza box, etc). ie. The bag with body remains in her appt until later in early am when he removes it, closing door behind. Now he should by all accounts remove the body by car to transport it to where it was found. He has no car we know of.. but a few plausible possibilities come to mind.. 1. he has a car nobody knows of. 2. He steals a car 3. borrows a car or.. 4. He uses some else's car without them knowing.

To me, no 4. and then 2. or 1. are most likely.

By all accounts the body was dumped in a rushed manner, and should have been left in the quarry 20-30 metres away where it could have remained undiscovered.

I suspect it was early am 18th and because VT was desperate to dispose of the body this is why its highly likely he was disturbed and had no time because he must keep up appearance of normality to go on his holland trip for xmas

Vt then goes back to appt and finalises going away to holland as planned..

 

[wfgodot]

Hello and welcome to WS, Journalist and essex63.

 

[Myserty64]

They found no significant links, which I don't think rules it out completely. They have bound to have connected Hardyman to the party in 1974, for a start, but he wasn't a suspect then or now. Trouble with the Glenis case is that they had so little to go on forensic wise.

What amazes me is a witness saw the perpetrator kneeling by the victim.
Then he got up and walked away and when challenged by said witness turned abruptly to head in another direction.

Truth be told my gut instinct told me there was a link to Joanna's murder but that feeling was obviously wrong.
That is not surprising since I have been incorrect in my thinking on this case (JY's) in several aspects.

 

[Trio]

From Tomorrow's Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ister-insists-he-could-not-be-the-killer.html

 

[trimed]

From Tomorrow's Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ister-insists-he-could-not-be-the-killer.html

Reading this and the fact that his family are very respectable people again reinforces my view that this maybe not the right person.

 

[Myserty64]

The family always come out with statements of that nature.
The shock has them reeling as it would me in the same circumstances.

The trouble is they have 'never walked in his shoes.'
None of us can ever know what is really going on in another persons mind.

If VT is guilty they will be part of the collateral damage.

It is very sad but killers never consider these consequences of their actions.

 

[Myserty64]

I still haven't seen an explanation of how, with three separate sample of DNA, they are all partial.

I realise DNA isn't the be all and end all as far as forensic evidence goes but it is a very powerful tool.

 

[otto]

The family always come out with statements of that nature.
The shock has them reeling as it would me in the same circumstances.

The trouble is they have 'never walked in his shoes.'
None of us can ever know what is really going on in another persons mind.

If VT is guilty they will be part of the collateral damage.

It is very sad but killers never consider these consequences of their actions.

It's a fact that well educated, intelligent, successful people commit murder, yet each time we learn about another well educated, successful, intelligent person accused of murder, we have problems wrapping our heads around it. To accuse the police of turning Tabak into a scapegoat is to suggest that police are desperate and have decided to go after the Dutch guy because he was alone that night, and he lived next to the victim. If the arrest is based on him travelling across the bridge in the early hours of the morning, and he was also going to the airport at that time, then I think that there are serious problems with this arrest. If the DNA matches, or there is evidence of Joanna in his flat, then it's a different story altogether.

 

[Trio]

Reading this and the fact that his family are very respectable people again reinforces my view that this maybe not the right person.

The LE will have had to have enough evidence against VT, for the Crown Prosecution Service to go ahead with this Case.

I do feel sorry for VT's Family they did not do this, VT's Family in a way have lost him, but anyone however mild and kind they seem and are like that in everyday life, can snap! something can happen and in moment of madness and something terrible happen's.
His Family are in denial, which is to be expected.
So many People have been affected by this, so many People's lives have changed forever and will never be the same again.

 

[Colombo]

from reading all the 'reports' of the case up to date I believe the police may be following this or variations of the scenario below

the man charged returns home from work on his bike around 6 30 - 7 pm

he is told by the landlord of the property that the male occupant of Jo's flat has had his car jump started and has left for the weekend

he enters his flat and is alone til around 9 pm as his partner is at a works xmas party 30 miles away

he then becomes aware that Jo has returned to her flat

the man charged in some way ends up in Jo's flat and a struggle leading to her death ensues

he then has to dispose of the body before he leaves on vacation on the 18th or 19th ...(this date has to be confirmed) and Jo' partner returns on the 19th night

he wishes to place the crime as occuring outside of the property as a crime at the flat leads back to him as the nearest neighbour

he has no vehicle on the premises as his partners is 30 miles away and she will not return it til Saturday when she is in a fit state to drive

he thus leaves on his bike to Aberdeen Road to a flat the keys to which his partner has been left so as to look after the property / charge the car battery etc as the owner has gone away to her family home for xmas and then will go straight abroad

he uses that car to return to Canynge Road , where it is seen by a motorist blocking the road and forces the motorist to use the pavement to get past it

he then uses the vehicle to drive to Failand where after a number of thwarted attempts to dump the body .. at the golf club and the Clifton College sports field where what is thought to be a light coloured 4 x4 with a hatch back is sighted... he dumps her on the side of the road

this site is chosen as it will allow discovery of the body in a time frame that will allow him to create a breathing space in his mind , but the rapid snow fall that night and the further snow fall on Monday cover it and it remains hidden til the thaw on 24th night / 25 th morning

he then either proceeds to the airport to check in to catch a flight to Holland around 630 am but is told that it has been cancelled

he returns the car to Aberdeen Road and returns home on his bike to 44

he is there when his partner returns either in the early hours of Saturday or later in the day

he then prepares for his vacation and he is driven by his partner to the airport for the 'new' flight on the 19th or for an existing prior booking

he and his partner are interviewed by the police at the stage when it is a missing persons enquiry and their story of hearing nothing etc is believed

he spends xmas away and the case then becomes a murder enquiry and the lanlord is then arrested

the man charged then return on the 4th to start work on the 5th

However with all the turmoil at the house and his parners discomfort on living near a murder scene she has taken up the offer to reside at Aberdeen Road and he joins her there

he returns to the flat at 44 to retrieve clothes and essentials when the time allows and weekends

it is at this time that the owner of a car seen on cctv passing across the bridge is contacted and cleared from the enquiry as he was not in Bristol at the time

the address of the car driver as opposed to the legal keeper is noted and is discovered to be the temporary abode of the couple from the flat next to Jo's

the driver of the car is abroad but her sister has followed the case and on the day of the parents appeal puts things together and calls the police in an emotional state

the man's partner is contacted and asked to clarify her movements on the night of the 17th and her arrival back at home on the 18th

this statement allows a time frame to be constructed where he was alone with no alibi and that the events of the crime could have been carried out

he is being watched and when he is seen to appear to be preparing to flee in a car he is arrested at 2 am taken to the station where his arrest is recorded at 6am

his dna is taken and he is interogated

he does not make a confession and his alibi is that he was seen on the bridge as he was visiting the airport

the dna results returned provide a partial or stronger match to the samples found on Jo's body and with the cctv evidence from the bridge and perhaps elsewhere the police believe they have a case and he is thus charged.

 

[Trio]

I still haven't seen an explanation of how, with three separate sample of DNA, they are all partial.

I realise DNA isn't the be all and end all as far as forensic evidence goes but it is a very powerful tool.

I would presume the FSS have done the following LCN,establishment of the DNA profile through LCN (Low Copy Numbers),this is achieved through increasing the number of amplification cycles,if the FSS can obtain a full Profile by doing LCN on the partial sample of DNA, and it matches VT's DNA, then they have their Man, because his DNA should not have been be on JY.

 

[Colombo]

re the charged man who is 6 foot 4 inches tall

Mr Jefferies yesterday declined to say exactly what he saw – and said that any suggestion he had reported seeing Miss Yeates was “a serious distortion of what I said to the police…Mr Jefferies said: “I made some comment which was very, very, very much vaguer than that. I definitely cannot say that I saw Joanna Yeates that evening.”

this may be true but
Jefferies told only friends and neighbours that he had seen a mystery trio, possibly including Miss Yeates, that night.


‘He said he had seen two to three people at the flat.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ched-bags-evidence-removed.html#ixzz1BmgmqOv3

Geoffrey Hardyman, 78, who lives in the top floor flat, said: “He [Mr Jefferies] saw people coming out after dark as he was parking his car. I don’t think he was really paying any attention but just assumed they were from Flat 1, Joanna’s flat. He didn’t know if they were male or female.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ith-two-people-her-landlord-tells-police.html


now suppose this is also true

and we can accept that it was dark and CJ was anything from 5 metres to 30 metres away

but he claims to have been able to see them and it is reported that he claimed they looked like they were talking in hushed tones

even with people wearing heavy coats, hats

is it not strange that he did not mention that one of the duo / trio was at least 1 foot taller than one of the people

Joanna is described as white, 5ft 4ins tall, of medium build, dress size 8-10, with short short blonde hair and grey/blue eyes.

http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/LocalPages/NewsDetails.aspx?nsid=22345

and if indeed it was the charged man who was with Jo

is it even stranger that CJ did not even remotely recognise / notice a resemblance to his 2 tenants , one of whom he had spoken to at most 2 hours before?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-suspect-Vincent-Tabak-split-girlfriend.html

and if he did not recognise them as his tenants was he not just a little suspicious of them from his role in the neighbourhood watch?.

 

[Malaconotus]

The only reason for moving the body in the 1st place is to gather time.

Why not just leave her in the apt? Why go to the bother of moving her?

This, to me, is the strongest indication that the murder did not take place in JY's flat. I have always thought that the murder took place somewhere which would incriminate the killer and necessitate the removal of the body, i.e. in the killer's own flat. The arrest of CJ and the dismantling of his flat suggests that was also LE's thinking. Of course, it now seems that the focus is on VT's flat.

Plus he has plans to go to Hollland on 18th, and looks like he did go on 18th since flights were not good on 19th.

By the 19th flights to Schipol were departing again. It was the early flight on the 18th which was cancelled, and which gave VT a reason to be crossing the bridge. I surmise that it was this flight which he was either booked on or claimed to be booked on.

So mid-late evening after the murder on 17th VT probably wondered how to get the body out of the area without disturbing a. nosy neighbors (CJ known & others) to be aware of all goings-on in the immediate area. And b. general passers by inc. party goers on friday night week of xmas. He knows he cant do it too early at night mainly due to a. above so more likely is early in the morning 4-6am.

If he's catching an early morning flight he arouses no suspicion loading up his car in the middle of the night regardless of who sees him.

VT may have used a large bag (perhaps a Surf board type one that supposedly went missing) in which he places the body and waits ( & then VT cleans up, eats and then burns pizza box, etc). ie. The bag with body remains in her appt until later in early am when he removes it, closing door behind.

You assume the body is in Flat 1. That's unlikely. If it was, he could, after all, just leave it there. As above, it makes a lot more sense if the body is in flat 2, but is moved using a bag borrowed from flat 1.

Now he should by all accounts remove the body by car to transport it to where it was found. He has no car we know of.. but a few plausible possibilities come to mind.. 1. he has a car nobody knows of. 2. He steals a car 3. borrows a car or.. 4. He uses some else's car without them knowing. To me, no 4. and then 2. or 1. are most likely.

You'll have to talk me through how stealing a car, with all the attending complexities, e.g. likelihood of being caught, need to have knowledge of modern car security etc., is somehow more likely than owning one. You also leave out altogether the obvious explanation which is that he had previously arranged to borrow one to get to the airport.

 

[jigzy]

Just a random thought:
I wonder what was going on in Clifton when this was occurring near the river Avon in the centre of Bristol.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nna-Yeates-was-stolen-from-us-say-family.html

I always thought it odd that a statement was read out there. Seems to me like it might have been a distraction technique to send the press off the scene - a bit like throwing a stick for a dog. Probably nothing - but seemed to stand out to me at the time. jmo

 

[Praxis]

This sighting seems to be more relevant now. I also think VT had his own car which could have been out of sight from the 18th/19th (or whatever his travel date was) and left in airport until 4th. Assuming VT left on 18th or 19th, he must have been interviewed on his return (4th?). The CCTV sighting on bridge and suspicious car up and down longwood lane are both from early hours, Saturday 18th.

A mysterious car was seen being driven slowly up and down Longwood Lane on the day after Joanna Yeates was last seen alive.

A couple became suspicious when the vehicle passed them three or four times on the morning of Saturday, December 18, the Evening Post can reveal.

They reported what they saw to police, not knowing 25-year-old architect Miss Yeates had gone missing from her Clifton flat the night before, and would be found dead on the side of the same road near Failand a week later, on Christmas morning.

 

[MMENJBRIT]

RE: TRIO

Why would someone do that!?,

I expect the FSS did LCN (Low Copy Numbers) on the partial DNA, and if it was possible from doing that, the FSS then obtained a clearer reading of who's DNA was on JY.

Its not just DNA that makes a Case, although DNA could be a big part of the Case,I expect the LE does have other substantial evidence against VT, because the Crown Prosecution Service are going ahead with this Case.

We will eventually know all the details I expect.

Tomorrow VT will appear in Court probably for about a Minute to give his name and Address and VT will be charged, then VT will be remanded in Custody, till his next Court appearance, which will be at a later Date.

The Trail wont be for a while, there is a lot of work to be done by everyone.

Hi Trio:

In response to your question "why would someone do that"?

I was going with the theory that the PERP was trying to pin someone else as the guilty party by putting someone else's DNA onto the victim.
Like I said it is far fetched but then again anything is possible

WHY WOULD SOMEONE DO THAT?

 

[Patticake]

The "Stand By Your Man" article. Nothing new but photos of Tabak's mother, sister and brother.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...ates-alleged-killer-vows-to-stand-by-him.html


.

 

[Journalist]

This, to me, is the strongest indication that the murder did not take place in JY's flat. I have always thought that the murder took place somewhere which would incriminate the killer and necessitate the removal of the body, i.e. in the killer's own flat. The arrest of CJ and the dismantling of his flat suggests that was also LE's thinking. Of course, it now seems that the focus is on VT's flat.



By the 19th flights to Schipol were departing again. It was the early flight on the 18th which was cancelled, and which gave VT a reason to be crossing the bridge. I surmise that it was this flight which he was either booked on or claimed to be booked on.



If he's catching an early morning flight he arouses no suspicion loading up his car in the middle of the night regardless of who sees him.



You assume the body is in Flat 1. That's unlikely. If it was, he could, after all, just leave it there. As above, it makes a lot more sense if the body is in flat 2, but is moved using a bag borrowed from flat 1.



You'll have to talk me through how stealing a car, with all the attending complexities, e.g. likelihood of being caught, need to have knowledge of modern car security etc., is somehow more likely than owning one. You also leave out altogether the obvious explanation which is that he had previously arranged to borrow one to get to the airport.

yes agreed, stealing one is least likely, but as i point out borrowing one is possible and most likely, but he may have a car no-one know about.

And yes, perhaps the murder happened in VTs appt. Either way he was due at airport early morning and wouldnt arouse suspicion by leaving at 4-6am with an extra bag, on way or an hour earlier before flight due to leave.

Disposal then went pear shaped, ie. disturbed, and couldnt wait around or come back. You see if he is disturbed at say 5.30am (a reported possible time of sighting) and had to be at airport then going back wasnt an option right away. (even though probably minor traffic, until 6.30-7am on a saturday morning)

SO after he attempts to fly and say, doesnt (for a day) he would be highly unlikely to want to revisit the scene again. too suspicious and wouldnt look normal. And, he doesnt know when the body will be found in such an obvious place so he goes about his normal business

 

[Journalist]

from reading all the 'reports' of the case up to date I believe the police may be following this or variations of the scenario below

the man charged returns home from work on his bike around 6 30 - 7 pm

he is told by the landlord of the property that the male occupant of Jo's flat has had his car jump started and has left for the weekend

he enters his flat and is alone til around 9 pm as his partner is at a works xmas party 30 miles away

he then becomes aware that Jo has returned to her flat

the man charged in some way ends up in Jo's flat and a struggle leading to her death ensues

he then has to dispose of the body before he leaves on vacation on the 18th or 19th ...(this date has to be confirmed) and Jo' partner returns on the 19th night

he wishes to place the crime as occuring outside of the property as a crime at the flat leads back to him as the nearest neighbour

he has no vehicle on the premises as his partners is 30 miles away and she will not return it til Saturday when she is in a fit state to drive

he thus leaves on his bike to Aberdeen Road to a flat the keys to which his partner has been left so as to look after the property / charge the car battery etc as the owner has gone away to her family home for xmas and then will go straight abroad

he uses that car to return to Canynge Road , where it is seen by a motorist blocking the road and forces the motorist to use the pavement to get past it

he then uses the vehicle to drive to Failand where after a number of thwarted attempts to dump the body .. at the golf club and the Clifton College sports field where what is thought to be a light coloured 4 x4 with a hatch back is sighted... he dumps her on the side of the road

this site is chosen as it will allow discovery of the body in a time frame that will allow him to create a breathing space in his mind , but the rapid snow fall that night and the further snow fall on Monday cover it and it remains hidden til the thaw on 24th night / 25 th morning

he then either proceeds to the airport to check in to catch a flight to Holland around 630 am but is told that it has been cancelled

he returns the car to Aberdeen Road and returns home on his bike to 44

he is there when his partner returns either in the early hours of Saturday or later in the day

he then prepares for his vacation and he is driven by his partner to the airport for the 'new' flight on the 19th or for an existing prior booking

he and his partner are interviewed by the police at the stage when it is a missing persons enquiry and their story of hearing nothing etc is believed

he spends xmas away and the case then becomes a murder enquiry and the lanlord is then arrested

the man charged then return on the 4th to start work on the 5th

However with all the turmoil at the house and his parners discomfort on living near a murder scene she has taken up the offer to reside at Aberdeen Road and he joins her there

he returns to the flat at 44 to retrieve clothes and essentials when the time allows and weekends

it is at this time that the owner of a car seen on cctv passing across the bridge is contacted and cleared from the enquiry as he was not in Bristol at the time

the address of the car driver as opposed to the legal keeper is noted and is discovered to be the temporary abode of the couple from the flat next to Jo's

the driver of the car is abroad but her sister has followed the case and on the day of the parents appeal puts things together and calls the police in an emotional state

the man's partner is contacted and asked to clarify her movements on the night of the 17th and her arrival back at home on the 18th

this statement allows a time frame to be constructed where he was alone with no alibi and that the events of the crime could have been carried out

he is being watched and when he is seen to appear to be preparing to flee in a car he is arrested at 2 am taken to the station where his arrest is recorded at 6am

his dna is taken and he is interogated

he does not make a confession and his alibi is that he was seen on the bridge as he was visiting the airport

the dna results returned provide a partial or stronger match to the samples found on Jo's body and with the cctv evidence from the bridge and perhaps elsewhere the police believe they have a case and he is thus charged.

Some very interesting points - (sounds like they are coming from a pol.ce person.)

Most interesting is that VT has the alibi of going over the bridge on way to airport, on perhaps 2 days

Im interested to know how you know VT was seen looking to leave in a hurry from his appt just before he was arrested?

Do you think this is all conclusive? Lots of circumstantial evidence, plus the DNA evidence supposedly is too weak for a conviction. Unless they have much more evidence its very difficult to believe VT is the one.