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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
ITN reporter at 630 news live from Bristol

appeared to emphasise that he had been told by police today that CJ was still a suspect

With regards to your earlier post about CJ's sighting. Did he ever mention hearing the alleged screams as all this occurred around the same time?
 
I always had "someone" else as the murderer but had we known of all possible suspects maybe this is the conclusion most people would have arrived at a lot earlier.
VT has been charged with murder which to me means the LE most definitely have concrete evidence but it seems that VT is going to plead not guilty otherwise no way would he be applying for bail, alas i dont think we will ever know the true sequence of events and the pizza will remain forever a mystery (if proven guilty) a bit like many other murders where someone is convicted all we get is their version of events

jmo

I think the truth may never come out too, if VT is going with a not guilty plea.
 
ITN reporter at 630 news live from Bristol

appeared to emphasise that he had been told by police today that CJ was still a suspect

Can you remember how it was worded?
Something along the lines of 'Chris Jefferies is still on Police bail pending further enquiries'

I didn't see that news.
 
With regards to your earlier post about CJ's sighting. Did he ever mention hearing the alleged screams as all this occurred around the same time?

no and he wasnt quoted as hearing the one scream at 12 midnight

although one unnamed resident of the house did
 
Can you remember how it was worded?
Something along the lines of 'Chris Jefferies is still on Police bail pending further enquiries'

I didn't see that news.

it was along the lines of that he had been told b the police today that cj is still a suspect

it was the tone in his voice that seemed to show emphasis

ive tried to track it down but no joy as yet
 
With regards to your earlier post about CJ's sighting. Did he ever mention hearing the alleged screams as all this occurred around the same time?

No mention of any screams from C.J as far as I'm aware. Just his original quote was
'very, very, very much vaguer than that, and that it had 'been seriously distorted since'

[video=youtube;Clee4IYy8aY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clee4IYy8aY&feature=related[/video]
A serious distortion.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK...-By-Police-In-Bristol/Article/201012415874586

Very vague comment.

No definite sightings, or screams.
 
The plot thickens

I honestly don't think he'll be cleared until the police are sure he isn't involved in some way. I'd be surprised if he didn't own the flat that Tabak lived in and they'll want to make sure that he hasn't meddled to point the finger at someone else. Also, no matter what some people say his alleged sighting just didn't add up. The press quoted the two other neighbours and so I doubt they made it all up. To be honest, when I first heard of that my first impression was that CJ was trying to shift speculation on to other people and he hadn't actually seen anyone, especially as the screams heard by two others were heard around the same time and I don't think he mentioned that. It was also not long after Greg's brother was talking about their alibi together and that made me think that the LL might have been trying to implicate those two at the beginning, before it became obvious that Greg's alibi was cast iron.
 
I honestley don't think he'll be cleared until the police are sure he isn't involved in some way.

indeed
I'd be surprised if he didn't own the flat that Tabak lived in and they'll want to make sure that he hasn't meddled to point the finger at someone else.

he does own the flat

Also, no matter what some people say his alleged sighting just didn't add up.

indeed

The press quoted the two other neighbours and so I doubt they made it all up. To be honest, when I first heard of that my first impression was that CJ was trying to shift speculation on to other people and he hadn't actually seen anyone, especially as the screams by two others were heard around the same time and I don't think he mentioned that.

indeed

It was also not long after Greg's brother was talking about their alibi together and that made me think that the LL might have been trying to implicate those two at the beginning, before it became obvious that Greg's alibi was cast iron.

indeed
 
I think the truth may never come out too, if VT is going with a not guilty plea.

Maybe a silly question and totally a matter of others opinion but I wonder what the police have told VT with regards to the evidence against him. If they have concrete evidence will he have been told?

He has already told the press he didn't know her - so concrete evidence such as DNA or hair fibres linking the two would without a doubt be just that -concrete indesputable evidence. And I am not talking about 1 strand of hair in his flat - that could easily be explained away.

Does it happen regularly - Forensic evidence is 'shown' to the suspect during interrogation by the police and they deny committing the crime?
 
The Moonstone introduces a number of attributes that were to become classic attributes of the twentieth-century detective story:

English country house robbery
An "inside job"
red herrings

A celebrated, skilled, professional investigator
Bungling local constabulary
Detective enquiries
Large number of false suspects
The "least likely suspect"
A rudimentary "locked room" murder
A reconstruction of the crime
A final twist in the plot


sound familiar????

the house would have once been a large mansion in the country!

the pizza was effectively stolen as well!!
 
I honestley don't think he'll be cleared until the police are sure he isn't involved in some way. I'd be surprised if he didn't own the flat that Tabak lived in and they'll want to make sure that he hasn't meddled to point the finger at someone else. Also, no matter what some people say his alleged sighting just didn't add up. The press quoted the two other neighbours and so I doubt they made it all up. To be honest, when I first heard of that my first impression was that CJ was trying to shift speculation on to other people and he hadn't actually seen anyone, especially as the screams by two others were heard around the same time and I don't think he mentioned that. It was also not long after Greg's brother was talking about their alibi together and that made me think that the LL might have been trying to implicate those two at the beginning, before it became obvious that Greg's alibi was cast iron.

They won't be rushing to say anything else with the lawsuit he is preparing against the police.

I think they will have to cut him loose as a suspect soon but they aren't going to hurry because if they could find something, anything, it might make the lawsuit go away

ETA, there see, I don't take what LE says as gospel lol
 
Maybe a silly question and totally a matter of others opinion but I wonder what the police have told VT with regards to the evidence against him. If they have concrete evidence will he have been told?

He has already told the press he didn't know her - so concrete evidence such as DNA or hair fibres linking the two would without a doubt be just that -concrete indesputable evidence. And I am not talking about 1 strand of hair in his flat - that could easily be explained away.

Does it happen regularly - Forensic evidence is 'shown' to the suspect during interrogation by the police and they deny committing the crime?

He'll be told, and shown where possible the most damning evidence they can muster. They want an outright admission of guilt during questioning. They don't want to have to build a court case with fragile pieces of evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
1,165
Total visitors
1,342

Forum statistics

Threads
602,127
Messages
18,135,169
Members
231,244
Latest member
HollyMcKee
Back
Top