Pisces Cloud
Active Member
I remember when the police found her body and they said they thought she'd been there for several days, so I think that rules out the Christmas period.
GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #10
- Thread starter Texas Mist
- Start date
- Status
I remember when the police found her body and they said they thought she'd been there for several days, so I think that rules out the Christmas period.
Phillb
Member
Because of the frozen state of the body they thought that yes. But that isn't conclusive really IMO.
The body would be frozen kept in cold tempretures anywhere.
Pisces Cloud
Active Member
Just to point out that this actually comes from the police and it isn't just a report by a source in the press.
http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/LocalPages/NewsDetails.aspx?nsid=22383&t=1&lid=1
http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/LocalPages/NewsDetails.aspx?nsid=22383&t=1&lid=1
Perhaps they were questioned but had a perfectly valid reason for the trip. Such as, hypothetically, travelling to catch a plane at Lulsgate.
Phillb
Member
Agreed.
It very much reminds of the Yorkshire Ripper £5 note puzzle.
He killed the girl in Manchester and left the body in an old greenhouse. It had been there for a week or two, but he remembered he'd given her a £5 note, he was worried it could be traced back to him. But he daren't go back for it, when he found out it hadn't been discovered for x amount of days (week or so) he did go back.
He moved the body (which made even him feel sick with the smell) but he couldn't find the £5 note. So he took his anger out on the corpse and stabbed it even more. The Police knew when the body was originally left there, they also knew it had been moved at a later date.
A copy of the Sun (or Daily Star) was left near the body with a date on it. The Police thought this was the killer taunting them with sick clues. But on Sutcliffes arrest he admitted everything, killing her, the day it happened, and when he went back. He admitted moving the body and stabbing it again. But he was adamant, and denied strongly he never left the newspaper there.
That leaves the question? Who did?? :waitasec:
Patticake
Member
Not much new here but article features a photo of Marcel Tabak, Vincent's brother.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/224632/They-have-the-wrong-man-says-brother-of-Vincent-Tabak
THEY HAVE THE WRONG MAN, SAYS BROTHER OF VINCENT TABAK
.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/224632/They-have-the-wrong-man-says-brother-of-Vincent-Tabak
THEY HAVE THE WRONG MAN, SAYS BROTHER OF VINCENT TABAK
.
brownbread
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction score
- 418
Quite right. There's many things which I don't think will become any clearer until a trial, and perhaps not even then.
We're now as close as we can be at this point of having an understanding of who may have done it. The exact whys and wherefores we don't know, and the more that becomes known in advance the greater the risk of a trial being prejudiced.
Phillb
Member
Yes but if it was V.T.
He was the murdered girls next door neighbour. Surely that rings alarm bells? Plus it isn't hard to check he doesn't own a car, and doesn't normally drive.
Especially if he was rather hasty in leaving the country as you say.
Curious Alice
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 2
The mystery was deliberate ? Seems very possible now we know a little more about VT.
brownbread
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction score
- 418
Leaving aside the car thing, presuming the flights were booked in advance, then there's nothing suspicious about leaving the country. It's Christmas and many people were going home to be with their families that weekend. It'd have been MORE unusual to have planned to have been travelling and then not done so.
As for the car, I have no idea whether he had access to a car or not, but if a car was sat in an airport car park over the Christmas period, that may explain why it wasn't one of the vehicles that was initially checked when CJ and PS's vehicles were.
I'm sure that there were thousands of people who drove across the Clifton Suspension Bridge in the days following the 17th December 2010. There might have been dozens of those who had some connection with Jo Yeates. Each one of them might have been questioned; each one would have provided a perfectly innocent explanation. Why should the police suspect one person simply because they happened to be the nextdoor neighbour? Would you expect the police to arrest you, and go all CSI over you and your home, just because your nextdoor neighbour had been murdered and you'd driven to Tesco on the following day?
With the benefit of hindsight it's easy to be critical. But I would expect it to be the case that, if the reports of the trip across the bridge on the 18th December are correct, and the individual concerned provided an explanation then, notwithstanding that explanation, they would have moved up the charts (so to speak) and qualified as a 'person of interest'. Possibly some of the subsequent actions of the police might, in the light of subsequent events, now be seen as specifically targetted attempts to obtain sufficient evidence to justify the arrest of that individual.
P.S. I realise that the above might sound a little vague, but proceedings are active.
That aspect is under review at this time. I think you'll find that Avon and Somerset have made a comment about that.
It appears to me that the Daily Mail knows quite a lot about what has been going on behind the scenes, and I get the impression that Aneurin knows something about it too and perhaps that he has more right to such knowledge than the Daily Mail.
It's been suggested in this thread several times that the police knew more than they were letting on and indeed were looking more for clinching evidence than new ideas.
Mrs Yeates" remark about "did anyone lend you a car?" now appears too appropriate to VT to have been pure chance.
It's been suggested in this thread several times that the police knew more than they were letting on and indeed were looking more for clinching evidence than new ideas.
Mrs Yeates" remark about "did anyone lend you a car?" now appears too appropriate to VT to have been pure chance.
Maybe there are ways in which it's possible to tell how long the remains were frozen for.
Phillb
Member
The Police have always said they thought the Killer would have used the suspension bridge, and most likely they thought it was soon after Jo died. They've always given the impression they thought she had died pretty much soon after arriving home.
The person 'whoever it was caught crossing the bridge' on the C.C.T.V was obviously in the right time frame they were looking at. Enough for them to question him. He wasn't going to any airport on the Saturday 18th
(as far as we can gather, if he did go, It was on Mon 20th)
The C.C.T.V quote does say it's Sat 18th the car is pictured.
It all leads back to the question, how can the next door neighbour to the murdered girl account for his movements over that bridge hours after the Police assumed she had died. On the very same route they were looking at. Even more so when V.T doesn't own a car, and doesn't normally drive.
It does make sense to question that something looks badly wrong. Either it was V.T in that car who was let off the hook all too easy, or it wasn't him??
No alibi about pre booked air flights would have got him off a trip across the bridge on the 18th.
Thousands of people hadn't used the bridge in those few hours after Jo died either.
JMO.
Perhaps a case of having to wait for more evidence. If the person was abroad for a while they'd have to wait, watch and then decide when they had enough other pieces in place (or a helpful call) and then go in.
Whatever, they must feel they have enough to bring charges at this time.
The man in custody will be charged tomorrow but has not yet been convicted. More information may still come to light where people rack their brains and memories and link a few other, so far, forgotten important bits of information. It's amazing what people remember in hindsight when they are focussing on one individual. So perhaps more info to come in yet.
Let's spell it out : Christmas abroad already planned; need to borrow car for airport perhaps already discussed; airport chaos already a factor; murder committed Friday evening; perhaps some minor adjustments to travel plans needed or perhaps not; car loan details finalised in view of double requirement ; luggage, some in very large case, loaded into car at Clifton early Saturday morning (packing done during night) ; journey to airport on Saturday 18th December includes minor detour to Longwood Lane ; frightened man then gets out of country as fast as possible, especially as, despite his precautions, he doesn't know how soon it might be discovered.
Plenty of time over Christmas using someone else's pc to keep up to date with UK news stories.
Return when the heat seems to be directed elsewhere. Low profile behaviour.
Meanwhile, police have been processing tons of data (as well as tons of garbage) and whittling candidates down to a very small number. For some time they have been all but sure. They know perfectly well it can't have been GR or MW as alibis rock solid and perhaps same applies to PS.
One or two final clinchers. Arrest made. Neighbours etc reinterrogated while the man is under arrest...
Not even an opinion of course. Just a hypothesis, which I think doesn't conflict with any known data and doesn't depend on tealeaf-inspection and obstinacy.
BTW Phillb, I don't think it's ever been shown that VT was ever "let off the hook". Just not ripe for arrest at a very early stage. Police wanting to accumulate full case before pouncing.
Plenty of time over Christmas using someone else's pc to keep up to date with UK news stories.
Return when the heat seems to be directed elsewhere. Low profile behaviour.
Meanwhile, police have been processing tons of data (as well as tons of garbage) and whittling candidates down to a very small number. For some time they have been all but sure. They know perfectly well it can't have been GR or MW as alibis rock solid and perhaps same applies to PS.
One or two final clinchers. Arrest made. Neighbours etc reinterrogated while the man is under arrest...
Not even an opinion of course. Just a hypothesis, which I think doesn't conflict with any known data and doesn't depend on tealeaf-inspection and obstinacy.
BTW Phillb, I don't think it's ever been shown that VT was ever "let off the hook". Just not ripe for arrest at a very early stage. Police wanting to accumulate full case before pouncing.
ruined detroit
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2011
- Messages
- 124
- Reaction score
- 13
Can you link to the statement please? I've read nothing official, merely comments from an un-named source. What have the force had to say on the record, official like?
- Status