GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #15

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
No mention of the broken nose and 40-odd other injuries? Hmmmmm.

If they try to claim the bruises pre-dated this encounter, will the prosecution be able to recall GR to ask about any bumps and scratches she might have had already?

I almost sure they cant now that he has been in the public gallery - I think if he'd remained behind the scenes they could have recalled them...

So TM didn't wonder where the bicycle cover had gone?

it strikes me they are going for the 'inexperienced oaf' who panicked...

is it normal for someone to make such a 'piercing scream' if someone just tries to kiss them?
 
I'm glad at least that there is no suggestion that JY was leading him on or consented at any point to his sexual advances. That's something to be grateful for.

There is a hell of a lot of suggestion - and worse. They have inverted the whole thing and put the responsibility on her of looking at him and opening the door and inviting him in. (If he wasn't nosing about outside her window and looking in, how would he know she looked at him?) Then after a short interlude she somehow up and died: phrases like went limp and Joanna was dead according to the defence. How inconsiderate.
 
Well I hope that, even if the jury find him not guilty of murder, the judge takes his dreadful behaviour into account when he deals out the sentence.
 
So if VT is to believed there was no grabbing of her wrists sufficient to cause bruising? No struggle from her to suggest she was dying as he grabbed her neck for 20 - 30 seconds? No clue that she was dying? She just remain still while he crushed life out of her a then she died?
Broken and bloody nose? Mess in the hallway? He had just killed her, why take the pizza? Turn off the oven and leave it.

Does anyone else get the impression that the defence QC doesnt like VT very much :)
Wonder if they got psychologicalal testing done?
 
Yes, we have the answere about the location but still remains question why?
Why the sock and pizza?
I still belive the was some kind of struggle and maybe the were some blood stains on the pizza box....etc.

It was already mentioned JY had damage to her toe and the sole of one of her feet. Perhaps he got rid one one sock and switched the other one around because it was bloody and he may of wanted to stop it from leaking everywhere. He could have stuck the bloody one in the toilet and flushed it away. Waited for the blood to harden on her damaged foot then switched socks over, hence only one sock found.

I remember the type of sock shown on the A&S presser, and folded up and soaked with blood or just water I can imagine it would of been easy to flush it away.
 
From hockey? It was said some injuries could predate death

I don't think that any injuries sustained whilst playing school hockey would still be present seven years later. There have been no reports that JY had played hockey recently; rowing was her thing.
 
Well, they say the first rule of lying is "keep it simple." This was simply unbelievable.
 
I don't think that any injuries sustained whilst playing school hockey would still be present seven years later. There have been no reports that JY had played hockey recently; rowing was her thing.

Also fresh breaks are obvious to pathologists, I'm sure.
 
So if VT is to believed there was no grabbing of her wrists sufficient to cause bruising? No struggle from her to suggest she was dying as he grabbed her neck for 20 - 30 seconds? No clue that she was dying? She just remain still while he crushed life out of her a then she died?
Broken and bloody nose? Mess in the hallway? He had just killed her, why take the pizza? Turn off the oven and leave it.

Does anyone else get the impression that the defence QC doesnt like VT very much :)
Wonder if they got psychologicalal testing done?

I am 99% sure that psych. assessment will have been done, especially if he was in the hospital wing and suicidal.

The defence QC is playing devils advocate (sorry) I think he is presenting things this way to show that VT knows that his actions were disgusting and admits the same. By admitting guilt he will get an automatic reduction in his sentence and possibly a small amount of something like sympathy
 
Well, they say the first rule of lying is "keep it simple." This was simply unbelievable.

I take the view that VT's account as summarised by his counsel contains some parts that are very probably true (no reason for them not to be and fit in with known facts), some parts that may or may not be true, some parts that are patently false and quite a few large deliberate omissions of material facts.
 
It was already mentioned JY had damage to her toe and the sole of one of her feet. Perhaps he got rid one one sock and switched the other one around because it was bloody and he may of wanted to stop it from leaking everywhere. He could have stuck the bloody one in the toilet and flushed it away. Waited for the blood to harden on her damaged foot then switched socks over, hence only one sock found.

I remember the type of sock shown on the A&S presser, and folded up and soaked with blood or just water I can imagine it would of been easy to flush it away.

He has admitted to disposing of the sock and pizza
 
By admitting guilt he will get an automatic reduction in his sentence and possibly a small amount of something like sympathy

But admitting guilt is just what he has NOT done, otherwise there would be no trial taking place.
 
so if VT has declared himself of no religion... how will he be sworn in? :waitasec:
 
By admitting guilt he will get an automatic reduction in his sentence

As I understand it, the automatic reduction in tariff is only given when a defendant pleads guilty to the charge (which is murder) at the earliest opportunity, which must be before the court case starts.
 
There is a hell of a lot of suggestion - and worse. They have inverted the whole thing and put the responsibility on her of looking at him and opening the door and inviting him in. (If he wasn't nosing about outside her window and looking in, how would he know she looked at him?) Then after a short interlude she somehow up and died: phrases like went limp and Joanna was dead according to the defence. How inconsiderate.

Exactly, probably something like faking a fall in the ice outside her window and she being a nice person went out to help. Have you hurt yourself, sit down for a while as any good neighbour would. Whatever happened, she is certainly not going to open her door and invite in a passing neighbour after a fleeting glance and a nod. Not that it's relevant here but lets face it he aint no George Clooney. Contrived and utter claptrap!,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
298
Guests online
381
Total visitors
679

Forum statistics

Threads
609,060
Messages
18,248,968
Members
234,535
Latest member
trinizuelana
Back
Top