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

[bees]

His story about misreading the signals after just 10 mins sounds plausible if he's socially inept but what happened after the attempted kiss doesn't ring true. He's missed out the wrist grabbing, the way she'd have fought hard, the reason for the nose injury that bled, the way she'd have looked as he was strangling her, which would make someone stop unless they were trying to kill her.

I hope the prosecution can expose all of that tomorrow and get some answers from him - he'll probably flood the dock with tears but he owes JY's family the truth and they haven't had it all yet.

 

[bax]

But admitting guilt is just what he has NOT done, otherwise there would be no trial taking place.

By the time he was arrested he understood there is enough evidence against him, so he had to pled quilty to have less penalty. If he had denied everything , they still had proved his quilt and this case judgment will be different.

 

[whiterum]

Whatever it was that was threatening enough to make Jo scream, if he had run off she would have with certainty locked the door and phoned the police, GR, her mum and dad, maybe even CJ since he lived close by.

He couldn't risk that, also TM finding out and dumping him. IMO when he put his hand/s around Jo' neck he intended to kill her, to shut her up for good rather than face the consequences and lose everything.

 

[kINGFISHER]

He certainly seemed to have his eye on her in Waitrose. The way he pushed the trolley near to her hoping for some contact but that didn't work, so he then walked out the store. He must have been obsessed with her for some reason . Who knows what the prosecution might come up with regarding that video . He knew she was on her own but what does that say for his relationship with TM.

 

[Cherwell]

There's nothing but supposition to say he was in Waitrose. It was most likely some random tall Bristolian who was completely unaware of JY and all the other shoppers. I don't know why you think he walked out of the store, he just went somewhere off screen and doubtless returned to his trolley later on.

He certainly seemed to have his eye on her in Waitrose. The way he pushed the trolley near to her hoping for some contact but that didn't work, so he then walked out the store. He must have been obsessed with her for some reason . Who knows what the prosecution might come up with regarding that video . He knew she was on her own but what does that say for his relationship with TM.

 

[veggiefan]

Sorry, I didn't explain myself. He has admitted guilt to manslaughter, if found NG to murder but guilty to manslaughter, the admission will help him during sentencing

I'm not sure. He did plead guilty to manslaughter at a relatively early stage, but the charge was murder and part of the idea of the reduced tariff is that an early plea saves all the costs of preparing for, and running, a long trial - which has clearly not happened, as he pleaded not guilty to the charge.

Perhaps aneurin can help us understand what might happen in these circumstances?

 

[kINGFISHER]

There's nothing but supposition to say he was in Waitrose. It was most likely some random tall Bristolian who was completely unaware of JY and all the other shoppers. I don't know why you think he walked out of the store, he just went somewhere off screen and doubtless returned to his trolley later on.

With due respect did you have a good look at that video.
Why do you think the video was removed. I am pretty sure it was him as are many others ,but then we cannot be a hundred percent sure.

Mr Lickley told the jury: "Jo Yeates didn't eat it — Vincent Tabak took it, as he took one of her socks.

.

Do we know why he took the sock.

 

[Frodo]

He certainly seemed to have his eye on her in Waitrose. The way he pushed the trolley near to her hoping for some contact but that didn't work, so he then walked out the store. He must have been obsessed with her for some reason . Who knows what the prosecution might come up with regarding that video . He knew she was on her own but what does that say for his relationship with TM.

What is the video from waitrose?!

 

[Luna15]

No, you're not. Originally I thought it an unlikely scenario and I always favoured the 'invited in, pass gone wrong' as being more plausible. But now we know a lot more, it doesn't fit so well ....

If I'd been defending him, I'd have gone with the cat story!

How do you think he could have had access?

He says he walked past the kitchen window and they smiled at each other; he would have been walking away from her front door, it would only have been a split second as he passed, so did he stop dead in his tracks when she smiled at him then?

BS imho

 

[Cherwell]

Why do you think the video was removed.

Maybe because of the speculation that it was Tabak, when it was actually an innocent party. Perhaps he complained. I wouldn't like it if I were him. However, it's probably for the same reason that they have taken down all coverage of the trial, but what that is I don't know. There wouldn't be any point leaving that one video up in isolation, would there.

 

[Cherwell]

How do you think he could have had access?

Only with a key IMO. I just wonder if the police have traced everyone who has lived in the flat since VT has been there? who might have left a key with him at any time for some reason. Or if the occupants were ever in the habit of leaving a key in a hiding place. (That is assuming they are the type of keys for which it's easy to get copies cut without a master.)

 

[Firefly75]

his innocent PhD-size brain.

Ah - he's so smart he's stupid?

This makes me dislike him even more.

No offense to anyone here who has a PhD or is working towards one.

 

[kINGFISHER]

Maybe because of the speculation that it was Tabak, when it was actually an innocent party. Perhaps he complained. I wouldn't like it if I were him. However, it's probably for the same reason that they have taken down all coverage of the trial, but what that is I don't know. There wouldn't be any point leaving that one video up in isolation, would there.

Yet there are still cctv images of him in Asda but the one from Waitrose has been removed. ?

 

[Luna15]

Only with a key IMO. I just wonder if the police have traced everyone who has lived in the flat since VT has been there? who might have left a key with him at any time for some reason. Or if the occupants were ever in the habit of leaving a key in a hiding place. (That is assuming they are the type of keys for which it's easy to get copies cut without a master.)

Yes I have been thinking along those lines, but I also think that CJ could have given him a set to let workmen or suchlike in at some point - by the time VT was arrested, relations were at an all time low with CJ and the police, so I cant see him 'helping them with their enquiries' in that direction, plus we all know how he doesn't like to 'muddy the waters'.

 

[aneurin]

I'm not sure. He did plead guilty to manslaughter at a relatively early stage, but the charge was murder and part of the idea of the reduced tariff is that an early plea saves all the costs of preparing for, and running, a long trial - which has clearly not happened, as he pleaded not guilty to the charge.

Perhaps aneurin can help us understand what might happen in these circumstances?

What me? Am I some kind of expert?

I think that in the circumstances where you plead guilty to manslaughter, but not guilty to murder, and the jury return a verdict of not guilty to murder, then you still get the 1/3rd discount for your guilty plea - to the manslaughter charge. (After all the responsibility for the expense of the trial rests with the prosecution for not accepting the guilty plea.)

That's what happened to Robert Brown recently anyway:-

Lord Justice Cooke ... said: “Had you denied manslaughter, the longest sentence I could give is 36 years imprisonment. Bearing in mind your early guilty plea, I sentence you to 24 years in prison".

 

[Cherwell]

Yet there are still cctv images of him in Asda but the one from Waitrose has been removed. ?

What, on the A&S website? I can't find it. A&S have removed the Asda video from Youtube as well. There are still versions of both on Youtube, uploaded by other people.

 

[konformation]

This sounds more plausible to me, too. I note the defence has not mentioned the bruises/grip marks on her wrists or the broken nose. Not minor injuries that you just pick up along the way, like a small graze or bruise.

if you look at her smiling pictures etc., she already appears to have suffered a broken nose sometime in the past. this injury could have been rebroken in a struggle (which there must have been).

It would be interesting to read VT's internet history in the time he was living at this house - in case he became obsessed etc., early on.

Re: leaving JY in the flat after killing her, (GR said when he returned the flat was on the snib only). Does that mean VT left the front door open, or took JY's key to regain access to the flat. If he left the door open it might easily have blown shut. VT would have to take the key with him once he had taken JY body from the flat, dumped it in his flat, then returned & tidied/staged the scenes in JY's flat.

On leaving for the final time he would have to be happy with how everything looked, then put the key in JY's rucksack and close the front door using the handle (possibly using the sock to hide fingerprints.)

 

[notsure]

How do you think he could have had access?

He says he walked past the kitchen window and they smiled at each other; he would have been walking away from her front door, it would only have been a split second as he passed, so did he stop dead in his tracks when she smiled at him then?

BS imho

I'm convinced that never happened. If I'm walking past someone's window at night, I don't look into their window at them. Likewise, if I'm indoors at night and someone is walking past, I don't make eye contact. This is not a plausible scenario. Yes, it could happen if they had met before (and VT said they hadn't), but otherwise not.

 

[Luna15]

Re: leaving JY in the flat after killing her, (GR said when he returned the flat was on the snib only). Does that mean VT left the front door open, or took JY's key to regain access to the flat. If he left the door open it might easily have blown shut. VT would have to take the key with him once he had taken JY body from the flat, dumped it in his flat, then returned & tidied/staged the scenes in JY's flat.

On leaving for the final time he would have to be happy with how everything looked, then put the key in JY's rucksack and close the front door using the handle (possibly using the sock to hide fingerprints.)

The prosecution have made the point (through GR) that they always double locked the door whether they were in or out of the flat - you might have a point; as why would JY put her keys in her rucksack after double locking the door? (presuming she did) surely they would be hanging in the lock on the inside of the door?

 

[FiestyFairy]

Re: leaving JY in the flat after killing her, (GR said when he returned the flat was on the snib only). Does that mean VT left the front door open, or took JY's key to regain access to the flat. If he left the door open it might easily have blown shut. VT would have to take the key with him once he had taken JY body from the flat, dumped it in his flat, then returned & tidied/staged the scenes in JY's flat.

On leaving for the final time he would have to be happy with how everything looked, then put the key in JY's rucksack and close the front door using the handle (possibly using the sock to hide fingerprints.)

on a YALE lock you can push the lever to stop the door automatically locking when closed. The door would then only be held shut like an internal door, on the snib