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

[graceholl]

So who do we think the next witness is going to be? Are we in for a big surprise?

I would be very interested to hear what TM has to say in all of this!

 

[kINGFISHER]

http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/group/busslab/stalkinghelp/StalkingWhyAm.html

heres a bit on the asphyxia theory and maybe a glimps of his mind, what makes him tick,not all will apply to him. B]Intimacy Seeker[/B] and Narcissistic Personality Disorder erotomania.

 

[veggiefan]

I would be very interested to hear what TM has to say in all of this!

So would I, but the prosecution did not read any statement from her, so I wonder if she will actually be called. In fact, I don't think it is usual for the prosecution to call any further witnesses once the opposing counsel has opened the case for the defence.

I really wonder if there is now very much more left to hear, other than possibly character witnesses for VT (and I doubt that TM will be one of those) and then the counsels' and judge's summing up.

The case was originally expected to last four weeks, although I think somebody said that that had now been reduced to three. I wonder if the case management hearing decided to build in quite a lot of jury deliberation time, on the basis that the actual factual evidence is far from decisive (not that you'd know that from some of the opinions expressed here!).

 

[Paulette]

A snippet of todays testimony.

"There was very little time for any chitchat, if at all. And you knew full well what you were doing when you strangled her to death," Mr Lickley said.


"You squeezed her neck and you carried on until she died. You were the one being aggressive and she was resisting you.


"You did that when you knew that no one would come and save her. You knew her boyfriend was away.


"She showed no interest in you, Vincent Tabak."


The defendant replied: "By inviting me in, she is showing interest."


Mr Lickley interjected: "That's not showing interest in you, Vincent Tabak - that's being neighbourly."

Wow! He is a very dangerous man - unable to judge or appreciate this situation.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vincent-tabak-denies-sex-thrills-strangling-2373963.html

 

[aneurin]

Well, there was that Russian (possibly the most successful serial murderer of recent times) who apparently could only attain sexual satisfaction while strangling teenage boys, but it didn't work unless they actually died.

That obviously wasn't VT's case. I think he was a newcomer to sexual violence and once she was dead lost his interest and was genuinely preoccupied by the need to get rid of the body.

Or indeed our very own John Reginald Halliday Christie who enjoyed strangling his victims to death whilst in flagrante delicto, so to speak. Deriving some kind of pleasure from strangulating victims to death is not uncommon amongst those who qualify as being sexual sadists.

 

[Cherwell]

The case was originally expected to last four weeks, although I think somebody said that that had now been reduced to three.

Well, next week will be week 4. The first few days were taken up with unreported legal stuff, so it's easy to disregard the first week as we weren't privy to what was going on.

 

[Paulette]

Basically, she beckoned him in when he was peacefully going to enjoy one of his favourite activities (i.e. strolling around big supermarkets), ran to open the door and pulled him in, tried to force a drink upon him, flirted with him, was friendly and cheerful, which is, as a rule, a sign that the other party should make 'a move'; kissing someone (especially when you don't really know them) is totally not sexual, only enjoyable (presumed to the person on whom the kiss is being forced against their will), and clearly this is/was obvious to everyone except poor JY; then she screamed when he had his arm around her back and tried to kiss her (quelle surprise), and didn't stop screaming after he covered her mouth and grabbed her neck? Then she died in 15 seconds flat without him even noticing that she couldn't breathe and that he was squeezing her neck, and she never fought back for a second. Apparently strangulation victims just stand there pleasantly and let you squeeze their neck politely until they quietly go limp and die. He never intended to hurt her in any way and never gave her any other injuries at all (never mind the 40-odd unexplained injuries on her body). Then the poor VT starts drinking heavily and his suffering is terrible. The way he's going, they should be judging JY for misunderstanding him and for making him do it. Is he for real?

You may be right. He obviously has no decent feelings for Jo - she was just an object to use. Here is a snippet that proves my point:

"Mr Lickley then asked the defendant who he was sorry for.

"For Joanna's parents, for Greg," Tabak said.

Mr Lickley replied: "What about yourself?"

Tabak said: "No."

Referring to Ms Morson, Tabak added: "I feel sorry for what I did to her yes, and for my parents."

Does he ever say anything about Jo? NO.

He has no remorse for his victim!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vincent-tabak-denies-sex-thrills-strangling-2373963.html

 

[bos]

The defence may still go for Tanja as a witness to build up more credibility to the drinking/weightloss/inner turmoil she was witnessing & how that caused her to (possibly) call the police. I'm doubting it.

There was a third post mortem done; I'm not clear why & who instructed it & if the pathologist who conducted it could also be a witness.

What about some forensic person querying DNA/fibre transfer?

Difficult for the jury to isolate their feelings of despising his manipulative ways; so disappointing that there isn't more forensic evidence/evidence of attempted cleanup that could effectively challenge his assertion it all happened in the kitchen.

 

[aneurin]

So who do we think the next witness is going to be? Are we in for a big surprise?

I'm expecting a few character witnesses, followed by summing up, and then over to the jury.

 

[Firefly75]

Hi Paulette (post 967),

Yes, what really gets me is the way he is saying that:[I]she[/I] beckoned him in, she was flirty,sheinvited him in so she had to be interested in him, she wanted him to kiss her, she wouldn't stop screaming, she never gave him any indication that she was struggling to breathe while he was choking her, she never fought back at all, she just died for no reason.

Does he ever take the responsibility for anything? Does he heck. He didn't learn as a child (!!!) what is likely to happen if you cover someone's mouth and squeeze their neck, he misunderstood the situation but it was because she invited him in, he didn't mean to harm her in any way or kill her but she wouldn't stop screaming.

Blame the victim, do! Bring it on, it's only the girl he throttled with his bare hands because she wouldn't give in to him. Someone said before it was either rape or kill her - I think they could very well be right.

 

[Cherwell]

Pity there's no chance of

"Call - Bernard The Cat!"

:cat:

 

[bos]

Hi Paulette,

Yes, what really gets me is the way he is saying that:she beckoned him in, she was flirty,sheinvited him in so she had to be interested in him, she wanted him to kiss her, she wouldn't stop screaming,she never gave any indication that she was struggling to breathe while he was choking her, she never fought back at all, she just died for no reason.

Does he ever take the responsibility for anything? Does he heck. He didn't learn as a child (!!!) what is likely to happen if you cover someone's mouth and squeeze their neck, he misunderstood the situation but it was because she invited him in, he didn't mean to harm her in any way or kill her but she wouldn't stop screaming.

Blame the victim, do! Bring it on, it's only the girl he throttled with his bare hands because she wouldn't give in to him. Someone said before it was either rape or kill her - I think they could very well be right.

Absolutely! Then when he can't blame her, blame the lawyers

 

[otto]

I strongly suspect that TB first attacked Joanna outside her flat. He could have been lurking outside her flat and Joanna has gone back outside for whatever reason, maybe to bring the cat back in?, and TB has pounced. I don't for one minute believe that Joanna invited him into her flat. No way. For people to have heard Joanna's screams so clearly I think that it's more likely that the attack occurred outside the flat, however, I do think that he dragged/carried her back into her flat at some point. JMHO

Quote: "Since Mr Tabak's arrest on Thursday, another witness claims to have heard cries from the building where Miss Yeates lived on the night she was arrested. A resident in a building directly behind 44 Canynge Road has told police he heard a woman screaming "Help me" on the night Miss Yeates went missing." End Quote
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...d-not-know-Vincent-Tabak-says-her-father.html

I too think that the attack happened either outside the flat, or inside with the door wide open. Otherwise, I don't think the sound of her screams or calls for help would have been heard as they were. I hadn't thought of her stepping out for the cat, but that could explain how he got in. Perhaps she came home and didn't immediately lock the door, set things down while the cat was out, cracked open a cider, turned on the oven and then opened the door to call the cat.

 

[bos]

Pity there's no chance of

"Call - Bernard The Cat!"

:cat:

It did cross my mind to wonder what Bernard's reaction would be when placed in close proximity to VT!

 

[Luna15]

The defence may still go for Tanja as a witness to build up more credibility to the drinking/weightloss/inner turmoil she was witnessing & how that caused her to (possibly) call the police. I'm doubting it.

There was a third post mortem done; I'm not clear why & who instructed it & if the pathologist who conducted it could also be a witness.

What about some forensic person querying DNA/fibre transfer?

Difficult for the jury to isolate their feelings of despising his manipulative ways; so disappointing that there isn't more forensic evidence/evidence of attempted cleanup that could effectively challenge his assertion it all happened in the kitchen.

seeing as the prosecution are going for sexual intent, the defence might want her to verify if he had any 'unusual habits' in that dept. - a big ask of her to be helping him in his defence after all he's put her through.

 

[otto]

Decision being the key word here i.e he knew what he was doing would result in her death.

In his words, there was no decision, but rather he reacted when she screamed and accidentally - she was dead 20 seconds later. Given her injuries and bleeding from a broken nose, I don't believe that all that blood got on her shirt, sock, wrist, hair and face in 20 seconds. The bleeding alone suggests to me that she was injured, there was a violent struggle and eventually he overpowered her by putting pressure on her neck, or face, such that she could no longer breath.

 

[Firefly75]

seeing as the prosecution are going for sexual intent, the defence might want her to verify if he had any 'unusual habits' in that dept. - a big ask of her to be helping him in his defence after all he's put her through.

Could have been a 'newly developed or discovered taste', for all we (or perhaps even his girlfriend) know(s). *shudder* She may have spent all the time since his arrest wondering if it 'should' have been her, or if she would have been next had he not been arrested. *shudder* Poor girl, it must be a nightmare for her, too.

 

[Firefly75]

In his words, there was no decision, but rather he reacted when she screamed and accidentally - she was dead 20 seconds later. Given her injuries and bleeding from a broken nose, I don't believe that all that blood got on her shirt, sock, wrist, hair and face in 20 seconds. The bleeding alone suggests to me that she was injured, there was a violent struggle and eventually he overpowered her by putting pressure on her neck, or face, such that she could no longer breath.

I, too, find it hard to believe that she just politely let him throttle her without putting up a fight and just went limp in a few seconds. No sir. He probably has a darn good reason for 'not remembering' how her nose got broken and all the rest of it. I just don't buy it.

 

[Curious Alice]

I, too, find it hard to believe that she just politely let him throttle her without putting up a fight and just went limp in a few seconds. No sir. He probably has a darn good reason for 'not remembering' how her nose got broken and all the rest of it. I just don't buy it.

I suppose he could have been directed by his legal team to only respond to certain specific known and proven information and offer his version of the "accidental death". Can they advise him to avoid questions that would incriminate him further and potentially lead to a murder conviction ?

 

[Firefly75]

I suppose he could have been directed by his legal team to only respond to certain specific known and proven information and offer his version of the "accidental death". Can they advise him to avoid questions that would incriminate him further and potentially lead to a murder conviction ?

I don't know. What about the bit where they all swear that they're going to tell the truth and nothing but the truth? Can his legal team give him the green light to lie? I've no idea.