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

[aneurin]

Exactly! He was an architect and presumably viewed the city as a piece of art....

VT was not an architect. He was a people flow analyst.

 

[otto]

It would only be manslaughter if it was accepted that a reasonable man would have not realised that compression of the neck would result in death or serious injury; the fact that VT himself might personally have been acting under some misapprehension of the consequences of his actions is irrelevant.

The other key point here is to understand the crucial importance of the 'no struggle' theory advanced by VT. Since, had JY struggled whilst VT was strangling her, then it would have been blindingly obvious, even to the dimmest of the dim, let alone someone in possession of a PhD, that she was in distress, and that he was physically harming her, and that he should desist immediately.

So, in order to believe that it was manslaughter, you not only have to accept that the 'average joe' doesn't realise that strangling someone is an act highely likely to kill them, but you also have to accept that at no point during the proceedings did JY exhibit any signs of concern at this unfortunate turn of events.

Interesting ... thank you. So by claiming that she did not struggle, it means that VT had no idea that she was in distress and therefore continued to apply pressure to her neck with his hand over her mouth until she went limp. He did not know, as a child, that applying pressure to someone's neck was a dangerous thing to do and therefore he can only be guilty of manslaughter. He's a very clever man ... well informed of the law and the evidence.

After she went limp, he completely panicked, misplaced 30 minutes, put Joanna in his car, texted his girlfriend and went shopping for beer, crisis and rock salt. Then, he drove back to his flat - not the roundabout route to the airport - and presumably put the rock salt on the back path where he dropped Joanna when it was slippery (and she was heavy). Then what ... drove around towards the airport, then took a right or a left towards the quarry bike path? It sounds very calculated ... like he was curious about killing someone, thought he could get away with it, and cleverly covered it up.

 

[otto]

Under the Repatriation of Prisoners Act 1984 it is indeed possible for foreign nationals to be 'sent home' to serve their sentence. Whether it would be deemed appropriate in whatever circumstances VT finds himself in, I do not know.

I think it's a given that he will be allowed to serve his sentence in the Netherlands. His mother is in her 70s and his four siblings, including a dr are in the Netherlands. It would be unusually cruel to his mother to deny this.

 

[otto]

VT was not an architect. He was a people flow analyst.

I understand that he has a phd in architecture and is referred to as an engineer. People Flow is architecture ... life safety routes, programming, things like that.
He studied in Eindhoven.

"VT, an architectural engineer specialising in optimising flows of people through sports stadiums and other buildings, works for the Bath-based company Buro Happold.

He confirmed his address as Flat 2, 44 Canynge Road, Bristol, which he shared with TM, an analyst for the Wiltshire-based vacuum cleaner company Dyson. Officers arrested him at the nearby flat of a friend. VT spent five years in Eindhoven studying for a doctorate in “User Simulation of Space Utilisation” before moving to Britain in 2008."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nt-Tabak-enjoyed-normal-family-Christmas.html

 

[aneurin]

I understand that he has a phd in architecture and is referred to as an engineer. People Flow is architecture ... life safety routes, programming, things like that.
He studied in Eindhoven.

Architects design buildings. VT does not design buildings. He might have studied at the faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning at Eindhoven, but the subject of his PhD thesis was 'User simulation of space utilisation'. He's a computer geek that builds models.

It's not an important point, but in the context of the statement - "He was an architect and presumably viewed the city as a piece of art" - the wrong inference was being drawn.

P.S. I now see you've edited your original post to add some further information. He's not an architectural engineer either, notwithstanding what it says in the Telegraph. An architectural engineer is someone who constructs buildings, as opposed to merely designing them. VT was involved in neither the construction nor the design of buildings, but rather dealt with the way that people moved through the buildings.

 

[otto]

Architects design buildings. VT does not design buildings. He might have studied at the faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning at Eindhoven, but the subject of his PhD thesis was 'User simulation of space utilisation'. He's a computer geek that builds models.

It's not an important point, but in the context of the statement - "He was an architect and presumably viewed the city as a piece of art" - the wrong inference was being drawn.

P.S. I now see you've edited your original post to add some further information. He's not an architectural engineer either, notwithstanding what it says in the Telegraph. An architectural engineer is someone who constructs buildings, as opposed to merely designing them. VT was involved in neither the construction nor the design of buildings, but rather dealt with the way that people moved through the buildings.

He completed degrees in Architecture as far as I know. He was granted a phd through Urban Planning and Architecture ... nothing to do with Computer Science. As an architect, in any capacity, yes he would have viewed the city as a piece of art. I stand behind that statement that architects, even people flow analysts, would still view architecture as art. His thesis preface describes how people flow understanding can be used in future designs. He is an architect, primarily a designer, attempting to perfect building function.

Here's his thesis: http://alexandria.tue.nl/extra2/200910371.pdf

He is an architectural engineer.

 

[aneurin]

He completed degrees in Architecture as far as I know. He was granted a phd through Urban Planning and Architecture ... nothing to do with Computer Science. As an architect, in any capacity, yes he would have viewed the city as a piece of art. I stand behind that statement that architects, even people flow analysts, would still view architecture as art. His thesis preface describes how people flow understanding can be used in future designs. He is an architect, primarily a designer, attempting to perfect building function.

Here's his thesis: http://alexandria.tue.nl/extra2/200910371.pdf

He is an architectural engineer.

Oh dear, you really are arguing simply for the case of arguing aren't you? Like I said, it's not an important point, it has no real relevance to the case, it has no bearing on VT's guilt, and if you want to use you own personal defintions of words like 'architect' and 'architectural engineer' please feel free to do so.

 

[otto]

Oh dear, you really are arguing simply for the case of arguing aren't you? Like I said, it's not an important point, it has no real relevance to the case, it has no bearing on VT's guilt, and if you want to use you own personal defintions of words like 'architect' and 'architectural engineer' please feel free to do so.

I actually think it is an important point. He was not simply a people flow analyst. He had a phd in Architecture. GR has a degree in architecture and Joanna had a degree in landscape architecture. I think it's an important point that all three were in the same field of work and in the same age group. In fact, early on it was wondered whether Joanna had ever come across VT through work. I recall reading that they attended one meeting in common.

I am not using my own personal definitions of architectural engineer and architect, I am quoting from his phd thesis.

 

[kINGFISHER]

QUOTE Many killers seem to go into a trance during their predatory and killing. So maybe he really could not remember and was helped , prompted with the details he says he can remember.

 

[otto]

This is VT: he used a "dynamic network simulation tool to model complex scenarios of people movement through a 3D network." He carefully studied people movement through a workday and plotted their movements to optimize buidling design.

In the case of a murder, it would involve VT predicting whether he could anticipate every move that everyone made and have a solution/explanation/calculated response. He failed and was arrested because he or his girlfriend called police from the Netherlands to report the landlord's car turning around. That police visit resulted in VT's DNA being taken for analysis and the stage was set ... it was only a matter of time. Still, he was very calculating in actions and apparently with his girlfriend after the murder, manipulating her to accommodating him.

 

[veggiefan]

Architects design buildings. VT does not design buildings. He might have studied at the faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning at Eindhoven, but the subject of his PhD thesis was 'User simulation of space utilisation'.

His BSc was in "Architecture, Building and Planning". It was only after spending three years on that and a further three years on the same subject (for his MSc) that he researched "User simulation of space utilisation" for his Doctorate.

In other words, he went through the same academic course that many Dutch architects follow, but he never (as far as I'm aware) practised as an architect.

I'm not sure of the relevance of all this, though!

 

[2goldfish]

When and if you do need glasses, further down the road you may discover progressive lenses (a.k.a. trifocals), which give one three separate opportunities to read things wrong. As I have done!

Just catching up here - can anyone tell me how VT today explained the 43 separate injuries if Joanna didn't put up a struggle?

I am sure someone already told you but he so angers & horrifies me, I will tell you too.


he said "I dont know" or "I cant remember" (or both) pretty much 43 times.

 

[Cadfael]

I do not think it were odd that they were in the kitchen, especially if as he stated she DID offer him a drink. It seems perfectly plausible to me that if indeed she did invite him in she offered him a drink and he would have followed her into the kitchen.

I think I am in the minority also by saying that I also find it equally plausible that she invited him in. This in no way infers she was flirting with him, she was bored that night, as proved by her texts and wanted company. She would have felt safe in her flat. I am not disputing the idea that he knocked on her door and he was invited in that way, but i do not think that this was planned as he did such a poor job of disposing of the body and also of his Internet searches. As he used the net so much afterwards I think if it were planned he would have used it beforehand to research thoroughly. As a PHD student he would have been used to research and I think had it been planned then her body would never have been found.

Of course this is all speculation, as it pretty much everything in this case. The prosecution did a poor job in my eyes of explaining the events of that night.

 

[aneurin]

His BSc was in "Architecture, Building and Planning". It was only after spending three years on that and a further three years on the same subject (for his MSc) that he researched "User simulation of space utilisation" for his Doctorate.

In other words, he went through the same academic course that many Dutch architects follow, but he never (as far as I'm aware) practised as an architect.

I'm not sure of the relevance of all this, though!

Well absolutely. I'm quite well aware of the fact that he studied architecture or something very like that, but it remains the case that VT has never worked as either an architect or an architectural engineer.

In one sense I find it quite amusing, as previously we had posters arguing that because VT was employed as a people flow analyst, he must have been obsessed by watching people, and began speculating about peepholes, crawlspaces and the likes. No we have someone arguing almost the exact opposite - that he was fascinated by the externalities of buildings rather than the internalities.

The relevance of either argument quite escapes me as well.

 

[Bright]

Hello, everyone. I was reading this forum for some time and have just joined in.

I like the friendly environment here and promise to be patient 'listener' and passionate contributor to information, thoughts, ideas.

Please, be aware that English is not my first language and that I was adult when started learning it so sometimes it will be obvious that I struggle to find the most appropriate word. But I strive to improve so any help or correction of my mistakes would be pretty much appreciated.

 

[Nausicaa]

I do not think it were odd that they were in the kitchen, especially if as he stated she DID offer him a drink. It seems perfectly plausible to me that if indeed she did invite him in she offered him a drink and he would have followed her into the kitchen.

I think I am in the minority also by saying that I also find it equally plausible that she invited him in. This in no way infers she was flirting with him, she was bored that night, as proved by her texts and wanted company. She would have felt safe in her flat. I am not disputing the idea that he knocked on her door and he was invited in that way, but i do not think that this was planned as he did such a poor job of disposing of the body and also of his Internet searches. As he used the net so much afterwards I think if it were planned he would have used it beforehand to research thoroughly. As a PHD student he would have been used to research and I think had it been planned then her body would never have been found.

Of course this is all speculation, as it pretty much everything in this case. The prosecution did a poor job in my eyes of explaining the events of that night.

I incline to nearly all your views here, Cadfael, but don't forget that the prosecution are not necessarily able to "explain the events of that night" because they don't know exactly what happened either. How could they ?

To me it is clear that VT can only be believed when he says something that is not self-serving. Now he said one such thing : he said he was led on by a remark he judged flirtatious and by her attractive appearance to attempt to kiss her, and he admitted that he thus "misread the situation". Filling in the blanks, leaving the flirtatious remark to one side and ignoring the ridiculous denials, that means that his motive was sexual.

However, a sexually-motivated attack could take any of three basic forms :

1. He went for consensual sex. The consent was not forthcoming and his pass rapidly led to screams and resistance on her part; he panicked at the thought of neighbours coming, grabbed her throat, etc.

2. He went for non-consensual sex: i.e. he committed sexual assault or attempted rape and killed her in the ensuing struggle.

3. He deliberately wanted her death as a direct condition of his own kinky sexual pleasure.

The prosecution seem to have evoked at one stage or another all of the above possibilities, but they don't want to pin their case on any one of them because there is no way for a judicious person, examining the available evidence, to be certain which one is right. And anyway it doesn't matter because even number 1 will still be murder if a reasonable man would realise that his actions were potentially lethal.

 

[kINGFISHER]

I don't think it really matters now, the defence and prosecution probably had some idea of how this was going to go. With the information that we don't know about they might already have a sentence in mind, based on there not being enough evidence to convict of murder. As has already been said on here neither sides seemed to have made a good job of it. But who knows the jury just might surprise If not, we have to rely on the integrity of the judge to give punishment that suits this terrible crime.

 

[Nausicaa]

... previously we had posters arguing that because VT was employed as a people flow analyst, he must have been obsessed by watching people, and began speculating about peepholes, crawlspaces and the likes. No we have someone arguing almost the exact opposite - that he was fascinated by the externalities of buildings rather than the internalities.

The relevance of either argument quite escapes me as well.

Yes indeed, but that is just one example of a long list isn't it ? Greg's allegedly unconvincing tears, the blocked-up doorway, where one ought to put one's keys on getting home, the sock as a trophy, the pizza as a trophy, the body deposited deliberately to be found on Christmas day, the relevance of people-flow analysis, the possibility that she caught him b*ggering the cat, CJ's alleged masonic involvements... Surprising how many would-be sleuths spend their time in the realms of fantasy. Let's hope the jury at least have their feet on the ground.

 

[Cherwell]

It would only be manslaughter if it was accepted that a reasonable man would have not realised that compression of the neck would result in death or serious injury; the fact that VT himself might personally have been acting under some misapprehension of the consequences of his actions is irrelevant.

The other key point here is to understand the crucial importance of the 'no struggle' theory advanced by VT. Since, had JY struggled whilst VT was strangling her, then it would have been blindingly obvious, even to the dimmest of the dim, let alone someone in possession of a PhD, that she was in distress, and that he was physically harming her, and that he should desist immediately.

So, in order to believe that it was manslaughter, you not only have to accept that the 'average joe' doesn't realise that strangling someone is an act highely likely to kill them, but you also have to accept that at no point during the proceedings did JY exhibit any signs of concern at this unfortunate turn of events.

Awesome post. :bow:

Can you email that to the judge for use as part of his summing-up. nline:

 

[aneurin]

I do not think it were odd that they were in the kitchen, especially if as he stated she DID offer him a drink. It seems perfectly plausible to me that if indeed she did invite him in she offered him a drink and he would have followed her into the kitchen.

I think I am in the minority also by saying that I also find it equally plausible that she invited him in. This in no way infers she was flirting with him, she was bored that night, as proved by her texts and wanted company. She would have felt safe in her flat. I am not disputing the idea that he knocked on her door and he was invited in that way, but i do not think that this was planned as he did such a poor job of disposing of the body and also of his Internet searches. As he used the net so much afterwards I think if it were planned he would have used it beforehand to research thoroughly. As a PHD student he would have been used to research and I think had it been planned then her body would never have been found.

Of course this is all speculation, as it pretty much everything in this case. The prosecution did a poor job in my eyes of explaining the events of that night.

I must admit I don't find it implausible that JY invited VT into the flat; I just don't think it matters that much how or why VT found himself standing face to face with JY. What I think matters is what he then did when he found himself in that position.

And whilst I can understand the frustration that people might feel at the failure of the prosecution to fully explain the events of that night, it should be appreciated that only two people really know what happened. One of them is dead, and the other one apparently 'can't remember' much at all.