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

[aneurin]

The starting point for sentencing for murder is 15 years. There are then guidelines (depending on severity) in respect to other starting points of 25 years, 30 years and "whole life" tariffs may be warranted.

On top of that mitigating and aggravating features will be taken into consideration when calculating a sentence - I think only a maximum of 5 years or 1/6 of the sentence can be knocked off for mitigating features. Aggravating features can include a sexual element or concealing the body afterwards, to name a couple off the top of my head.

Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 - Determination of minimum term in relation to mandatory life sentence - is where it is all laid out. Typically a 'common or garden murderer' (if there is such a thing) gets a minimum sentence of between 10 and 20 years.

On of the biggest impacting differences between a sentence for manslaughter and murder is that someone released after serving a sentence for murder remains "on licence" for the rest of their lives after release ie they can be recalled to prison for the slightest of misdemeaners at any time until they die. They also must serve a minimum term before they can be even considered for parole, which they aren't guaranteed to get.

With a manslaughter conviction (unless given a life sentence) they will be released at the two-thirds or at worst three quarter point (I think thats still the case) of their sentence and then remain "on licence" only until the end of that sentence ie if they were given lets say 12 years - they may be released on licence after 8 years, then remain on licence until 12 years have passed and then thats it where being recalled to prison for any reason is concerned.

I believe that it is the case these days we have what is known as a 'standard determinate sentence' with a "compulsory half way release date" - so someone sentenced to 12 years would be 'let out' after serving 6. Although the rules are quite complicated and depend on this and that. There is a detailed explanation here - http://www.howardleague.org/francescrookblog/complex-rules-for-release-from-prison

Sentence wise for manslaughter a life sentence is discretionary (compared to it being mandatory for murder). There's no minimum - the judge decides, and sentencing is based on past precedent (ie previous cases) and formal sentencing guidelines.

Manslaughter is subject to a wide variety of sentencing - you can get life, or you can get probation - simply because there are different kinds of manslaughter in terms of both the law and the circumstances in which the homicide occured.

 

[stmarysmead]

Just a couple of points. As to Jo and Tabak having some sort of relationship, isn't it true that Tabak had just returned to the apartment from some course of study and their opportunity to meet was deemed slight because there was only a 2 week period that Jo lived there that Tabak was actually in residence next door? It seems highly unlikely with each of them working and having live-in partners, that there would be time for any relationship to develop.

But there is plenty of time for Tabak to have seen his attractive neighbor coming and going...then maybe have spotted her in the store and made "plans."

As for Jo's use of the cell phone, to me that is understandable as the behavior of someone nervous to be alone that night. She might not have used the phone much when feeling "comfortable"...but that night, she was NOT comfortable. She was nervous about staying alone. I too wonder if she had seen the creepy neighbor looking at her with too much interest...

I have also wondered why she did not go on the Christmas visit with her boyfriend to his family that weekend. The fact that he was not alarmed earlier that she did not return his calls...makes me wonder if there was some issue between them about this visit. When he came home, he first assumed she had made plans and was angry. Did he assume before that...that not returning his calls was "punishment"...so he didn't worry much? Was there a call or text to him...driving in that snowy weather to see if he had arrived safely?

I'm also wondering about the underwear on the hallway floor and the broken earring in the bed...either of which might have been the trigger to convince the parents that she was kidnapped.

 

[Cherwell]

Can't see VT getting off lightly with this. To use a legal term he's ****ed.

 

[Firefly75]

for a person who we are told didnt like texts or mobiles she seemed to use them quite a lot that night ...and is it not strange that she didnt text / call GR at all ? even to say hope you got off ok or hows the journey? but she was willing to talk to her friend in Swansea and even travel there to meet up on the worst night of weather of the year and actively seek out company from people that in some cases she hadnt seen for quite a long time?

I think I can understand why she phoned and texted friends and not the boyfriend - suppose she knew he may still be driving and didn't want to risk him answering the call with one hand and causing an accident? Or if she had calculated that he'd just arrived, and was being greeted by family. If she was feeling uneasy about being on her own, she may have wanted to talk to someone for a bit longer to tide her over until she got into the flat, and then maybe have a chat with her boyfriend later, before going to bed, when his family would have given him privacy. Perhaps she didn't want to make him feel bad by admitting that she was nervous about being on her own, that sort of thing can easily come across as a reproach, which it probably wouldn't have been.
From my own experience, girls relate better to 'home alone' uneasiness, while boyfriends tend to be quick to feel 'guilty' about not insisting on bringing you along (or going somewhere in the first place).
I tend to not answer texts and phone calls promptly either, but when in a similar situation, I've been known to send a month's worth of texts in a short space of time, or phone friends. I have learnt to answer my partner's texts and calls as soon as I can, but the rest, I answer at my own convenience. I personally can't read great significance into her not texting the boyfriend, or contacting friends. Their relationship was solid, even though she may not have been the type to text him every five minutes.

 

[Luna15]

theres also the 'points of law' that were discussed and the jury had to leave

were they anything to do with the cctv evidence from Waitrose?....

re cctv it appears there is a resemblance to VT with the man with the trolley and the body language of both of them is rather odd

I have been wondering that - perhaps the defence managed to get it as 'inadmissable' ? especially if he arrived home before her... he could have left first and hung back waiting for her to catch him up so it wasn't so obvious that he was following her...

If it had been rendered inadmissable in court though, would the police risk 'putting it out there'? surely that could jeopardise the whole case and they wouldn't risk that?

 

[Colombo]

Just a couple of points. As to Jo and Tabak having some sort of relationship, isn't it true that Tabak had just returned to the apartment from some course of study and their opportunity to meet was deemed slight because there was only a 2 week period that Jo lived there that Tabak was actually in residence next door? It seems highly unlikely with each of them working and having live-in partners, that there would be time for any relationship to develop.

But there is plenty of time for Tabak to have seen his attractive neighbor coming and going...then maybe have spotted her in the store and made "plans."

As for Jo's use of the cell phone, to me that is understandable as the behavior of someone nervous to be alone that night. She might not have used the phone much when feeling "comfortable"...but that night, she was NOT comfortable. She was nervous about staying alone. I too wonder if she had seen the creepy neighbor looking at her with too much interest...

I have also wondered why she did not go on the Christmas visit with her boyfriend to his family that weekend. The fact that he was not alarmed earlier that she did not return his calls...makes me wonder if there was some issue between them about this visit. When he came home, he first assumed she had made plans and was angry. Did he assume before that...that not returning his calls was "punishment"...so he didn't worry much? Was there a call or text to him...driving in that snowy weather to see if he had arrived safely?

I'm also wondering about the underwear on the hallway floor and the broken earring in the bed...either of which might have been the trigger to convince the parents that she was kidnapped.

the suggestion from some is that VT knew her from quite a time before and has links to the beast917 posts saying an incident had occurred that pointed to this

 

[aneurin]

Neither the prosecution nor the defence have to provide a motive. On the other hand if VT does take the stand he will have to answer the question.

Do you think he will, Aneurin?

My gut tells me that if he doesn't, he might as well just plead guilty and save us all the trouble. So in that sense, I certainly expect him to.

 

[veggiefan]

I have also wondered why she did not go on the Christmas visit with her boyfriend to his family that weekend. The fact that he was not alarmed earlier that she did not return his calls...makes me wonder if there was some issue between them about this visit.

As I recall, he went to see his twin nephews whom he'd not seen since their birth in September, and possibly attend their baptisms. It does seem a little odd that JY didn't accompany him, not least to share the driving on a long and difficult journey, as she didn't seem to have anything pressing to do in Bristol, other than bake mince pies.

One can't help reflect that had she accompanied JR, things would have turned out very differently.

 

[Colombo]

My gut tells me that if he doesn't, he might as well just plead guilty and save us all the trouble. So in that sense, I certainly expect him to.

would agree with that

unless they bring in 3 specialists who say hes a complete nutter ...or he can prove that he knew her very well and it was a crime of passion

or he gets up and says id like to plead not guilty and challenge the evidence which seems very very unlikely

 

[Luna15]

As I recall, he went to see his twin nephews whom he'd not seen since their birth in September, and possibly attend their baptisms. It does seem a little odd that JY didn't accompany him, not least to share the driving on a long and difficult journey, as she didn't seem to have anything pressing to do in Bristol, other than bake mince pies.

One can't help reflect that had she accompanied JR, things would have turned out very differently.

and she was prepared to forego all her previous plans for the weekend to jump on a train to Swansea and spend the weekend with Rebecca...

 

[Clio]

I have also wondered why she did not go on the Christmas visit with her boyfriend to his family that weekend.

As I recall, he went to see his twin nephews whom he'd not seen since their birth in September, and possibly attend their baptisms.

Also, JY & GR were planning on hosting a party the following week, IIRC she was planning to prepare for that by cleaning the flat. She was going to bake the pies for the party I believe.

She also stayed to look after the cat.

 

[caramac]

evansma Martin Evans
#VincentTabak's DNA was found on swabs taken from #JoYeates breasts and nipples.

(tweeted at 11.18am)

 

[bees]

It's possible she didn't go to Sheffield for the weekend because of the cat. Whereas you can leave enough dried food for an overnight stay, it's not as practical to leave a cat for 48 hours. They might have planned to take the cat with them to her parents but didn't want to inconvenience a family with 2 young babies.

Alternatively, she might have decided not to go because she'd had a bad cold that week - enough to keep her at home on Thursday and thought she wouldn't take her germs to visit the babies.

 

[kINGFISHER]

and she was prepared to forego all her previous plans for the weekend to jump on a train to Swansea and spend the weekend with Rebecca...

We don't know how other people feel about their relatives . She was dreading staying on her own , so if it was so easy for her to go I would have thought she would have. She was also off work with a cold so she might not have felt like going. When it came to the crunch and reality of staying on her own she couldn't face it.

 

[brownbread]

Wonder if she already had some sort of uneasiness about the place. She didn't want to be left on her own and Greg knew that, that's why she didn't phone or text him.

My gut tells me that if he doesn't, he might as well just plead guilty and save us all the trouble. So in that sense, I certainly expect him to.

My thoughts exactly aneurin!

 

[bees]

Bloodstains on her finger nails - sounds like she might have put her hand up to her nose when it was bashed - still no clue as to how that happened yet.

 

[Cherwell]

My gut tells me that if he doesn't, he might as well just plead guilty and save us all the trouble.

You're probably right - but I can't see him standing up too well to cross-examination either. He has no credibility left having changed his story more than once already. He is in a hole and I expect him to keep digging

 

[Redgoblin]

Tweets;various sources:-

skynewsgatherer (Harriet Tolputt)
There were blood stains on the sole and toe of Miss Yeates' sock and on her finger nails, court hears

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
Forensic Scientist still giving evidence. Confirming blood in boot of Tabak's car came from Joanna Yeates.

richardpayneitv (Richard Payne)
Jury seeing photos of Tabak's car boot where Jo Yeates' blood was found. Not clear how it was deposited there.

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
Source of DNA on Jo's chest could have come skin touchng skin when Tabak tried to put her over the wall.

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
Can't tell whether DNA was transferred before or after death.

skynewsgatherer (Harriet Tolputt)
Defence lawyer William Clegg, QC, asks if there was DNA found of any unidentified persons. Ms Lennen replies: "No there was not..."

richardpayneitv (Richard Payne)
Tabak's DNA on jeans consistent with holding Jo Yeates in effort to put her over the wall.

skynewsgatherer (Harriet Tolputt)
Clegg clarifies that scientists cannot say whether blood in boot was as a result of direct contact.

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
It is possible blood might transfer through a "cycle bag" into the boot of the car.

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
Clegg asking if cycle bag were used to transfer body to Longwood lane then bag itself could contain DNA from Vincent Tabak....

jonkay01 (Jon Kay)
Tabak's QC asks if Jo's body was transported from her flat to the lane in a bicycle bag, whether his DNA could have come from his bag.

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
Asks scientist if it would be possible for DNA from Tabak from inside the bag to transfer to Jo's body while inside the bag. Answers yes.

rupertevelyn (Rupert Evelyn)
Detective Constable Colvin now called to witness box. he's expected to answer questions about Tabak arrest

 

[Cherwell]

Where's Clegg going with this business about the bag? What's that got to do with the essential matter which is murder v. manslaughter?

 

[Clio]

Where's Clegg going with this business about the bag? What's that got to do with the essential matter which is murder v. manslaughter?

DNA on breast and nipples - at the moment that looks very like a sexual motive. If his DNA got there from the bag then they can try and claim not a sexual motive maybe