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

[kINGFISHER]

Yes I believe he had his camera .Look at the video on BBC website , Waitrose, and he said he was home having tea and did not go out until after nine. ?

 

[Sammyme]

The chipped green plastic pedestal with a pair of JY's undies on it was in the hall I believe

Has anyone seen a photograph of this pedestal? I've been wondering what exactly it is. The prosecution referred to it as a console. What height and shape is it? I don't remember seeing any green furniture. I do remember a wood-coloured shelf-unit with boots and shoes on the shelves.

 

[veggiefan]

I dont want to think this. I dont want him to get a manslaughter sentence. forgive me but here in the UK most of the time a manslaughter sentence is a drop in the bucket. it's barely 3 years with good behaviour.

The sentence is entirely at the discretion of the judge, but only a couple of weeks ago Damien Fowkes was given a life sentence (with a minimum tariff of 20 years), for the manslaughter (by strangulation) of Colin Hatch. He, too, was charged with murder but the court accepted a plea of manslaughter by diminished responsibility.

However, Fowkes has a long criminal record and the judge in his case undoubtedly took a view on the risk to the public had a shorter tarriff been prescribed. I have no doubt that the judge in VT's case will also commission psychological reports and form a view on the likely risk of VT re-offending before he passes sentence.

But it is important to remember that the sentence for manslaughter can be longer than that for murder, all depending on the circumstances.

 

[Firefly75]

OK I've worked out how it was done.

What you do is this. You take one female victim, you take hold of her wrists, and force them above her head as you push her back against a wall. You can then use your arms to pin her arms against the wall, leaving both your hands free; one of which you can place on her mouth, and the other against her throat. If at the same time, you place your body at right angles to hers and thrust one knee between her legs, you can pin her lower body against the wall. She can then kick as much as she likes, but she can't make contact, and she can't move her arms, because you're using your entire body weight to pin them to the wall. And of course, all you need is 20 seconds worth of pressure to finish her off.

Now you're going to leave grip marks on her wrists, and it's possible, during the intitial struggle as you grapple with her wrists, that you might give her face a bash and give her a nose bleed, whilst she might well end up with other bruises and marks on her body, but most importantly she can't scratch or kick you, so she can't really injure or mark you. Which is a very good thing if you intend being seen in public soon afterwards. After you've popped home and changed naturally - you don't want to be seen with any blood on your shirt after all.

Now I've tried this and it works. OK, I left out the bloody nose bit. And the actual throttling to death bit as well, now that you come to mention it. There are limits to experimentation. But it does work, and it would appear to me to be a very effective method of homicide. However, I'm not sure how you'd come across it by accident.

This is going to give me nightmares.

Note he never denied having her against the wall - he couldn't remember. But he categorically denied having her on the floor (which I think would scream 'sexual attack' to everyone in the court room) when there was no struggle on her part whatsoever (never mind the grapple marks on her wrists or her broken nose, not to mention that she must have been screaming just to spite him since he wasn't being aggressive or threatening at all) and he just wanted an innocent kiss (as you do when you've just met someone; oh, and it was she who wanted him to kiss her, of course). And he didn't learn as a child what is likely to happen if you obstruct someone's airways by covering their mouth and squeezing their neck, nor did he ever notice she was in distress.

 

[notsure]

I think it's likely he was sexually aroused when attacking Jo. It's possible he might have "relieved himself" after she died, possibly in the sock. That would also explain being too weak to carry the body afterwards.

Sorry for this disgusting scenario. I definitely read too many crime novels.

 

[Sammyme]

I am beginning to suspect in my heart that he intended to rape her, I think possibly he did strangle her on accident trying to stop her from screaming and fighting off the attack. but this doesnt make sense because he was her NEIGHBOR. if he left her alive, she could obviously rat him out. maybe he intended to kill her in the end, but not when it actually occured.

I dont want to think this. I dont want him to get a manslaughter sentence. forgive me but here in the UK most of the time a manslaughter sentence is a drop in the bucket. it's barely 3 years with good behaviour.

in the US in my state at least, a death that occurs during the commission of a felony (in my scenario, the felony would be the rape) would still get a murder charge. it isnt the case here, is it, even if the prosecution could prove VT intended to rape her?

It's very hard to make sense of it in any way that seems real and believable, precisely because he was her neighbour. And we don't know enough about it all or about him - how he was around people, how he thought and what sort of character he really was - and about the background activities and patterns of life of the occupants of the flats. Was he someone who was prone to fits of temper or bad moods? Was he impetuous and unpredictable? Was he a control freak? Someone who would brook no opposition? A lonely person? A lone prowler? Someone with a fixation of some sort? We know so little.

 

[Luna15]

If you believe the case for the prosecution, JY was killed very shortly after she got home. That doesn't look great for VT. It suggests that he was waiting for her to get home and planned to have some sort of contact with her. (It's not really relevant to whether he murdered her though. To prove murder, the prosecution need to convince the jury that he knew, when he had his hand round her neck that it would seriously hurt or kill her).

Also, if you believe the prosecution timeline, the text sent to TM at 9:25pm was after JY was dead. It was a calculated attempt to show that he was quietly sitting at home, bored without TM there.

If the jury find him not guilty of murder, and I'm guessing here, it may be that a lot of what the prosecution are suggesting could be aimed at influencing the judge when he deals out the sentence for manslaughter. (e.g pre-planned, calculating, cover story etc etc)

If however you believe the timeline the defence suggests, VT sent the text to TM at 9:25pm and set out for Asda. On passing JY's window, she waved him into her flat. He misread her allegedly flirtacious comment as a come on, went to kiss her, which according to VT was in no way a sexual activity. She screamed and in trying to calm her down she went limp and died not having put up any kind of struggle.

In his version of events, when he went to Asda and texted TM at ~10:30pm he was in a blind panic. He just picked up on his original planned shopping trip and "reached out" to TM

As for taking her body to his flat, he couldn't know that JY wasn't expecting guests. Someone could turn up at any moment and find her body. He had to move it quickly. His car was on the road. He couldn't carry her straight to the car. He had to move the car round the back near to his flat and wasn't going to risk leaving her in her flat whilst he did that.

Did he put her down when carrying her to his flat or did he drop her? If he dropped her perhaps that might account for the blood. It would also explain the need for the rock salt and the fact that there hasn't been any mention of blood in the flat. It might also explain why he put her inside the cycle bag so as not to get blood in the car.

ETA: We don't know for sure there was no blood in the flat. It may be a fact that is not contested by the defence so there's possibly no need to prove it in court

Or did he carry her part way, and because she was so "heavy" he put her down and dragged her by her wrists/feet the rest of the way? and she grazed her head as she was dragged along the pathway, the sock could have 'snagged' on something along the way, if being dragged by her wrists her socks could have come into contact with blood as she was being dragged along - remember there was a lot of forensic activity at the back of the property - albeit over a month after the event! We have no idea what towels/bedding/clean up materials were missing from the VT/TM household

 

[Cherwell]

Has anyone seen a photograph of this pedestal? I've been wondering what exactly it is.

I'm thinking it might have been a small garden table style of thingy. These are often made of green plastic. The area outside the living room window was described as a patio for the use of Flat 1.

 

[Nausicaa]

OK I've worked out how it was done.

What you do is this. You take one female victim, you take hold of her wrists, and force them above her head as you push her back against a wall. You can then use your arms to pin her arms against the wall, leaving both your hands free; one of which you can place on her mouth, and the other against her throat. If at the same time, you place your body at right angles to hers and thrust one knee between her legs, you can pin her lower body against the wall. She can then kick as much as she likes, but she can't make contact, and she can't move her arms, because you're using your entire body weight to pin them to the wall. And of course, all you need is 20 seconds worth of pressure to finish her off.

[...]

Now I've tried this and it works. OK, I left out the bloody nose bit. And the actual throttling to death bit as well, now that you come to mention it. There are limits to experimentation. But it does work, and it would appear to me to be a very effective method of homicide. However, I'm not sure how you'd come across it by accident.

Very interesting, but would it not be easier still if you turned the scenario through 90° making the floor replace the wall ? One hesitates to suggest that Mrs Aneurin could oblige again, but a bunch of flowers might prove persuasive.

 

[goldielox]

VT claims to have been facing Jo when he strangled her. Does anyone know whether it's been backed up by the pathologists? I'm just wondering whether he could have grabbed and strangled her from behind instead. I'd guess it would be far harder for someone to fight back if the attacker was behind them at the time.

Also, if someone were to fall flat on their face at the time of death, or immediately ie seconds after death, if they were to break their nose upon impact with the floor would there be blood or not? I know bleeding doesn't occur if the victim is already dead but would this also be the case if death occured and within a second or so an injury that would normally bleed then occured?

Speaking of bleeding years ago whilst walking into my bedroom I passed out, falling instantly face first onto the carpet. I came round to find myself with a slightly black eye, grazes to my brow and chin, a sore neck ...and a broken nose. The nose didn't bleed that much, though it was the septum that was broken rather than the bone above it. My point here is, if VT could have strangled her from behind then let go of her when she went limp, perhaps she fell flat on her face and her facial injuries resulted from that fall.

The lack of blood in the flat wouldn't support this theory however I know, but then the lack of blood in the flat still bugs me the most with this case.

The knickers in the hall is another strange one. If VT had the presence of mind and for whatever reason to remove the pizza, or the wrapping, then why leave the knickers there in the hall? I'm thinking that maybe that's because they were already there. Maybe Jo had them in her hand and put them down in passing or when going to the door or something. A man like VT, who sees mere friendliness as a flirty come-on would most probably see a pair of knickers on the hall stand as even more of a come-on. That's if she did open the door to him in the first place of course. If she did then I don't believe she let him inside or intended to. You wouldn't invite a man even into your hall if you had a pair of your knickers on a table there would you.

 

[goldielox]

Very interesting, but would it not be easier still if you turned the scenario through 90° making the floor replace the wall ? One hesitates to suggest that Mrs Aneurin could oblige again, but a bunch of flowers might prove persuasive.

Yes, and then if you can try it again but this time from behind that would be splendid

 

[Luna15]

Very interesting, but would it not be easier still if you turned the scenario through 90° making the floor replace the wall ? One hesitates to suggest that Mrs Aneurin could oblige again, but a bunch of flowers might prove persuasive.

I think Aneurin should exercise extreem caution with his experimentaion - you'd have a job convincing a jury of that one :crazy: ..... mind you, I'm hearing of one in similiar realms of fantasy.

 

[goldielox]

This case is bugging me. I'm wondering why anybody would even take VT's utterances seriously. He tried to cover up the crime, lied to his own family and the police, tried to incriminate his LL. When it was proved that he did it, he just made up a story that gave him the best chance of getting the least damning charge. How can anything he says be believed? Of course he will not tell the truth: what benefit would that be to him?

I always thought we would never find out what really happened that night. That's a bad thing, but worse would be if VT is found not guilty of murder. That would mean that all anybody would have to do is to say that they didn't mean to kill their victim, and we're just supposed to take their word for it.

I don't know why he bothered to take the stand, I really don't. OK I've heard of people so losing control at a particular moment that they can't truthfully recall what happened and what they did at that precise moment, but its obvious that he can remember and is just absolutely not prepared to say. Considering that, and all his "dunnos" and "can't remembers" I don't know how he had the brass neck to dare say how sorry he felt for Jo's parents. Then tell the truth! Or at least, once in the dock, come up with something better than "dunno" to all the questions he didn't like!

On the same vein I don't recall him saying one word about him being sorry for Jo the person, the person whose life he took. He's sorry for putting her family through it yet isn't prepared to say he's sorry for taking his victim's life away from her! And of course he's sorry (and only sorry) for himself and for having been caught.

 

[aneurin]

As in the old song, Dem Bones, the thigh bone is connected to the knee bone, so the arms are connected to the hands, which made me wonder how do you manage all that? Just how free are your hands when your arms are engaged in pinning someone's arms and how do you manage to use your hands to do two other separate actions without dislodging your arms from their pinning hold? And then keep your legs in a certain position and hold as well?

Yes, I quite understand. I tried working out in my head how the grip marks on the hands connected with the 'mechanism of death' as described in the defence statement and got nowhere. It's only when I tried it out in practice that I worked it out. And believe me, it can be done.

 

[Cherwell]

I think Aneurin should exercise extreem caution with his experimentaion - you'd have a job convincing a jury of that one :crazy: ..... mind you, I'm hearing of one in similiar realms of fantasy.

Don't worry, Aneurin, I'll be a defence witness and testify that it was all in the interests of experimentation :smile:

 

[goldielox]

Don't worry, Aneurin, I'll be a defence witness and testify that it was all in the interests of experimentation :smile:

Once they've trawled through all of Aneurin's web history they'll defo have it down as a copy cat killing...and us as participants for encouraging it.

 

[aneurin]

Very interesting, but would it not be easier still if you turned the scenario through 90° making the floor replace the wall ? One hesitates to suggest that Mrs Aneurin could oblige again, but a bunch of flowers might prove persuasive.

Well it cost me a bar of chocolate last time round.

I suspect it would work on the floor as well, and the assilailant would have gravity to assist. It's just that if you start off from the position of grabbing hold of someone's wrists, it's easier to propel them backwards against a wall, rather than force them down to the ground.

 

[kINGFISHER]

the sentence is entirely at the discretion of the judge, but only a couple of weeks ago damien fowkes was given a life sentence (with a minimum tariff of 20 years), for the manslaughter (by strangulation) of colin hatch. He, too, was charged with murder but the court accepted a plea of manslaughter by diminished responsibility.

However, fowkes has a long criminal record and the judge in his case undoubtedly took a view on the risk to the public had a shorter tarriff been prescribed. I have no doubt that the judge in vt's case will also commission psychological reports and form a view on the likely risk of vt re-offending before he passes sentence.

But it is important to remember that the sentence for manslaughter can be longer than that for murder, all depending on the circumstances.

a “sane” manslaughter conviction on the basis of “loss of control” may result in an even earlier release, because normality and rationality will be retained and over time and with help the risk of loss of self-control may become greatly reduced or even eliminated, thus justifying early release.

lets hope its not this one.

 

[Cherwell]

a “sane” manslaughter conviction on the basis of “loss of control” may result in an even earlier release, because normality and rationality will be retained and over time and with help the risk of loss of self-control may become greatly reduced or even eliminated, thus justifying early release.

lets hope its not this one.

I imagine that his behaviour following the events would be taken into account. It would be different had he called the emergency services and given himself up straightaway.

 

[aneurin]

I think Aneurin should exercise extreem caution with his experimentaion - you'd have a job convincing a jury of that one :crazy: ..... mind you, I'm hearing of one in similiar realms of fantasy.

Don't worry, Aneurin, I'll be a defence witness and testify that it was all in the interests of experimentation :smile:

Don't worry. No humans were harmed during the conduct of the experiment.

Once they've trawled through all of Aneurin's web history they'll defo have it down as a copy cat killing...and us as participants for encouraging it.

I must admit when I heard the prosecution evidence regarding VT's internet history, I realised that if one of my neighbours were ever to meet their death in suspicious circumstances then I'd be in a certain amount of trouble.