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

[Cherwell]

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.

That goes for all of us, I bet.

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

What about cats? :cat:

 

[Sammyme]

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.

That's one thing that strikes me about him: sheer brass neck. He has shown that quality throughout, even questioning the police about forensics and accusing them or the laboratory of corruption or contamination! Then there is his brass neck in standing up and telling a load of blatant lies such as that Joanna showed sexual interest in him, that there was no struggle, that he was only trying to calm someone he strangled to death and that he can't remember any of the facts and events that just might put him in jeopardy. There is no recompense, nothing that can help, nothing that can fix any of it, give Joanna her life back or mend the lives of her parents, brother and Greg but he could at least have told them truth if he had any remorse and any decency in him.

 

[kINGFISHER]

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.

It's the events leading up to and during the murder that should be taken into account, not just after. imo

 

[Cherwell]

It's the events leading up to and during the murder that should be taken into account, not just after. imo

But we don't know what they were.

 

[goldielox]

Getting a hospital order and ending up in the likes of Broadmoor isn't the "cushy" option a lot of people think. They're appalling places. Of course there is a chance that after a couple of years they're deemed sane/fit for release but more likely is that they'll remain incarcerated in there for ever or for far longer than if they'd received a prison sentence instead.

There's also another option in these circumstances whereby they are given a prison sentence but are sent to a secure psychiatric unit instead of prison immediately after sentencing...but on the proviso that, when and if they are deemed to no longer need to be in the hospital unit they are transferred back to prison to serve out the rest of their sentence.

I think the law has been tightened up now in respect to one particularly appealing aspect (to the criminally minded) of being sectioned instead of jailed. It used to be that, if someone was sent to a mental unit and subsequently managed to escape from said unit- if they managed to evade capture for 30 days or more then they were home and free and couldn't be detained again. This was on the basis that, if they could manage on their own outside of the unit for that long they were obviously not "insane" and so in no need of being sectioned. I can't recall the name of the man in question but they Krays tried this one with one of their cronies, springing him from an asylum and hiding him. Legend has it that, mad as a hatter (and even more so without his medication) they soon got fed up with putting up with him and so ended up killing him in the end to get rid of their problem.

 

[Curious Alice]

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.

Wow - you are right, I visualised that as I read it and it is a very plausible method. As for how someone chances upon this - I think it's instinctive and fuelled by something such as rage, or desperation, but can't see anyone getting out of that hold alive unless they were stronger.

 

[kINGFISHER]

But we don't know what they were.

I think you could make a good argument for the defence.

 

[Curious Alice]

Then by the application of Occam's razor I'd go for the hall.

Agreed, it's where I think it happened, the kitchen story is to back up his story of a pleasant social chit chat. I think this happened in the hall maybe even as soon as she opened the door. IMO any social exchange happened in the doorway, if indeed there was one and it was not a surprise attack.

 

[Cherwell]

I think you could make a good argument for the defence.

Look.

Only two people were present. One is dead and the other is a proven liar. We can do no more than speculate as to the course of events that led to the killing. In the absence of a credible eye-witness, or CCTV, we cannot know.

 

[Curious Alice]

You wouldn't invite a man even into your hall if you had a pair of your knickers on a table there would you.

Absolutely not ! I am messy but can't see that knickers would be lying about in my hallway.

 

[goldielox]

lets hope its not this one.

Agreed, it's where I think it happened, the kitchen story is to back up his story of a pleasant social chit chat. I think this happened in the hall maybe even as soon as she opened the door. IMO any social exchange happened in the doorway, if indeed there was one and it was not a surprise attack.

I agree. I think it happened in the hall too. Since he was also in oither rooms of the flat at some point too he's placed the conversation in the kitchen and then added the part about moving her body to the bed so to try to give credible reasons as to why he was in both of those rooms.

I can't fathom out much reason why he would place her already dead body on the bed, and then on the bed in his own flat, or even why he supposedly took her in to his flat at all. OK, park the body inside his own doorway whilst taking a breather but why go a step further (especially when supposedly struggling with the body as it is) and stick her in a bedroom and on a bed? His story doesn't make sense there either.

 

[Curious Alice]

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.

I think the average person who had killed someone accidentally would want an opportunity to explain, convince, apologise. The dunno's are simply so he doesn't dig himself into a deeper hole. I would instinctively distrust a person who refused to take the stand to offer some kind of explanation.

 

[kINGFISHER]

Look.

Only two people were present. One is dead and the other is a proven liar. We can do no more than speculate as to the course of events that led to the killing. In the absence of a credible eye-witness, or CCTV, we cannot know.

Yes agree , But I take it you believe he is guilty as the majority do here .
So if this is the case it seems that people can in fact get away with murder. Not a good thought is it.

 

[Curious Alice]

I agree. I think it happened in the hall too. Since he was also in oither rooms of the flat at some point too he's placed the conversation in the kitchen and then added the part about moving her body to the bed so to try to give credible reasons as to why he was in both of those rooms.

I can't fathom out much reason why he would place her already dead body on the bed, and then on the bed in his own flat, or even why he supposedly took her in to his flat at all. OK, park the body inside his own doorway whilst taking a breather but why go a step further (especially when supposedly struggling with the body as it is) and stick her in a bedroom and on a bed? His story doesn't make sense there either.

Good point, why the beds, why not the floor ? Certainly easier. Make me suspicious of a sexually related instinct or fantasy.

 

[goldielox]

Yes agree , But I take it you believe he is guilty as the majority do here .
So if this is the case it seems that people can in fact get away with murder. Not a good thought is it.

The Steven Lawrence murder? A classic one.

 

[aneurin]

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.

Fowkes was also up for attempted murder. Of Ian Huntley no less.

There was also the case of Clive Wood. Got life and 18 for murder. Appealed and got the conviction reduced to diminished responsibility manslaughter but still got life and 13.

 

[goldielox]

Good point, why the beds, why not the floor ? Certainly easier. Make me suspicious of a sexually related instinct or fantasy.

Makes you wonder. Sorry to be so blunt but signs of his semen in his own flat would be nothing unusual. Of course they'd be absolutely damning if found in Jo's flat.

 

[aneurin]

The Steven Lawrence murder? A classic one.

Trial starts 14th November.

 

[kINGFISHER]

The Steven Lawrence murder? A classic one.

Thanks for that, shocking , so who knows what's going on in this case.

 

[Sammyme]

Absolutely not ! I am messy but can't see that knickers would be lying about in my hallway.

It seems quite an odd thing even for an untidy person.

That sparks another thought as to VT's story and whether Joanna would invite in an unexpected visitor. I don't know what the state of tidiness of the flat was generally but as Joanna had just got home, she wouldn't have had time to tidy things away or to make it presentable. If it was a bit untidy, would she then invite in a caller at the door? Some people wouldn't as they would hate to have a visitor in an untidy flat.