GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #16

[edgedweller]

A table for use on the patio perhaps? Maybe something like this?

Surely that would take up the width of half the hallway though?

 

[bos]

I think realistically, the only other witness the defence could have called would have been Chris Jeffries regarding if he heard/saw/spoke to Tabak on that evening. Obviously, he could be regarded as something of a loose cannon based on his negative experiences in connection with this investigation, so the chances were always going to be extremely slight.

Evidence given by Tanja would have only served to build a picture of what a consummate manipulator VT was after the killing & the defence are not denying that so her appearance would not be illuminating to the case.

I can't think of anybody else the defence would consider calling, unless they had wanted to re-call somebody who'd already been in the witness box?

 

[edgedweller]

Didn't know someone had taken the stand. Then stood down? Who is Dr Cary? An expert witness for the defence or the prosecution? The name seems familiar but I just can't remember who he or she is.

Expert witness for the defence - pathologist who performed a post-mortem on JY's body. Although he didn't say much in defence!!!

 

[Sammyme]

On the Friday it was "that's as far as we can go this afternoon"; today it's "'my lord that concludes the case for the defence" after a couple of hours of 'legal argument'. As I said before, I suspect the defence tried to initiate Plan B and the judge said 'No'.

I must admit I'm quite surprised though. I expected the defence to at least drag up some old professor from Eindhoven prepared to tell us what a nice chap the defendant was etc.

Their final piece of evidence was a bit of a damp squib when we were hoping for at least some sparks of revelation.

 

[Clio]

Didn't know someone had taken the stand. Then stood down? Who is Dr Cary? An expert witness for the defence or the prosecution? The name seems familiar but I just can't remember who he or she is.

Dr Nat Cary is the pathologist for the Defence. He testified last Friday

All that happened this morning was they read a statement from Geoffrey Hardiman, who lives on the top floor of No 44. It said he heard nothing.

I seem to remember that the media reported at the time that he was asleep in bed and also hard of hearing but I guess the jury might not know that

 

[Luna15]

I'm imagining this as the 'pedestal table'

 

[veggiefan]

Didn't know someone had taken the stand. Then stood down?

He stood down after completing his evidence.

Who is Dr Cary?

The pathologist who undertook a postmortem for the defence.

 

[Sammyme]

Expert witness for the defence - pathologist who performed a post-mortem on JY's body. Although he didn't say much in defence!!!

Ah yes, I remember him. He did give detailed evidence last week. I didn't know he was being called again today. I thought maybe we'd hear from another pathologist who did a third pm - Dr White, I think.

 

[bos]

Didn't know someone had taken the stand. Then stood down? Who is Dr Cary? An expert witness for the defence or the prosecution? The name seems familiar but I just can't remember who he or she is.

Dr Cary was the pathologist who performed the second post mortem examination of JY & is an expert witness for the defence. He gave evidence & was cross-examined by the prosecution on Friday.

 

[Sammyme]

Dr Nat Cary is the pathologist for the Defence. He testified last Friday
All that happened this morning was they read a statement from Geoffrey Hardiman, who lives on the top floor of No 44. It said he heard nothing.

I seem to remember that the media reported at the time that he was asleep in bed and also hard of hearing but I guess the jury might not know that

Yes, thanks. I remember him now. I thought he'd finished last week.

 

[Sammyme]

It's been a strange case, as presented by both sides, with many aspects seemingly not explored or elucidated.

 

[Fluttershy]

WRT the small plastic table/pedestal, it was just before Christmas, maybe it was one of those stands for Christmans trees? They tend to be made of plastic.
For example,

 

[FiestyFairy]

I found this interesting web site which explains England and Wales Trials. Im not sure if this has been posted before, so if it has my apologies
http://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proceedings/summary-trial-procedure.htm

 

[Clio]

Ah yes, I remember him. He did give detailed evidence last week. I didn't know he was being called again today. I thought maybe we'd hear from another pathologist who did a third pm - Dr White, I think.

Yes, thanks. I remember him now. I thought he'd finished last week.

Yes Dr Cary did finish last week

You are right that Dr White did a PM after the 2 PMs conducted by Dr Delaney. However Dr White did the PM on behalf of the prosecution so unlikey we would have heard from him at this late stage I guess

 

[bos]

Yes, thanks. I remember him now. I thought he'd finished last week.

He did, my point was that after he finished, the defence(Clegg) said that was as far as they could go that afternoon but if they'd planned to read Hardyman's statement as their last submission before the summing up, then why not do so on the Friday? It only took 5 minutes after all!

Apparently legal points are being talked about this afternoon(obviously won't be tweeted); is it possible that Tabak could change his plea to guilty to murder in return for a shorter sentence?

 

[Luna15]

On the Friday it was "that's as far as we can go this afternoon"; today it's "'my lord that concludes the case for the defence" after a couple of hours of 'legal argument'. As I said before, I suspect the defence tried to initiate Plan B and the judge said 'No'.

I must admit I'm quite surprised though. I expected the defence to at least drag up some old professor from Eindhoven prepared to tell us what a nice chap the defendant was etc.

It has already been proved that nobody really knew his true character.

Imagine poor Neurotripsy getting up at 5.30 for that poor show, hopefully he/she might be there for the summing up/verdict.

 

[veggiefan]

Ah yes, I remember him. He did give detailed evidence last week. I didn't know he was being called again today.

He wasn't recalled today. I think you must have misunderstood something a few posts back.

 

[Cherwell]

All that happened this morning was they read a statement from Geoffrey Hardiman, who lives on the top floor of No 44. It said he heard nothing.

I seem to remember that the media reported at the time that he was asleep in bed and also hard of hearing but I guess the jury might not know that

Yes, I would have expected the prosecution to have wanted to bring all that out into the open. Presumably written statements can only be used if both sides agree that they don't wish to cross-examine? Wasn't it also said that Mr Hardyman had a cold - colds can sometimes bung up your ears and affect your hearing.

 

[veggiefan]

He did, my point was that after he finished, the defence(Clegg) said that was as far as they could go that afternoon but if they'd planned to read Hardyman's statement as their last submission before the summing up, then why not do so on the Friday? It only took 5 minutes after all!

I'm quite sure that the defence either expected to submit more evidence today or expected the prosecution to apply to be allowed to submit new evidence. Whichever it was was ruled out by the judge.

is it possible that Tabak could change his plea to guilty to murder in return for a shorter sentence?

Not a hope. Plea bargaining very rarely occurs in the UK and is strongly disliked by judges. In any case, VT has nothing concrete to offer (such as the name of an accomplice) for a reduced sentence. A change of plea after a case has started more often results in a longer tariff once sentence has been passed, since it is such a waste of the court's time and the public's money.

 

[Sammyme]

A table for use on the patio perhaps? Maybe something like this?

Perhaps, although I'd call that a table! I can't see anyone calling it a pedestal.