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

[notsure]

I'm glad I haven't seen it. Even so, I am angry. It's so unfair, so monstrously unfair that she should be attacked and killed in her own home on an ordinary day for no reason by someone that she couldn't have suspected or guessed to be a mortal danger to her. So unfair that the weather prevented her going to stay the night with her best friend. I long for her family and Greg to hear and see the word "Guilty" being pronounced in that court. It's small comfort I know but they will be there to face him and hear it for Joanna, whatever the verdict.

We have all taken her to our hearts, this young lady we should never even have heard of, whose cctv footage we should never have seen, in her last carefree hour. We watch helplessly, unable to save her, but hoping that at least justice is done for her sake.

 

[bijoux]

Question:

Could the bodily mechanism involved with screaming, hasten strangulation time, due to the higher volume of air during exhalation (or other reason), and in this case, with a hand over the mouth inhibiting the release of airflow?

 

[brownbread]

It looks like the jury will be given an incredibly difficult task, one which I don't envy them.

I think much will come down to the summing up, and in particular the directions given by the judge.

Personally I think this is murder: I feel that his motivation was to silence her, and although it is impossible to know whether, in that moment, he intended her to be permanently silenced, I do think he should have been able to foresee the consequences of his actions. For that I think he should be found guilty.

In many respects whatever happened before those fateful seconds is irrelevant, unless they would demonstrate premeditation or intent. I've heard nothing from the court that would indicate this, and I've not even heard a compelling theory from this forum which would explain him going round to her flat with the intention to cause her harm.

To me it comes down to what happened in the minute or two leading up to her death, and it is very difficult to be certain about what that was.

 

[brownbread]

One other thing: the question of the Waitrose CCTV. You may remember way back when Joanna was first reported missing, one of the early pieces of footage released were pictures of her caught on CCTV at Waitrose entrance - fairly clear images.

If VT were also in Waitrose at that time, this could easily have been ascertained by the police via checking the comings and goings on the store entrance CCTV. That it hasn't suggests it is because it just isn't him.

 

[veggiefan]

All 7 flats were inhabited, but only CJ and Hardyman were named in the media. I don't think there was any reliable information on whether the other occupants were at home.

Most of the residents above the lowest floor are retired staff of Clifton College (who formally owned the building) and are members of the Clifton and Hotwells Improvement Society. Using various (not necessarily reliable) sources, I think the disposition from top to bottom was something like:

Geoffrey Hardyman (79-year old retired teacher, didn't hear anything)
Peter Rendle (former science teacher, habitually away on foreign tours in winter)

CJ (claimed he saw something, but not that he heard anything - no statement in court from him)
Richard Bland (74 year-old former history teacher - no statement from him)

Mr and Mrs Woodman-Smith (double flat) - not heard anything from them, either

VT
JY

The one person I would have expected to hear a scream is next-door neighbour Peter Stanley. His back door is only a few feet from JY's door. Yes, there was scaffolding, but it seems extraordinary that he hasn't come forward to say that he heard a scream (or not) - I can only think that he must have gone out after helping to start GR's car.

It's a real difficulty for the prosecution, who are relying on screams for the timing of the killing: nobody in the immediate vicinity seems to have heard a thing (apart from the neighbour at the back, who got the day and timing totally wrong), and the only reports of screams before 9pm are from people who were an implausibly long way away.

 

[Clio]

It seems clear that there is some dispute between the prosecution and defence over whether the screams heard by the Lehmans were from JY.

At first, the defence suggested the screams were unrelated. I thought at that point they might be going to say JY did not scream at all. In which case Mr Hardyman's testimony would make sense and it would explain why nobody else in the near vicinity heard anything i.e any other resident of 44 or other nearby neighbours.

Is it possible that JY didn't scream? Many have said that it seems unusual to scream if all VT did was move to kiss her.

Is it possible that VT latched on to the screams that were heard in order to provide an explanation as to why he tried to "calm" her i.e. to stop her screaming.

Having then realised the timing of the screams didn't look good, he stuck with the story of having tried to stop her screaming and merely moved the timings to suit his story?

Hopefully the summations will paint a clearer picture for both the prosecution and defence.....

 

[veggiefan]

JamesBeal
Closing speeches from the prosecution and defence to be heard in the tabak trial today. Possibly jury out tomorrow afternoon.

Rupert Evelyn
The jury are in court. The trial resumes with Nigel Lickley QC giving the closing speech for the prosecution

 

[veggiefan]

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'this trial is about one central issue. what was VT intending'
'it is your decision as to what happened' he tells the jury

 

[veggiefan]

Harriet Tolputt
NL:" 20 seconds is a long time when you have your hands around the throat of another person."

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'it is a longtime ladies and gentleman. imagine the holding of the neck, the sounds, the fight;

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'it is a longtime to hold your breath and it takes no time to realise what the consequences are'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'strangulation is a particular way to kill There is no use of a weapon it brings a unique connection between' victim & attacker

Harriet Tolputt
NL:"Every second means a continued determination to kill."

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'there is no attempt here by Vincent Tabak to resuscitate this young woman'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he lied and he misled people because he knew she was dead as she fell it was what he wanted and intended'

 

[aneurin]

It seems clear that there is some dispute between the prosecution and defence over whether the screams heard by the Lehmans were from JY.

At first, the defence suggested the screams were unrelated. I thought at that point they might be going to say JY did not scream at all. In which case Mr Hardyman's testimony would make sense and it would explain why nobody else in the near vicinity heard anything i.e any other resident of 44 other nearby neighbours.

Is it possible that JY didn't scream? Many have said that it seems unusual to scream if all VT did was move to kiss her.

Is it possible that VT latched on to the screams that were heard in order to provide an explanation as to why he tried to "calm" her i.e. to stop her screaming.

Having then realised the timing of the screams didn't look good, he stuck with the story of having tried to stop her screaming and merely moved the timings to suit his story?

Hopefully the summations will paint a clearer picture for both the prosecution and defence.....

Is it possible that JY didn't scream? Yes

Is it possible that VT latched on to the screams that were heard in order to provide an explanation as to why he tried to "calm" her i.e. to stop her screaming. Yes again.

Having then realised the timing of the screams didn't look good, he stuck with the story of having tried to stop her screaming and merely moved the timings to suit his story? If VT had initially told his defence that JY had screamed, then his defence would be in no position to deny that she had in court.

 

[veggiefan]

Harriet Tolputt
Lickley questions why Tabak has denied certain elements to what happened: if there was a struggle; the injuries;

Harriet Tolputt
Tabak denies if Joanna was pushed against something; that the kiss was sexual; of knowing of the dangers of strangulation.

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'VT cannot admit the injuries were caused by him because it goes towards intent'

Harriet Tolputt
Lickley says Tabak denies a sexual nature to the kiss because he "knows the whole incident is linked to sex. The killing is linked to sex"

Martin Evans
If he misread the signals, why did he not just walk away? Mr Lickley asks.

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'VT the man. He is very clever, he is intelligent, he is highly educated. There is another side to VT. He can tell you what happened, the last moments of JY's life yet he is dishonest'

 

[veggiefan]

I have to get on with some chores - I'll post the highlights of the tweets later, if nobody else does.

Seems to me that the prosecution is painting a graphic and highly emotive picture - but if I was on the jury, I'd be constantly thinking of how little fact and how much opinion there is in the case.

 

[Luna15]

I have to get on with some chores - I'll post the highlights of the tweets later, if nobody else does.

Seems to me that the prosecution is painting a graphic and highly emotive picture - but if I was on the jury, I'd be constantly thinking of how little fact and how much opinion there is in the case.

I'll post rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn

PLEASE ALWAYS READ FROM THE BOTTOM UP

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Nigel Lickley QC (NL) 'there was no time to eat the pizza'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he sent both of those bored texts after he killed Jo Yeates. what was he doing with her body?'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'not after 9.30pm as VT would have it but a few minutes after Joanna Yeates got home'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'there was no 10-15 minutes of chat as VT says. The killing took place a lot earlier than VT would have it'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'carefully crafted deceptive and dishonest' referring to VT's actions

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he is not just like that after the event. If he is like it after he is like it before and he is like it before'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he is when he chooses to be very calculating. There is an old English word that describes that... that is shrewd'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'something happened in the bedroom and VT explains it by telling you he moved the body'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'there is another side to VT. He can tell you what happened, the last moments of JY's life yet he is dishonest'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'VT the man. He is very clever, he is intelligent, he is highly educated'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'we all know it's dangerous to strangle someone. we known it since childhood. VT denied it at first, he knows it is dangerous'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'why was he looking up phrases, definition of sexual assault and conduct?'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'it is a killing linked to sex'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'even if that's true or might be true why does VT not accept that that was sexual. It is sexual it is pleasurable in a sexual way'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'why deny it was sexual? his case was of an attempted pass towards a young woman he'd known for about 10 minutes'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'VT cannot admit the injuries were caused by him because it goes towards intent'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Jo's family are sat in the public gallery. Mother, Father, Boyfriend and Brother. #yeates #Tabak

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he knew she was in pain and frightened he knew she could not breathe until she went limp in his hand'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL to accept the struggle means 'he had to overcome her'. #yeates #Tabak

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'JY did struggle and fight, it might have been quick, these significant injuries mean there was a struggle'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'why does VT deny a struggle? why does VT deny the injuries? why does VT deny the kiss, if it happened, was sexual?'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he lied and he misled people because he knew she was dead as she fell it was what he wanted and intended'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'there is no attempt here by Vincent Tabak to resuscitate this young woman'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL strangulation is 'protracted and persistent and a determination to carry on and carry on until the person goes limp in your hand'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'strangulation is a particular way to kill There is no use of a weapon it brings a unique connection between' victim & attacker

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'it is a longtime to hold your breath and it takes no time to realise what the consequences are'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'it is a longtime ladies and gentleman. imagine the holding of the neck, the sounds, the fight;

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Vincent Tabak is in the dock, head in his hands looking down at the floor flanked by 4 custody officers

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL '20 seconds is a longtime.... it is a longtime when you have your hands around the throat of another person'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'it is your decision as to what happened' he tells the jury

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'this trial is about one central issue. what was VT intending'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he accepts he's killed her. He's told you how he did it'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
The jury are in court. The trial resumes with Nigel Lickley QC giving the closing speech for the prosecution

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Morning from Court 1 in Bristol. Closing speeches in R v Tabak due to happen today

 

[Luna15]

Harriet Tolputt
Lickley suggests that Tabak told the jury he moved Joanna's body to cover up the fact that "something" happened in the bedroom.

skymartinbrunt martinbrunt
Pros: #Tabak is calculating, shrewd and manipulative
stevenmorris20 steven morris

Why did Tabak say he moved the body into her bedroom. It was, says pros, because her earrings were found there....

skymartinbrunt martinbrunt
Pros: Tabak has planned his case to fit the evidence

 

[Luna15]

FROM THE BOTTOM UP

Rupert Evelyn
Jury being shown aerial picture of a snow covered clifton with 44 Canynge rd in the centre of the image.

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'second scream was lower in tone and she said it was more stifled or muffled she heard a bump'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'Mrs Lehman said more of importance, she described the person screaming as female, loud and in distress'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'Mr & Mrs lehman are important. They told you what they heard'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'we know JY bought that pizza at 20:31. VT took it as he took one of her socks. what role or part that played we do not know'

 

[Luna15]

FROM THE BOTTOM UP

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'the time of the attack of just before 8.49'

NL 'those 4 people heard someone scream at an important time, not after 9.30pm'

Rupert Evelyn
NL talking about witness Harry Walker's account of hearing screams on Dec 17th between 2015 and 2050 in the evening

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'Mrs lehman noticed the light was on above the pathway (at no 44) she told you of loud screams'

 

[enzeder]

skynewsgatherer Harriet Tolputt
"Mr Lickley says Joanna dropped her apron by the door, because something happened by the door."
17 minutes ago

 

[enzeder]

@skynewsgatherer
Harriet Tolputt
"Mr Lickley says that four people heard the screams putting the time of the attack at 8.49pm."
5 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

@skynewsgatherer
Harriet Tolputt
"Mr Lickley said Joanna had time to only take her coat off, let the cat out, put the oven on and take a sip of cider."
4 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

@skynewsgatherer
Harriet Tolputt
"Lickley says Tabak said "I don't remember" more than 80 times in his evidence. But suggests it's more a case of " I won't remember""
3 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhon

@skynewsgatherer
Harriet Tolputt
"Mr Lickley says Tabak says he can't remember details because they don't fit with his version of events."
3 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

 

[Luna15]

skynewsgatherer Harriet Tolputt
Mr Lickley says Joanna dropped her apron by the door, because something happened by the door.

stevenmorris20 steven morris
Lickley notes that when he was interviewed by police Vincent Tabak was especially interested in why they took Jo Yeates' front door away.

skynewsgatherer Harriet Tolputt
Lickley reminds the jury how Tabak was interested in why the door had been taken for forensic testing.

READ FROM THE BOTTOM UP

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he used those words a crazy detached person, he was talking about himself'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'his girlfriend had no inkling of what he had done because he was able to mask his feelings completely. he was cool and detached'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'bearing in mind the enormity of what he has done he is able to focus on his emails'

Rupert Evelyn
Lickley QC 'what is clear and not in dispute is he was driving round in his car with her body in the boot'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he was thinking that carefully very shortly after killing Jo Yeates, there is no panic'

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he told you after killing JY he decides to go to Asda, he has a dead body in his car, he is thinking, calculating, in effect an alibi'

Rupert Evelyn
NL says Vincent Tabak 'found her attractive'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'there are more than 80 can't remembers in his evidence and answers. sometimes we can't remember sometimes we won't remember'

Rupert Evelyn
throughout all of this closing speech Vincent Tabak has kept his head in his hands, both elbows on his knees, looking down. #yeates

rupert Evelyn
NL 'the time of the attack of just before 8.49'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'those 4 people heard someone scream at an important time, not after 9.30pm'

Rupert Evelyn
NL talking about witness Harry Walker's account of hearing screams on Dec 17th between 2015 and 2050 in the evening

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'Mrs lehman noticed the light was on above the pathway (at no 44) she told you of loud screams'

Rupert Evelyn
Jury being shown aerial picture of a snow covered clifton with 44 Canynge rd in the centre of the image.

 

[edgedweller]

I have to get on with some chores - I'll post the highlights of the tweets later, if nobody else does.

Seems to me that the prosecution is painting a graphic and highly emotive picture - but if I was on the jury, I'd be constantly thinking of how little fact and how much opinion there is in the case.

But the fact is that to squeeze someone's neck for 20 seconds hard enough to stop their heart is only going to result in serious injury or death. He must have known this. Therefore he murdered her.

At the moment where he could have stopped and resuscitated her, he didn't.