Without some more facts, we just aren't going to come up with any more suspects at this stage, I feel. Maybe that's how the police feel too? And they have a lot more facts than we have, to start with. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if there was an arrest at the weekend. Just a feeling.
GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #5
- Thread starter wfgodot
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
New Posts
-
-
-
KY- I-75 Active Shooter Targeting Vehicles- Latest: arielilane
- Status
Without some more facts, we just aren't going to come up with any more suspects at this stage, I feel. Maybe that's how the police feel too? And they have a lot more facts than we have, to start with. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if there was an arrest at the weekend. Just a feeling.
mikeymot
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 0
Just sitting here having a 'quiet' moment (which I rarely do!). Mulling over everything gleaned so far...I think C/J DID see something that night. I am inclined to believe him that he was parking his car and saw three people near J/Y's flat. We know he is a member of the neighbourhood watch and...some would say...a bit of a 'busybody'. At this stage I believe he may have mentioned his sighting to one of his friends/neighbours and...being the busybody..set about trying to find out who the three people were. I think he then found out....but declined to put them 'in the frame' for whatever reason...maybe he was scared of them? But he then set about trying to retract/change what he had already said to the neighbour/friend and that is when the police became interested. I don't think he was ever a serious suspect for the actual murder...but I think the police believe he knows a lot more about the murderer and what happened that night (even if most of it happened before he arrived home). For the record...I don't think any of the suspects so far are gay. I think most of them have a control issue...but more about women than men.
naturally suspicious
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 139
- Reaction score
- 0
broke my left wrist badly just before xmas...hence typing with no capital letters or question marks....
largely confined to house up till now...and very -painful.
waking up in the night after anaesthetic in pain....feeling extremely scared.
son's girlfriend owns flat in next house to jo, overlooking clifton college playing fields.....super, plush flat, lift/stairs but isolated.
son has house near filton ...where landlord joined gym....in spite of deriding sport/exercise
their time spent together but obviously she gets home at different time to him.
was a time when people of clifton extremely nervous about going out...
i have spent time at home looking into this murder...for obvious reasons...and feel nos 42 and 44 canynge rd are not good places to be...landlord, peter stanley, lodger.....friend....snowboarding at night, paedophile ex-owner of flat, connections with murder of glynis 1974 etc
don't want to put specific info about which flat they live in just in case murderer reading this thread.....hope you understand...
largely confined to house up till now...and very -painful.
waking up in the night after anaesthetic in pain....feeling extremely scared.
son's girlfriend owns flat in next house to jo, overlooking clifton college playing fields.....super, plush flat, lift/stairs but isolated.
son has house near filton ...where landlord joined gym....in spite of deriding sport/exercise
their time spent together but obviously she gets home at different time to him.
was a time when people of clifton extremely nervous about going out...
i have spent time at home looking into this murder...for obvious reasons...and feel nos 42 and 44 canynge rd are not good places to be...landlord, peter stanley, lodger.....friend....snowboarding at night, paedophile ex-owner of flat, connections with murder of glynis 1974 etc
don't want to put specific info about which flat they live in just in case murderer reading this thread.....hope you understand...
mikeymot
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 0
Another thought...if my previous theory (re C/J) is correct..I hope the police are keeping an eye on him, if the perps know he is the only witness, he could be in danger. I think that they would, at best, try to 'implicate him' (if they don't already have something on him) or, at worst, try to silence him.
mikeymot
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks for the info...hope the wrist gets better soon. I used to have a device that typed the spoken word...would be handy for you now (excuse the pun!). Must say, it feels refreshing not to be considering G/R at the moment...think my interest is shifting back to the 'snow mates'.
Ok, here goes. I'm new (and have my hands full with my little one) so be patitent with me re. spellings etc
Thanks for all the sleuthing, I've been reading for days and some interesting theories. Here's my take in brief:
1. As we don't have many details/facts, it's difficult to rule out a lot. We can only put forward theories in order of the most likely. To me, given what we know, JY was definitely killed by someone she knew, given the lack of break in/struggle and the body move. What we need is some motive.
2. I don't think this was premeditated on the basis of the way the body was dumped - hurried, lack of fore thought.
3. I have been swinging between various theories that centre around GR, motive being control/posessiveness.
4. RS break up on the 17th has been bothering me. Coincidences should be treated with suspicion. Having watched that interview of her, body language aside, my antenae are well and truly up. So RS is now my focus, Jealousy as a motive, with GR in the know? I strongly believe GR knows something.
a. When she found the police message, why did she phone Jo? Shouldn't she have phoned the police directly as it would have been urgent. I'd like to know what her and GR discussed.
b. Someone mentioned earlier the similar language being used by GR and RS.
c. Stumbling on whether she was alive...@ about 3:00
d. Can't remember (sorry, rushing) at what point she says they were all devastated then corrects it to being, she was more devastated. Almost competing to appear the mmost devastated.
e. Is it just me who finds it strange that RS says her family tried to have Christmas as best as they could given the circumstances?? Who even thinks about Christmas at a time like that? Almost like trying to pretend it's not happening.
f. Is she just nervous?
5. So, did RS do the deed on the Friday/Saturday (on her way home for the Christmas break), end up stopping in Bristol until Sunday, and get some help from GR on the Sunday with the clear up? Proceeded home to Hampshire on Sunday.. What's the relationship between RS and GR? Can RS movements be accounted for?
More to come.
PS. 4.- people are only assuming that JY and RG broke up on the 17th. I dont belive they did. People have too spicy imagination
I'm wondering about CJ's rants about suing the police for unlawful? arrest. If what he said he saw on that night wasn't the truth, surely it would be futile for him to sue.
I don't understand. Whose son are you talking about? You don't seem to specify in this post or the earlier one. Sorry if I'm being dim.
ruined detroit
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2011
- Messages
- 124
- Reaction score
- 13
I think the theory of RS as an angry resentful and jealous lesbian are really far fetched! I watched the interview and she came across as they same type of girl Jo is: middle class and serious. If RS murdered Jo in an angry lezzo fit it would make good copy, but that is all.
On the video though, I don't think RS's plea would make anyone feel guilty or morally compelled to hand themselves in on the basis of her message. She didn't pull at my heartstrings!
On the video though, I don't think RS's plea would make anyone feel guilty or morally compelled to hand themselves in on the basis of her message. She didn't pull at my heartstrings!
Luna15
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2011
- Messages
- 545
- Reaction score
- 5
sorry to drag this up again, but as it was my post re the body language that appears to have prompted things over there....
How someone can condemn behaviour on this site, when they are a member of a site that allows sick jokes about Heather McCartney/1 sock says it all really.....
I echo the thoughts of naturally suspicious above.
Moving swiftly on...... really interesting posts re RS, mmm I did question her demeanour throughout the interview, and someone made a good point about, why was it filmed by A&S?? maybe to keep case in the public eye? The one thing thing that struck me was how monotone she came across, and clinical, I put that down to shock, and maybe the shaking of the head, could be disbelief.... maybe?..... I did see on DS (so cannot be read as gospel) someone posted that they had a nose in RS facebook and Greg was not added as a 'friend' which caused some debate at the time.....
I find it most odd that Greg did not try to contact RS during the 4 hours upon arriving home are reporting Joanna missing.... RS was her best friend!
I dont know what the procedure is for missing persons, but the police calling someone in the middle of the night? 4am!!! they are obviously taking this very seriously, and why are they allowing Greg to handle her phone? when potentially they are dealing with a crime scene? Joanna mentioned in her interview that the police were aware (@4am) that she was the last person to speak to Joanna.... how did the police know that? they must have gone through Joanna's phone? had it held it's charge all weekend? or did Greg charge it on his return? Once charged, did it show 'missed calls' and unread texts?.... did he read them? Obviously the police will know if and when he did this, and if this happened soon after his return, why didn't he raise the alarm earlier?
The parents stated in their appeal that Greg called them at midnight and they knew something was wrong and drove straight down there.... according to AARoutefinder, it is two hours from Ampfield to Bristol, so they would have reached there @2-2.30am (clear roads) they knew within half an hour (@3am) that she had been abducted, so maybe they convinced the police to call her friends.
mikeymot
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 0
Think what he saw that night was the truth. But he is (from reports) a very proud and private individual and is probably very indignant that he has attracted so much speculation and vilification in the press. But my guess is, he's running scared. Don't think he will be suing anytime soon....maybe one of his so called 'friends' made the statement about suing and C.J would rather keep his head down?
Good points. I'd also like to know, if they were as happy as RS states, surely he would wonder why Jo hadn't rung him see how his visit was going etc..and if he had rung her with no reply he must wonder why. I don't get that about Jo not returning calls to somebody she is supposed to be madly in love with. Even a text would be something.
If they telephoned the police I would think the first thing the police would say to them is "have you rung around and spoken to her friends and aquaintances?"
I don't think they would offer to do it for them - not in the first instance anyway.
Have no idea what time the police turned up at flat. Does anyone know?
Just re-read above Luna - they must have been in flat before 4am.
mikeymot
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 0
There was something in the flat that convinced the parents and the police...that something bad had happened (NOT just a missing person). Could be that when G.R got back...he saw the same thing but.....(don't ask me why) it is sometimes human nature to hold off...even deny what you are seeing...in the hope that it isn't true. As long as he didn't report it..to either her parents or the police...then there may have been the faint hope that she would return. Maybe G/R just sat there...hoping that what he thought had happened...hadn't.
I haven't been able to understand why any killer would remove Ms Yeates's body from the flat.
Being kidnapped without shoes or her private belongings, bundled into a car or whatever, would place the murder scene elsewhere - the police have not suggested that they are dealing with three sites (kidnap flat, murder scene, body location).
If as the police think the killing took place in the flat, why on earth would a killer then move the body into a car, across a city, to a public place for disposal? Why not leave it where it is and scarper?
Certainly if it was an accidental death during attack, removal would be very odd. But there is no sense from what the police say that this was an accident or an unintentional killing - a ligature would make it even less likely that it was a misadventure.
If it was premeditated, there would be even less reason to move the body. Premeditation would surely have included a killing in the flat with a quick, unnoticed escape. The killer would have bargained for doing the killing in the flat - if not, he or she would have done it elsewhere, say on the road.
I have wondered all along if the girl made it back to the flat at all. That she had maybe been killed elsewhere, in a car, and her body disposed of in one go; and that the flat is not a true feature in the affair at all, but a kind of misdirection.
However, the police investigation would indicate otherwise, as they believe she returned to the flat after her drinks evening.
Which is why I have wondered why her parents were so sure from the off that she had been abducted because of how the flat looked, but neither the boyfriend nor the police seemed to recognise anything immediately suspicious. Why her parents thought what they did, we haven't been told.
Had the cider been poured? Were there dirty dishes or glasses? Were both cider bottles present, one full and the other half-empty? Had the lights been left on, burning for two days? Or did they have to be switched on when the boyfriend arrived back on Sunday?
We may never know the answers to these. But I think, for what it's worth, that the 'condition' of the flat and the attitude of the police in thinking for several days they were dealing with a missing person rather than a murdered person, will prove critical to whether or not the case gets solved.
Thanks for everyone for your thoughts on here.
Being kidnapped without shoes or her private belongings, bundled into a car or whatever, would place the murder scene elsewhere - the police have not suggested that they are dealing with three sites (kidnap flat, murder scene, body location).
If as the police think the killing took place in the flat, why on earth would a killer then move the body into a car, across a city, to a public place for disposal? Why not leave it where it is and scarper?
Certainly if it was an accidental death during attack, removal would be very odd. But there is no sense from what the police say that this was an accident or an unintentional killing - a ligature would make it even less likely that it was a misadventure.
If it was premeditated, there would be even less reason to move the body. Premeditation would surely have included a killing in the flat with a quick, unnoticed escape. The killer would have bargained for doing the killing in the flat - if not, he or she would have done it elsewhere, say on the road.
I have wondered all along if the girl made it back to the flat at all. That she had maybe been killed elsewhere, in a car, and her body disposed of in one go; and that the flat is not a true feature in the affair at all, but a kind of misdirection.
However, the police investigation would indicate otherwise, as they believe she returned to the flat after her drinks evening.
Which is why I have wondered why her parents were so sure from the off that she had been abducted because of how the flat looked, but neither the boyfriend nor the police seemed to recognise anything immediately suspicious. Why her parents thought what they did, we haven't been told.
Had the cider been poured? Were there dirty dishes or glasses? Were both cider bottles present, one full and the other half-empty? Had the lights been left on, burning for two days? Or did they have to be switched on when the boyfriend arrived back on Sunday?
We may never know the answers to these. But I think, for what it's worth, that the 'condition' of the flat and the attitude of the police in thinking for several days they were dealing with a missing person rather than a murdered person, will prove critical to whether or not the case gets solved.
Thanks for everyone for your thoughts on here.
mikeymot
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't think the police did treat this as a missing person...for some reason I think they knew all along that they were dealing with a death. We only think they believe the flat was the murder scene....because that is what they WANT us to believe.
To be honest I think the L/E are playing cat and mouse with the killer(s) and the press...and ourselves are simply moving the pieces around in this very sad 'board game'.
Robin Hood
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,340
- Reaction score
- 195
I totally agree. Missing person enquiries don't begin at 3am, unless a child is involved. From the moment the police received that first call, this was treated as a murder enquiry in all but name. We will only find out why if this ever comes to court, I guess. Does anybody know who made that call? Greg or the parents?
This news bulletin is interesting regarding the Rebecca interview- but more confusion over the disposal site, I'm afraid (I'm still with you on that one, Phillb!).
It states that the video was edited by the police, so we won't be seeing the full version anytime soon, I think. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006pft9
It states that the video was edited by the police, so we won't be seeing the full version anytime soon, I think. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006pft9
- Status