GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #5

[Phillb]

Don't think the perp can be that stupid...otherwise his/her DNA would be everywhere (unless they lived there?). If it's a shrewd perp (as I suspect) think they are treating this as a bit of a game....and relishing every minute...probably constantly watching news/papers......and sites like this?????????????????

The DNA wouldn't be everywhere, not if they hadn't been in the flat. And seen as they haven't found any damning DNA yet (I assume they haven't)
And the perp would be very stupid risking moving a dead body if there was no need. Extremely so I.M.O.

It's all swings and roundabouts. No hard fact and substantial evidence.

 

[teabreid]

I too find R/S s video strange, I think the police have been sending snippets to the press to keep the case in the headlines, so may have asked her if she would make the video, but I think she has been asked not to tell all, and so she is being very careful to disclose only what she has been told, so may account for the very careful thought, and often repeating the same things, anyway just an idea.

I don't thing Jo was murdered in the flat, there would be no point risking taking the body out, why not just leave it there, I think her belongings were returned, but why would someone do that?, very strange.

I would love to see an unedited version of that video! I must assume things were said that the police don't want the public to know, it looks heavily edited imo.

If this was an abduction, there's no need for items to be returned to the flat. She gets home, puts her bag down with most of her things in it, starts taking her boots and socks off, when the abductors arrive, getting in by unknown means, carry her away forcibly (hence the screams), leaving the bag behind,with keys and phone inside, and for some strange reason taking the pizza.

I can't remember whether the remaining sock was on the body or in the flat?

Maybe the abductors left a message- that would explain the superfast police response.

Not my own favourite theory, but it could have happened like that.

 

[Firefly75]

If Jo never got home that night but was murdered somewhere on the way home, or in the immediate vicinity of her home, the killer had to:
*know which house she lived in;
*know which flat she lived in;
*know no one else was going to be in (or else he wouldn't have risked going in later);
*take off her jacket and shoes after she'd been murdered, or _make_ her take them off before she was murdered;
*take her keys out of wherever she kept them (handbag, pocket, or she may have had them ready in her hand);
*EITHER leave the body in situ while he went to the house, unlocked the door of her flat, went in, put down her handbag and shoes and hung up her jacket, and poured out the cider, without leaving much evidence or removing the evidence after he'd done all that, OR conceal the body somewhere (vehicle? bushes? or did he dump her near the quarry first, then went back?) before doing all that;
[*take the pizza - as it hasn't been found lying around nearby].

If she never got home, the killer must have known an awful lot about her and it was probably premeditated.

The words, cold, efficient, calculating, sick, dangerous come to mind. And a lot of others.

What do you guys think?

 

[Nausicaa]

If this was an abduction, there's no need for items to be returned to the flat. She gets home, puts her bag down with most of her things in it, starts taking her boots and socks off, when the abductors arrive, getting in by unknown means, carry her away forcibly (hence the screams), leaving the bag behind,with keys and phone inside, and for some strange reason taking the pizza.

I can't remember whether the remaining sock was on the body or in the flat?

Maybe the abductors left a message- that would explain the superfast police response.

Not my own favourite theory, but it could have happened like that.

But why would the abductors choose to run such risks rather than pick up a girl walking along the street ? What is the "unknown means" by which they get in ? Why carry off the pizza ? And why, assuming sexual motive, don't they get what they want ? Too many unexplainables to be the right solution for my money.

Having said that, there is one thing that makes the hypothesis of abduction by persons or persons unknown attractive to me : it is that it is very easy to strangle someone in a vehicle if you are sitting behind - you can even use the seatbelt to do it and you will not get a single scratch in the process.

And to be fair the pizza might be a complete red herring. I am not interested in the notions in circulation that she gave it to a beggar or ate it raw while walking along the road or dropped it by mistake. But I can imagine more credible circumstances in which its disappearance is quite independent of the crime.

 

[Nausicaa]

If Jo never got home that night but was murdered somewhere on the way home, or in the immediate vicinity of her home, the killer had to:
*know which house she lived in;
*know which flat she lived in;
*know no one else was going to be in (or else he wouldn't have risked going in later);
*take off her jacket and shoes after she'd been murdered, or _make_ her take them off before she was murdered;
*take her keys out of wherever she kept them (handbag, pocket, or she may have had them ready in her hand);
*EITHER leave the body in situ while he went to the house, unlocked the door of her flat, went in, put down her handbag and shoes and hung up her jacket, and poured out the cider, without leaving much evidence or removing the evidence after he'd done all that, OR conceal the body somewhere (vehicle? bushes? or did he dump her near the quarry first, then went back?) before doing all that;
[*take the pizza - as it hasn't been found lying around nearby].

If she never got home, the killer must have known an awful lot about her and it was probably premeditated.

The words, cold, efficient, calculating, sick, dangerous come to mind. And a lot of others.

What do you guys think?

I think your post shows that can't have been the way it happened. At least I may have led a sheltered life, but I doubt whether the annals of crime offer a single example of a criminal quite so "cold, efficient, calculating, sick, dangerous" etc all at once, though please disabuse me if I am being naïve. Much more likely must be a solution that doesn't present so many incredible features.

 

[Firefly75]

I think your post shows that can't have been the way it happened. At least I may have led a sheltered life, but I doubt whether the annals of crime offer a single example of a criminal quite so "cold, efficient, calculating, sick, dangerous" etc all at once, though please disabuse me if I am being naïve. Much more likely must be a solution that doesn't present so many incredible features.

Well, that's why I am inclined to believe the police when they say she got home.

But I'd say that the adjectives 'cold, efficient, calculating' still come into it, given the lack of evidence. And sick and dangerous, given that he strangled the girl.

 

[brummster]

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

Hi Bax, only just catching up on today's posts now. Sorry my post wasn't clear earlier. I meant RS breaking up from uni, not JY/RG...

 

[whitedove]

She got to the flat. It's about the only thing the police have stated as fact.
Really, there's almost nothing else they've said. But they have said that she made it home.

The police have to say Jo made it home as her belongings were there, but it does'nt mean to say they believe it themselves, they will have an open mind, they are only three ways here, the body was taken out, she walked out without her belongings, or her belongings were returned.

 

[teabreid]

But why would the abductors choose to run such risks rather than pick up a girl walking along the street ? What is the "unknown means" by which they get in ? Why carry off the pizza ? And why, assuming sexual motive, don't they get what they want ? Too many unexplainables to be the right solution for my money.

Having said that, there is one thing that makes the hypothesis of abduction by persons or persons unknown attractive to me : it is that it is very easy to strangle someone in a vehicle if you are sitting behind - you can even use the seatbelt to do it and you will not get a single scratch in the process.

And to be fair the pizza might be a complete red herring. I am not interested in the notions in circulation that she gave it to a beggar or ate it raw while walking along the road or dropped it by mistake. But I can imagine more credible circumstances in which its disappearance is quite independent of the crime.

Assuming you can get access, it is much, much less risky to abduct somebody from their home than from the street. IMO. Especially if you know they are alone.

As for the Pizza, a complete red herring in my view also. Maybe the abductors were hungry, took it, ate it and that's that.

As regards motive, I don't think it was sexual in the normal sense. Maybe simply abducting this girl and murdering her was all these sickos needed? The lust for power over another human being is a strange, strange thing, I don't pretend to understand it, but I know it exists.

I do agree that strangulation in a vehicle is a strong possibility, given no signs of struggle in the flat. However if it was an abduction, then 2 involved, definitely. Which takes us back to LL's original story, doesn't it?

Still not my own pet theory, but maybe I'm getting there.

 

[Phillb]

The Police are assuming Jo got back to her flat, there also pretty sure that she was attacked there not long after she arrived home. The trouble with this theory is, they have absolutely no evidence to back this up. The forensic tests are not telling them what they want to hear. They've gone through the place with a fine tooth comb. They've gone back again with special chemicals and lasers.

There are 2 reasons for this.
Either it didn't happen there like there forensics are telling them, or some considerable effort was made to cleanse the area. Which i must add also shows up on forensic evidence.

You can only go on fact can't you?

 

[teabreid]

The police have to say Jo made it home as her belongings were there, but it does'nt mean to say they believe it themselves, they will have an open mind, they are only three ways here, the body was taken out, she walked out without her belongings, or her belongings were returned.

Fourth way- she was taken out alive but against her will, without her belongings.

 

[Robin Hood]

If Jo never got home that night but was murdered somewhere on the way home, or in the immediate vicinity of her home, the killer had to:
*know which house she lived in;
*know which flat she lived in;
*know no one else was going to be in (or else he wouldn't have risked going in later);
*take off her jacket and shoes after she'd been murdered, or _make_ her take them off before she was murdered;
*take her keys out of wherever she kept them (handbag, pocket, or she may have had them ready in her hand);
*EITHER leave the body in situ while he went to the house, unlocked the door of her flat, went in, put down her handbag and shoes and hung up her jacket, and poured out the cider, without leaving much evidence or removing the evidence after he'd done all that, OR conceal the body somewhere (vehicle? bushes? or did he dump her near the quarry first, then went back?) before doing all that;
[*take the pizza - as it hasn't been found lying around nearby].

If she never got home, the killer must have known an awful lot about her and it was probably premeditated.

The words, cold, efficient, calculating, sick, dangerous come to mind. And a lot of others.

What do you guys think?

IMO she reached the flat, poored the cider and the door was knocked on by somebody asking her for a xmas drink. She explained she was about to eat and they said bring your pizza with you we can cook it at mine. She took the Pizza and went to another flat where she removed her boots when she entered. After a short while something took place and she was strangled. Her own sock was removed and used to carry her boots and possibly her bag back to her flat. The pizza wasn't cooked or was cooked but not eaten but it had to go just because of it's relevence.

 

[whitedove]

Fourth way- she was taken out alive but against her will, without her belongings.

Third way, When I say walked out, I mean she was alive when she left, she may have a gun in her back, knife, or even carried, somehow without her belongings

 

[brummster]

If Joanna was killed in her cflat, then it cwas by someone who would have had reason to have been there at some point before. Surely LE would have found DNA of people who had ever been to the flat and would have eliminated the ones they could..

LL, neighbours, parents, gr, rs, friends, cleaners etc DNA is expected there. Which is why killer is someone she knew otherwise a. stranger DNA would have been found (and I imagine warnings to the public etc issued) or b. she wasn't killed at the flat in which case the killer wouldn't have returned stuff to the flat risking leaving DNA.

 

[Nausicaa]

The Police are assuming Jo got back to her flat, there also pretty sure that she was attacked there not long after she arrived home. The trouble with this theory is, they have absolutely no evidence to back this up. The forensic tests are not telling them what they want to hear. They've gone through the place with a fine tooth comb. They've gone back again with special chemicals and lasers.

There are 2 reasons for this.
Either it didn't happen there like there forensics are telling them, or some considerable effort was made to cleanse the area. Which i must add also shows up on forensic evidence.

You can only go on fact can't you?

I agree the police are convinced she got back to the flat. Anyone contrasting the language used by the police on things they're evenly marginally doubtful of with their tone in saying she got back has to be convinced : they are really certain she did. To me they seem pretty certain, but perhaps a little less so, that the major physical attack took place there.

But I can't understand why you think they have no forensic or other evidence for Joanna's return. They have stated their conviction that the assailant(s) was/were forensically aware - being careful and knowing what to be careful about.

OK, that suggests they have located no relevant DNA in the flat, but that is not necessarily an argument along the lines of "if there was an invisible cat in the chair we couldn't see it, but we can't see it, so there is one". It seems to me very likely that what they have traced is clear signs of a clean-up job directed towards forensically sensitive locations.

(BTW one reason for the special interest in the front door, I think, may be that it's not so practical to clean. You'd feel such a damn fool wiping down the outside of someone else's front door with bleach at midnight in December if a neighbour passed by, wouldn't you ?)

 

[Firefly75]

IMO she reached the flat, poored the cider and the door was knocked on by somebody asking her for a xmas drink. She explained she was about to eat and they said bring your pizza with you we can cook it at mine. She took the Pizza and went to another flat where she removed her boots when she entered. After a short while something took place and she was strangled. Her own sock was removed and used to carry her boots and possibly her bag back to her flat. The pizza wasn't cooked or was cooked but not eaten but it had to go just because of it's relevence.

*Shudder*

Good reasoning!

Every now and again I find myself wondering if she could have opened the door to someone she didn't know who was posing as a motorist with car trouble/person who lost their way to a party or was looking for another address/someone who pretended to need help/said they'd taken in a parcel for her.

I'd like to think she wouldn't have done that (we are all repeatedly told not to fall for such tricks, especially after dark) - yet I can just see myself doing the same, caught by surprise when the bell goes and someone says they need help. *Shudder*

 

[teabreid]

I agree the police are convinced she got back to the flat. Anyone contrasting the language used by the police on things they're evenly marginally doubtful of with their tone in saying she got back has to be convinced : they are really certain she did. To me they seem pretty certain, but perhaps a little less so, that the major physical attack took place there.

But I can't understand why you think they have no forensic or other evidence for Joanna's return. They have stated their conviction that the assailant(s) was/were forensically aware - being careful and knowing what to be careful about.

OK, that suggests they have located no relevant DNA in the flat, but that is not necessarily an argument along the lines of "if there was an invisible cat in the chair we couldn't see it, but we can't see it, so there is one". It seems to me very likely that what they have traced is clear signs of a clean-up job directed towards forensically sensitive locations.

(BTW one reason for the special interest in the front door, I think, may be that it's not so practical to clean. You'd feel such a damn fool wiping down the outside of someone else's front door with bleach at midnight in December if a neighbour passed by, wouldn't you ?)

I agree she got back to her flat, for me it is just too far fetched to imagine someone who has just strangled this woman somewhere else taking stuff to the flat afterwards- hoping Greg hasn't returned unexpectedly, for instance. Far too risky, and why? Plus it's about the only thing the police have confirmed as certain in this whole investigation.

If the police believe she was murdered in the flat, and have discovered no DNA apart from Jo and Gregg, despite taking the place apart,then I'm back to my pet theory.

 

[Phillb]

(BTW one reason for the special interest in the front door, I think, may be that it's not so practical to clean. You'd feel such a damn fool wiping down the outside of someone else's front door with bleach at midnight in December if a neighbour passed by, wouldn't you ?)

You see this is my point. Everything can be discounted.
Your quote about the front door cleaning. Well it's down the side of the house, external doors always open inwards. You'd be cleaning it in the seclusion of the hall. It's not visible to people passing in the street.

I'm not trying to be pedantic here. I'm trying to sate there is always an exception to every rule, however implausible it might seem, It happens. Good Detectives never close thier minds to such things.

 

[Nausicaa]

...then I'm back to my pet theory.

You think it was Bernard ?

 

[whitedove]

A Murder Scenario

The young lady was walking home, car pulls up, ‘Hi there’, do you want a lift,
‘Oh that looks nice’, my favourite pizza, how’s the boyfriend?, he’s off to see his brother for the weekend, tell you what I got a nice bottle of wine, bring the pizza and we can catch up with old times.
You know what its like when you have boots on and its very cold, the first thing you do is take your boots off and warm your cold feet.


Pizza’s ready, wine is poured, both feeling relaxed chatting away.

Then things start to change, he comes on heavy, she was’nt expecting it, she starts screaming, hands tighten around her neck, he finds he has a big problem.

He needs to get rid of everything, piles it all on the back seat, he knows a place he used to spend time when he was a young man and makes his way there, its bitterly cold, he try’s to drop her over the wall, he can see a car in the distance, drops the body by the side of the road and makes a run for it.


He’s back in town now, he then remembers her things are still in the back of the car, he has to think fast, her phone might be traced, he knows her place well, his friend used to live there, he finds her keys, waits till its all quiet, runs up, opens the door, drops all her belongings, had a quick drink of cider, wiped the bottle, made his way home, as he was going up the drive he found a sock and popped it in the bin.

Any new people joining, this is just a story, it did'nt happen.

[FONT=&quot]How many holes can you pick in this idea?

Anyone got any story’s to tell?. [/FONT]