GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #7

[equationgirl]

I agree with you, equationgirl, that a drugs link is very unlikely.
But I nearly spluttered a mouthful of coffee over my keyboard at reading your last two sentences re taking care not to tar anybody a drug dealer.
There are well over half a dozen individuals who've been cleared named here as the killer. Crikey, most of us have named one person, gone to bed, and then the next morning pinpointed somebody else.
I think the greatest legal threat is that there may be one or two people in Clifton who we *haven't* labelled as a psychotic killers, and they'll sue for the fact that they won't be invited to have a role in the TV mini-series ten years down the line.

I'm concerned that some of the posts on here may breach laws on libel/slander (can't remember which applies to written and which applies to verbal statements). Yes, we're all trying to get to the truth and help the investigation where we can, and I know a lot of what is written is opinion, but there are some pretty strong statements being posted about specific individuals when there is no factual basis or supporting evidence. I have also posted previously that naming people outright as the killer may be problematic.

I'm all for solving this, but this is a public site that could be read by anybody and I for one think that it would be a tremendous irreplaceable loss if this website was shut because the owner was sued, especially when such an outcome could have been avoided through careful posting.

Pseudonyms were being used for various people earlier on, for example, and I don't see why it can't be reintroduced.

When this has been solved, whilst we may move onto the next case easily, innocent people caught up in the aftermath of this one may be wrongly branded as drug dealers or killers or paedophiles etc for a very long time. That is not justice.

 

[MrZhivago]

I'm concerned that some of the posts on here may breach laws on libel/slander (can't remember which applies to written and which applies to verbal statements). Yes, we're all trying to get to the truth and help the investigation where we can, and I know a lot of what is written is opinion, but there are some pretty strong statements being posted about specific individuals when there is no factual basis or supporting evidence. I have also posted previously that naming people outright as the killer may be problematic.

I'm all for solving this, but this is a public site that could be read by anybody and I for one think that it would be a tremendous irreplaceable loss if this website was shut because the owner was sued, especially when such an outcome could have been avoided through careful posting.

Pseudonyms were being used for various people earlier on, for example, and I don't see why it can't be reintroduced.

When this has been solved, whilst we may move onto the next case easily, innocent people caught up in the aftermath of this one may be wrongly branded as drug dealers or killers or paedophiles etc for a very long time. That is not justice.

I agree with your concerns that there's a lot that's libellous here.
The problem is that pseudonyms really don't make any substantial difference.
But one can be pretty sure that a site such as this won't face legal ramifications because otherwise half of the interwebs would end up being sued, too.
I do appreciate the point, though, that in some ways branding a tangental person a paedophile or drug dealer could be worse than branding them a possible killer, since a successful closure to this case wouldn't erase the former claims. So, yes, I can see that.

 

[MrZhivago]

Actually I think they have known this from the start, and it is not a suitcase or luggage-style bag - but a case for a surfboard or snowboard. Why would a case like this be missing from the flat? A suitcase might have been lent to a friend, but this, not so likely.

I think this is the thing that caused them all to think she was dead, and that the police asked the parents not to talk about.

It was missing from the flat - I wonder if it is still missing or .....



I wouldn't pay much attention, it's the Sun innit. What's all that about the back seat? Most cars have got boot space that can't be seen from outside.

I'm pretty confident that if it was immediately noticed that a specific bag was missing from the flat, police would straightaway have appealed for it.
Or at least that they've made a big mistake if that was the case and that they left it however many weeks to ask after it.

 

[MrZhivago]

Interesting point about the cat ... does a freaked out cat get an owner's attention, or does the owner simply think the cat is moody. I have an allergy to cats and have no idea how to interpret a freaked out cat.

I'm no cat expert. But if a cat hasn't had fresh food and water put in its bowls for 48 hours, it will be jumping all over the owner on return, miaowing louder than a burglar alarm and going very obviously manic for attention and food.
And, if it has needed to poop, it'll likely not have used the litter tray but made a mess on the floor, which'll be another reason to be very aware that things aren't right.

 

[Rossetti]

I'm pretty confident that if it was immediately noticed that a specific bag was missing from the flat, police would straightaway have appealed for it.

They didn't even say what clothes JY was wearing when she was still officially a misper ...

Or at least that they've made a big mistake if that was the case and that they left it however many weeks to ask after it.

Do we know that the body was not in a bag when found?

 

[Destroyer]

Am still camped outside News International & just popping my head out of the tent to ask if theres any news on the 'Major Breaktrough' yet ?? , the oil in my lamp is running low so might have to call it a night soon

 

[Praxis]

JMO, personally I’m of the opinion that Joanna wasn’t removed from her flat but never made it back to her flat at all - despite the police being 'satisfied' she did. Evidence from her phone signals would trace her path home to 44 Canynge Road on the 17th but I imagine Joanna's phone might give the same location if she were anywhere in the building or possibly next door in no. 42?

Like many, I’m still perplexed why one would move her body, had she been in situ at 44 – distancing oneself from the crime doesn't sit with me as reason enough, yet.

Until further info – I think Joanna was murdered in the building or close by with phone/bag/coat returned to flat & phone signal remained in same location all weekend. Had these not been replaced to her flat, the signal might give a trail and timeline of the murderer, leaving less time to create an alibi.

If phone/bag were replaced, I imagine the murderer knew the layout of the flat, how to negotiate the lock, where to place her belongings. Like others – I believe there could have been an ‘unusual’ mock tidy up, giving appearance she was alive longer. Again, I feel this needed familiarity with the property by someone who was very familiar with the timings and habits of the other residents at both 44 and nearby.

Going back to the beginning -it’s puzzling for me that CJ’s statement at seeing 3 people leaving after 9pm could be vague. I find it unusual that he would be unsure of this at all. Either he sees 3 people leaving the long distinctive pathway to Joanna’s flat or not. It’s not a pathway leading to anywhere else but her door nor a place people pass through regularly. I can understand he might not be able to give descriptions but possibly it’s been misreported or his statement to police is entirely different.

JMO

 

[otto]

I'm no cat expert. But if a cat hasn't had fresh food and water put in its bowls for 48 hours, it will be jumping all over the owner on return, miaowing louder than a burglar alarm and going very obviously manic for attention and food.
And, if it has needed to poop, it'll likely not have used the litter tray but made a mess on the floor, which'll be another reason to be very aware that things aren't right.

Thanks ... so it seems that the boyfriend should have had several clues that things were not right when he first arrived home Sunday at 8. We haven't heard, but it's possible that he called around to friends before calling parents and police.

Still, if the boyfriend is more or less excluded, then the scenario of having been abducted and taken away alive makes sense. Taking her away after she was murdered doesn't make sense to me except if the boyfriend did it. One thing I think we see more and more is couple type kidnappers. I wonder if something like that happened here ... no reason to think that, but a thought.

 

[liz b.]

I'm concerned that some of the posts on here may breach laws on libel/slander (can't remember which applies to written and which applies to verbal statements). Yes, we're all trying to get to the truth and help the investigation where we can, and I know a lot of what is written is opinion, but there are some pretty strong statements being posted about specific individuals when there is no factual basis or supporting evidence. I have also posted previously that naming people outright as the killer may be problematic.

I'm all for solving this, but this is a public site that could be read by anybody and I for one think that it would be a tremendous irreplaceable loss if this website was shut because the owner was sued, especially when such an outcome could have been avoided through careful posting.

Pseudonyms were being used for various people earlier on, for example, and I don't see why it can't be reintroduced.

When this has been solved, whilst we may move onto the next case easily, innocent people caught up in the aftermath of this one may be wrongly branded as drug dealers or killers or paedophiles etc for a very long time. That is not justice.

Slander is the spoken word, and libel is the written word. If we post that whatever we write is our opinion, and only that,it is very difficult to prove libel. Reminds me of the saying : A cat can look at a King.. ( not referring to Bernard here ).

JMO

 

[liz b.]

They didn't even say what clothes JY was wearing when she was still officially a misper ...



Do we know that the body was not in a bag when found?

I tend to believe that the couple walking their dog spotted Jo's corpse, not a large bag/suitcase. But,who knows ?

JMO

 

[liz b.]

JMO, personally I’m of the opinion that Joanna wasn’t removed from her flat but never made it back to her flat at all - despite the police being 'satisfied' she did. Evidence from her phone signals would trace her path home to 44 Canynge Road on the 17th but I imagine Joanna's phone might give the same location if she were anywhere in the building or possibly next door in no. 42?

Like many, I’m still perplexed why one would move her body, had she been in situ at 44 – distancing oneself from the crime doesn't sit with me as reason enough, yet.

Until further info – I think Joanna was murdered in the building or close by with phone/bag/coat returned to flat & phone signal remained in same location all weekend. Had these not been replaced to her flat, the signal might give a trail and timeline of the murderer, leaving less time to create an alibi.

If phone/bag were replaced, I imagine the murderer knew the layout of the flat, how to negotiate the lock, where to place her belongings. Like others – I believe there could have been an ‘unusual’ mock tidy up, giving appearance she was alive longer. Again, I feel this needed familiarity with the property by someone who was very familiar with the timings and habits of the other residents at both 44 and nearby.

Going back to the beginning -it’s puzzling for me that CJ’s statement at seeing 3 people leaving after 9pm could be vague. I find it unusual that he would be unsure of this at all. Either he sees 3 people leaving the long distinctive pathway to Joanna’s flat or not. It’s not a pathway leading to anywhere else but her door nor a place people pass through regularly. I can understand he might not be able to give descriptions but possibly it’s been misreported or his statement to police is entirely different.

JMO

I thought CJ stated that he saw 3 people leaving via the communal exit ? Not sure where that is in relation to JY's flat,or the blue front door...

 

[Destroyer]

Here is an estimated timeline to go by -

Bump......

 

[MrZhivago]

<snip> If we post that whatever we write is our opinion, and only that,it is very difficult to prove libel. <snip>

I know I sound like Mr Negative tonight, but I'm afraid that is just completely, absolutely and utterly wrong.

edit: Sorry, I should be more constructive.
It's simply that a) something being just an opinion doesn't get one off the hook at all and b) nor does it matter if it's "just one person's" personal opinion.
Yes, there's "fair comment" but it doesn't actually give much wriggle room.
I've got a lot of experience of [specifically British, mainly] libel law and, believe me, there's an awful amount here that is certainly libellous.
As I say, though, I can't imagine a suit coming from it (for lots of different reasons).
So I think that effectively it's only, really, moral considerations that guide us here as to what we feel we should or should not say.
But, likewise, JMO and sorry for curtness.

 

[MrZhivago]

I tend to believe that the couple walking their dog spotted Jo's corpse, not a large bag/suitcase. But,who knows ?

JMO

I agree. Particularly as the body was described as "slumped".

 

[liz b.]

I know I sound like Mr Negative tonight, but I'm afraid that is just completely, absolutely and utterly wrong.

Could be wrong... Are libel laws different in the USA and the UK ? How do some of the UK newspapers get away with the things they print ? Regarding WS site, I have always understood that we do need to post that what we write is our opinion only...

JMO

 

[Destroyer]

Here Is A New Wider Poll Some Of You Might Want To Divulge In -



1. Who Did It ?
2. What Was The Motive ?
3. What Was The Time Of Death ?
4. How & When Did JY's Items ie.. Keys , Bag & Coat Get Back To Flat ?
5. Where Did The Murder Take Place ?
6. What Happend To The Pizza ?
7. When Was The Body Dumped ?

(Please Only Use Initials & Not Names)

 

[MoveEveryStone]

Whatever happened to investigative journalism in the UK? Used to be newspapers could command similar or more resources than LE and took it upon themselves to put the pieces together, and publish the results to sell papers. Multiple papers would have investigative journalists working that case. They kept LE honest and moving forward, and found new leads for them to follow up on. Justice was the better for it. All we get now is the papers being spoon fed by LE and all reporting the same thing with a slightly different twist.

I for one am very frustrated with the lack of progress. Where is the accountability of LE?

 

[MoveEveryStone]

Officers are now checking surveillance camera footage taken from the Clifton Suspension Bridge for signs of a car with a large bag on the back seat.

Because no perp. would ever think to put the suitcase in the boot and drive over the bridge with no CCTV. Of course they would put a suitcase with a dead women in the passenger compartment. Maybe even in the front seat, and drive over the suspension bridge. Brilliant, not:banghead:

 

[Destroyer]

an interesting read if youve got time -

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/forensics-profiling-the-perpetrator.html

& an article interview with Greg Reardon early on before Jo's body was found -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rchitect-Jo-Yeates-sobs-I-want-Christmas.html

(Beware of the 'were' & 'was' comments ?? Very suspect i must say).

 

[MrZhivago]

Could be wrong... Are libel laws different in the USA and the UK ? How do some of the UK newspapers get away with the things they print ? Regarding WS site, I have always understood that we do need to post that what we write is our opinion only...

JMO

Yes, there are substantial differences between US and UK libel laws.
The chief one is that, roughly, in the US you can defend yourself by demonstrating that you took great care before you wrote what you did and by showing that you weren't wilful. In the UK it's a lot harsher. Essentially, if you can't demonstrate that the claims you made which damaged a person's reputation are correct, regardless of how careful and well-meaning you were, you're still stuffed.