A lot of discussion overnight, but I don't see this case nearer a solution. What do we know that we didn't know yesterday?
1.Jo didn't eat the Pizza
I don't see that this takes us very far, in fact very few of the theories on here involved her eating the pizza anyway. However looking again at the size of the pizza, I am pretty sure it was bought to share. I am also pretty sure that she only became aware that she was catering for two after she left Waitrose. Otherwise, why not buy a pizza in Waitrose?
2. It appears she did, after all, buy something in Waitrose, whatever is in the black bag, which the police haven't revealed the contents of, except to tell us they aren't significant- thanks for that, chaps. This does explain what to me was always a minor mystery- how on earth was the CCTV from Waitrose found almost immediately, if she bought nothing there? I was almost impressed by the police's efficiency! It now looks like the police found a Waitrose receipt as well as a Tesco receipt in the flat.
3. The police don't know whether a ligature was used. What? Well no more CSI for me, then.
4. The police don't know where she was killed. That makes sense if she was killed in a car they haven't looked at yet.
5. The police don't know when she was killed. Another triumph for forensics! (yes, I know the frozen conditions made it difficult, but even so)
I'm sort of guessing the police also don't know when the body was dumped?
I see that theories are now spreading to include Jo's brother, Greg's brother, a mystery drug dealer----I'm sensing desperation, but if GR and MW really do have cast iron, watertight alibis then we obviously have to look elsewhere, but I for one will take a lot of convincing that GR has an unbreakable alibi.
Anyone else getting that impending "cold case" feeling? Or am I just being too pessimistic?