I simply don't see someone committing murder, and then going back to the victim's home to leaves keys, cell phone, boots and so on. That would require the belief that this is someone not particularly interested in abducting and murdering a woman, but more interested in playing head games with investigators - and that just doesn't seem likely. After the murder, that person is not going to take the risk that her disappearance has been noticed or that someone could arrive at any moment. The only thing that makes sense is that she arrived home, put her bag on the table, had a couple of sips of cider, and then something happened. It's conceivable that she had the pizza in her hands or tried to use the pizza to defend herself ... and the pizza was taken away because it contained evidence from the murderer.
Hi again otto. Problem is I dont see that as any more strange than someone killing her in her flat and then moving the body, but leaving bits and pieces of clothing in various places, including taking a pizza but not other items of shopping.
But thats the core of the thing, isnt it tho? Im not starting from the point of view of 'who dunnit', just from the inferences we being asked to make by the police, some of which - like the pizza meal which wasnt - turn out to have entirely misleading.
If Im asked to choose between two possible versions, on the basis of what we have been told, I can understand that someone she knew would apprehend the girl on her way home and persuade or bundle her into a car. From then, whatever happened and however it happened, its simple, much more simple than lugging a body out of a flat in an evening into a car, travelling with it riskily and in public for at least three miles and then dumping it, and with no conceivable reason for doing so in the first place.
Entering a flat no one is in, and no one is expected to return to for two days, and in an area no one has any reason to suspect foul play of any description having taken place, in order to leave a few items of clothing and give the impression a victim had not in fact been apprehended by someone she knew on her way home but had been kidnapped by a stranger or otherwise mysteriously assaulted in her own home, may be a bit rococo, but its not as gothic as the scenario of a dead body being carried out of the flat into a waiting car which would have been outside the house for some time before it left with its cargo and which no one saw, though the place is full of nosey parkers and neighbourhood watchers, one of whom is under arrest.
When DCI Jones says 'The jacket and her boots were found at her home address. That would indicate that Jo returned home,' Im not convinced by that. Maybe there is other information we dont have, but this alone is not obvious to me.
And until the police state categorically - enough nods and winks already! - that Ms Yeates did in fact return home that evening and was then carried, alive or dead, from that flat into a car which was then driven through the streets to the location of dumping, I dont know why any of us should be expected to follow that line of thinking alone.