GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #16

[veggiefan]

Jon Kay
No verdict in the Tabak trial until at least 1400.

 

[Clio]

I agree. She was heating up the oven for the pizza, not to start baking.

Conjuring up an image of feminine domestication in the form of baking on the night she was attacked is being used for effect by the prosecution but with no basis IMO.

Possibly. I hadn't realised that the "apron in the hall" and "recipes for mince pie downloaded on Jo's computer" evidence was read from a written statement from GR on 19th Oct and not given in his testimony from the witness box on 17th Oct

 

[Curious Alice]

It seems that way but you only have to look at a group of people discussing any topic and you will see how varied are views and shades of opinion and how resistant some people can be to facts staring them in the face.

Of course; we as a group on this thread are a perfect example of this. Even more so the FB thread (which I tend to read but not interact with purely because I can't bring myself to reason with some of the outlandish conspiracy theories and cruel finger pointing).

It's good to have people point out other facts and emphasise information that you might not lend weight to, our personalities and psychological make up are so different that we are all bound to interpret events slightly differently.

 

[brownbread]

Some very good points.

If he was in the apartment, when Jo first arrived , VT had to make a choice. In order to make the Neighborhood Watch story plausible, he really need to call out AT ONCE to Jo. But if her bedroom was in any way disturbed, a drawer open, etc....he may have hesitated. He would be panicked now at being discovered.

But if he continues to lurk in the bedroom, unsure what to do, as Jo settles in...his problem grows. Hestitation makes the excuse less plausible every second it continues. Helpful neighbors do not silently lurk in one's bedroom.

Jo may have put her things down, looking about as she does, and then started to search. Perhaps their first encounter was in the bedroom as she comes upon him there and screams.

We have seen VT is a calculating person, He may have been trying to calculate his next move when caught in JY's bedroom. He took too long for the "helpful neighbor" story to seem plausible, that's all.

Which could all help explain why, in this scenario, he felt he had to 'silence her'. However he could still have easily adjusted his story after the event - he's convinced Jo is actually a burglar, his heart is pounding, he makes a dash for the door to escape, he bumps into her, she screams, he grabs her, he wants to explain, she won't stop screaming.... I think a jury would find this more credible than his ACTUAL explanation.

 

[stmarysmead]

I've explained above how he could easily account for his actions - maybe not so easily to Jo at the time, but to a court after the event he could put forward a perfectly explicable version of these events, and with the added element of panic and adrenaline coursing about as they find themselves face to face in the flat, she screams, he tries to stop her, the manslaughter defence sounds much more plausible.

If what you described had happened, why would VT reject providing an account which was based upon this 'truth' and instead invent a bizarre account of a conversation which led to an attempted kiss which led to a scream, that all happened about 40 mins later, and still doesn't account for any of the 'disarray'?

Well, the "kiss" account puts JY responsible for her own demise in several ways that he may think offer him "sympathy" with a jury.

First, he was just innocently walking by...it's JY's fault that he even entered the flat. My version puts his presence in the flat squarely on him. He had no invitation and no right!

Secondly, his version has JY flirting and therefore, his his mind, inviting his action next (the kiss.) My version has JY startled with a GENUINE reason to scream and be fearful. In this latter scenario, VT bears responsibility alone for her response.

Likewise, his version makes JY sound like an hysteric...again shifting responsibility to her. No one would fault a woman screaming at finding her stranger-neighbor in her bedroom.

In his mind, his version has JY sharing the blame with him for the "accident." If he is caught in her flat and terrifies the poor woman, it is both humiliating to him...and shifts the responsibility for events that transpired next, entirely on him.

VT feels sorry for himself. He wants JY to shoulder some blame for HIS predicament. Hence, his "story."

 

[Curious Alice]

Well, the "kiss" account puts JY responsible for her own demise in several ways that he may think offer him "sympathy" with a jury.

First, he was just innocently walking by...it's JY's fault that he even entered the flat. My version puts his presence in the flat squarely on him. He had no invitation and no right!

Secondly, his version has JY flirting and therefore, his his mind, inviting his action next (the kiss.) My version has JY startled with a GENUINE reason to scream and be fearful. In this latter scenario, VT bears responsibility alone for her response.

Likewise, his version makes JY sound like an hysteric...again shifting responsibility to her. No one would fault a woman screaming at finding her stranger-neighbor in her bedroom.

In his mind, his version has JY sharing the blame with him for the "accident." If he is caught in her flat and terrifies the poor woman, it is both humiliating to him...and shifts the responsibility for events that transpired next, entirely on him.

VT feels sorry for himself. He wants JY to shoulder some blame for HIS predicament. Hence, his "story."

Good points, says a lot about his psychological make-up if your theory is right. Were professional reports submitted before the court, perhaps prior to trial or are these submitted prior to sentencing ?

 

[2goldfish]

Of course; we as a group on this thread are a perfect example of this. Even more so the FB thread (which I tend to read but not interact with purely because I can't bring myself to reason with some of the outlandish conspiracy theories and cruel finger pointing).

It's good to have people point out other facts and emphasise information that you might not lend weight to, our personalities and psychological make up are so different that we are all bound to interpret events slightly differently.

which one is FB? (not currently following it so I dont recognise it!)

 

[Luna15]

snipped by me - the irony is, if he told that tale - snooping, stealing panties, getting caught, she screams and from the shame and horror he does what he claims to have done because of an attempt to kiss - that would be far more believable than what he did tell - that it was a ten min convo and attempted kiss.


I've begun to also believe that he was snooping and she caught him. that is the only thing that makes sense to me. I could see her catching him and him freaking out and causing her death. I cannot see him freaking out and causing her death because she didnt want him kissing her.

far more chance of him going down for murder in that scenario (intent to silence her) he's hedged his bets according to the cards that the prosecution played.... as my strongest theory is that he was caught in the flat, and he was never going to admit that (too strong a case for murder) he had to manufacture another story. I think I am right in thinking he saw all the cards the prosecution were playing before he presented his case to the court (and then threw in a couple of embellishments when on the stand).

It's all very complex ullhair:.... it might be another one of those 'Carry on in the Algarve' .... we might never know.

 

[Sammyme]

Of course; we as a group on this thread are a perfect example of this. Even more so the FB thread (which I tend to read but not interact with purely because I can't bring myself to reason with some of the outlandish conspiracy theories and cruel finger pointing).

It's good to have people point out other facts and emphasise information that you might not lend weight to, our personalities and psychological make up are so different that we are all bound to interpret events slightly differently.

I am always fascinated by this. In any online discussion or debate of any issue, there are always loads of points of view and ways of looking something, a good many of which I wouldn't have thought of. It's the same thing if you ask people to draw something or solve a problem. You'll get a hundred different styles and solutions. Individuals are so interesting. In a jury, though, it must be pretty difficult and even infuriating when trying to reach some sort of a joint decision.

 

[Luna15]

Which could all help explain why, in this scenario, he felt he had to 'silence her'. However he could still have easily adjusted his story after the event - he's convinced Jo is actually a burglar, his heart is pounding, he makes a dash for the door to escape, he bumps into her, she screams, he grabs her, he wants to explain, she won't stop screaming.... I think a jury would find this more credible than his ACTUAL explanation.

I expect he's spent a lot of time on 'if only I'd...' if it is the scenario that she caught him in the flat - it would explain his blind panic too

Good points, says a lot about his psychological make-up if your theory is right. Were professional reports submitted before the court, perhaps prior to trial or are these submitted prior to sentencing ?

I think sentencing might be adjourned for psychological reports.

 

[Sammyme]

which one is FB? (not currently following it so I dont recognise it!)

Does that means Facebook perhaps? Or do you mean which thread in Facebook? Not sure if they even have threads in Facebook! I am also wondering what BBM is. I've seen it in this thread but have no idea what it signifies.

 

[Curious Alice]

which one is FB? (not currently following it so I dont recognise it!)

The Facebook page for discussion of this case, it's been running since Joanna was missing. There is a wall, and a variety of discussion links but due to the changes in the FB format I believe the discussions element will be deleted very soon. Edit: You sometimes need a strong disposition to read it; there are some very unpleasant theories and cruel finger pointing from some contributors. I'm happy on here personally - you guys are so civilised, polite and thoughtful :yourock:

 

[Curious Alice]

Does that means Facebook perhaps? Or do you mean which thread in Facebook? Not sure if they even have threads in Facebook! I am also wondering what BBM is. I've seen it in this thread but have no idea what it signifies.

BBM is an acronym for the Blackberry messaging system.

 

[Luna15]

I am always fascinated by this. In any online discussion or debate of any issue, there are always loads of points of view and ways of looking something, a good many of which I wouldn't have thought of. It's the same thing if you ask people to draw something or solve a problem. You'll get a hundred different styles and solutions. Individuals are so interesting. In a jury, though, it must be pretty difficult and even infuriating when trying to reach some sort of a joint decision.

It's funny, because when I see the diverse opinions, especially on the FB Discussion wall - it makes me wonder supposing there's someone like that on the jury... I'm all for a conspiracy theory but VT taking the rap for someone else??:crazy:

 

[2goldfish]

Does that means Facebook perhaps? Or do you
mean which thread in Facebook? Not sure if they even have threads in Facebook! I am also wondering what BBM is. I've seen it in this thread but have no idea what it signifies.

you're right, after I reread it I realised they prolly meant the FB thread :crazy:


bbm- is bold by me, meaning I bolded into their quote and they did not bold it originally! sometimes you'll see sbm which is snipped by me, meaning they deleted some of the quoted post for space or whatever :hug:

 

[Clio]

On the question of why VT didn't make up a story around being inside the flat and being caught out by JY as opposed to the failed kiss scenario.

GR testified that the flat was locked when he left on Friday evening
The natural assumption is that VT would not have keys to Flat 1 so he probably didn't have keys
There was no evidence of breaking and entering

He couldn't make a story like that fit the evidence

 

[goldielox]

Possibly. I hadn't realised that the "apron in the hall" and "recipes for mince pie downloaded on Jo's computer" evidence was read from a written statement from GR on 19th Oct and not given in his testimony from the witness box on 17th Oct

Did you not mean 19th Dec there?

 

[stmarysmead]

On the question of why VT didn't make up a story around being inside the flat and being caught out by JY as opposed to the failed kiss scenario.

GR testified that the flat was locked when he left on Friday evening
The natural assumption is that VT would not have keys to Flat 1 so he probably didn't have keys
There was no evidence of breaking and entering

He couldn't make a story like that fit the evidence

In regard to Greg's testimony: on the day, I came home to find I'd left my door unlocked, until I saw it for myself, I would have sincerely sworn that is was secured as always! And everyone who knows how compulsive I am about this, would have adamantly agreed with my statement.

 

[Myserty64]

Whenever a jury is deliberating a case I'm interested in the classic 1957 movie '12 Angry Men' comes to mind.
It only takes one, maybe two dissenting voices and the jury is in for the long haul.

The jury has heard a lot more than the tweets we were fortunate enough to get I'm sure.

 

[goldielox]

VT did claim he did actually leave his house to go out intending to take photos of the snow didn't he? Would there not have been some cctv footage from somewhere along the route he claims he took to evidence this? They had footage of Jo and Greg leaving on foot for work that morning so would they not have footage (depending on where the footage was exactly of Jo and Greg) to show VT passing by at some point too?