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

[Nausicaa]

It's looking to me very much as though there exists a mass of information that has not been presented in court which makes it clear that the prosecution is right about the timeline and the motive. But it may be easy for the prosecution to forget what the jury have heard and what they haven't heard.

On the question of why there were no good character witnesses called by the defence, it occurs to me that the prosecution might have some "bad character" evidence to counter it with and that either by order of the judge or by mutual agreement the whole lot has been omitted as cancelling one another out and not really relevant to the question before the jury anyway.

 

[FiestyFairy]

Oh goodness, no wonder the scream issue has been so confused. He didn't say anything about the flirting or kiss until last Thursday. That could explain why his QC was challenging that there were any screams or the time of the screams

 

[Luna15]

skynewsgatherer Harriet Tolputt
Lickley says he told police he ate pizza to cover his tracks should they ever find the box he discarded from Joanna's flat.

skynewsgatherer Harriet Tolputt
Lickley says that Tabak knew he couldn't escape the DNA evidence - which is why he changed his plea and admitted manslaughter.

skynewsgatherer Harriet Tolputt
Lickley challenges Tabak's account and says if it were true why not admit it sooner, or call an ambulance.

the following tweets READ FROM THE BOTTOM UP

Nigel Lickley QC has now finished his closing speech. Defence barrister Bill Clegg will deliver his closing speech at 1330. Lunch break.

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'he could at any point have released his grip and walked away. he chose not to. Joanna Yeates didn't have that choice'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'there is no doubt to how that woman died and there can be no doubt as to his intentions at that time.'

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'we know VT strangled JY. It was deliberate it was calculating..... he was in control and he knew what he was doing'

Rupert Evelyn
'what do you intend if you grip with one hand and smother with the other?' asks Prosecutor Nigel Lickley QC

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'the most important parts of his case emerged last thursday in this room'. flirting only mentioned 1st time last week.

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'the DNA evidence is not corrupt and it does not lie' referring to Tabak' suggestion that forensics got it wrong.

Rupert Evelyn
NL 'panic or intent? an intent to deceive.' referring to Tabak's original Defence Case Statement

 

[enzeder]

@rupertevelyn
Rupert Evelyn
"Nigel Lickley QC has now finished his closing speech. Defence barrister Bill Clegg will deliver his closing speech at 1330. Lunch break."
3 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

 

[veggiefan]

@rupertevelyn
Rupert Evelyn
"Nigel Lickley QC has now finished his closing speech. Defence barrister Bill Clegg will deliver his closing speech at 1330. Lunch break."
3 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

Hmm. I suppose Lickley did the best with what he'd got, but an awful lot of it seemed to be reiterating, in various paraphrases, what is really an assumption rather than a fact (that VT ought to have known how long it would take for someone to die when strangling them), plus some further confusion about the timing of the screams.

It'll be interesting to see how William Clegg performs this afternoon.

 

[Tricksy]

Harriet Tolputt
Lickley suggests that Tabak told the jury he moved Joanna's body to cover up the fact that "something" happened in the bedroom.

skymartinbrunt martinbrunt
Pros: #Tabak is calculating, shrewd and manipulative
stevenmorris20 steven morris

Why did Tabak say he moved the body into her bedroom. It was, says pros, because her earrings were found there....

skymartinbrunt martinbrunt
Pros: Tabak has planned his case to fit the evidence

Quick question anyone please?

Has it actually been proved that VT was in Joanna Yeates's bedroom? Dna? fibre analysis? or is this supposition on the prosecution's part?

Not taking sides here, I just want to know if there was earlier evidence introduced to suggest this? I can't remember.:waitasec:

D'oh! I see why, serves me right for not reading it all!

 

[veggiefan]

On the question of why there were no good character witnesses called by the defence, it occurs to me that the prosecution might have some "bad character" evidence to counter it with and that either by order of the judge or by mutual agreement the whole lot has been omitted as cancelling one another out and not really relevant to the question before the jury anyway.

I think VT has pretty much admitted to being a person of bad character by confessing to manslaughter and admitting that he lied to the police in an attempt to cover his tracks.

In other words, counsel may simply be leaving the jury to make their own conclusions about his character.

The main legal aspect to "good character" is showing that VT had no previous convictions which if (as I think) is true, will doubtless be introduced at some point before sentencing.

 

[veggiefan]

Quick question anyone please?

Has it actually been proved that VT was in Joanna Yeates's bedroom? Dna? fibre analysis? or is this supposition on the prosecution's part?

I think it's purely suggestion on the part of the prosecution.

 

[Nausicaa]

Hmm. I suppose Lickley did the best with what he'd got, but an awful lot of it seemed to be reiterating, in various paraphrases, what is really an assumption rather than a fact (that VT ought to have known how long it would take for someone to die when strangling them), plus some further confusion about the timing of the screams.

The prosecution does not have to prove that 32 year-old PhDs know that strangling people tends to kill them any more than it has to prove they know that acorns come from oak trees or that "making a pass" involves trying to initiate sexual intimacy. In the unlikely event that the defence seriously wishes to claim such improbable ignorance it is for them to do the proving.

Lickley's real difficulty IMO was how to state the obvious without appearing to patronise and while still respecting the tradition that the closing speech takes more than 30 seconds.

 

[Curious Alice]

I think it's purely suggestion on the part of the prosecution.

Did VT not admit to being in the bedroom then ? To placing her on the bed ?

 

[Nausicaa]

Quick question anyone please?

Has it actually been proved that VT was in Joanna Yeates's bedroom? Dna? fibre analysis? or is this supposition on the prosecution's part?

Not taking sides here, I just want to know if there was earlier evidence introduced to suggest this? I can't remember.:waitasec:

D'oh! I see why, serves me right for not reading it all!

If my memory is more reliable that Veggiefan's, VT expressly stated that he moved her into the bedroom after her death. But haven't time to go hunting for the source at present.

 

[Sammyme]

Quick question anyone please?

Has it actually been proved that VT was in Joanna Yeates's bedroom? Dna? fibre analysis? or is this supposition on the prosecution's part?

Not taking sides here, I just want to know if there was earlier evidence introduced to suggest this? I can't remember.:waitasec:

D'oh! I see why, serves me right for not reading it all!

Have we ever been told about any such evidence found in any part of the flat?
I can't recall it if we have. We do know they took away carpets and door but do we know what if anything they showed?

Edited to add: VT said he was in the bedroom.

 

[enzeder]

Quick question anyone please?

Has it actually been proved that VT was in Joanna Yeates's bedroom? Dna? fibre analysis? or is this supposition on the prosecution's part?

Not taking sides here, I just want to know if there was earlier evidence introduced to suggest this? I can't remember.:waitasec:

D'oh! I see why, serves me right for not reading it all!

"He claimed the attack took place in the kitchen. He carried Yeates's body into the bedroom, where he placed it on the bed. He then carried it into his own flat."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/20/vincent-tabak-apologises-joanna-yeates-parents

"Tabak said he lifted Jo's body on to her bed and went home, then returned to the flat hoping to find her alive.

He then carried her body to his flat before putting her in the boot of his car. He went back into Jo's flat, where he switched off her TV and oven, and picked up a pizza she had bought and a sock that had fallen off her foot."
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3885018/Jo-Yeates-trial-Vincent-Tabak-sobs-in-dock.html

 

[Tricksy]

Hmm. I suppose Lickley did the best with what he'd got, but an awful lot of it seemed to be reiterating, in various paraphrases, what is really an assumption rather than a fact (that VT ought to have known how long it would take for someone to die when strangling them), plus some further confusion about the timing of the screams.

It'll be interesting to see how William Clegg performs this afternoon.

Tbh, I tend to agree with you here, I'm not taking sides here, but looking at it from an impartial mind I could challenge or offer alternative explanations for some of the points he suggests.

For example, I don't find it that unusual that the flirting information came out in court. Some defence lawyers I know definitely prefer their clients to go "no comment" in Police interviews and wait and see what the Police/CPS come up with and the explanations come later.

I'm not trying to be unreasonable of harsh here, I'm just trying to offer a pov.

 

[Tricksy]

"He claimed the attack took place in the kitchen. He carried Yeates's body into the bedroom, where he placed it on the bed. He then carried it into his own flat."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/20/vincent-tabak-apologises-joanna-yeates-parents

"Tabak said he lifted Jo's body on to her bed and went home, then returned to the flat hoping to find her alive.

He then carried her body to his flat before putting her in the boot of his car. He went back into Jo's flat, where he switched off her TV and oven, and picked up a pizza she had bought and a sock that had fallen off her foot."
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3885018/Jo-Yeates-trial-Vincent-Tabak-sobs-in-dock.html

Thank you so much for the sources Enzeder and many thanks to all of you who answered my questions, even though I was a dimwit and did not read all of the original post. They are very much appreciated.

 

[Clio]

Have we ever been told about any such evidence found in any part of the flat?
I can't recall it if we have. We do know they took away carpets and door but do we know what if anything they showed?

Edited to add: VT said he was in the bedroom.

AFAIK nothing has been made public about any forensic findings in either flat

 

[Clio]

I thought Greg let the cat OUT, and then it came in with Joanna... but I might be wrong.

You're not wrong. GR testified that he let the cat out before he went to Sheffield. He also testified that it was inside the flat when he got home on Sunday.

It must therefore have been inside the flat when VT finally closed the door after removing JY's body, the pizza and the sock.

One might even go so far as to suggest VT made sure the cat was inside. He wouldn't want a cat scratching and meowing at the door over the weekend in case somebody noticed and thought something was wrong.....

 

[Cherwell]

"Tabak said he lifted Jo's body on to her bed and went home, then returned to the flat hoping to find her alive.

Really that bit should be enough to do it. But has the fact that he never made any attempt to save her been emphasised enough?

 

[enzeder]

@skynewsgatherer
Harriet Tolputt
"William Clegg QC says he is not going to ask the jury to like Vincent Tabak - because there's nothing to like."
2 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

 

[Luna15]

It would be useful to know exactly where the earings were found (what parts where) - even if he was carrying her, I think the likelihood of one being found on the carpet, and one in the bed, through the action of "carrying" is remote.