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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #381
I have read (possibly on this forum) that the last time shown in Tesco was
8 33 pm.

I've never understood this Hop House thing. When I looked at a map to see her route home, it shows that the Hop House is on another road that loops around and would be a detour from the straight road home from Tesco to Canynge Road.

If Tesco was her last stop at 8 33 pm and she took the straight road home, she would be home around 8 40 pm, I think.

Exactly and why did the defence not mention the Hophouse on closing argument as they did on opening regarding timing.

Reported at the time:

Landscape architect Miss Yeates was recorded by cameras at the Hophouse pub in Clifton, Bristol at 8.44pm on Friday, December 17.

Police said they were aware of the footage but were keen to concentrate on clearer images obtained from cameras she visited on the Friday evening
.

The footage of a blurred figure carrying a Tesco bag thought by some to be Jo was distant and grainy and could have been deemed by police as not being Jo and irrelevant.
 
  • #382
So, we are to believe that this "flirtatious"woman, with her dinner in the oven, and her underwear exposed in the hall, wearing only one sock...decides to beckon through her window...and invite in a near-stranger?
 
  • #383
Not sure if this has been posted before, it's very interesting. Lots of pictures of the inside of the flat as it was left.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pic...oanna-Yeates-was-killed-by-Vincent-Tabak.html

check out this picture. If one were to look through the letter box with the bathroom door open - ? <maybe this was happening for some time ?

If it were to happen on a day when a) JY saw something suspicious (whilst sitting on the lavatory) - and b) there was snow on the ground (tracks in the snow) - then we have a potential conflict situation - as she went after the peeping tom.

I am not saying this happened but I would say this is the type of situation that would lead to a conflict of certain shame for the perpetrator.
 
  • #384
Yep, putting actual murder aside for a moment, its bad enough that the g/f finds out they've made a pass at another woman. Worse still if it's been an aggressive and/or violent pass ...and to the next door neighbour!

He had to silence her didn't he. He'd no doubt done enough to merit her involving the police if she was left alive.

Yes goldielox, that could well be the motive. I don't believe that JY screamed just because he tried to kiss her. I have never done it and I don't know anyone else who has.
I would only scream if I felt something serious was going to happen to me, rape would be the first thing to cross a woman's mind.
He could have thought how was he going to be able to cope, living next door to a woman who spurned his sexual advances,while her boyfriend was away from home. He had a lot to lose.
 
  • #385
So, we are to believe that this "flirtatious"woman, with her dinner in the oven, and her underwear exposed in the hall, wearing only one sock...decides to beckon through her window...and invite in a near-stranger?

Apparently so :innocent:
 
  • #386
That's exactly how this trial looks to me.
I don't know much, if anything about law but he bloody well murdered her, end of.:maddening:

No doubt in my mind either that he murdered Jo. I truly believe based on the two arguments and the evidence presented that the Jury will clearly see that his sorry tale doesn't hold water.
 
  • #387
So, we are to believe that this "flirtatious"woman, with her dinner in the oven, and her underwear exposed in the hall, wearing only one sock...decides to beckon through her window...and invite in a near-stranger?

only after she's rolled up her pinny and left it by the front door!
 
  • #388
Well, the prosecution surmise that as soon as she got home he forced his way in with sex in mind. A violent struggle ensued,he possibly molested her and then intentionally killed her. All in the space of 30 minutes, and then cooly sent his g/f a text. That's a scenario that fits with murder. It also would lead to a more severe sentence too if the sentence is based on the prosecution's version - believed forced entry/sexual element.

The prosecution have nothing to back up their claim that VT forced his way into J's flat.
Why would VT go forcing himself into J's flat when he did not know that GR was not at home?
 
  • #389
Exactly and why did the defence not mention the Hophouse on closing argument as they did on opening regarding timing.

Reported at the time:

.

The footage of a blurred figure carrying a Tesco bag thought by some to be Jo was distant and grainy and could have been deemed by police as not being Jo and irrelevant.

That's interesting. I hadn't known that about that footage. Also I'm wondering if the private CCTV in Canynge road recorded her.

I would really like to see a definitive list of timings and the evidence for them.
 
  • #390
No doubt in my mind either that he murdered Jo. I truly believe based on the two arguments and the evidence presented that the Jury will clearly see that his sorry tale doesn't hold water.

well as his own brief has said 'There is only one thing that I can ask and that is a verdict based on the evidence heard in this court, nothing more, nothing less.'

one assumes that includes the 80 'dunno's' caused by the post traumatic stress he's still suffering (surprised he's deemed fit to stand trial), the newly remembered bits (not in previous submissions) the sock that came off in mid air as he moved JY from the kitchen to her bedroom (or was it the one that JY took off cos she had a hole in her boot?)... there must have been a gale blowing cos the earings flew off too and landed in different directions (one even ended up under the duvet cover).... we only have his word as to what happened during those alleged 20-30 seconds and that word has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that it cannot be relied upon - no doubt in my mind he is guilty.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ak-let-Jo-decided-kill-her.html#ixzz1bpvqTg00
 
  • #391
There are only two people who know what happened and one of those is dead.

The person who is alive has admitted he killed the other person. The killer is now looking for a suitable excuse for this heinous act in his quest for a relatively light sentence.

It is a shame that the law often gets in the way of justice.
 
  • #392
Far from being the great bastion of British justice, I found myself ensconsed with a charming elderly lady doing her knitting, who said she hadn't understood a word of the case, but reckoned that anyone with bushy eyebrows is likely to be guilty. Then there was the one who fully supported any crime against HMRC, another who said he knew the defendant was guilty because he's read about it in the Daily Mail long before the case started, and the jury foreman who never stopped complaining that - as a self-employed businessman - he was losing a fortune every day, and would we please agree on something, and he'd go along with whatever it was.

To be frank, it was a shambles - Gilbert and Sullivan would have had a field day. At one point I complained to the court usher, who simply said "don't worry, it's always like this - just try to decide on something, or we'll have to put you up in a hotel for the weekend, and there's not the budget to do it".

British justice? Lottery, more like.
I was present at the prosecution's closing yesterday and I wish I hadn't seen the jury- one of them was doodling circles the whole time and another kept staring into space with a daydreamy smile on their face. Maybe I'm just being paranoid but it worried me.
 
  • #393
  • #394
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344276/Joanna-Yeates-murder-Strangled-sock.html

Scroll on down the page,as you can see this image is so blurred, could be anyone passing and has rarely been mentioned since.

IIRC this CCTV is from the Hophouse pub. It seems to be important to the defence as Clegg specifically asked the jury to pay attention to "how long it takes to walk from hophouse pub in Clifton (where last CCTV filmed) to canynge road where Joanna lived."

Rupert Evelyn timed the walk at 7 minutes. IMO Clegg wouldn't have asked the jury to time the walk unless he was pretty sure that they would conclude that JY couldn't have been home at the time the prosecution claim.

Personally, I don't believe the time she got home or whether the screams were hers or not matters all that much.

What is important is whether the jury believe that he put his hand round her throat purely to stop her screaming. (If indeed she was screaming in the first place)

If so, do they also believe that she put up no resistance whatsoever.

If they believe that both of those things are true do they therefore conclude that he had no way of knowing that she might come to some harm as a result of his actions?
 
  • #395
IIRC this CCTV is from the Hophouse pub. It seems to be important to the defence as Clegg specifically asked the jury to pay attention to "how long it takes to walk from hophouse pub in Clifton (where last CCTV filmed) to canynge road where Joanna lived."

Rupert Evelyn timed the walk at 7 minutes. IMO Clegg wouldn't have asked the jury to time the walk unless he was pretty sure that they would conclude that JY couldn't have been home at the time the prosecution claim.?

I'm not sure if he did but if not, why didn't he mention the timing on the cctv in his closing argument, if it was so important at the outset. If I were on the jury I would be wondering why.

This very blurred image could be anyone and imo there is no proof at all it was her. Maybe he was just throwing it out there to see if any of it would stick.
 
  • #396
I'm not sure if he did but if not, why didn't he mention the timing on the cctv in his closing argument, if it was so important at the outset. If I were on the jury I would be wondering why.
"Before the visit, William Clegg QC, Tabak's barrister, asked the jury to consider certain areas closely. Clegg said he wanted jurors to think about the time it would take to walk from a pub called the Hophouse to 44 Canynge Road."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/12/joanna-yeates-jury-visit-flat

This very blurred image could be anyone and imo there is no proof at all it was her. Maybe he was just throwing it out there to see if any of it would stick.

I agree it's very blurry. Maybe it was a piece of evidence that got turfed out. As I said, I don't think it's particularly relevant anyway
 
  • #397
Well said Fluttershy. I tried to type out a similar post last night it took me ages and then I lost the d****d thing, so I gave up.
You put it across in 2 small paragraphs.
Would you mind if I copied your post to another blog. I will not take the credit for it, promise.
Sorry Weeva, I missed this yesterday, please help yourself.
 
  • #398
The prosecution have nothing to back up their claim that VT forced his way into J's flat.
Why would VT go forcing himself into J's flat when he did not know that GR was not at home?

Jo & Greg's car would not have been in the drive or on the road, and there has been talk that CJ had told VT about getting Greg's car started that afternoon so he could go to Sheffield. But there is reasonable doubt about this, I suppose. I don't believe he forced himself in, but I do think there was a struggle in the hall and he may have touched the door during that. Hence the questions about the police taking the door.
 
  • #399
well as his own brief has said 'There is only one thing that I can ask and that is a verdict based on the evidence heard in this court, nothing more, nothing less.'

one assumes that includes the 80 'dunno's' caused by the post traumatic stress he's still suffering (surprised he's deemed fit to stand trial), the newly remembered bits (not in previous submissions) the sock that came off in mid air as he moved JY from the kitchen to her bedroom (or was it the one that JY took off cos she had a hole in her boot?)... there must have been a gale blowing cos the earings flew off too and landed in different directions (one even ended up under the duvet cover).... we only have his word as to what happened during those alleged 20-30 seconds and that word has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that it cannot be relied upon - no doubt in my mind he is guilty.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ak-let-Jo-decided-kill-her.html#ixzz1bpvqTg00


Re the earrings - she was wearing studs on the actual day, wasn't she? And the amethyst teardrop earrings, I get the impression, were quite precious to her and may have been on the bedside table originally.
 
  • #400
I was present at the prosecution's closing yesterday and I wish I hadn't seen the jury- one of them was doodling circles the whole time and another kept staring into space with a daydreamy smile on their face. Maybe I'm just being paranoid but it worried me.

Neurotripsy - did you see VT? Was he really hanging his head so low that you could barely see it above the edge of the dock? That's what the twitter description was, and I didn't see any court artist depictions, so just curious as to what he looked like!

Apparently GR was shaking his head during the defence closing statements - did you see that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
119
Guests online
3,147
Total visitors
3,266

Forum statistics

Threads
632,579
Messages
18,628,669
Members
243,198
Latest member
ghghhh13
Back
Top