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

[otto]

But in your last post, you put the murder at 8 40 pm.

Now you are building something around her being seen away from the flat at 8 40 pm (and arriving home at 8 45 pm) even though we heard from the court - both sides and the judge - that she arrived home at 8 40 pm. Nothing that I have heard from court stated that she was seen away from the flat at 8 40 pm.

I'm not presenting fact, I'm trying to sort out the timeline including the discrepancies. The judge and prosecution have Joanna at home at 8:40. Earlier information has Joanna away from the flat at 8:40 (at the beginning of the investigation). The prosecution has the murder between 8:45 and 9, VT has the murder closer to 9:25. I am questioning how there could be a sexual assault on a live victim if the time of death corresponds with her arrival at home. I am questioning what happened during the missing 30-40 minutes and whether the prosecution is alleging that this is when the sexual assault occurred. Given that VT texted his girlfriend at 9:25, after the murder (according to all parties), and did not arrived at the grocery store until about an hour later, it is most likely that he moved her to his car after the first text, not before.

The below timeline is based on early information. I guess it is now changed.

 

[Robin Hood]

To a maximum value of about a fiver, if I remember correctly. One always had the feeling that the judge and barristers got something considerably better.

In fact, now I think about it, most of the jury took to bringing in their own packed lunches after the first few days - but you can't claim the cost if the court has offered its own historic sandwiches.



I've only been to one, but that was my experience, too.

When I did JS we were allowed hot meals or sandwiches. We were given vouches/tokens daily to the value of IIRC £5. At the end of JS we were given the cash to the value of any unspent vouches/tokens.
Most folk did say they would have taken their own food if they knew the tokens were redeemable.

 

[otto]

Not sure what you mean about missing time? According to VT up until 9:25pm he was in his flat having a beer and watching TV.

If VT is lying (perish the thought) and she was dead just before 9:00pm then between 9:00pm and 9:25pm he could have moved her body to his flat and collected the pizza and sock and put her in the cycle bag
He then texts TM to pretend he is at home and is bored without her
He could have moved the car and put the body in the boot either before or after texting TM at 9:25pm

Exactly. According to VT, the murder occurred 40 minutes later than the prosecution is alleging. If he put the body in the car at 9:25, what was he doing until 10:30? Again there is another missing period of time. Are we to believe he drank beer, murdered his neighbour, went home, sat around for 3/4 of an hour and then went shopping? When did the sexual assault on a live Joanna occur? Certainly not at 8:40 or 8:50 when she arrived home as that is the prosecutions theory about the time of murder ... as soon as she arrived at home.

 

[otto]

Thanks otto, there are several routes, some direct and some a round about way of getting to LL so that report makes sense; would have been interesting to know the time though.

One thing that surprised me was the revelation (assuming VT is being truthful and CCTV backs this up) was that Jo was left (dumped like roadkill :furious: that upsets me so much) at LL in Failand on the night of her death - I had initially assumed that she was taken there at a later point in time; seems incredible that she wasn't found before even with the bad weather that subsequently occurred.

My understanding is that after buying beer, crisps and rocksalt he returned to his flat. If he was in the shop at about 10:30, that should have him home again at 11(not sure about exact driving time). I would like to know when he was seen driving to Longwood Lane too, as that would fill out whether he had a long gap there too, or whether he went home, put the salt on the path, and left right away.

I remember we debated early on whether she was put there on the night of the murder or later. We looked at the weather and tried to figure out when it snowed and whether she could have been there from the night of the murder on. My gut feeling was that she was left there later. There may be a good reason why we haven't heard about when he was on Longwood Lane as it may be that it was a day or two later - it would make him appear more heartless if he did that.

 

[Curious Alice]

I am questioning how there could be a sexual assault on a live victim if the time of death corresponds with her arrival at home. I am questioning what happened during the missing 30-40 minutes and whether the prosecution is alleging that this is when the sexual assault occurred.

Otto, the prosecution did not allege a sexual assault did they, they suggested a sexually motivated attack; the impulse as opposed to the act ? The words used in closing were "this is a case linked to sex"...they suggested the kiss was sexual.

 

[Cherwell]

Again there is another missing period of time. Are we to believe he drank beer, murdered his neighbour, went home, sat around for 3/4 of an hour and then went shopping?

Having eaten the pizza? :winko:

When did the sexual assault on a live Joanna occur? Certainly not at 8:40 or 8:50 when she arrived home as that is the prosecutions theory about the time of murder ... as soon as she arrived at home.

Yes but Otto, don't you think that the assault may have been the trigger that caused her to scream in the first place? It doesn't have to be something elaborate that took a long time, he might just have grabbed her. That would be a matter of seconds.

 

[veggiefan]

Crikey. Sandwiches! (in the manner of Lady Bracknell's "A handbag!")
I'd have expected they'd run to a buffet at least. No wonder if juries want to reach a decision - any decision - just to get out of there.

Jury service is actually totally appalling. Because so many people fail to turn up or are deemed unsuitable if they do, the courts have to book many times the number of jury members than are actually required. This results in a lot of people hanging around for days, losing money, without ever seeing a court room before they are dismissed.

And, as I mentioned earlier, there used to be certain reserved professions who would be excused. Perhaps it's good that that is no longer the case - but I was unable to book an appointment with my GP for six weeks back in the spring, because she was off on jury service.

And the amounts paid for expenses and to employers are derisory - in fact HMRC makes it clear that it rather likes the idea of employers paying their staff for all the weeks they are off on jury service. There's a very complex process by which the employer can apply to the court for recompense for topping-up the derisory "loss of earnings" payment, but it all boils down to a lot of trouble and the distinct feeling that employers (and the self-employed) are actually having to subscribe to some sort of compulsory "charity" in order to keep the courts supplied with a jury service.

Perhaps it will all change one day when there is more money available - if the entire system hasn't collapsed first!

 

[otto]

Reasons for believing that Joanna was not at home at 8:40 - based on media information during the search. Presumably the media information came from police. Certainly if police were investigating her disappearance by nailing down the timeline, they had accurate information about her movements that night. Now, during trial, she was no longer at the Tesco at 8:40, now she is home and that, coincidentally, aligns nicely with the screams heard by the neighbour. I think the prosecution should have had her home at 8:50, which still corresponds with the screams, but pretty much eliminates any possibility of sexual assault. The moving timeline doesn't sit well with me.

http://www.channel4.com/news/police-search-for-joanna-yeates-missing-socks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12084756

www.thesun.co.uk

"At 2030 GMT she uses her mobile phone to ring her best friend Rebecca Scott and arranges to meet on Christmas Eve.

She visits a nearby Bargain Booze off-licence to pick up some cider and then buys a pizza from a Tesco Express before returning to her nearby flat on Canynge Road.

Then she disappears."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12109085

 

[otto]

Having eaten the pizza? :winko:



Yes but Otto, don't you think that the assault may have been the trigger that caused her to scream in the first place? It doesn't have to be something elaborate that took a long time, he might just have grabbed her. That would be a matter of seconds.

Grabbing is one thing, turning that into a sexual assault ... I think there has to be more evidence to make that conclusion. His DNA on her could have occurred during movement of the body - as we heard from experts. Experts also said that the blood on the wall, and presumably the rest of the blood, could be a result of difficulties moving the body. He attacked her and it seems that all parties agree that she could have died very quickly. Then I suppose he sat around and ate pizza, then texted his girlfriend, then went shopping and finally returned to his flat. At some point later he went to Longwood Lane. If there was a sexual assault, there doesn't appear to be a time reference for it - other than after the murder. Perhaps that is what the prosecution was thinking but was unable to present in court.

 

[Sammyme]

I'm not presenting fact, I'm trying to sort out the timeline including the discrepancies. The judge and prosecution have Joanna at home at 8:40. Earlier information has Joanna away from the flat at 8:40 (at the beginning of the investigation). The prosecution has the murder between 8:45 and 9, VT has the murder closer to 9:25. I am questioning how there could be a sexual assault on a live victim if the time of death corresponds with her arrival at home. I am questioning what happened during the missing 30-40 minutes and whether the prosecution is alleging that this is when the sexual assault occurred. Given that VT texted his girlfriend at 9:25, after the murder (according to all parties), and did not arrived at the grocery store until about an hour later, it is most likely that he moved her to his car after the first text, not before.

[cut]
Why are you not presenting fact, though? Or at least the best information that we have. There is no point in presenting erroneous information, such as that large map with a wrong time on it for buying pizza. That is more like sowing confusion than anything else. If we have new and more accurate information, we have to take it on board and discard anything else.

 

[Cherwell]

Let it go, Otto. The British media cannot be trusted for accuracy.

 

[Cherwell]

Grabbing is one thing, turning that into a sexual assault ... I think there has to be more evidence to make that conclusion.

Grabbing certain parts of the body IS sexual assault. Surely you must realise that.

 

[stmarysmead]

The sexual "assault" could have occurred after Jo's death, as VT laid her out in her bed...then, took her back to his own apartment. It might have been limited to "exploring" ...touching. He does not seem squeamish about "contact" with a young woman he has just killed. At the very least, he was carrying her here and there.

If he had, as someone suggested, a fascination with Jo...as he "overheard" his neighbors through the adjoining bedroom wall..well, here she is (although dead)...in HIS bed, and the girlfriend won't be home for hours.

He may very well have made his "pass"...strangled her...then "enjoyed" himself with her during one of the lost periods of time.

This would fill in the blank times.

I hope the jury twigs to the fact that if VT were truly remorseful and the killing were straightforward...his story would not contain so many blanks and unexplained spaces. At the very least, after admitting the killing, VT would know that JY's loved ones want desperately to know the FULL story of her last moments.

This cartoonish account of a beckoning woman wearing one sock, dashing past her undies in the hall, dropping her apron in her haste to invite in a near stranger and flirt with him is cruel. He is making JY partially responsible.

He does not give detail nor does he fill in the long spaces. He can't. Because he is mortified..probably to have his bizarre sexual "doings" revealed to the world.

 

[otto]

This is the final version of the floorplan that we, as a group on this forum, put together shortly after the murder. The coloured lines were added just now. I think the green line is what happened on the night of the murder. VT accosted her at the door for some reason (maybe it was the cat). I think she retreated to the bedroom, knocking over the coat rack in the process, and that she was murdered in her bedroom. I do think that the screams heard across the street were from Joanna and that the door would have been open for the screams to be heard as clearly as they were. I think the screams were closer to 8:50 if Joanna (according to earlier reports) was home shortly after 8:40. By all accounts (defence & prosecution) the murder occurred quickly. According to VT, he then left the flat, but didn't lock it. The next accounting of time is at 9:25 when VT texts his girlfriend, and then 10:28 when he is seen buying beer/crisps/rocksalt. The only activities that can be confirmed from 8:50 - 10:28 are that VT moved the body into his car. That's a lot of time to do that one thing, and not much time set aside for any sexual assault.

 

[otto]

Why are you not presenting fact, though? Or at least the best information that we have. There is no point in presenting erroneous information, such as that large map with a wrong time on it for buying pizza. That is more like sowing confusion than anything else. If we have new and more accurate information, we have to take it on board and discard anything else.

Why were all the media outlets given the wrong timeline during a search for a missing person?

 

[otto]

The sexual "assault" could have occurred after Jo's death, as VT laid her out in her bed...then, took her back to his own apartment. It might have been limited to "exploring" ...touching. He does not seem squeamish about "contact" with a young woman he has just killed. At the very least, he was carrying her here and there.

If he had, as someone suggested, a fascination with Jo...as he "overheard" his neighbors through the adjoining bedroom wall..well, here she is (although dead)...in HIS bed, and the girlfriend won't be home for hours.

He may very well have made his "pass"...strangled her...then "enjoyed" himself with her during one of the lost periods of time.

This would fill in the blank times.

I hope the jury twigs to the fact that if VT were truly remorseful and the killing were straightforward...his story would not contain so many blanks and unexplained spaces. At the very least, after admitting the killing, VT would know that JY's loved ones want desperately to know the FULL story of her last moments.

This cartoonish account of a beckoning woman wearing one sock, dashing past her undies in the hall, dropping her apron in her haste to invite in a near stranger and flirt with him is cruel. He is making JY partially responsible.

He does not give detail nor does he fill in the long spaces. He can't. Because he is mortified..probably to have his bizarre sexual "doings" revealed to the world.

That's exactly what I'm suggesting ... that if the prosecution is arguing sexual assault, then the only timeframe when it could have occurred is after he killed her. The prosecution did not spell that out - at least I did not read that - but if the murder was when she arrived home and there was a sexual assault (not proven IMO), then it occurred later. Experts have determined that the DNA on Joanna could have come from moving the body, yet the prosecution seems to still believe that there was a sexual assault.

 

[Curious Alice]

This cartoonish account of a beckoning woman wearing one sock, dashing past her undies in the hall, dropping her apron in her haste to invite in a near stranger and flirt with him is cruel. He is making JY partially responsible.

Like the script of a dodgy pornographic film, I wonder if he has a taste for sexual fantasies of that kind ?

 

[stmarysmead]

I suppose I'm applying a variation on the Sherlock Holmes "dog that didn't bark" theory. Here we have the supposedly contrite Accidental Killer who did not tell a complete accounting...will NOT tell a complete accounting.

It has to be because that account still threatens him in some way...as JY threatened him.

He continued to throttle JY (If it was truly NOT premeditated) because her lack of reciprocation now meant she was both an embarrassment and a threat to him. She could destroy his relationship with T, her family and his family's great admiration for him. Show him to be NOT the object of JY's overwhelming desire...so overcome was JY by the sight of him tramping by the window, that she just had to try and have her flirtatious way with him. No, instead, VT is the clumsy buffoon...the slightest move made her recoil and scream.

He throttles her in fear and anger.

Then...carries her into the bedroom where his sexual fantasies play out in a modified way.

There absolutely are parts to this story he is holding back to protect himself. So that, if in a few years he is free,,,he is just the poor victim of a frightened flirtatious beckoning vamp, not the scheming post-mortem sexual pervert.

 

[whiterum]

Not this this is terribly important however....

Lunch being brought in takes very little time. If the stale/soggy sandwiches aren't there already, you fill in tick box form to say which stale sandwich/flavour of crisps/soft drink you want and the usher goes and fetches them.

There has been a toilet adjoining the jury room in all the ones I've been in.

Just as well, after consuming ancient, stale soggy sandwiches they might not make it down the corridor.

 

[Curious Alice]

No. I was waiting for bridge footage, a sobbing female and a very important item handed in by a member of the public. Very disappointing that apparently none of them were mentioned.

I wonder if the very important item was some CCTV footage of Jo or VT ?

I am almost sure sobbing girl was TM, but we may never know this.

Did I not read somewhere, here or in the press, way back at the start of the investigation, that the bridge footage was unlit, too dark to make a clear id of vehicles ?