Some reports on the early morning police visit Monday 20th December:
Mr Reardon – who had unsuccessfully tried to contact Miss Yeates on the Friday night, returned home Sunday to find her missing, with signs of a disturbance and her phone, keys and wallet still in the flat – made a 999 call to police early on Monday, December 20.
The report prompted a missing person inquiry, with house-to-house inquiries in Canynge Road. Police knocked on Tabak's door at Flat 2, Number 44, at 4.15am and introduced him to Mr Reardon for the first time. Tabak looked just awoken, a little vague and confused but "relatively calm", Mr Lickley said. http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/CCTV-...ail/story.html
@jonkay01 Prosecution: Police knocked on VT's door at 0415 after JY reported missing. Police said he seemed "relatively calm" and "knew nothing"
@rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn When police "commenced house to house inquiries" the first flat they went to was Vincent Tabak's
If the guy in Waitrose is VT then he's changed his coat by the time he visits Asda as the one he's wearing in that CCTV clip is longer.
EDIT no it isn't - I was looking at the wrong man!
As for the man in Waitrose - there must be hundreds of tall blokes in Bristol. People were convinced the chap in Tesco was VT as well. The odds are very much against it in both cases.
Measure the lenght of his coat and then his legs in both the waitrose and adsa video . Stop the video at the point he is leaving waitrose and when he is walking down the aisle at asda looks pretty similar in propotion to me.
The jackets of VT and the Waitrose guy are very similar in length and both look like the same person but wouldn't it be surprising for A&S police to release a video of VT in Waitrose before it had been mentioned in court that he'd been there?
This guy (who appears to abandon trolley) has a shoulder bag.... could the bag be carrying a camera? .... this would have been the time he said he went for a walk to take photographs wouldn't it?
Having said that... he could be a normal shopper, who looks around just after Jo has walked past him, he could realise that what he wants is in another ailse far away and cant be bothered to lug the trolley.... I've done it many a time.... I've also deliberately failed to see many a neighbour in the supermarket.
Not to help justice in her need would be an impiety ~Plato~
At 00:45 Greg called the emergency services. He'd called Jo's family and friends. The police arrived at 2am. #joyeates
Police contacted local hospitals and returned to Jo and Greg's flat at 4am to speak with Joanna's parents.
Must say I was particularly impressed with the candidness of GR's testimony today.
Originally Posted by Firefly75VT is a victim of his own actions too. His life as he knew it is completely over. *not saying he doesn't deserve it, just stating a fact*Originally Posted by notsure
Does anyone know the minimum and maximum sentences for
manslaughter and murder?
Does the judge make this decision ie. duration of sentence?
Are alarm bells not screaming in TM's head?
"Home alone? You texted me you were in Asda, You said you were bored!"
For an intelligent man, who we know did his research after the crime, he really didn't do a great job of trying to cover his tracks did he. What strikes me most is the fact that the day after killing her he was on the Avon & Somerset website, and a few days after that looking on Google Earth at the exact spot he dumped her body. If you were going to do that then you'd think he'd have had the sense not to use his own or his work computer to do it, or to only use his own computer and get shot of it for a new one pretty sharpish.
There's been no mention of him having his car valeted either. That's not to say he didn't but if you'd had a body in your car I'd have thought cleaning it or even getting rid of it would be extremely high on your "things to do" list afterwards.
It still beggars belief that CJ was hauled in, when the real and most obvious culprit managed to slip so seemingly easily under the radar and for so long.
He said he had just got home when he text TM at 7:15. If it was him, he must have went out again to be in Waitrose at 8:10. This guy appeared to move quickly towards her as if he wanted to cross her path. It's strange the police released other CCTV images in the shops on her way home but not this one.
Last edited by whiterum; 10-17-2011 at 05:31 PM.
Now, having re-watched it, I may have to agree with you that it is possibly a different figure. Both were in dark clothing and the first figure had something protruding from his side silhouette, which you say was a shoulder bag. Also having paused it about every single second of play towards the final few seconds, I don't think he actually went to the trolley and put something in it although he was heading towards it and did go very close to it. Again it cut off abruptly but I think he may have gone to the right of the trolley and the item he was carrying may have been a shopping bag or basket or something of that sort. Anyway, having looked at the possibly two figures involved, I did not form the impression that either was VT but I couldn't be at all sure about that.
We can assume we'll get SOME level of detail, as the jury have already been instructed to pay attention to the kitchen window and the fact this is how the defence claim the first saw each other that night. That doesn't have much relevance if not set in some context.
VT accepts his actions were unlawful, you got that one right Mate!!!
Last edited by whiterum; 10-17-2011 at 05:36 PM.
On top of that mitigating and aggravating features will be taken into consideration when calculating a sentence - I think only a maximum of 5 years or 1/6 of the sentence can be knocked off for mitigating features. Aggravating features can include a sexual element or concealing the body afterwards, to name a couple off the top of my head.
On of the biggest impacting differences between a sentence for manslaughter and murder is that someone released after serving a sentence for murder remains "on licence" for the rest of their lives after release ie they can be recalled to prison for the slightest of misdemeaners at any time until they die. They also must serve a minimum term before they can be even considered for parole, which they aren't guaranteed to get.
With a manslaughter conviction (unless given a life sentence) they will be released at the two-thirds or at worst three quarter point (I think thats still the case) of their sentence and then remain "on licence" only until the end of that sentence ie if they were given lets say 12 years - they may be released on licence after 8 years, then remain on licence until 12 years have passed and then thats it where being recalled to prison for any reason is concerned.
Sentence wise for manslaughter a life sentence is discretionary (compared to it being mandatory for murder). There's no minimum - the judge decides, and sentencing is based on past precedent (ie previous cases) and formal sentencing guidelines.
If he hadn't done such a lousy job of covering his tracks, he could easily never have been caught. If he'd done a decent job of hiding the body, and had taken the precaution of taking her bag/coat/shoes from the house, then the chances are this would have been treated as a missing person case that would have faded into obscurity for everyone except Jo's friends and loved ones who would have been left with the torment of uncertainty.
Of course LE would have taken his computer also which is a bonus, but it is not essential for them as a record of what sites he visited. LE may of checked the ISP's in question while building a case and without his knowledge. Perhaps LE had to wait a while to get the records, hence while they pulled in CJ for questioning, re VT dropping himself in it by blaming his landlord. For all we know CJ might have been a ploy by LE to convince VT that he was getting away with it.
VT dropped himself in it by phoning LE in Holland.
He'd been better off of using an Internet cafe or a library for his 'research' so long as he wasn't spotted on CCTV doing so.
IMO for LE it was like a ball of 'VT string' that as soon as they started tugging on more of it unravelled.
Valeting his car would have been a real give away although he could have done it later by himself or paid to have it done, again having paid for that kind of service would be a real give away. Perhaps he was clever enough not to clean it, thinking it would arouse suspicion?