GUILTY UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #12
- Thread starter Salem
- Start date
- Status
Some general comments ... after catching up on the thread.
I read in the links from this morning that VT has "legal aid". I'm guessing this means that he has very little savings. If he were to apply for bail, he would need to put something up. Is it possible that he has nothing pay for bail and therefore hasn't requested it?
It does sound like the prosecution has until the beginning of April to spell out the case against him, and then the defence has until the beginning of May to respond. Is that like the prosecution "disclosure"?
I read in the links from this morning that VT has "legal aid". I'm guessing this means that he has very little savings. If he were to apply for bail, he would need to put something up. Is it possible that he has nothing pay for bail and therefore hasn't requested it?
It does sound like the prosecution has until the beginning of April to spell out the case against him, and then the defence has until the beginning of May to respond. Is that like the prosecution "disclosure"?
I watched a bit of it again. At 4:01 minutes (approx) the brother discusses VT being away for work. He says that the flat that Joanna and GR were in was empty for a few months, and then Joanna and GR were there for only a couple of months, and in the same time VT was in the US working ... so there wasn't much opportunity for them to have contact.
I suppose this suggests that if VT did murder Joanna, then it would be a random, stranger attack.
BBM
I'd like to know the answer to that as well.
I posted these links a thread or two ago regarding the plea and case management hearing but I'll post them again.
PLEA AND CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING (PCMH)
http://www.needasolicitor.com/61/Legal-Terms-Explained/PLEA-AND-CASE-MANAGEMENT-HEARING-PCMH.html
Plea and Case Management Hearing - Advocates Questionnaire
http://www.justice.gov.uk/annex-e-pcmh-april-2010.pdf
There isn't really an opportunity to plead not guilty at a Preliminary Hearing, although he could have entered a guilty plea yesterday. Indeed, had he done so there is even provision for him to have been sentenced on the spot, although for a crime this serious the judge would almost certainly have delayed sentencing until psychological reports become available. See:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/criminal_procedure_rules/
"If the Defendant intends to plead guilty, the magistrates' court should make appropriate orders so that he can be sentenced at the Preliminary Hearing if possible."
See also www.justice.gov.uk/anx_e2page1-4.pdf in which it is asked if the defendant has been advised about credit for pleading guilty, and if it is likely that the case can be concluded at the Preliminary Hearing by the defendant pleading guilty?
Yesterday's Preliminary Hearing took only 15 minutes, but an hour had been allocated, in case of this eventuality.
Not entering a plea yesterday strongly suggests that VT intends to contest the case, but it leaves open the possibility of a guilty plea in May, once the weight of evidence has been put to him.
In short, there isn't really a mechanism or reason to plea not guilty at a Preliminary Hearing. Just an opportunity to plead guilty and thus save the ordeal of a trial by jury.
Hope that makes sense!
I think its about time David Yeates stopped giving soundbites to the press. :silenced:
notsure
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 932
- Reaction score
- 4,188
I suppose you mean no known motive. We cannot see inside his mind, and that is where motives may be hidden. The fact that he has a PhD is irrelevant. We don't know that there is nothing in his background either. Perhaps we will find out at some point.
Patticake
Member
Tabak Family Summit
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3382641/Vincent-Tabaks-family-summit.html
Not sure if this was in Marcel's video ... but Vincent called a family summit [minus the children] when he was visiting at Christmas to tell them he was "under suspicion.
So his family could not have been completely surprised when he was arrested.
.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3382641/Vincent-Tabaks-family-summit.html
Not sure if this was in Marcel's video ... but Vincent called a family summit [minus the children] when he was visiting at Christmas to tell them he was "under suspicion.
So his family could not have been completely surprised when he was arrested.
.
Exactly, there are people who have some underlying psychological problem yet outwardly show no signs. Also there are people who are guilty of a one off compulsive act, maybe triggered by lust, envy, drink, drugs whatever.
As you say we cannot see inside the mind.
"Under suspicion" seems an odd phrase to use, if it has been reported accurately. If my neighbour had been murdered and the police had asked to search my house, I'd be curious to know why, but I wouldn't assume that I was "under suspicion" (unless I'd done it, of course).
It would be a complete nightmare if he was innocent. Personally, I would have to be dragged into court sceaming my innocence to everyone in the vicinity. I would not care at all about the consequences, even the Judiciary would get an ear bashing, or worse if they said anything to the contrary.
I swear, I would have to be ankle chained or I would be out of there at the first opportunity
:woohoo:
His defence costs are paid from public funds otto. If in due course he's convicted then there's a possibility he could then be asked to contribute towards his costs but since he'll be jobless, locked up and has no property then, unless he has savings (over £3k) he wouldn't have to because obviously he'd have no means to be able to.
Re bail - defendants can't put themselves up to stand surety for themselves. Someone else has to come forward to do it for them. They don't pay the court anything but they agree to...should the defendant breach bail conditions.
I know. At the time CJ was under arrest and didn't get released until 1st January. It would be interesting to know what day he actually called this summit. I'm wondering if it was only after CJ was released. TM's brother was proclaiming on Twitter on 31st December he was 100% sure CJ would be charged which leads me to think perhaps VT didn't call this summit until after CJ was released. I'm guessing of course but why would you announce you were under suspicion while someone else has been arrested? You'd at least wait to see what happened with the one under arrest first wouldn't you...or I would anyway.
Robin Hood
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,340
- Reaction score
- 152
If I were innocent I wouldn't even think of any summit, meeting or otherwise. If I were totally innocent it wouldn't even cross my mind.
Just to add if my neighbour in ajoining flats were missing or found dead I wouldn't be surprised at all if they wanted to take a serious close look at my flat. As long as any damage was made good they could rip it up. Maybe that's just me.
Just to add if my neighbour in ajoining flats were missing or found dead I wouldn't be surprised at all if they wanted to take a serious close look at my flat. As long as any damage was made good they could rip it up. Maybe that's just me.
I think VT returned on Sunday 2nd January. CJ was released sometime that same evening. So, if the date for VT's return is correct, the summit was held while CJ was still under arrest. Very odd.
While searching for VT's return date, I happened to come across that very odd quote from neighbour LP (tenant at No.42), reported in the Daily Telegraph on 1st January:
"I assumed she had absconded with someone, I didn't think she'd had been killed."
I wonder what led him to make that assumption?
"I assumed she had absconded with someone, I didn't think she'd had been killed."
I wonder what led him to make that assumption?
Cherwell
Ice Cream
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2011
- Messages
- 6,465
- Reaction score
- 16,391
It's the Sun
but the phrase was not directly attributed to anyone.It's worth remembering that whatever was originally said would have been in Dutch. Allowances should always be made for translation, and the fact that words and phrases can carry a slightly different sense in another language.
Powerful post!
VT isn't making any noise and there was no application for bail.
Is it possible the police have nailed this one? The prosecuting team must think so. They give the green light to go to trial do they not.
VT gets his day in court and twelve of his peers will weigh up the case against him.
Joanna Yeates is the tragic loser not to mention all those who loved her.
The great mystery is where the L/L fits in all this. He isn't making any noise either.
bees
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 2
I could imagine doing the same if it were me. I'd get the adults together and tell them all about the case and what the police doing in the house. No doubt the family were asking him about it and he didn't want to talk about it in front of the children. He probably said that everyone in the block was under suspicion, including him. It sounds quite a reasonable thing to do in the circumstances. They probably told TM's parents all about it too, including having their flat searched.
The main thing that's puzzling me is the lack of any alibi during the time JY went missing. If he was "away" as he told some journalists, you'd think the people who could corroborate that would have said something that would have leaked out by now. For example, VT's brother has told the media (via the spokesman) where VT was from 24th but not before, which is the crucial time.
If a combination of VT's phone records and other people's witness accounts put him out of the area at that time, he'd be discounted as a suspect (as GR was).
The main thing that's puzzling me is the lack of any alibi during the time JY went missing. If he was "away" as he told some journalists, you'd think the people who could corroborate that would have said something that would have leaked out by now. For example, VT's brother has told the media (via the spokesman) where VT was from 24th but not before, which is the crucial time.
If a combination of VT's phone records and other people's witness accounts put him out of the area at that time, he'd be discounted as a suspect (as GR was).
- Status