GUILTY UK - Viktorija Sokolova, 14, Murdered, Wolverhampton W. Mids, 11 April 2018 *Arrests*

New Posts

I will be happy with whatever the 12 people on the jury decide.

I'm just saying that if I thought there was even a 1% chance this might have been done by one of the other people also on the street that night I could not convict. I'm sure the jurors have a better perspective of the evidence than I do.

It looks like the jury has been back with a question

Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 14:58
Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 15:36
Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 15:41
 
mrazda71 said:
If he'd raped her but genuinely not I injured/attacked/killed her - that he'd be a lot more vocal rather than 'no comment' ...

I imagine, like most of the cases we've all followed here ... a lot more will come out after the verdict, especially a guilty verdict.
Click to expand...
I don't know with him being 16. Do you think the judge might lift the identity suppression?
 
Elainera said:
Was it thrown there from the shore? How far out is this island?
Click to expand...
I don't know, I've found some pictures of the West Park Wolverhampton boating lake but perhaps @sar2them1984 might be able to tell us if it's within throwing distance.

West_Park_Wolverhampton_cb03854_uxga.jpg
 
Elainera said:
Was it thrown there from the shore? How far out is this island?
Click to expand...

It's been a while since I've been there (spent many an afternoon strolling round there hand in hand with a boyfriend once upon a time) but if I recall correctly then - yes, the mobile could've been thrown into the island from the park side in certain spots.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20181212-194626_Instagram.jpg
    Screenshot_20181212-194626_Instagram.jpg
    274.9 KB · Views: 10
Strangely the court website is saying case adjourned until 13:00.

I think we've seen that before on another case and I can't remember what it meant. It could be a court error, it could be that they've reached a verdict and the judge isn't available to hear it until 1pm, or it could mean a juror is missing and deliberations are on hold until 1pm.
 
Court was showing a 10.30am start, so if they adjourned at 10.35am, could that just mean the Jury was in the courtroom for 2 minutes, then sent out again by the Judge ?

Am also trying to think of other cases where we have seen this wording, but can't remember what it might mean.
 
I don't think he killed her. It seems very likely, though, that he did rape her. Not many 14-year-old girls would be down to have anal sex, I guess. Maybe she was receptive to it, at first, and then changed her mind and he forced her. If they have evidence that he did rape her, then he should do time for that. It's just very unlikely that he bludgeoned her to death and didn't have a single drop of blood on the jacket he was wearing. No blood on his hair or fingernails. No blood anywhere in his house. That doesn't add up.
In my opinion, and this is just me thinking about what might have happened, he met her in the park, raped her and left her there. Someone else might have stumbled upon her, raped her again and killed her, maybe thinking she was a sex worker of some sorts.
She had what? Four seminal DNA samples in her body? One of those was her stepfather's. The DNA transfer idea doesn't convince me. A mother wearing her daughter's underwear or vice versa? A teen girl taking dirty underwear out of the laundry to wear it? I mean, kids going into the laundry and wearing dirty jackets or jeans is gross but makes sense and we know that happens, but underwear? I don't see that as very likely or logical.
 
claudianunes said:
I don't think he killed her. It seems very likely, though, that he did rape her. Not many 14-year-old girls would be down to have anal sex, I guess. Maybe she was receptive to it, at first, and then changed her mind and he forced her. If they have evidence that he did rape her, then he should do time for that. It's just very unlikely that he bludgeoned her to death and didn't have a single drop of blood on the jacket he was wearing. No blood on his hair or fingernails. No blood anywhere in his house. That doesn't add up.
In my opinion, and this is just me thinking about what might have happened, he met her in the park, raped her and left her there. Someone else might have stumbled upon her, raped her again and killed her, maybe thinking she was a sex worker of some sorts.
She had what? Four seminal DNA samples in her body? One of those was her stepfather's. The DNA transfer idea doesn't convince me. A mother wearing her daughter's underwear or vice versa? A teen girl taking dirty underwear out of the laundry to wear it? I mean, kids going into the laundry and wearing dirty jackets or jeans is gross but makes sense and we know that happens, but underwear? I don't see that as very likely or logical.
Click to expand...

The DNA from step dad was minute trace samples (negligible amounts?) It doesn't say where on the knickers the sample was, I think it's perfectly possible for Tori to have taken her jeans out of the dirty wash basket where they might have got the DNA on them and if the DNA were on the jeans then it could easily transfer to the knickers - think the mum and daughter sharing knickers was just the mum trying to explain how the hubbys DNA might have come to be on Toris clothing.

I think it's highly unlikely that the accused went to that much trouble and then he just left her and another random person capable of rape and murder just happened to come across her and commit the crime and there be no cctv of anyone else at all.

Reading on social media about this case it annoys me immensely thast a race/religion is being deemed the reason for the crime when in reality, I strongly feel that online *advertiser censored* has a much bigger role in crimes like this than anything else.
 
mrazda71 said:
The DNA from step dad was minute trace samples (negligible amounts?) It doesn't say where on the knickers the sample was, I think it's perfectly possible for Tori to have taken her jeans out of the dirty wash basket where they might have got the DNA on them and if the DNA were on the jeans then it could easily transfer to the knickers - think the mum and daughter sharing knickers was just the mum trying to explain how the hubbys DNA might have come to be on Toris clothing.

I think it's highly unlikely that the accused went to that much trouble and then he just left her and another random person capable of rape and murder just happened to come across her and commit the crime and there be no cctv of anyone else at all.

Reading on social media about this case it annoys me immensely thast a race/religion is being deemed the reason for the crime when in reality, I strongly feel that online *advertiser censored* has a much bigger role in crimes like this than anything else.
Click to expand...
What about race and religion? Regarding to the victim or to the suspect? I haven't seen anything on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 100 more.
Total: 3,442 (members: 101, guests: 3,341)

Online statistics

Members online
101
Guests online
3,341
Total visitors
3,442
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,291
Messages
17,966,758
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top