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

[FiestyFairy]

Well that's it. No TM! No sobbing woman?

I can't wait to hear the judges direction to the jury

 

[veggiefan]

Well this is all very sudden! I wonder if it's because VT has done so poorly on the stand over the past few days.

He wouldn't be expected to say any more at this stage, however badly or well he may have done last week.

 

[stmarysmead]

The defense has gone too far in depicting VT as almost the "victim" himself... of this woman who had the temerity to up and die when he only choked her for a tiny bit of time. They admit to no malice, no anger, no controlling emotion. The jury is asked to believe that this friendly neighbor saw in the dying face IN FRONT OF HIS EYES no pain, no terror, no changes whatsoever that would make him release his grip.

And this wonderful normal young man then sought no help for JY; this compassionate normal oung man offered no relief to the torment endured as her family searched for her; this moral normal young man had no issues with trying to have his Landlord pay the price for his crime.

It's too much. VT is claiming this was a "crime" of "no passion" so therefore hardly a crime. I'd like to know if VT often showed a physical response to stop the actions of others that displeased him. Putting hands on others, restraining others? Or are we to believe that, dispassionately, this was the first and only time.

VT has sanitized this story too much.

 

[Tricksy]

Does anyone know - if he does get found guilty of murder but appeal - could the police/family/journos release information that had been held back so as not to 'prejudice' his case? or would they have to hold back until after his appeal?

The media will usually report the information that they have held back after he is found guilty.

I suppose in this case, even if he is found not guilty of murder he will still be jailed for Manslaughter, so it will either come at a guilty verdict or indeed if he is sentenced for Manslaughter.

If you can remember the Barry George/Susan Dando murder trial, the media was full of information about him after the verdict.

Although it should be noted that his murder conviction was found unsafe at a later date.

Reporting restrictions are usually lifted once a verdict is in.

I'm trying to think of a more recent example to give you, Stephen Shaun Griffiths, the Bradford crossbow murderer, once he plead guilty the media then released stills of the CCTV footage of him chasing Suzanne Blamires and his previous jailings and mental health issues.

 

[edgedweller]

There is the distinct possibility that VT knew Joanna would be alone and that he deliberately did not attend the party with his girlfriend because he had other plans.

In many companies partners are not invited to some events - I expect the Dyson Christmas party was the same.

 

[Clio]

Not sure why anybody thought TM would be a witness.

The prosecution don't need her to prove he lied and manipulated her as he admits he did that

The defence were unlikey to get her to testify to VT's movements/good character etc

 

[edgedweller]

... knickers were in the hallway. Either Joanna normally left her knickers on the pedestal in the hallway, or Mr VT skarfed her knickers and left them in the hallway. The latter suggests murder, the former suggests VT wandered into a strange situation.

I think they were drying on the radiator and got knocked off either by a struggle or by the comings and goings of VT with her body. He probably picked them up and bunged them on the pedestal/console* as part of his clean-up when he turned the oven off, etc.

*Is anyone else having trouble imagining this thing? A small table? A plant stand???

 

[edgedweller]

<<"VT was seen tossing candies into his mouth in the video after the murder." >>

Was he? I thought he was just putting his hand over his mouth in the Asda footage.

 

[edgedweller]

I too am amazed that the defence has rested. Bizarre. Logged on to Twitter expecting amazing revelations from several defence witnesses, and er.... five minutes of Hardiman's statement and that's it???! Very disappointing!

No mention of whether VT or Jo's family were even there. Perhaps everyone realised it would be a very short day and nothing new would be said. Who sums up first tomorrow - prosecution?

 

[Fluttershy]

This is a shot of some of the things in the hallway. There's a hat stand, shoe cupboard and something closer to the door. There's also a radiator on the right.

 

[Clio]

JY's family and GR were there. This from earlier today

Richard Payne
1025; #Tabak trial. Defendant arrives, Jo's parents here and boyfriend.

 

[Cherwell]

*Is anyone else having trouble imagining this thing? A small table? A plant stand???

A table for use on the patio perhaps? Maybe something like this?

 

[bos]

How utterly bizarre! William Clegg said something along the lines of "that's as far as we can go today" after Dr Cary had taken the stand & they knocked off even earlier than usual! Surely, if it had only been intended that that statement was read, they could have fitted it in before close of play Friday?

 

[Tricksy]

I think he must have known that she was on her own probably from the LL. I believe she was stalked the minute she came out of Waitrose and there must be CCTV coverage to show this. When she arrived home she had time to take off her shoes and coat with him still lurking outside and peeping in the window. At that point I think he took his opportunity either, he had a key or he knocked on the door, then he pounced on her . Can't understand why the possibility of him stalking and the fact that it maybe him on CCTV coverage in the store was not brought up in court. More to this then will ever be allowed to know I suspect. The whole thing stinks to me .

I think this is more about getting off on asphyia , like the prosection intimated.

So would I like to know the answers to those questions.

Which all due respect, if the prosecution had any evidence that could suggest that I am sure that they would have used it. It would have definitely helped their case against him.

A maybe is not enough in a court of law, they would have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

I think that the prosecution have stuck to what they can prove. If the CCTV footage is very poor or unclear they will be so much less inclined to introduce it. I would have thought if he had followed her then the chances are that he would have been picked up on several cameras. This does not seem to have happened.

I am not saying that you are wrong, just that I can see why the Prosecution have not brought that in to evidence.

As people have said in the past: "its not what you know, its what you can prove in Court".

It is harsh, but true I am afraid.

 

[Sarahlou]

Well that was all very short and strange! It'll be interesting to hear the summing up.

 

[aneurin]

How utterly bizarre! William Clegg said something along the lines of "that's as far as we can go today" after Dr Cary had taken the stand & they knocked off even earlier than usual! Surely, if it had only been intended that that statement was read, they could have fitted it in before close of play Friday?

On the Friday it was "that's as far as we can go this afternoon"; today it's "'my lord that concludes the case for the defence" after a couple of hours of 'legal argument'. As I said before, I suspect the defence tried to initiate Plan B and the judge said 'No'.

I must admit I'm quite surprised though. I expected the defence to at least drag up some old professor from Eindhoven prepared to tell us what a nice chap the defendant was etc.

 

[FiestyFairy]

Not sure why anybody thought TM would be a witness.

The prosecution don't need her to prove he lied and manipulated her as he admits he did that

The defence were unlikey to get her to testify to VT's movements/good character etc

I didn't expect her to be a witness but I was hoping she would be called even as a hostile witness. Seems I am to be disappointed

 

[Sammyme]

I think they were drying on the radiator and got knocked off either by a struggle or by the comings and goings of VT with her body. He probably picked them up and bunged them on the pedestal/console* as part of his clean-up when he turned the oven off, etc.

*Is anyone else having trouble imagining this thing? A small table? A plant stand???

No, Greg mentioned them as something out of place and that wasn't normal.

I asked this on the previous thread. Someone mentioned that it could be a piece of garden furniture, being green plastic. A small garden table perhaps?

 

[Clio]

I didn't expect her to be a witness but I was hoping she would be called even as a hostile witness. Seems I am to be disappointed

Yes it is disappointing not to have heard more but not really surprising. VT is the only person who really knows what went on and he certainly didn't tell us!

 

[Sammyme]

How utterly bizarre! William Clegg said something along the lines of "that's as far as we can go today" after Dr Cary had taken the stand & they knocked off even earlier than usual! Surely, if it had only been intended that that statement was read, they could have fitted it in before close of play Friday?

Didn't know someone had taken the stand. Then stood down? Who is Dr Cary? An expert witness for the defence or the prosecution? The name seems familiar but I just can't remember who he or she is.