Criminologist questions why Chris Jefferies is still a suspect in Jo Yeates murder caseBy - January 26, 2011
A leading criminologist has questioned why the landlord of Jo Yeates stills remains a suspect in her murder.
Criminologist questions why is Chris Jefferies is still Jo Yeates murder suspect
Eccentric Chris Jefferies, 66, was arrested on suspicion of murdering the 25-year-old on December 30 at the Canynge Road, Clifton, Bristol, where the two both lived.
Police obtained two extensions to keep Mr Jefferies detained for the maximum time limit but released him early on police bail, without charge, on January 1.
Dutch engineer Vincent Tabak, 32, was then arrested and charged with Jo’s murder.
But despite Tabak’s charge, Mr Jefferies has not had his police bail cancelled and is therefore still a suspect, police confirmed today.
David Wilson, professor of criminology and criminal justice at Birmingham City University, said it would be normal practice to release other suspects from bail following a charge.
Professor Wilson, who has researched many murderers including serial killer Fred West, Soham murderer Ian Huntley, and Suffolk strangler Steven Wright, said: ”I’ve not heard that the landlord Chris Jefferies has had his bail cancelled, which could be seen as significant.
”Now that they’ve charged Vincent Tabak it would make sense for police to cancel Mr Jefferies’ bail – that would be normal procedure.
”I’d expect the police to act quickly to end any misunderstanding in relation to Mr Jefferies not being released from bail.”
After Tabak was charged on Saturday evening Inspector David Horwood, from Avon and Somerset police, said: ”We’re now considering the impact of the charge on other aspects of the investigation.”
A force spokesman confirmed Mr Jefferies was still on bail but refused to comment further.
Criminologists everywhere....
What is it about this case that they all come out of the wood work??
After Tabak was charged on Saturday evening Inspector David Horwood, from Avon and Somerset police, said: ”We’re now considering the impact of the charge on other aspects of the investigation.”So what other aspects of the Investigation?? What were they really looking at?? What was "Operation Braid"???
This case cannot be as clear cut as everyone wants us to believe.... I don't see it myself....
Joanna Yeates murder: how the inquiry will develop12:24PM GMT 29 Dec 2010
Miss Yeates's body was found on Christmas Day three miles from her home in Bristol after being missing for eight days. Detectives investigating the murder of the 25 year-old will be looking at forensic evidence, CCTV footage and continuing to talk to witnesses in their hunt for the killer.
Mr Williams-Thomas, a criminologist, said: "The key for the police now is the two locations - where she lived and where the body was found. They will have found as much information as they can from places such as the shops she visited and the pub that she drank at through CCTV and talking to people.
"The focus forensically is these two places. At the location the body was found they will be looking for transfer of fibres or DNA in her clothes. They would look to see if there are car or footprint marks. These may have been clearer in the snow.
"Toxicology reports on the body will show whether any drugs or alcohol were used to subdue her and they will be looking for signs of struggle on her body. That will show how she was strangled. Obviously they will be searching for anybody who was in the area at the time."
Miss Yeates's body was found frozen through - a fact which will help forensic experts because it slows down the rate of decay.Mr Williams-Thomas said: "The body will be in pretty much the condition that it was in when it was dumped."
Turning to Miss Yeates's flat in the Clifton area of Bristol police are expected to focus on how she got home on December 17 and the circumstances under which she left.
Mr Williams-Thomas said: "The key to the flat is that she either went back home or someone went back to the flat with her property. It is more likely that she went back home."
The front door of the property will prove the focus for most of the forensic investigation.
Mr Williams-Thomas said: "Every contact leaves a trace so they will be looking for that in the front door. The only way in and out of the property is through that so if the killer opened it, banged it, forced it - there will be traces that can be lifted."
The front door is being removed today to be taken to a forensic laboratory for intensive light testing.
Information released revealed that the landlord saw Miss Yeates leaving the flat on Friday night with two other people.
Mr Williams-Thomas said: "I would be very confident saying that whoever killed her she knew. There's no sense that she was pulled off the street by a stranger."
He added: "To dump the body so close suggests someone who either lives in the area or knows the locality well. It suggests that the killer might have been panicked."
There are two obvious routes from Miss Yeates's flat to the spot in Failand where she was found - over Clifton Suspension Bridge or over another bridge further down.
Both bridges have CCTV footage - however, if Miss Yeates's body was taken by car it will take police teams days of scouring footage and sending car indexes to the DVLA to eliminate vehicles.
There will also be an investigation into online contact that Miss Yeates may have had on Facebook or Twitter or by email.
Mr Williams-Thomas said: "The police will now have to build up a picture of her life over the last two or three years. Very few offences are stranger offences. If they can find that link back they may then find the offender."
Everyones an expert..... everyone knows more than the Police.... none of them are on the investigation as far as i know.... yet they are vying for attention in the media.... Personally i find it weird, but that is me....
Faces on the TV... faces we recognise and are supposed to trust their opinion.... Well their opinion is no different from mine to be honest... What makes them more knowledgable?? Their statements are incorrect, my statements may be incorrect... What facts of the case do they know??
I do not know if David Wilson did a piece to camera at the time.... I know he participated in a documentary were he contradicts his original theory.... And of course we have MWT outside Canygne Road and on Longwood Lane....
Take this comment from David Wilson..... and of course the printing of this comment by this newspaper.....
David Wilson, professor of criminology and criminal justice at Birmingham City University, said it would be normal practice to release other suspects from bail following a charge.If CJ thought that the 3 days of vilification did damage to his reputation, he should have read more of the articles that followed.. (imo)
David Wilson, is known... he's on TV.... he will have a following, and people will believe what he says is of importance... By making the comment he made on the 26th January 2011 after the charging of Dr Vincent Tabak and after he appeared at court... David Wilson is bringing into question, why they still have CJ on bail.... which anyone whom followed the case would see as significant... They would put two and two together and believe that CJ must have some involvement....
Yet CJ doesn't flinch at this obvious article.... He's more bothered about the photo's of him in the paper and whether or not he went into peoples flats unannounced....
He should have been concerned as to what this article is intermating... "Normal Practice"?? Suggesting that it was extremely unusual to keep someone on bail following the charge of another, suggesting that there may be more to this landlord than meets the eye, and his arrest was warranted, further investigation into him is needed.....
So why didn't this article bother CJ??
Next The article with MWT.....
Miss Yeates's body was found frozen through - a fact which will help forensic experts because it slows down the rate of decay.Mr Williams-Thomas said: "The body will be in pretty much the condition that it was in when it was dumped."Such a generalisation..... It's not exactly rocket science.....
Now re-reading that statement, in the light of the trial, it looks like he was accurate....
But, on the 29th December 2010 no-one knew how long Joanna Yeates had been on Longwood Lane for .... No-one knew whether or not she had been abducted....
She could have easily been kept at someones home, and started to decay, then be dumped... anything could have happened....
So a general statement will be accurate, if the second scene of crime is actually the second scene of crime..... No-one knows how long Joanna Yeates has been on Longwood lane at that point in time.... So which dumped does he mean... She may have been dumped in a barn covered in hay and nature started to take its course... Then moved and dumped somewhere else..... Then moved again....
By generalising about the apparent condition of Joanna Yeates body without supporting evidence, because people know who you are, they will believe your opinion... But the facts are not known at this point....
Joanna Yeates may have been kept in someones freezer..... That may be the reason that she was frozen to the core... we don't know... Because no-one knows when she was placed on Longwood Lane.....
So is it rocket science?? I'd say not....
Mr Williams-Thomas said: "Every contact leaves a trace so they will be looking for that in the front door. The only way in and out of the property is through that so if the killer opened it, banged it, forced it - there will be traces that can be lifted."
The front door is being removed today to be taken to a forensic laboratory for intensive light testing.
Now how did MWT know that the front door was being removed on that day?? which front door did he believe was going to be removed??
Has MWT got contacts within Avon and Somerset Police, telling him information?? Or did he just get info like other journalists??
The door that he has set so much stall in, that didn't even come as evidence at trial....
Did the fact that many criminologists were part of this investigation through the media, sway the public's opinion??
Do they sway opinion when they appear on our TV's.... Makes great telly for some.... But I believe that what happens is they reinforce the public's idea about an individual.... Based purely on their reputation.... And not based in fact....
I could have a room full of people and give them some true facts about a case, but if a well known criminologist, were to speak to the same set of people in that room and give them an opposing view based on no facts.... I bet the room would ignore what ever I had to say.... And be swayed by the well known criminologists persuasive argument...
My point being.... every known trick in the book was used to influence the public about Dr Vincent Tabak... Experts whom do not have access to investigative material and suspects of the time, making statements in the media... And these same experts making their way onto programs about this case....
Experts who we find out later have changed their opinion on what they were happy to tell us in the beginning....
They never disagree with each other.... that has become clear... we never see 2 criminologists on a program having opposing views about a case.... Now that would make for some good TV....
Every expert in their field will have opposing views.... This is why when we come to trial, both the prosecution and The defence have their own experts, experts that cast doubt on what the prosecution may be claiming.....
When it comes to trial by media, we do not get the opposing views.... we do not get experts telling us different reasons for their conclusions on the same program... We can all make generalisations... We can all put two and two together, but do we have the correct answer....
If most of the evidence in this case didn't make it to trial, then how can it be a fair trial.... If Dr Vincent Tabak admitted to something he didn't do... how would we know??
If the truth about this case ever surfaces, where will it leave these experts??
With egg on their faces??
The experts are only working with information that hey have been given, and not the full facts... there opinion is formed on very little....
The fact that David Wilson is part of a program where the facts of the case are virtually ALL incorrect, makes me wonder why he hasn't spoken up about it...
The Countdown to Murder program, where events didn't actually happen that way.... where Dr Vincent Tabak didn't go around to Joanna Yeates house with Bernard the cat, where Dr Vincent Tabak didn't lie in wait for Joanna Yeates to arrive home.... were we see Joanna Yeates wearing a Pink Flowered top all day on the 17th December 2010, when the CCTV footage from the Ram clearly shows her in a plain top.....
Why would he not come forward and say something?? The facts of the case are what was stated at trial by the defendant.... whether or not you believe what the defendant stated was true or not.... The prosecution may have suggested ideas, but Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted on what he stated on the stand, and that didn't include what was suggested by the prosecution... He was convicted by his tall story......
The story on a Countdown to Murder, is inaccurate, going from what was stated at trial..... why would they produce such a program?? Why didn't they stick to what Dr Vincent Tabak stated on the stand?? There was no evidence at trial of a fight in the hallway, as depicted in this program.... No finger prints, no blood, no nothing coming from this hallway in terms of evidence..... Yet the program happily tells us this was the version of events....
Did people not believe anyone would actually notice that the program was factually incorrect in accordance with what had been stated at trial... ?? was no-one concerned that someone would pick up on this fact??
All these programs appear to do is reinforce in the publics mind that the person who has been imprisoned for the crime , did in fact do the crime.... But why would you need to reinforce the public's opinion?? why would you need to tell them an untrue story??
The only use of these programs I have found... Is that the people who give interviews are shown up for the statements they made previous... Like the Yeates adding a detail we knew nothing about... "The Washing Pile"...
Do we need celebrity criminologist to tell us what the facts are?? Do we really need them to share their opinions?? Wouldn't it be more prudent if we actually had statements from those involved, rather than those who surmise...
Opinion is just that .... opinion.... we all have one.... But again I will reiterate, Should we have celebrity criminologists?? Should there be a warning placed on such programs? Should the public be informed that what is stated is based on opinion and not all on fact... (imo)
If the public stops getting spoon feed these ideas, they may at some point think for themselves... They may question what may have taken place, and not have a biased opinion made for them by someone they trust whom they know nothing about....
15 minutes of fame... Andy Warhol I believe stated that... In the future everyone will get their 15 minutes of fame...
Well 15 minutes of fame could be a lifetime of devastation for some, those 15 minutes of fame, could be the difference between truth and fiction....
As a society we love media... we are influenced by media.... we may not all take notice, but it is ingrained in many of us....
But this case shouldn't be about media... The media shouldn't have told us all of the apparent facts of the case before trial.... The media shouldn't be parked outside a house 24/7 for a Missing persons inquiry....
The media, should not be influencing what we believe to be true, when in fact certain pieces of information were never produced as evidence...
It all appears to be about entertainment... when I wish it were based on fact... were I do not know whom to believe anymore...
Trial by media is not helpful... and this case certainly was that.... And a case that was and is still in the public eye so many years on.... But where the media appear to have failed in furnishing us with the truth.... Where the media know more than they are telling us... (never mind the police)
The media were outside Flat 2... They were on Longwood Lane when The Yeates placed flowers and crossed Crime scene tape, before they had officially identified their daughter.... Yet the very same media, didn't bring these oddities and wrong procedures to our attention... They never pointed out how odd this was and unusual this was.... even how it wasn't procedural... They ignore it.... They know ... they know what is right procedure and what is wrong procedure, but do not point out to the public, what is going on....
Maybe at the time they thought keeping quite was helpful for the Investigation..... But what about since the trial??
The media should be informative... And they should raise questions and doubts based on what they knew at the time and whether there opinion has changed... Even if it brings into question a trial.....
But that isn't ever going to happen.... Just like the criminologists we have got used to seeing on TV... They too are not going to put up their hands and state that they may have been wrong....
Until the public themselves wake up and question what happens at trial or in the media, then we are left with a biased view based on nothing but opinion... And the likes of Dr Vincent Tabak will spend time in prison for a crime that could not have been committed in the way he has stated.....
A crime where nothing at trial supported what he said.... But a public happy that someone payed the price.... It could have been anyone.... It didn't matter.... The book on the case was then closed...
https://stories.swns.com/news/criminologist-questions-why-chris-jefferies-is-still-a-suspect-in-jo-yeates-murder-case-14343/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8229691/Joanna-Yeates-murder-how-the-inquiry-will-develop.html