Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[John]

Could posters please refrain from posting exceptionally long posts as they are difficult to reply to. TY

[mrswah]

The very first appeals by the police for her safe return contained only the vaguest description of what she would have been wearing, with no mention of the colour of her blouse, nor of the bright green that can be seen in the CCTV clips showing her going into the various shops.

This is possibly because they were not sure when she had died?  Had they known she had died soon after arriving home, all her colleagues in the pub could have given a good description of what she had been wearing. VT said that he killed her on the Friday night, so why is it that he was charged with killing her "between the 16th and the 19th December"?? 

[[...]]

One of the most problematic conundrums is how did he manage to move the body on his own????

Because this task is so difficult, the police had kept CJ on bail until march because they thought the pair of them had colluded..

When someone had died their centre of gravity changes which in turn makes it more difficult to control, This is one time a Demonstration was needed.

Stranger murders tend to walk there victim to any given location. Alternatively, they would leave them in situ..

I cannot see how Dr Vincent Tabak managed to carry Joana Yeates..

(a): From Kitchen to her bedroom

(b): From her bedroom to the hallway

(c): From her hallway down side of building

(d): Across rear of the building

(e): Placing her on ground outside flat

(f): Carrying her into his flat

(g): carry her down his hallway

(h): Putting her in his small bedroom

(i)  Putting her in Bicycle bag/ cover

(j):Carrying her through his hallway

(k): Take her outside the flat

(l): Lift her into boot of car (fail)

(m):Lift her into boot of car again

(n): Lift her out of car boot

(o): Take her out of Bicycle bag / cover

(p): Try lift her over wall

(q): Lay her down and cover her up because she is TOO HEAVY to lift!!!!!!!

Firemen train to get the upper body strength it takes to lift unconscious people...

So what made Dr Vincent Tabak turn into Superman???

The energy expanded to constantly move a dead body must require an extremely fit person, and looking at the images of Dr Vincent Tabak in the run with Tanja Morson, he looks completely exhausted.

So I wouldn't say he was extremely fit...

The amount of perspiration Dr Vincent Tabak would have produced would have fallen all over Joanna Yeates and he would have no control as to where this perspiration would land, if he tried to clean this up from her clothing, fibres from what ever cloth he used would have been found on the forensic examination.

Has anybody tried to see how difficult it is to lift someone who is unconscious up?

He had to start from floor level, that first movement in it's self is incredibly difficult to achieve.

When every I have seen real crime programs a solitary perpetrator can not easily manage to lift a dead weight... they tend to drag the victim to either the car... or the location that they have hidden them.

Not make more and more EVIDENCE of the crime they committed... I believe that's when the perpetrator has killed someone in their home... you often see drag marks or smears of blood as they have wrestled to move the body.

With the constant moving of Joanna Yeates between her flat and Dr Vincent Tabak's flat to her eventual resting place, seems to me to be quite an impossibility., especially with the time constraints available to Dr Vincent Tabak.

This ... Remember, is the first time he has ever done anything illegal and it's the BIGGY... He would not be able to have such a calm exterior and go about his business, and even if you believe that he could, his own body would give him away with the amount of perspiration it produced..

[Leonora]

This is possibly because they were not sure when she had died?  Had they known she had died soon after arriving home, all her colleagues in the pub could have given a good description of what she had been wearing. VT said that he killed her on the Friday night, so why is it that he was charged with killing her "between the 16th and the 19th December"??

I don't agree with you.

Her death did not become known until a week later. The first appeals, on the Monday and the Tuesday, allowed all possible scenarios, from voluntary disappearance to forcible removal. The police always insisted that she got back to her flat, because her outdoor coat and other items were in the flat. They also believed that she had left the radar, presumably wearing these same indoor clothes, by the time her boyfriend told them he failed to contact her by phone after reaching Sheffield. Her colleagues in the pub could have told the police what she was "last seen wearing" indoors, so their failure to describe her clothing suggests that the police already "knew more than they were telling", as her father later stated.

[Leonora]

Now as I'm re watching the video " Killers: Vincent Tabak"... The lady from the CPS says this: at 28:03 mins

She speaks as if the DNA sample had been checked a lot earlier than the 20th of January... So why the planned arrest???

That telling remark was new to me. With hindsight, the arrest always seemed to have been planned, and now you have found the master-mind behind the case acknowledging it. This means that she also planned the public appeal made by the victim's parents three days before the arrest, AND the story of the tip-off from the weeping girl who never made it to court.

I believe it was also the lady from the CPS who had planned the arrest of the landlord. At the time of the second arrest, she had just won high public praise from "The Times" for rounding up a paedophile ring in Cornwall, so you may be sure that she would have told the police to scrutinise any computers that they confiscated for images of child abuse.

[[...]]

I don't agree with you.

Her death did not become known until a week later. The first appeals, on the Monday and the Tuesday, allowed all possible scenarios, from voluntary disappearance to forcible removal. The police always insisted that she got back to her flat, because her outdoor coat and other items were in the flat. They also believed that she had left the radar, presumably wearing these same indoor clothes, by the time her boyfriend told them he failed to contact her by phone after reaching Sheffield. Her colleagues in the pub could have told the police what she was "last seen wearing" indoors, so their failure to describe her clothing suggests that the police already "knew more than they were telling", as her father later stated.

Agreed Leonora... They did not know what she was wearing or a description of her clothes would have been given to the public at the time they were supposed to be looking for her.. Which means whatever she wore at the Ram that evening were still at home.

EG: ...

When last seen he was wearing a green hat, a green leather jacket, brown or green corduroy trousers and brown walking boots.

He had also been carrying a red walking stick.

t http://www.kentlive.news/police-appeal-for-missing-orpington-man-83-last-seen-using-a-red-walking-stick/story-29833067-detail/story.html#RSEaM6S9oQxY35j7.99

This was NOT the case for Joanna Yeates and the pictures used were of her wearing the White Coat...  which in itself would be slightly misleading.

[[...]]

Could posters please refrain from posting exceptionally long posts as they are difficult to reply to. TY

Apologises John... Sometimes I need the relevant Quotes and Links to back up what I am saying 

[[...]]

That telling remark was new to me. With hindsight, the arrest always seemed to have been planned, and now you have found the master-mind behind the case acknowledging it. This means that she also planned the public appeal made by the victim's parents three days before the arrest, AND the story of the tip-off from the weeping girl who never made it to court.

I believe it was also the lady from the CPS who had planned the arrest of the landlord. At the time of the second arrest, she had just won high public praise from "The Times" for rounding up a paedophile ring in Cornwall, so you may be sure that she would have told the police to scrutinise any computers that they confiscated for images of child abuse.

Exactly... No sobbing girl to tip them off with regards Dr Vincent Tabak.......

So......... What Evidence did the Police have to arrest Dr Vincent Tabak in the first place???

Because the partical DNA sample would NOT be enough.....

The Police having had his DNA sample obtained voluntarily in Holland and checked against... erm.. findings on Jo's body.. discovered that it was his DNA was on her body...and that was one of the key factors, that lead to the planned arrest of him later in January..

And as the CPS Lady said: They Planned it...!!!!

EDIT... If my memory serves me correctly... from the helpjo/wordpress, the interview that the parents gave was transmitted on the 19th January 2011 this is what prompted the Sobbing Girl telephone Call.. It was aired just before they were due to do the Crimewatch.. reconstruction...

So how could the CPS lady Plan, an arrest before they aired anything????

And couldn't plan to arrest him the next day at about 6:00am!!!  (20th January 2011)

[Leonora]

Exactly... No sobbing girl to tip them off with regards Dr Vincent Tabak.......

So......... What Evidence did the Police have to arrest Dr Vincent Tabak in the first place???

Because the partical DNA sample would NOT be enough.....

And as the CPS Lady said: They Planned it...!!!!

I believe that the slender basis for his arrest was (1) the tip-off from the anonymous girl, whom they would allege was his girlfriend, for the benefit of the duty solicitor, and (2) his own statement placing him in the vicinity of the presumed scene of the crime without an alibi during the Friday evening before the snow fell to cover the body.

I believe that the police didn't introduce the DNA evidence until the second day of his custody, pretending that the match to the partial DNA found on the body had been made from the swab taken from him by the duty nurse immediately after his arrest. The duty solicitor would not have known about the Schiphol interview.

The police seem to have introduced new evidence gradually during the second day, including perhaps the fibres from his black coat and the blood spots on his car. Eventually, after the solicitor and her QC had declared that  bail would be applied for, the CPS probably revealed the presence of 43 injuries on the body, the signs of a struggle in the flat, and the attempt to incriminate the landlord at Schiphol. Very humiliatingly, the solicitor decided her client was guilty after all, suggesting he should plead manslaughter, and her QC was obliged to withdraw the bail application.

[mrswah]

The police seem to have introduced new evidence gradually during the second day, including perhaps the fibres from his black coat and the blood spots on his car. Eventually, after the solicitor and her QC had declared that  bail would be applied for, the CPS probably revealed the presence of 43 injuries on the body, the signs of a struggle in the flat, and the attempt to incriminate the landlord at Schiphol. Very humiliatingly, the solicitor decided her client was guilty after all, suggesting he should plead manslaughter, and her QC was obliged to withdraw the bail application.

Why were the 43 injuries kept secret for so long?

I am assuming there never was a "sobbing girl".

Does anyone think VT's arrest was planned for a particular date to stop the Crimewatch programme being aired?

[Leonora]

Why were the 43 injuries kept secret for so long?

I am assuming there never was a "sobbing girl".

Does anyone think VT's arrest was planned for a particular date to stop the Crimewatch programme being aired?

The injuries were probably kept secret to keep one step ahead of the duty solicitorand mislead  her into believing that it wasn't murder. The injuries would also have been revealed if the news media had been invited to the inquest, but presumably they were not invited. Presumably the police put pressure on reporters not even to mention that an inquest had been opened.

I am sure you are right - the sobbing girl was imaginary. You may be right about "Crimewatch". In my opinion the date of the arrest was fixed so as to charge the prisoner 28 days after the murder investigation had begun. It also gave the CPS the weekend to dot the i's and cross the t's of the case before the magistrate's hearing.

[mrswah]

Yes, I agree with you about the 28 days-----VT was arrested just in time, before  a review of the investigation would have taken place.

[mrswah]

Apologies---it's me again!!

Most people tell me that they know VT is guilty because he pleaded guilty, and admitted killing Jo, and that nobody would plead guilty if they were innocent.  This seems to be the general consensus of people on this forum---and on other forums.

However, VT  claimed that he killed her on the Friday night, and in her flat.  There are doubts about him having killed her in either of their flats as there was no forensic evidence.  It now seems that there are doubts that Jo died on the Friday night, as we cannot be sure what she was wearing. If she died shortly after arriving home, as VT said, she would have been wearing what she had been wearing in the Ram pub, minus her coat and boots!

So, if the details are not true, how can we know the guilty plea is true?  If Jo died later than the Friday night, it is very unlikely that VT killed her. He had an alibi.

[Leonora]

Apologies---it's me again!!

Most people tell me that they know VT is guilty because he pleaded guilty, and admitted killing Jo, and that nobody would plead guilty if they were innocent.  This seems to be the general consensus of people on this forum---and on other forums.

However, VT  claimed that he killed her on the Friday night, and in her flat.  There are doubts about him having killed her in either of their flats as there was no forensic evidence.  It now seems that there are doubts that Jo died on the Friday night, as we cannot be sure what she was wearing. If she died shortly after arriving home, as VT said, she would have been wearing what she had been wearing in the Ram pub, minus her coat and boots!

So, if the details are not true, how can we know the guilty plea is true?  If Jo died later than the Friday night, it is very unlikely that VT killed her. He had an alibi.

Sherlock Holmes famously remarked that the detective should eliminate the impossible, and concentrate on what is possible, no matter how improbable it may seen. Probability plays a large role in assessing how other people and institutions will react to our own behaviour. The defendant in this murder case was an extremely trustworthy person. Forgive me for spelling it out, but trusting other people, and developing our own trustworthyness, play essential, and indeed, motivational roles in society.

If the victim had declared that she intended to relocate to Arizona, taking the children with her so that he would never see them again, then the defendant might well have flown into an angry rage - though I suggest that this particular defendant was so gentle that he wouldn't have raised his hand against her.

However, this is a fantasy scenario, as they certainly had no children, and if they were in some prior secret romantic relationship, no hint of this was given at the trial. So the probability that this particular defendant would have acted in the way the court wants us to believe he did is obviously ZERO.

It is perfectly true that some people cannot take rejection - "hell hath no fury!" - but this applies only to rejection by a partner with whom one has had a sustained, consummated, sexual relationship. NOBODY except a sociopath reacts violently to rejection after a brief flirt. Therefore the only possible explanations for why the defendant agreed to take part in this trial are that (1) he had agreed to do so, perhaps under coercion of some sort, possibly to protect his girlfriend from being charged as his accomplice, or (2) he was an imposter who agreed to impersonate the real defendant, even at the trial.

[Leonora]

I am sorry to post at some length, but the question of MOTIVE has bedevilled both the reporting and the discussion of this case. Only a sociopath would kill without a motive. From the day her body was discovered, to the very end of this case, the police and the lawyers have wriggled out of any serious public analysis of what motive the killer of this particular victim, in her particular circumstances, might have had. The Chief Investigating Officer lost no opportunity to twist the facts to make it into an unmotivated sex-related attack, with the unbelievably bizarre resulting conflict with the known character of the person who was eventually convicted.

There was a wealth of facts about the actions of the victim and those around her, available both to the police themselves and to us, the general public, which could have narrowed down the killer, by analysing their most probable motive, but this has been taboo. I have never understood the motives of those who want to let the real killer go free, to spare her family from being plagued by speculation about the improbable guilt of the man actually convicted.