Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[[...]]

Hey, this is not Amanda Knox, Rafaelle Sollecito, Patrice Lumbumba and Rudy Guede we are discussing! I have never seen anything to suggest that VT was ever charged with anything other than having murdered Joanna Yeates alone and unaided.

Apart from CJ's video..... which was not released until after the court case.... This is why I am asking about the Joint Enterprise... If we are to take on board what CJ has stated since the trial... then that has to mean they thought that there were killers....

Once they have Dr Vincent Tabak in custody charged with murder... what stops CJ's bail release?????

How did the POLICE think that Dr Vincent Tabak could move a body so many times?????

[[...]]

When we have talked about DNA etc.... we accept that all of the information put into a computer is correct and nobody has challenged this...

I was watching a crime program last night... and the DNA wasn't able to be collected because of the snow... Now i don't know what year this crime was... but how did they collect DNA from Joanna Yeates?? If snow interfers with its collection??

Also back to my first point... I read this article about putting information into computer incorrectly... We all forget there is always human error in cases...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-typing-error-led-dad-10023269#ICID=sharebar_twitter

[Leonora]

I was watching a crime program last night...

... in which the victim was found lying in a downtown alley frequented by rough sleepers, with one shoe missing. The investigators satisfied themselves that the victim had not made his own way to the alley, as the killer had intended them to think, but had been killed elsewhere and dumped from a car, just as Joanna Yeates had been. They examined the soles of the feet and found no evidence that the victim had been walking out of doors with only one shoe on. Although we have been told that Joanna's one sock had her blood on it, we have never been told whether she had been walking - or running - out of doors on it. I suspect, therefore, that she had been.

[[...]]

... in which the victim was found lying in a downtown alley frequented by rough sleepers, with one shoe missing. The investigators satisfied themselves that the victim had not made his own way to the alley, as the killer had intended them to think, but had been killed elsewhere and dumped from a car, just as Joanna Yeates had been. They examined the soles of the feet and found no evidence that the victim had been walking out of doors with only one shoe on. Although we have been told that Joanna's one sock had her blood on it, we have never been told whether she had been walking - or running - out of doors on it. I suspect, therefore, that she had been.

Don't remember Joanna Yeates blood being on her sock.. if so.. why wasn't there any blood on her bare foot???

[[...]]

Talking of programes I have watched... A series called 'Forensic Files" is on Netflix at the moment..

Collection 9 episode 5.. Dinner and a Movie ...

I mention this because the ligature marks are done after she died.. to make it look like the cause of death...

Now... If Dr Cary or the Defence say Joanna Yeates died from a heart attack... isn't it also possible someone made it look like a strangulation???  Just a question I'm posing....

I had said before it was possibly a game gone wrong.. so this is just as plausible.....

I hadn't realised it was possible to cause such marks after death,... that's what made me question it!!!!

[mrswah]

Don't remember Joanna Yeates blood being on her sock.. if so.. why wasn't there any blood on her bare foot???

I haven't heard anything about this before either.

[Leonora]

I haven't heard anything about this before either.

"Forensic scientist Lindsay Lennen (described as a body fluids and DNA specialist on the staff of LGC Forensics, and case leader for homicides) identified blood on the T-shirt and the bra as Joanna’s. There was blood on the toe and the sole of the left sock. There was blood on her finger nails."

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/mum-s-tears-joanna-yeates-murder-trial/story-13598437-detail/story.html

[John]

"Forensic scientist Lindsay Lennen (described as a body fluids and DNA specialist on the staff of LGC Forensics, and case leader for homicides) identified blood on the T-shirt and the bra as Joanna’s. There was blood on the toe and the sole of the left sock. There was blood on her finger nails."

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/mum-s-tears-joanna-yeates-murder-trial/story-13598437-detail/story.html

From the link...

'Lindsay Lennen, a forensic scientist, confirmed she detected Tabak's DNA on Miss Yeates' chest area and on her jeans, behind the knees.

She said the DNA could have been transferred by touch or even breath, and the contact with the jeans could be consistent with him carrying her.

In cross-examination William Clegg QC, defending, asked Ms Lennen if Tabak's DNA could have been transferred to Miss Yeates if he had used a cycle bag to take her body from her flat in Canynge Road, Clifton, to Longwood Lane.

She said that it may well have done, as the cycle bag would contain his DNA.

Ms Lennen also confirmed Miss Yeates' DNA was recovered from spots of blood found in a Renault Megane car Tabak was driving on the night she disappeared. Her blood was found on her pink T-shirt and lilac bra, as well as on the sole of the toe of the one thick grey left sock she was wearing, which belonged to Mr Reardon.

The court heard analysis of fibres linked to Miss Yeates put her in direct contact with Tabak's black coat as well as the boot of the Renault he drove, owned by his girlfriend.'


It begs the question as to where the blood came from.  Was it an injury sustained in the initial struggle or caused by transporting the body or even an attempt to push it over the wall into the quarry?

Someone asked the question as to how the people in the several cars exiting the adjacent Golf Club never saw Joanna's body lying on the verge.  The answer also appears in the above link.  Joanna's body lay on a bed of leaves and was also covered by leaves prior to being covered by snow.  By covering the body in leaves the killer had inadvertently protected the forensic material found on the victim and her clothing from the harsh elements.  He had effectively sealed it in.

[[...]]

"Forensic scientist Lindsay Lennen (described as a body fluids and DNA specialist on the staff of LGC Forensics, and case leader for homicides) identified blood on the T-shirt and the bra as Joanna’s. There was blood on the toe and the sole of the left sock. There was blood on her finger nails."

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/mum-s-tears-joanna-yeates-murder-trial/story-13598437-detail/story.html

If it was on the sole of her sock, that would sound like she stood in it... but there was no blood at the scene...

Also, I found this odd:..

Ms Lennen also confirmed Miss Yeates' DNA was recovered from spots of blood found in a Renault Megane car Tabak was driving on the night she disappeared. Her blood was found on her pink T-shirt and lilac bra, as well as on the sole of the toe of the one thick grey left sock she was wearing, which belonged to Mr Reardon.

Now DCI Phil Jones said when they were talking about the sock that was missing that it was a SIZE 5... which I found strange anyway... Since when has Greg had such tiny feet!!!!!!!!

There is something fishy about the sock business (IMO)!! 

DCI Jones said the sock he was looking for was a grey size five ski sock and called for the public to continue to feed his team with clues

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344276/Joanna-Yeates-murder-Strangled-sock.html#ixzz4bhA6wCdW



 http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/mum-s-tears-joanna-yeates-murder-trial/story-13598437-detail/story.html#gMTcLw4DX44GIpMP.99

[Leonora]

In cross-examination William Clegg QC, defending, asked Ms Lennen if Tabak's DNA could have been transferred to Miss Yeates if he had used a cycle bag to take her body from her flat in Canynge Road, Clifton, to Longwood Lane.

It begs the question as to where the blood came from.  Was it an injury sustained in the initial struggle or caused by transporting the body or even an attempt to push it over the wall into the quarry?

William Clegg, by his own admission, was accustomed to making mincemeat of prosecution witnesses such as this one. Why did he not repeat the accusation that his own client had made against her employer when he was first confronted with her DNA allegations? Yet instead, here is Mr Clegg making suggestions to her that not only enhance the credibility of her testimony, but also reinforce the police's bag/hold-all allegation made at the time his client was first arrested. Why didn't he call his client's girlfriend as a witness to cross-examine her about the missing cycle-bag and its very existence? In a place like Clifton, only a Dutchman would use a bicycle.

Joanna's nose was fractured and bled sufficiently profusely before death to supply the blood clot on the stone wall as well as blood found elsewhere. From my own experience of transporting heavy, messy objects in large bags, I can confirm that fluids on these objects do get transferred to the insides of the bags and then back to other parts of of the objects. So if her body really were transported in this cycle-bag of whose existence the jury never heard any evidence from a reliable witness, then it is entirely possible that blood could have been transferred to other parts of her body, such as the toe of her sock.

But blood would also have been deposited in other places in her flat if she had been killed there, yet neither Reardon nor Joanna's parents noticed any blood. No one, in fact, ever testified that they had identified any of her blood in the place where she is supposed to have been killed. Yet some of you really believe that she was killed inside her flat.

[Leonora]

If it was on the sole of her sock, that would sound like she stood in it... but there was no blood at the scene...

There is something fishy about the sock business (IMO)!! 

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344276/Joanna-Yeates-murder-Strangled-sock.html#ixzz4bhA6wCdW

Fishy is putting it mildly.

"Police believe missing clothing may have been kept by murderer as trophy"

"Detective Chief Inspector Phil Jones today said the missing sock may hold the key to solving the murder of the architect whose body was found dumped by a roadside in Bristol on Christmas Day."

On the days when we are wearing socks, most of us put one sock on at a time. Later on, we first take one sock off, and then we take the other one off. This is so normal that we do not think about it. However, if the phone or the door bell rings, for example, we may be interrupted with only one sock on, just as Joanna most probably was interrupted.

In the world of DCI Phil Jones, however, the bizarre explanation that comes to mind is that the sock was taken as a TROPHY. We know that the CPS was already planning to arrest Vincent Tabak, who never had any motive for killing his neighbour, so the Detective took this opportunity to plant in the mind of the public - including the hapless Dutchman who didn't know what was in store for him - that Joanna was killed by a "crazy detached person" - the very words VT is said to have used at a dinner party five days before his arrest - rather than by someone who had some personal animosity towards her that could constitute a motive.

A public belief that no motive needs to be demonstrated is very convenient for prosecutors planning to convict innocent scapegoats.

[[...]]

William Clegg, by his own admission, was accustomed to making mincemeat of prosecution witnesses such as this one. Why did he not repeat the accusation that his own client had made against her employer when he was first confronted with her DNA allegations? Yet instead, here is Mr Clegg making suggestions to her that not only enhance the credibility of her testimony, but also reinforce the police's bag/hold-all allegation made at the time his client was first arrested. Why didn't he call his client's girlfriend as a witness to cross-examine her about the missing cycle-bag and its very existence? In a place like Clifton, only a Dutchman would use a bicycle.

Joanna's nose was fractured and bled sufficiently profusely before death to supply the blood clot on the stone wall as well as blood found elsewhere. From my own experience of transporting heavy, messy objects in large bags, I can confirm that fluids on these objects do get transferred to the insides of the bags and then back to other parts of of the objects. So if her body really were transported in this cycle-bag of whose existence the jury never heard any evidence from a reliable witness, then it is entirely possible that blood could have been transferred to other parts of her body, such as the toe of her sock.

But blood would also have been deposited in other places in her flat if she had been killed there, yet neither Reardon nor Joanna's parents noticed any blood. No one, in fact, ever testified that they had identified any of her blood in the place where she is supposed to have been killed. Yet some of you really believe that she was killed inside her flat.

They have changed their minds several times as to whether or not it was a Blood Clot, or a Blood Smear...

I for the life in me cannot see where it would come from... She is not pumping blood around her system for nearly 2 hours if we are to believe what they say took place.. 

They say it dislodged from her nose...  Why??? it's not likely too (IMO) I believe because the rest of the blood would have dried, which make the Blood in the Boot of the car a problem too... How would that have got there???

As far as Clegg is concerned , your correct leonora.. he makes suggestions to Lyndsey Lennen... (IMO) he also puts in the minds of the jury how it may have been possible for the blood to be in his car...

Defence Counsel: Did the cover become inverted?
Tabak: I can’t remember.

So.. here if the bicycle cover is inside out, then the blood could transfer.... (rubbish) (IMO)

Thats why I question those crazy broom handles??? If Joanna Yeates body is thawing at the time and there is moisture from the snow, the blood would be wet in some part... therefore it's as easy for it to have been transferred by accident.... Did we ever get to see Andrew Mott holding His trusty Broom Handle????


There are plenty of possibilities for the transfer of blood on the wall... Also the position on the wall changed several times... from the Top... to down the wall..

The Blood evidence is again ...questionable....(IMO)

And why is there NO BLOOD any where else at the first scene of crime??????

[mrswah]

Well, when I go to Clifton, I will count the number of cycles I see!!  Of course people cycle in Clifton, even if it is hilly!  The uni  isn't far away,  and I would imagine lots of the students cycle!

Both the sock and the pizza were given too much media attention in this case, IMO. Of course, VT didn't keep either as a trophy, or they would have been found in his flat.

The fact  that the police had arrested the landlord, and then had to let him go,cannot have inspired confidence in the public. When VT was arrested, the public must have been relieved. At first, a number of people thought it was another mistake ( look at old fora threads from the time), but once he appeared to have "confessed", that was it: CJ was a goodie,  and VT was a baddie!!! Very few people would have thought any further than that. The fact that he had no previous form and no motive just didn't count.

Most people to whom I have spoken, remember the case as "the one where they arrested the landlord". They don't even remember who was finally convicted of Joanna's murder.

As for "confessions" and guilty pleas, I cannot help recalling the case of Simon Hall, who confessed after protesting his innocence for a number of years. From what I have read, most people accept his confession as proof of his guilt. It doesn't seem to occur to people that he might have been an innocent man who had a complete breakdown! !

[[...]]

So there is No Blood of any description in the flat, we have Greg's description of the state, but nothing to prove what the flat looked like upon his return... photographs etc...(we only have the photo's after the police have emptied it)!!

There should have been a quantity of Blood in the flat of Joanna Yeates or Dr Vincent Tabak's and there was NONE.....

Question:.... If as many would probably agree Joanna Yeates did not died or was killed in her Flat, then... how does that apply to the prosecutions case... legally I mean, as they have maintained that is where she came to her demise?????

Would that create reason for a re-trial?????


Another point... at no time in the trial do they ask Dr Vincent Tabak if he cleared any blood up!!! which you would have thought would be a pertinent question..(IMO)

[[...]]

From the link...

'Lindsay Lennen, a forensic scientist, confirmed she detected Tabak's DNA on Miss Yeates' chest area and on her jeans, behind the knees.

She said the DNA could have been transferred by touch or even breath, and the contact with the jeans could be consistent with him carrying her.

But why would DNA from breath even still be there after the body was removed from the scene and placed outside, wouldn't that make it even less likely that breath would play a part.... think you would need other components (IMO)..

Behind her jeans.... Originally it was only One DNA sample, the more I read the more sample that they are..  If Dr Vincent Tabak had picked her up as many times as he was supposed too,, surely there would have been a far great DNA transfer than they indicate... again... Clegg helps with this DNA behind her knee..

Defence Counsel: Your hand being on what part of her body?
Tabak: One arm was underneath her knees.

Again where was the other hand????   But if you look closely at that statement, it doesn't say bare arms.... He hand his coat on... If he is being so careful, his coat would be next to her jeans....

Where was the fibre transfer exactly??? Why isn't there more DNA transfer.... he's supposed to have committed a Murder???

http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf

EDIT:........Did Lyndsey Lennen explain the colour and fibre type??? (Shade).... dye composition, what manufacturer had use what dye, whether the dye colour was made purely for that particular company and whether or not it was distinctive...... Whether or not the particular dye colour had a patent.... What colour Number was this dye..... was it a Blue black... Midnight black.. ebony black...

Where they singular threads? What shape were these threads??? Was every microscopic detail given with regards the fibres on Joanna Yeates body and that they were defineatley from Dr Vincent Tabaks coat!!!