Joanna Yeates case - why is this happening at all?

[Ponders]

It seems clear that he did kill her, & I don't see how he can claim it was unintentional, so why do her poor parents have to be put through such harrowing evidence?

Although the Prosecution applied to present this evidence at trial, they were the ones who didn't want the media to be allowed to print it after today's verdict in case it was prejudicial to any further charges that may be lodged against Tabak.

Thunders I wish you would stop...criticising or mocking earlier posters isn't helping anyone, why are you so bothered about them or what they said?

I do wish I hadn't been right about the acting out a fantasy thing, it makes me worry about my own criminal potential, the fact it seemed so obvious to me what he was doing.

I'm not likely to murder anyone...don't worry.

No - no disarrangement of lower garments, no evidence of rape, no semen stains.

Interesting, member, thanks.

They must have other charges in mind then.

JaneBirkin - that's impressive insightfulness. I really thought the sexual gratification thing was barking up the wrong tree.

Pressed post too soon: meant to add - bra still in place. Only a rucked up shirt, and it was conceded that could have been incidental. In light of evidence from images, then one might reach a different conclusion on that, but it's still short of sexual assault; it seems more likely it was post-mortem posing.

I suppose not, but presumably they had enough evidence to prove murder even before he'd confessed to the killing, as he didn't confess to that until fairly far into the process.

Tbh I don't know. I was shocked as well that the porn use hadn't been admissible, but I guess that it's easy for us to sit in judgement of what should and shouldn't be presented, but most of us don't have that kind of legal knowledge and expertees to know what should and shouldn't be admissible as evidence and the reasons why not.

I do think the fact that he'd already admitted to the killing makes the justification easier since he was going down anyway.

Actually there were plenty of personal views presented Edith. Including the claim that Tabak didn't wake up that morning planning to do what he did, when we see now that it's very possible that's exactly what happened.

This faux-objectivity stance of the people who were enjoying helping Tabak make his defense is a bit ridiculous at this point.

I realise that there can be some kind of weird enjoyment in analysing lying murderers claims and treating them as valid is possibly enjoyable for some people, but a real woman was killed in a terrible manner and a real man was standing up in court lying about it. We knew he had no credibility because he had lied about the killing already, yet somehow people thought it was necessary to take what he said at face value. It isn't necessary to do that to a confirmed liar and a killer, those two facts about him can be taken into account when weighing up any claim he makes. We hear now he was protected too, although it was pretty clear to anybody with half a brain what sort of person he was. Why anybody here felt the need to take another approach is up to them and their consciences, but in my view treating a case like this as an oportunity for intellectual posturing was in incredibly poor taste.

Vile, disturbed, dangerous man.

That poor girl.

I can only think of her parents and boyfriend . I am quite a bleeding heart liberal, but honestly, I really do hope he rots in prison for the rest of is miserable life.

Thanks, I think

I didn't think of it in sexual terms. That bit I couldn't have been more surprised about. But the fantasy, the waiting around for her to get back, the excitement and anticipation - again, I didn't think of it in sexual terms, but there was some kind of gratification he was waiting for.

The excuses about going out for short periods, the internet use for all of about 10 minutes on getting home, he was restless, he was waiting for her.
It's so horrible to think about.

Poor lass. And yes, he's unable to figure other people's feelings in his actions, whatever sort of personality disprder that might indicate. No one matters to him at all imo.

No, I'm describing the actual nature of the thread pre-verdict, apart from a brief invasion of derailers. We know you don't get this, then or now.

'This faux-objectivity stance of the people who were enjoying helping Tabak make his defense is a bit ridiculous at this point. '

You what????

Who on earth do you think was getting any pleasure out of discussing this?

That's a horrible thing to say.

Does anyone know if Tabaks's girlfriend made a statement to the police?
Did she have any suspicions?

I"d appreciate it if people could stop talking about the possibility of Joanna Yeates having been sexually assaulted. It's prurient at this point. He's been found guilty of murder.

Her family have the right for Joanna to be allowed to rest in peace.

Edith, I think you'll find that my posts were right on topic with the original post of this thread. It was the people going into vile detail and helping to justify Tabak's defense who derailed it.

As are you with your descriptions of why or why not Joanna was sexually assaulted. Who does that help talking about it now? It's prurience.

"I"d appreciate it if people could stop talking about the possibility of Joanna Yeates having been sexually assaulted." and you are ...?

If you don't like the nature of the discussion then don't read it.

I think thunders is being unkind, but I know what she means.

There is a tendency to think that if you are playing devil's advocate that you are being more reasonable and thoughtful than people who think obvious truths are still obvious.

And it happened on this thread. There was a lot of credence given to Tabak's account of the murder, despite the fact that he was a proven liar, who had gone to extreme lengths to cover up the murder.

Why would anybody have taken his version of events as anything other than the self-serving bullshit it obviously was?

And then to bask in your own fairness and ability to see both sides is infuriating.

Particularly when it is often this kind of faux reasonableness that is used to minimise, justify or deny crimes against women.

See yesterday's Eamonn Holmes thread - "oh dear, you were raped. But really, you should have taken a taxi."

"Oh your husband broke your nose. I'm sure there is some perfectly reasonable explanation. We're only hearing one side of the story"

She deserves better. I think it's important to say that.

A woman was murdered and now people are dissecting a possible sexual assault of her. If you were her mother how would you feel about discussions like that about her?

In case anybody is finding that a difficult idea to grasp, victims of sexual assault are usually granted anonymity, in order to stop exactly these kind of discussions about them and what was done to them.

It wasn't credence - it was a day by day account. Thunders only joined the thread quite late on in the trial, and Tabak's evidence (good and bad points) was the discussion because that was where the thread had reached. We weren't very welcoming because the weekend invaders were rehashing points which had been covered in detail a few days before. When posters arrive in the middle of an existing discussion and start slagging it off, and continue slagging it off, then yes people do get shrill. Especially when it is peppered with totally unwarranted slurs on motivations of posters.

The unemotional testing of e evidence is almost verbatim what the trial judge said was required. It is also a cornerstone of the British legal system.

BTW: I posted about sexual assault in response to SheCutOffHerTails question. If you have concerns about appropriateness, then perhaps she might be the one to ask.

The agents are just as bad. When ours was valued it was def over valued and even so we had lots of viewings. The 1st offer was roughly what we thought it was worth and I do know the local market. There then proceeded to be a bidding war which the agent would just have let go on and on yntil I stepped in and said enough x amount will do. If we had kept going it would never have been valued at that for mortgage purposes but the agent just wasn't bothered about that.

Oh god sorry wrong thread

Thunder has been a bit OTT and annoying in her posting style but I see her point and felt it too with the way the discussion was going. I usually don't get dragged into these things as I like to think I'm rational and objective often playing the devils advocate so I'm glad I wasn't on that jury as I might have been one of the two in my worry not to be emotional but dispassionate.

Shecutofftheirtales phrased it so much better.

My question was in response to wanna's suggestion about murders of this type having a different kind of charge. I certainly wasn't being prurient, just checking my facts, which Edith kindly helped with.

Edith the weighing of evidence was nowhere near as neutral as you describe. Not everyone was doing what you were doing. Some people were talking about Tabak's account of the murder as though that account was factually accurate and the jury should treat it as such.

shecut but before the verdict is reached there is no way of knowing which way the verdict will go.

There are even members of the jury who were unsure since it was only a majority verdict and not unanimous, and even then that was only reached after clarification was sought on intent to kill or commit serious harm.

Nobody ever argued that what Tabak did was anything less than despicable.

But until someone is found innocent or guilty they are actually considered innocent until proven such, and to argue that only one side of a case should be listened to is dangerous ground to tread, because not everyone who appears to be guilty turns out to be or vice versa.

Perhaps people would prefer that trials are held in secret and that they not be allowed to be discussed until a verdict is reached by only those who have been privy to the evidence..

and any reference to sexual asalt was made in response to opinions on the porn use not being disclosed.