Exactly the way things could have happened.

JK2006 wrote:
Exactly the way things could have happened.

But does it make for a good story?

If he'd have handed himself in at the time he may have got away with serving about 3 years with parole.

JK2006 wrote:
Exactly the way things could have happened.


It's the only thing he could have said really to try and get himself a lesser sentence for manslaughter.
If his account is true why did'nt he try to resuscitate her or phone an ambulance?
Instead he disposed of her body, decided to pop to the Asda for a bit of shopping then sent a few texts to his girlfriend.
Seems to me like a guilty man trying to get himself the lowest possible sentence, can't blame him really.

I predict he will be found guilty of murder and receive a life sentence with a minimum term of 25 to 30 years.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2053178...Yeates-murdered.html

Notice it was by a majority of 10-2

I hope the poor girl's murderer is now behind bars.

Well the last thing I want to do is - like the rest of the world and the media - make a decision based on the limited information we have; but I can't go along with a verdict clearly influenced by the fact that the man tried to get away with it; most people would have done the same. It has all the signs of an unplanned manslaughter; still dreadful and deserving a hefty sentence. It doesn't matter much; he killed her.

Agreed. Given what the media had done and said, no one would have got a fair trial in this case. If you listen to what was said about the poor girl before and now, it's as if she had lived such a clean life that she had never even farted. We need to stop releasing information about criminal trials to the press, until *after*.

What's been released after is the news that this person had a fetish for porn featuring strangulation.

Which doesn't mean he planned or intended death though (as the Judge correctly ruled) but, if true (I don't trust either police or media) implies he got turned on when he thought she wanted sex and got carried away. Unforgivable, awful, ghastly - but manslaughter, not murder.

Prunella Minge wrote:
What's been released after is the news that this person had a fetish for porn featuring strangulation.

Yes Pru,and to the credit of the legal system it was kept from the jury so they could decide on the actual facts involved.

However it does not bode well for his defence! But what facts about her were not disclosed? When i was falsely accused all kind of her details were withheld from the jury,and in this case we will never know if they're hiding anything now about her.

Innocent Accused wrote:
Prunella Minge wrote:
What's been released after is the news that this person had a fetish for porn featuring strangulation.

Yes Pru,and to the credit of the legal system it was kept from the jury so they could decide on the actual facts involved.

However it does not bode well for his defence! But what facts about her were not disclosed? When i was falsely accused all kind of her details were withheld from the jury,and in this case we will never know if they're hiding anything now about her.


I would say that the fact that he was interested in Strangulation porn was relevent to the fact that he had strangled her for sexual pleasure, rather than just to keep her quiet.

It IMPLIES it, if true, but the scenario that she was mildly interested, then realised he liked rough sex and resisted, and he panicked - seems more likely. No sign of sexual DNA implies it was never consummated.

robbiex wrote:

I would say that the fact that he was interested in Strangulation porn was relevent to the fact that he had strangled her for sexual pleasure, rather than just to keep her quiet.

But was that a fact?

I was slightly out on the length of minimum sentence, however I feel the jury reached the correct decision.
If he did panic, why did he not phone for an ambulance or try to revive her?
Instead he put her dead body into his car and dumped it.

In my opinion a complete and utter evil liar, trying to claim manslaughter was way too far fetched for anyone to believe, however as I said previously he had nothing to lose by trying to convince the jury that is was some sort of accident.

The fact that he has a fetish for female strangulation just confirms his guilt even more.

Pru sums up my reservations Robbie - not just in this case but in many cases. I don't trust the media - they exaggerate rather than invent - to make a better story. Likewise the police and CPS - to get safer convictions.

So we don't have FACTS here - we have coloured assumptions and that's terribly dangerous. The truth is - very often - a blurred, muddled combination of influences. I think, from what I've read, he appears guilty of a dreadful and unforgivable manslaughter.

Bandwagon? Good story? meejah with nothing else to write about? cheap whore looking for her 15 mins of fame?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2055281...ncess-Butterfly.html

'Police find 30 sick images of child porn on murderer Vincent Tabak's laptop'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056041...urderers-laptop.html

The plot thickens...

'An anonymous officer involved in the investigation said he and colleagues wanted to clear up speculation surrounding 'other matters' in the inquiry which were alluded to by the prosecution.'

I wonder why these things cannot go through official channels? Blackening someone's name by the illegal release of information does no credit to this case,and indeed casts more doubt on the impartiality of the investigative branch of the law.

Quite agree, IA. Plus of course how long have the Police had this equipment? This 'material' could have been bunged on by the Police at any point after they were taken, for another officer or whoever to find - later.

Innocent Accused wrote:
'Police find 30 sick images of child porn on murderer Vincent Tabak's laptop'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056041...urderers-laptop.html

The plot thickens...

'An anonymous officer involved in the investigation said he and colleagues wanted to clear up speculation surrounding 'other matters' in the inquiry which were alluded to by the prosecution.'

I wonder why these things cannot go through official channels? Blackening someone's name by the illegal release of information does no credit to this case,and indeed casts more doubt on the impartiality of the investigative branch of the law.

Welcome to the real world,getting a copper done when they break the law is a complete joke.