jo yeates - Updated:Tabak charged with murder

dazedandconfused wrote:

wjk wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:At least he's pleaded guilty. The police must have had some pretty incriminating evidence.

Yes, guilty to manslaughter, not guilty to murder.
Police are still going for a murder charge!

Oh, I didn't realise that they could do that once he'd pleaded guilty to the lesser charge.

Indeed they can and if they think it was murder then they should. The reason people who kill someone often plead guilty to manslaughter is because it doesn't carry a mandatory life sentence the way murder does. If you're convicted of murder, you get a life sentence, then the judge decides how many years you'll stay in prison. The important thing is you have to stay in prison for whatever number of years he decides, should it be 20 or 25 or whatever. You can't earn remission, in the way someone convicted of a lesser offence such as manslaughter can. Remission can halve a sentence, ie if you're sentenced to 20 years, you probably end up (if you're a 'good' prisoner) only serving 10.

Of course we've no way of knowing until the court case what crime Joanna's killer is guilty of; it'll be up to the jury to decide.

PS That's my understanding of it anyway; please correct me, somebody, if I've got it wrong.

wjk wrote:The B*stards pleaded guilty to Jo's manslaughter!
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Joanne-Yeates-Vincent-Tabak-Admits-Manslaughter-Of-Architect-At-Old-Bailey/Article/201105115985869?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15985869_Joanne_Yeates%3A_Vincent_Tabak_Admits_Manslaughter_Of_Architect_At_Old_Bailey_

Thanks wjk. I think there must be really good evidence against him and this is on the advice of his legal team. It will be very interesting when this comes to court.

It'll be interesting - though horribly distressing for Joanna's family and friends - to hear what, according to Vincent Tabak, actually happened. His version presumably will be that he had no intention of killing her, that something went horribly wrong. And of course that could be true ... we don't know. I've sometimes wondered how juries decide who to believe, especially in cases where there seems no motive for killing someone. Anyone here done jury service in a murder or manslaughter case?

wjk, thanks,

I"m really, really surprised, see, you never know people do you, I could have sworn he was innocent. His Family must
be devastated as well as all who know him. Manslaughter is when it"s unintentional isn"t it? If the CPS think it"s
Murder, they must be convinced . It will be interesting to know what the evidence is, we might be swamped with
Court cases come September/October , what with the McCanns v Amaral, Murat v Jane Tanner, Murat v the Tapas 3.

Panda wrote:wjk, thanks,

I"m really, really surprised, see, you never know people do you, I could have sworn he was innocent. His Family must
be devastated as well as all who know him. Manslaughter is when it"s unintentional isn"t it? If the CPS think it"s
Murder, they must be convinced . It will be interesting to know what the evidence is, we might be swamped with
Court cases come September/October , what with the McCanns v Amaral, Murat v Jane Tanner, Murat v the Tapas 3.

Yes, the evidence in the Joanna murder case will tell a tale, I think. I agree VT seems an unlikely killer, be it murder or manslaughter, and I feel very sorry for his family and friends. They must be devastated to hear he has admitted to the killing.

I'm not surprised the landlord Chris Jefferies has launched libel proceedings against various newspapers. Wonder how that will go? - my guess is they'll pay up before it ever gets to court.

Jefferies deserves nothing less. I still would like to know how Tabak , who hasn"t got a Car, managed to borrow one,
drive across the Bridge which apparently scanned every Car, but was not spotted until well after Jefferies was interviewed .

Whose car was it and were any traces of Jo"s DNA in it? What about the 2 men seen leaving the Woods , have they been identified? I thought it might have been Tabak and a Friend who had lent him his car, but would a Friend be so
eager to be an accomplice to Murder?

Panda wrote:Jefferies deserves nothing less. I still would like to know how Tabak , who hasn"t got a Car, managed to borrow one,
drive across the Bridge which apparently scanned every Car, but was not spotted until well after Jefferies was interviewed .

Whose car was it and were any traces of Jo"s DNA in it? What about the 2 men seen leaving the Woods , have they been identified? I thought it might have been Tabak and a Friend who had lent him his car, but would a Friend be so
eager to be an accomplice to Murder?

Things to think about Panda which won't come out until the trial..... I'm afraid l don't have much sympathy for Jeffries either, he told some friends he'd seen Jo leaving with a man then went and asked them to forget what he'd told them and not tell the police. Well hellloooooo this is a murder investigation so he deserves what he gets sorry.

margaret wrote:

Panda wrote:Jefferies deserves nothing less. I still would like to know how Tabak , who hasn"t got a Car, managed to borrow one,
drive across the Bridge which apparently scanned every Car, but was not spotted until well after Jefferies was interviewed .

Whose car was it and were any traces of Jo"s DNA in it? What about the 2 men seen leaving the Woods , have they been identified? I thought it might have been Tabak and a Friend who had lent him his car, but would a Friend be so
eager to be an accomplice to Murder?

Things to think about Panda which won't come out until the trial..... I'm afraid l don't have much sympathy for Jeffries either, he told some friends he'd seen Jo leaving with a man then went and asked them to forget what he'd told them and not tell the police. Well hellloooooo this is a murder investigation so he deserves what he gets sorry.

Margaret, Jefferies comes across as a typical Professor who might have felt lascivious towards a pretty girl like Jo,
Tabak looks the more Studious shy type, see how appearances can be deceptive.? His Lawyer is supposed to be
astute and thought manslaughter would have been accepted, but by taking Jo"s body into the Lane he also showed
he had not intention of confessing at the time.

margaret wrote:

Panda wrote:Jefferies deserves nothing less. I still would like to know how Tabak , who hasn"t got a Car, managed to borrow one,
drive across the Bridge which apparently scanned every Car, but was not spotted until well after Jefferies was interviewed .

Whose car was it and were any traces of Jo"s DNA in it? What about the 2 men seen leaving the Woods , have they been identified? I thought it might have been Tabak and a Friend who had lent him his car, but would a Friend be so
eager to be an accomplice to Murder?

Things to think about Panda which won't come out until the trial..... I'm afraid l don't have much sympathy for Jeffries either, he told some friends he'd seen Jo leaving with a man then went and asked them to forget what he'd told them and not tell the police. Well hellloooooo this is a murder investigation so he deserves what he gets sorry.

I must admit, margaret, I thought he was guilty of Jo's murder when he was arrested. Everything pointed to that, to me.
Obviously, I was wrong but it does seem a stupid thing to say considering the circumstances.

He looked dodgy to me from the start .And the cops went for the 'patsy' in the landlord about time they got it right.

wjk wrote:
I must admit, margaret, I thought he was guilty of Jo's murder when he was arrested. Everything pointed to that, to me.
Obviously, I was wrong but it does seem a stupid thing to say considering the circumstances.

Me too wjk, he had the opportunity and he was saying these very strange things - even the police thought the same as us in taking him in. However, maybe peoples names shouldn't be revealed in future for good reason.

margaret wrote:

wjk wrote:
I must admit, margaret, I thought he was guilty of Jo's murder when he was arrested. Everything pointed to that, to me.
Obviously, I was wrong but it does seem a stupid thing to say considering the circumstances.

Me too wjk, he had the opportunity and he was saying these very strange things - even the police thought the same as us in taking him in. However, maybe peoples names shouldn't be revealed in future for good reason.

Yes, as this has proved.

I'd like to offer sincere apologies to Greg as I was convinced it was him. Just goes to show that people's way of dealing with grief can lead to wrong assumptions.

Panda wrote:

margaret wrote:

Panda wrote:Jefferies deserves nothing less. I still would like to know how Tabak , who hasn"t got a Car, managed to borrow one,
drive across the Bridge which apparently scanned every Car, but was not spotted until well after Jefferies was interviewed .

Whose car was it and were any traces of Jo"s DNA in it? What about the 2 men seen leaving the Woods , have they been identified? I thought it might have been Tabak and a Friend who had lent him his car, but would a Friend be so
eager to be an accomplice to Murder?

Things to think about Panda which won't come out until the trial..... I'm afraid l don't have much sympathy for Jeffries either, he told some friends he'd seen Jo leaving with a man then went and asked them to forget what he'd told them and not tell the police. Well hellloooooo this is a murder investigation so he deserves what he gets sorry.

Margaret, Jefferies comes across as a typical Professor who might have felt lascivious towards a pretty girl like Jo,
Tabak looks the more Studious shy type, see how appearances can be deceptive.? His Lawyer is supposed to be
astute and thought manslaughter would have been accepted, but by taking Jo"s body into the Lane he also showed
he had not intention of confessing at the time.

What this actually shows is that your perceptions for reading people is pretty dire panda.

Martin Brunt said on that clip, that the prosecutor refused to accept his guilty plea to manslaughter and they will prosecute him for murder. The difference being intent.

How do you become surprised that someone you STRANGLE is dead? It takes a long time to kill someone that way and it is up close and personal. it's not like he backed the car over her or something. He put his hands around her neck and squeezed until she stopped breathing and her heart stopped. That is going to be interesting to hear how he explains this as not having the intent of killing her - a blind rage? After which he ate her pizza?

Where was the girlfriend during this, it's obvious Jo made it home with her shopping and was taken or left with this guy. She had a BF and knew he had GF. What was she doing leaving with him I wonder.


eta - as one poster has remarked that the police believe he may have used the sock to strangle her, it is less likely that he used his hands. For purposes of an intent to murder however there is a difference. You could be enraged at your lover for instance and get a blind rage going, see red like a bull, and the next thing you know she is lying there dead and you practically blacked out while doing it. To use a ligature is no more or less likely to kill a victim than using your hands, if you want them dead you can kill them either way-- however it seems much more likely to be premeditated because to use a ligature of some type takes planning.

How did he manage this with her being a strong woman, and no scratches or bruises on him?

fedrules wrote:

Dimsie wrote:I don't know what it is about socks, you can have all the pairs in the world and throw them into the washing machine and when they come out there's always at least one, sometimes more, with no match. I swear the washing machine eats them or changes their colour. So yes, Jo could have been wearing slightly different socks; after all, no one sees them with boots so it doesn't really matter.

You know, just thinking of this makes me feel so sad for Jo and her family. Just an ordinary young girl, doing the everyday things everybody does, going to work, having a drink in the pub with colleagues, a little bit of shopping, making plans with a friend, home, maybe feed the cat, have some cider ... and then something happened, though we don't know exactly when or what. But that was the end of all her hopes and dreams, as well as an end to her everyday routine, the end of her parents having a daughter, her brother having a sister, her boyfriend having a girlfriend, even an end for her cat having a woman to fuss over him and love him. All over, for no reason that seems to make sense, just someone with a wish to kill or at least no objection to killing. How can that person live with himself? Isn't he scared to go to sleep at night? Isn't he haunted by what he's done to an innocent girl and to the lives of her loved ones? I suppose what I'm asking is - how could he do it? I couldn't bear to be responsible for ending anyone's life, it would destroy me.

'

Exactly how I feel. How can anyone live with themselves after committing such a dreadful act ? Although, if the perpetrator is mentally ill, then they are not responsible for / may not even be fully aware of what they have done..

I felt sad also when I saw the sock held up by the police as my 21 year-old son has some very similar ski socks. I imagine the one displayed was the one poor Jo was wearing when she died...

.

Dimsie :you are so right so many lives destroyed even the cats what right do these people have to take a life and destroy so many other lives by this evil, and evil is what it is.

So the guy has confessed? - I assume that a Guilty to manslaughter plea would come with some sort of confession of what DID happen since he is saying murder did NOT happen - with that the dna and the CCTV of the car he borrowed - probably his GF's - you would think they have a good case however as we have just seen with the Casey Anthony trial, possibly not for Murder. The authorities have to be careful in what they charge. In their zeal to get the highest charge possible they may end up with an acquital on their hands if they cannot prove this was not done in the heat of the moment without prior intent to kill her.

It seems odd that the girlfriend was not providing him with an alibi if she is covering up for him, I wonder where her head is at with al this? She was at a work party that night, her BF meets this gal Joanna, with whom, despite her father's ignorance of this fact, he does have a relationship - both being architects and neighbors (with a nosy chatty landlord who would know both of their jobs the kind of guy who tells VT that he helped fix Jo's BF's car on his way out of town - thanks to Mr Jeffries, now VT knows she will be alone for the weekend, Greg won't be coming back to disturb him) they have done work together before on joint projects.

His GF is out at a party, perhaps they (VT and Jo) planned to meet and share that pizza and she thought it was on a friendly or work basis and he expected more. He does look creepy. Those eyes.

I think given the screams at 9PM she did not have an affair with him, she appears to have gotten home and managed to get her coat and boots off and start relaxing with a bottle of cider when she was attacked. She would have opened the door to him - clearly, her loud screams of HELP ME! were verfied by two people (neither of whom managed to call the police at the time, only later when they found a woman had gone missing from that night! stupid!) so whatever he was doing, she objected to it violently. Perhaps the second bottle of cider was for him and they had agreed to have dinner together and talk about a plan for a garden or something. And then something went "horribly wrong" very very quickly. Too quickly IMO for this to have been some kind of accident.

I think he was planning to assault her sexually because why would he just up and murder the girl next door? He probably tried to make a move in that direction, to kiss her or the like, and when she objected and fought him - and she was strong, a keen rower and could beat men in arm wrestling -it got out of control and he killed her. The short length of time that she was home - 20 minutes between cctv last sighting, she still had to walk home, open her door, get her coat and boots off and have time to start in to her cider, and that scream - tells me they did not have long enough to sit around getting friendly with each other to where he could make a move on her sexually, thinking that she would accept it - he seems rather to have as the paper dramatically put it, "pounced" on her. If they were having an affair you could imagine such a scenario - hey - I'm glad to see you too but let me get my boots off first, Romeo! - but then if they were having an affair she probably wouldn't reject his advances. She doesn't seem like the type to have an affair if she was happy with her BF but she did try and call some guy she had known two years ago the minute her BF is out of town, maybe she was a little drunk from the two hours in the pub...

I don't think she left with two men - Jeffries probably made that up because he himself was suspected and lying about it made him look even MORE suspicious so I don't blame the cops for not releasing him sooner! I think she died in her flat.

The idea that this was manslaughter doesn't make sense to me given what I know from reading the last 24 pages and the links to the news about it.

This is a guy who can kill someone and go home for Christmas as if nothing is wrong.

The body was dumped the 18th which means that if he used his GF's car he had the body in their flat or left it lying in her OWN flat til the next day. Either he took her keys and let himself back in to her flat knowing her BF was not going to be home -or he took her next door in which case I find it hard ot believe the GF would not know anything about this. Was it dumped in the wee hours? The guy leaves, borrowing her car on some unknown errand... highly dodgy, probably was the GF who called the police when the report came in about the type of car someone had seen. (although they'd have known long before then, what kind of car VT had access to via his GF)

If she wasn't home and had her car with her, at out this work Cmas party - whose car did he borrow? Jeffries doesn't have a light colored SUV does he? If he did surely this would have been reported. Maybe this friend who went to Chile had a car and left him with the keys to it along with those to her flat. He'd have had to cycle over there and get the car, drive it in to their car park and load the body up and it is highly doubtful he could do that with the GF just turning her head and ignoring it. The fact that he left the house at 2 AM is in itself highly suspicious (or 5AM or whatever time before 8 AM on a Saturday morning you would think).

Maybe the GF stayed in town because she drank too much and stayed with a friend or the like, and only later realized that the car they saw was one he had access to, via this accountant friend who was in Chile with him having her keys.

Or maybe it wasn't her who called cops. Maybe the accountant friend did.

I guess they are looking for her sock in that friend's flat and also possibly the pizza box or any of her hair or dna to pin it on him.

On the sock. I think it is quite unusual to wear two different socks even if under boots, those kind of ski socks are quite thick and springy and you wouldn't want to wear one like that and a normal sock or you'd feel weird, your feet would feel different and boots would fit one more snugly than the other. Like Dimsie we lose socksin the dryer but not huge long ones like that, it is more often the little ones that get stuck thru static to a sheet or something and you don't notice them in folding it.

She clearly didn't leave the house not only shoeless but with one bare foot.

It seems likely she lost the sock in the struggle and probably by her trying to get out of there and him lunging at her and getting her by the ankle or something it came off, he would have known it would have his dna on it and either got rid of it for that reason or as they are saying, used it to strangle her after immobilizing her - maybe with a punch in the head or something althogh they never said she'd been beaten, only strangled - realizing she was going to tell the police about his attempted sexual assault and this attack, his life would be ruined etc so he killed her to keep her quiet and because it was the only way she wasn't going to leave that flat and scream the house down, was if she was dead.

It seems an extremely fast attack for it to not have been premeditated - she was a pretty girl but not some kind of bomb shell that would make a normally placid man feel the need to leap on her, on sight. I guess there is a first time for everything and maybe this was his first sexual assault or assault of a woman but at 32 I kind of doubt it.

I think he probably thought his chance had come because of their respective partners being out of the way.

I wonder if these people tweeting their nonsense about Jeffries and his friend being in league as two aged serial killers are just paranoid or are trying to in some way sway this case?

Surely defense lawyers will not be the LAST ones to come up with an idea on how the social media can be used to help their business.

It certainly HURTS their business to have everyone know about the details of the crime, maybe they think they cann put alternative theories out there - in any case the "celebrity" if that is what you want to call it, DOES help the criminal, at least in the US there is one sort of justice for celebrities and another for everyone else from David Beckham drunk driving on the freeway with his 8 year old son in the car, and smashing into another car and not being charged, to OJ Simpson or even in the case where the person wasn't celebrated BEFORE the crime their notoriety gives them that celebrity after they are locked up - like Casey Anthony.

This guy looks like the type who will not be helped by celebrity however. Foreign and weird, obviously killed this woman as he has admitted to it - we know when and how, and who, and where - we just don't know why.

http://alexandria.tue.nl/extra2/200910371.pdf

Just reading his thesis it seems obvious he is extremely intelligent, possibly brilliant - I wonder how this "average bloke" kind of commentary got out there. Lovely man. etc. Do the people who know him feel that there is something odd about his intellect, because if this were my son or brother, one of the things I would say in describing them would be, with a great deal of pride, that my kid - or my brother - is brilliant, or is extremely bright. that they don't say so makes me wonder if maybe he is a little socially inept along with it.

I was just at a conference for building chemical plants and refineries (gripping life, I know) and we saw simulations exactly like what he is talking about, they use a SIMS -like software application (like your kids probably have as a computer video game) to model how people woud evacuate the plant in case of a gas leak, fire or other disaster. This is not rocket science but it's not far from it, these engineering feats just amaze me, and being an expert at it means you are extremely clever.

Not sure how that fits in to the attack or motive if it does.

eta just thinking if he could have "misread" social cues from her that she would be interested in him as more than a friendly neighbor and colleague type thing, and then panicked. He's clearly not clever at hiding bodies as it would have been easy to dump her inthe river or over that wall into the underbrush rather than leave her on a 3 foot wide footpath used for dog walking. Remember, he is an expert in how people move through spaces - he wanted her to be found or didn't mind in the least that she would be found, and as he does not control the weather, the fact that she was buried under snow for 8 days was unlikely to be any part of a plan to conceal the body.

He leaves for Holland and has Christmas as usual - no one thinks he could have done this, his behavior is not in the least suspicious to them. That tells me that he is either a sociopath or has somehow managed to put it out of his mind as if it did not occur - pretending that he dreamed it or the like. He was able to fool police thru their early suspicions of him as the perp. interesting case.

fedrules wrote:The police are giving the impression of leaving all possible options open. It's interesting how this case started with the most likely suspects i.e. the boyfriend or the eccentric landlord and has since expanded to include far less plausible perpetrators like Asian gangs or Facebook friends. It wouldn't surprise me so much if Jo had told people Greg was away, especially friends. Why wouldn't she ? In 99.9% of cases this wouldn't really be risky..

In the McCann case, things seemed to go in the opposite direction, at least from what was reported in the UK media i.e first the stranger abduction theory, then the 'weird' neighbour and finally, the most statistically likely culprits, Maddie's parents...

I think the sad @ss media is trying to make this story into something more sexy, facebook is this big deal right now and they are just trying to connect it as with the "how much worse off are Madeleine McCann's parents than YOU" kind of stories.

I just received a warning from a friend not to tell people we were going to go visit my daughter last weekend as they do use such sites to plan burglaries etc. you never know who your "friends" are telling things to. However as we have come to know in this case it was her landlord that told her neighbor, colleague and friend VT that she would be alone for the weekend by stating that he had helped her BF Greg get his car started as he was leaving for the weekend.

My theory is, he is either a incipient serial killer or a socially inept big-brain engineerg type who took her bubbly friendliness to mean more than she really did mean. Perhaps after two hours in a pub on an empty stomach she was a little too relaxed with him and allowed him to kiss her or to come in and he had some kind of expectation that when he put it into play, she at some point said "NO!" and maybe it turned into an altercation where, as strong and angry as she was she may have refused physically and roughly and gotten herself into a situation of being in a fight with a man - no matter how strong she is he is still a 32 year old man. I can't see much different out come as to who would "win" in that case.

she might have triggered a fight or flight response in him - he couldn't flee - she knew where he lived, and would call the police - so he killed her in rage - that might be considered manslaughter.

Obviously the saliva on her bare breasts backs this up, as it would be highly odd to get his saliva on her breasts after she was dead - she had not been sexually assaulted that they could tell (ie the rape if that was what was going down, did not actually occur) so maybe they were more friendly than they ought to have been given they were both in relationships and maybe when she said no he could not deal with that rejection, continued to press for more or to try and force her and this thing escalated.

Either that or he pounced on her meaning to rape her and knowing that he'd have to kill her afterwatds because she would identify him. I do wonder what the police have to back that scenario up because they have rejected the idea of manslaughter. Is it the fact he could take her pizza and eat it within hours or minutes of killing her?

Wow! It's alot to read back on and bring yourself up to date on!
I wonder what the police actually HAVE on this guy to go for murder? I was certain this would be a case of murder, pure and simple, because the cops didn't except his manslaughter plea. Having followed the Casey trial, I hope they have got some good strong evidence!
Does anyone who knows about UK law, know if they fail in the Murder charge, can he be charged with the manslaughter that he's admitted too?

wjk wrote:Wow! It's alot to read back on and bring yourself up to date on!
I wonder what the police actually HAVE on this guy to go for murder? I was certain this would be a case of murder, pure and simple, because the cops didn't except his manslaughter plea. Having followed the Casey trial, I hope they have got some good strong evidence!
Does anyone who knows about UK law, know if they fail in the Murder charge, can he be charged with the manslaughter that he's admitted too?

Exactly - if Casey anthony can get off ANYONE can get off.

In the US you charge for whatever you think they could find so they would charge with M1, Manslaughter and aggravated child abuse which is what they did charge her with. In the UK I wonder too how this will work. Because if they were going to charge him with both they would have said so, he pleaded guilty already on that although I don't understand how he can plea to a charge if no such charge is made? It's not fair to charge him with Manslaughter then when he pleas guilty to that say "aha, if you are willing to admit you killed her, we will now charge you with her murder!" dirty pool.

I wonder what cops have to make them know or feel so strongly they have a case of premeditated murder here. They have nothing to go on but his say so, the other party is not talking (because she's dead) so if he says "we were engaged in a bit of a cuddle when this all came apart" who can say him nay? Her parents can say "she'd never do that" but then they also said she didn't know this guy and she did, she worked voluntarily with him on joint projects so they don't know as much about the relationship as they could.

carmen wrote:

Joanna Yeates murder: groundsman may have heard killer
A groundsman working late around the time Joanna Yeates disappeared may have heard the killer trying to dispose of her body, the Daily Telegraph has learned.

Flowers on Longwood Lane, Bristol, where the body of Joanna Yeates was found Photo: GEOFF PUGH
By Martin Evans, and Gordon Rayner 6:30AM GMT 07 Jan 2011
2 Comments

The man, who is based at one of the sports clubs bordering Longwood Lane in Failand, where Miss Yeates’s body was dumped, heard a car pull up on the secluded road on one of the nights after she disappeared.

Concerned that someone might lost or struggling in the icy conditions he approached the vehicle which he was unable to see clearly because of a large hedgerow.

The man told police he heard the driver get out of the car and open the boot or hatchback.

But as he moved closer to offer assistance, the driver suddenly closed the boot, got back into the car and drove away.
The groundsman told a friend he thought nothing of the incident at the time, but later realised its possible significance when he heard Miss Yeates’s body had been discovered close to the spot on Christmas Day.

He passed on the information to Avon and Somerset Police who earlier this week issued an urgent appeal for the driver of a light coloured 4x4 vehicle to come forward.

Detective Chief Inspector Phil Jones said: "This 4x4 may be completely unconnected but I urge anyone in that car or any other driver in the vicinity that night to come forward.”

The man told a friend: “I was working late at the sports club because of the weather when I heard a car pull up and stop. It was very icy that night and I thought perhaps they were struggling with the conditions.

“I couldn’t see the car because there was a large hedge in the way but I went over to see if I could help.

“I heard the driver door close as if someone had got out and then heard what sounded like the boot or hatchback being opened.
“At the time I thought they must have broken down. But as I walked towards the gate to see if I could help I heard the boot and door close again and the car drove away.

“I just went back to work and thought nothing more of it. It was only when I heard about Jo’s body being found on Longwood Lane that I went forward and told the police what I had heard. They took all the information down and that was the last I heard of it.”

Detectives are uncertain when Miss Yeates’s body was left in Longwood Lane, but are investigating the theory that heavy snowfall in early hours of Saturday 18 December could have played a part in concealing her remains.

Longwood Lane in the village of Failand, North Somerset, is surrounded on all sides by sports fields and a large quarry.
A spokesman for Avon and Somerset Police last night refused to comment on the matter.

The spokesman said: “We would not comment on matters such as this related to the investigation.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8244617/Joanna-Yeates-murder-groundsman-may-have-heard-killer.html

(Mods - if already posted, please let me know and I'll delete)

That answers my question on why he couldn't see the body or how he could see the color of the car - it wasn't right where she was dumped but NEAR to it. So maybe he interrupted the guy and he drove on a hundred yards and dumped it there instead. Wow! So he could see thru the hedge it was a 4x4 and a light colored one. VT must have heard him coming and decided against leaving the body at that place.