*Still more added on the possible association between the Glenis Carruthers murder and the Joanna Yeates murder. Now includes more observations and an analysis of the 'Moonstone story', which involves the mysterious presence of the Hindu Moon god. The 'Moonstone' is a reputed favorite of Mr Jefferies.
Mr Jefferies, Joanna Yeates' resident Landlord, and Mr Peter Stanley, their immediate neighbour, who headed up the Neighbourhood Watch scheme together, were in a position to frame Vincent Tabak by planting and arranging forensic evidence.
We know that the scene in Joanna Yeates' flat was meticulously arranged when poor Greg discovered it on his return from Sheffield. There were two bottles of cider on the side, one of which appeared to have been drunk by Jo half way down, but there were no glasses in evidence. Her belongings, including her handbag, mobile phone and keys, were meticulously placed on the table. These, we saw, seemed on appearance as if they had been planted there by a neighbour who wanted it to look like there had been a stranger abduction.
The crime scene was evidently designed to give the police the impression, albeit strangely and rather contrivedly, that Joanna had arranged to meet with a lover that night who had later killed her, possibly in her flat, ( though this was left open to consideration) and had attempted to dispose of evidence ( the pizza) while leaving incriminating evidence on the side ( the two bottles of cider). Two bottles of cider were left conspicuously on the side, one was half drunk. The pizza had disappeared.
Was that appearance and impression created deliberately, for the purpose of framing someone?
The receipt for the pizza was tucked neatly inside Jo's bag; yet the pizza was gone.
The mobile phone contained evidence of text sent via that phone asking to meet someone for a drink. ( The killer(s) may not have known about it, unless he/they either examined the phone and saw that there was a text on it, or sent it himself/themselves.)
We know that Mr Jefferies and Mr Stanley both helped Greg, Joanna's boyfriend, start his car before he left for Sheffield. hence they knew he was going away for the week end.
Here, detail in an article that describes Mr Jefferies as having in former days been the landlord of the flat that Vincent Tabak rented. He was evidently in posession of the keys to that flat. It is not known whether Mr Jefferies actually rented to Vincent Tabak, or whether the locks have ever been changed since he rented to the former tenants who rented the flat that Vincent Tabak was living in with his girlfriend. The former tenants, who cannot have an ulterior motive, at least not as far as relevant practical facts are concerned, went to a newspaper with their story and permitted their photo to be taken. Here.
Mr Jefferies, Joanna Yeates' resident Landlord, and Mr Peter Stanley, their immediate neighbour, who headed up the Neighbourhood Watch scheme together, were in a position to frame Vincent Tabak by planting and arranging forensic evidence.
We know that the scene in Joanna Yeates' flat was meticulously arranged when poor Greg discovered it on his return from Sheffield. There were two bottles of cider on the side, one of which appeared to have been drunk by Jo half way down, but there were no glasses in evidence. Her belongings, including her handbag, mobile phone and keys, were meticulously placed on the table. These, we saw, seemed on appearance as if they had been planted there by a neighbour who wanted it to look like there had been a stranger abduction.The crime scene was evidently designed to give the police the impression, albeit strangely and rather contrivedly, that Joanna had arranged to meet with a lover that night who had later killed her, possibly in her flat, ( though this was left open to consideration) and had attempted to dispose of evidence ( the pizza) while leaving incriminating evidence on the side ( the two bottles of cider). Two bottles of cider were left conspicuously on the side, one was half drunk. The pizza had disappeared.
Was that appearance and impression created deliberately, for the purpose of framing someone?
The receipt for the pizza was tucked neatly inside Jo's bag; yet the pizza was gone.
The mobile phone contained evidence of text sent via that phone asking to meet someone for a drink. ( The killer(s) may not have known about it, unless he/they either examined the phone and saw that there was a text on it, or sent it himself/themselves.)
We know that Mr Jefferies and Mr Stanley both helped Greg, Joanna's boyfriend, start his car before he left for Sheffield. hence they knew he was going away for the week end.
Here, detail in an article that describes Mr Jefferies as having in former days been the landlord of the flat that Vincent Tabak rented. He was evidently in posession of the keys to that flat. It is not known whether Mr Jefferies actually rented to Vincent Tabak, or whether the locks have ever been changed since he rented to the former tenants who rented the flat that Vincent Tabak was living in with his girlfriend. The former tenants, who cannot have an ulterior motive, at least not as far as relevant practical facts are concerned, went to a newspaper with their story and permitted their photo to be taken. Here.
'Gary and Kat Anderton lived for seven months in 2005 in a two-bed flat in Clifton, Bristol, next to the one that murdered Jo Yeates later rented. They said Jefferies was always checking up on them and knew their movements.
TV editor Gary, 42, said: "There was nothing sinister, but I have no doubt he went in to check on things when we weren't there. He was very meticulous, everything had to be pristine.
"Every week he'd say, 'I need to check this, can I come over?' And you couldn't really say no. He had a key so he could come in when he wanted.
"He would also have known if Kat was there on her own. He seemed to know everyone's movements and could see if my car wasn't there."
Here you have a floor plan of the two basement flats: Vincent's is the two bedroomed one. At the base of page linked ( this Newspaper linked does not permit image save.)
Mr Jefferies was in a position to set up a scene in both Joanna's and Vincent Tabak's flat, arrange forensic traces in both flats, and frame Vincent Tabak.
In the first article linked on this page hereto, Mr Jefferies is described by a former pupil as 'obsessed with death' . Others have emphatically described him as "obsessed with the Pre Raphaelites." Just one article containing that information here.
See post below for an analysis of the significant relevance of the Pre Raphaelites and their art to the extraordinary period in which Joanna Yeates died. Recently I read about the extraordinary event over Solstice ( the time Joanna Yeates was murdered) involving the rare coincidence of a Lunar Eclipse, and checked out its association with the subject the Moon goddess 'Artemis', a 'Moon goddess' reverenced by the 'Pagans' and the 'Freemasons', who was regularly painted by the Pre Raphaelites, ( in Victorian times as well as today). It had previously seemed to me that people were just picking on Mr Jefferies on account of an artistic vent when they criticised his love for the Pre Raphaelite artists. However Mr Jefferies' own personal interest in the Pre Raphaelites would now seem to be significant in the case- along with everything else he has been doing.
His 'old boys network' and all its characters, including those who are Pagans and Canynge Lodge Freemasons, would seem to be of great interest in respect of this matter, too.
Mr Jefferies bought one of the flats he rents out from a convicted paedophile, as we know. This man was another schoolmaster at the Bristol Clifton Academy were Mr Jefferies taught, and one of Mr Jefferies' and Mr Stanley's close circle of friends. He probably still is.
Throughout the time that Mr Jefferies has been on bail, at various interludes, usually prior to a development in the case, we have consistently heard him state that 'his ordeal will soon be over'- ( according to reports.) How should such a thing be known by him?
It would be my own personal recommendation that Mr Jefferies and Mr Stanley should not be released from their respective positions of bail and observation without a thorough, proper investigation.
Given Mr Jefferies' evident Pre Raphaelite and possibly Moon goddess obsessions, ( which he may posess individually or share with a group/cult), which puts him in the picture regaridng the murder of Jo Yeates much more than we previously expected, I have questions about his so called coincidental link with the man who rents the flat at the top of that house at 44 Canynge road.
The man who rents the flat at the top of the house where Joanna was murdered is Geoffrey Hardyman, a pensioner of seventy five- he is related to Sandra Hardyman, a woman who was hosting the party in Clifton, Bristol, that Glenis Carruthers attended on the night she died all those years ago, in 1974. The party was hosted really just a few yards from 44 Canynge road, where Mr Jefferies has been renting out his flats for some time; it's almost diagonally opposite.
Do we have to believe that it's a coincidence just because the police are too hopeless or too corrupt to make any progress on the cold case? I feel it just cannot be a coincidence! How can it be? Here is the BBC documentary on Glenis Carruthers. There were some mistakes in the original news reports; for instance they state that Glenis was killed where she was found, whereas of course that is not entirely known- although the interesting witness, the Zookeeper, who appears to describe what would be a very good likeness to a young Mr Chris Jefferies, appears to think she was murdered where she was found. He claims to have seen the murderer. The cold case police obsess over forensic DNA techniques and have all but thrown investigation and deduction away as if they were an old pair of shoes.
According to one report, Chris Jefferies and Geoffrey Hardyman have 'known each other for forty years.' Other reports state that they have known each other for less time, but for a significant amount of time, nonetheless.
Could Chris Jefferies have met Sandra Hardyman through Geoffrey Hardyman, and Glenis through Sandra? Of course he could have!
Or could Mr Jefferies and Mr Hardyman have met after the Glenis murder, with Mr Jefferies keen to keep the relations of Glenis Carruthers and Sandra Hardyman sweet towards him? The Hardymans most of all perhaps, because they of course hosted the party that Glenis attended the night she died and were in a postion to discuss where the murderer might have been that night, and who he was.
Do you think there might have been a sad love story between Chris Jefferies and Glennis Caruthers? ( If only for a few days?) Chris Jefferies was only twenty eight back in 1974. They are rather alike in some ways. Similar facial features ( Mr Jefferies was young once), and both teachers of course. Perhaps Chris Jefferies' affection was somehow distorted in life; very aesthetic and fantastical, and ending in murder.
Why did Chris Jefferies come to work in Bristol? Do you think it was the memories of the place, in a strange or unusual way? Or, given that he was ( is) evidently very exacting and controlling, did he move to Clifton, Bristol, in order to dominate and control the scene where Glenis Carruthers died? And keep tracks on the Hardymans at the same time?
Glenis Carruthers had been a PE teacher, in training apparently. Has that got anything to do with why Mr Jefferies always flatly refused to take part in PE and sport at the Bristol College where he taught for twenty years? Usually masters always take part in sport, his colleagues all noted, but Mr Jefferies flatly refused to. It is indeed strange. Like so much of this case. He is not unfit or overweight and he doesn't suffer from any type of condition- and this has always been the case. Why wouldn't he participate in PE or on the sports field even once?
( It was very near to the party apart from everything else, that sports field, wasn't it?)
''Mr Jefferies was also famous for his utter dislike of sports. At boarding schools, teachers often referee rugby or football matches - but not him. He made it perfectly clear from the start that that was not his scene."
Glenis Caruthers was very lovely in the face; gentle and generous eyes.
Why did Geoffrey Hardyman leap to Chris Jefferies' defence when he was accused of the murder of Joanna Yeates? Ringing up the newspapers and so on? Has he been 'kept sweet' by Mr Jefferies? (Or is there some mutual protection going on there perhaps?)
Is there a chance that Mr Geoffrey Hardyman imparted some vital information to Jo quite unwittingly? And dropped it in conversation to Mr Jefferies that he had?
The Avon and Somerset Police site gives a description of Glenis’ ( possible) murderer:
"The witness described the man as white, between 20 to 25 years old; around 5ft 10inches tall in height, medium build, with brown shoulder length hair. He was wearing a three-quarter length coat and a denim type cap.”Here is Agatha Christies' second most beautiful story. (The best is 'Nemesis', titled after the goddess of retribution, with its beautiful Freemasonry secrets style themes). Her two really lovely ones are both cold cases, and very inspiring. Showing she really had got the psychological talent. I told you about that beautiful little tune ( not the introductory theme tune) that permeates this story once didn't I. It's full of joy. ( Both 'Sleeping Murder' and 'Nemesis' were originally broadcast in two parts, and the youtube edit for both devides the two parts into twelve.)
This is rather lovely; the history of the Carruthers clan. 'Ready and faithful.'
I think one of the most interesting features of the 'Sleeping Murder' story is the way Christie portrays so simply and so beautifully the concept of 'displaced memory.' In the Sleeping Murder story case, the displaced memory experienced by the innocent witness.
This is rather lovely; the history of the Carruthers clan. 'Ready and faithful.'
I think one of the most interesting features of the 'Sleeping Murder' story is the way Christie portrays so simply and so beautifully the concept of 'displaced memory.' In the Sleeping Murder story case, the displaced memory experienced by the innocent witness.
Mr Jefferies, when he talked about seeing Jo leave the flats with a couple of people talking in hushed tones gave us evidence which of course may be true to fact.
I also wonder though, whether if in fact his recall was displaced; whether it in fact went back to another time much further back?
I also wonder though, whether if in fact his recall was displaced; whether it in fact went back to another time much further back?
Glenis Carruthers most conspicuously left a party in a flat on the night she died, and was last seen talking with people just outside the house where a party was being hosted just nearby, apparently. Did Mr Jefferies see it? (What role had he played in Glenis' short life that night?) Or did he say he did, at the time, all those years ago?
Of course his statement might have been a simple strategic cover for the fact that he himself had individually perpetrated or taken part in a recent murder.
It has to be one of the above, unless he was making up a story just to promote himself as a Neighbourhood Watch supremo. ( How likely is that in the case?)
Of course his statement might have been a simple strategic cover for the fact that he himself had individually perpetrated or taken part in a recent murder.
It has to be one of the above, unless he was making up a story just to promote himself as a Neighbourhood Watch supremo. ( How likely is that in the case?)
And last but not least, the ex pupils who were taught by Mr Jefferies describe him as having a fascination with the Moonstone story written by Wilkie Collins, often claimed to be one of the most famous and wonderful detective novels in the history of English literature. Some students at Clifton College describe it as having been 'his favourite book'.
'The student told how Jefferies had an "academic obsession" with death, and was particularly fascinated by Victorian murder novel The Moonstone and disturbing Holocaust documentary Night And Fog.
He said pupils mostly tried to avoid Jefferies - but he and his classmates were once taken to the teacher's flat. He added: "We went for a book reading. I thought it was odd we went to his flat. To go to a master's house was very, very strange, but there was nothing more to it."'
The Hindu sacrifice rituals involve a complete removal of footwear. Especially you mustn't wear any leather on your feet, because the cow is considered sacred. We know that Glenis Carruthers' body was found without her boots, an her socks were on her feet; otherwise she was fully clothed. Here, everything that comes up when you put in 'Hindu Ritual Barefoot' in the toolbar.
Here, the Wiki summary of the 'Lunar deities.'
Normally we, the 'woefully ignorant public who simply are not Freemason moral bastions and pillars of the community' associate Freemasonry only with Isis and Osiris, ( Isis is an Egyptian Moon goddess). However many Moon goddesses are in fact of interest to the Freemason community and their tites and rituals. It depends on the time of year and the different haoppenings within the Freemason community.
We know that Joanna Yeates was murdered during the period of the spectacular Lunar Eclipse during Winter Solstice, and that Glenis Carruthers was curiously murdered during the year of the 1974 Lunar Eclipse. And that Mr Jefferies was ( is ) devoted to the Pre Raphaelites, who painted the goddess 'Artemis', and to the 'Moonstone' story.
( See post below for a detailed analysis of the significance of the goddess 'Artemis' and rites and ritual sacrifices associated to her, as they relate to the Lunar Eclipse during Winter Solstice, and as they may relate to the Joanna Yeates murder case.)
According to one colleague, he condescends and looks down on other people. To me he seems to have a disregard for others; he appears high minded but sadly arrogant. I wouldn't put it beyond him to set imaginative puzzles for people he might perceive as illiterate and uneducated, people who he considers to be beneath him. However the limited information available on Mr Jefferies ( provided the press reports are genuine, and he is entitled to dispute them) doesn't explain the CCTV capture of what was purportedly two people who followed Joanna home.
Today ( 31st Jan) we learn that Vincent Tabak has appeared in court and a date has been set for his trial, the 4th October. Evidently there is no 'Guilty' plea, no confession, and a great deal of research to be done on the case. Mr Jefferies is still on bail. And Joanna's body has been released by the pathologist. Vincent hasn't got a trial date without entering a 'Not Guilty' plea; why has his plea not even been identified and reported?
Vincent Tabak appears to me to have absolutely no motive.
Vincent Tabak appears to me to have absolutely no motive.
He has a relationship with an interesting girl he's grateful for: they seem to have a very loving relationship. Even if he might have been tempted elsewhere for a short while he'd be hardly likely to throw away what he had for some murderous episode next door! Likewise his good position, his comfortable home, and work he enjoys. Why would he risk losing it all?
The police may also have contributed to framing Vincent and planting evidence against him in his flat.
I notice that in this current Joanna Yeates case police appear to have been advised by Professor David Wilson, the criminologist who is so foten used by Murdoch's Tory press, who has often stated that he advises his students when analysing a crime scene that it is important to go by the superficial appearance of evidence available and not bother about motive.
What dangerous advice, and what an unimaginative outlook; possibly left over from his early Prison Warden days ( which is how Professor David Wilson began in the criminal justice system). He's a poor shadow of the wonderful Doctor Joseph Bell, Sir Conan Doyle's model for his Sherlock Holmes, who is reputed to have stated that the police are ( were) so "shallow and incompetent, and the system so riddled with corruption and hypocrisy, that as a result the murderers they do catch are scarcely even worthy of the name."
Unless they are simply trying to make use of partial traces of DNA which could have been left there by Jo when she visited him.
Why then did the police suddenly start focusing on him again so late in the day- on the basis of an anonymous phone call to a TV station that has turned out to have been malicious and insubstantial?It can't have been on account of forensic evidence discovered, because police have (purportedly) told newspapers that before the anonymous phone call to the TV station they had "hit a wall" in the case.
Some people are suggesting that police might have planted forensic evidence in the flat Vincent Tabak rented from Mr Jefferies in order to frame him, too. From a purely logical point of view that does seem quite possible, doesn't it?
COMMENT: I have placed this rather interesting post for the simple reason Tony Gosling who has a local radio station was contacted by the police at the time of Jo Yeates murder and TOLD not to speculate on this subject.
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=20088&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
Some people are suggesting that police might have planted forensic evidence in the flat Vincent Tabak rented from Mr Jefferies in order to frame him, too. From a purely logical point of view that does seem quite possible, doesn't it?
COMMENT: I have placed this rather interesting post for the simple reason Tony Gosling who has a local radio station was contacted by the police at the time of Jo Yeates murder and TOLD not to speculate on this subject.
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=20088&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
