egafd.com

Yeah, it's a bit perturbing that two were against. I assume if there had been one more they would have had to have a retrial.

I remember listening to a summary of Tabak's evidence and thinking no way is this guy going to get away with manslaughter. Apparently, Jo Yeates had 43 injuries, including bruises to her face, throat and arms which apparently could only have happened while she was still alive. The hallway showed signs of a sustained struggle having taken place.

How could all of that happened as a result of squeezing her neck for 20 seconds which was Tabak's line? How many blokes accidently strangle a women when they get knocked back trying to give a kiss?

Then there was all the additional stuff about him checking on the Internet about how long it took bodies to decompose and the impact on DNA evidence etc etc.

I suspect that either Tabak was a brilliant actor or the two who voted against were not the sharpest knives in the kitchen drawer.

Cheers
D

Thanks Jim. I should have pointed out, perhaps, that I was indeed
referring to producers who choose to shoot the edgier nastier SM
stuff and not the vanilla sex. Trouble is, once a backlash gets under
way we all get tarred with the same brush.

The reason the judge would not allow this into evidence was that he looked at it after he had killed Jo, it therefore could not have "made him do it". As for the two jurors who swallowed his bullshit, words fail me.