Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 599766 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3240 on: January 29, 2019, 11:19:40 AM »
Yes...... I know that is what we know

But like most things, there always more to something than meets the eye...

No, not always.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3241 on: January 29, 2019, 01:50:02 PM »
No, not always.

True... I see coincidences that may not be linked..... But coincidences all the same....  just had a quick look for something about the case I mentioned... Noticeable coincidences to me ... no one else....

https://livebyfamily.com/2015/12/19/the-zabrocki-christmas-letter/

Quote
And at the end of the line up is Iris.  She is beyond funny and crazy and she never, ever, ever, ever stops talking.  That’s a lot of evers coming from another person that talks a lot, but she supersedes me in all areas of talking.  Iris is just another great blessing that somehow God fit perfectly right into this family.  She is so sweet and kind.

But the strangest thing that peaked my interest.... At the bottom of the page....

Quote
Love came down at Christmas,
Love all lovely, Love Divine,
Love was born at Christmas,
Star and Angels gave the sign.

-Christiana Rossetti

These are observations, that is all...  maybe you are all correct... I have no idea what I am talking about... I have no idea about anything...  I have wasted my time....




Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3242 on: January 29, 2019, 06:48:30 PM »
True... I see coincidences that may not be linked..... But coincidences all the same....  just had a quick look for something about the case I mentioned... Noticeable coincidences to me ... no one else....

https://livebyfamily.com/2015/12/19/the-zabrocki-christmas-letter/

But the strangest thing that peaked my interest.... At the bottom of the page....

These are observations, that is all...  maybe you are all correct... I have no idea what I am talking about... I have no idea about anything...  I have wasted my time....

What coincidence? Christmas?

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3243 on: January 30, 2019, 10:24:42 AM »
Articles about the trial at the time raise many many question.... And this article is no different...


___________________________________________________________________________________________


Vincent Tabak 'researched killings and sentences after Joanna Yeates's death'
Dutch engineer allegedly searched online for information about jail sentences and the decomposition of bodies

Steven Morris
Wed 19 Oct 2011 12.55 BST First published on Wed 19 Oct 2011 12.55 BST
 This article is over 7 years old

Vincent Tabak did online research on sexual offences after killing Joanna Yeates, Bristol crown court heard on Wednesday.

Among the phrases Tabak Googled were "sexual offence explained" and "definition of sexual assault", the jury was told.

The 33-year-old Dutch engineer, who admits manslaughter but denies murder, also carried out internet searches on the average sentences for manslaughter and for murder, it was claimed.

A police analyst described the online searches Tabak carried out after killing the 25-year-old landscape architect, whose body was found on a snowy roadside verge on Christmas morning last year.


Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
 Read more
Lyndsey Farmery said that on the day after Yeates went missing — December 17 — Tabak was doing research on subjects including the five-day weather forecast.

Next day he looked at online maps and images of Longwood Lane, the road three miles from her Bristol flat where her body was discovered. In subsequent days Tabak looked at news articles on Shrien Dewani, the Bristol man accused of hiring hitmen to kill his wife in South Africa, and the case of Melanie Hall, who was murdered after leaving a nightclub in Bath in 1996.

Later, the jury was told, he researched subjects including: "How does forensic identification work?" and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton, where Tabak and Yeates lived.

He researched "body decomposition time" and an article about a man who strangled his wife and pleaded diminished responsibility.

When police revealed they were sifting tonnes of rubbish he looked up details of household waste collection in Bristol.

Tabak, who denies murder but admits manslaughter, also spent time finding out about prison life in the UK. In addition he searched online for phrases including the "definition of sexual assault", "definition sexual conduct" and "sexual offence explained".

The trial continues.


https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/19/vincent-tabak-joanna-yeates-death?fbclid=IwAR3oovi66vEdYxh1F3zNIIXv5VFubUwbwXnFnXVxkh-4kPGclYjCpMxEBt0
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

The most striking paragraph is this one:

Later, the jury was told, he researched subjects including: "How does forensic identification work?" and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton, where Tabak and Yeates lived.

Three separate points in that paragraph..


(1): "How does forensic identification work?"

(2): and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton,

(3): where Tabak and Yeates lived



(1): Appears that the person who checked this had no- idea  whatsoever about forensics... yet apparently Dr Vincent
       Tabak was worried about DNA

(2): Dr Vincent Tabak didn't need to research for CCTV on Canygne Road seeing as he lived there, he just had to
       walk up and down the road and look...

But the most concerning point is:

(3): Why would Dr Vincent Tabak be searching the internet to find where Tabak and Yeates lived??

A trial I have described as a MOOT TRIAL... A trail that made no sense... A man apparently in prison for 20 years for a crime I have stated i didn't believe he committed....

I get the impression the real killer they could not touch... I get the impression that they wanted to let everyone know what had taken place.... I get the impression the trial was to let the public know what happened....

I think their are 3 options, they may be more....

* Dr Vincent Tabak stopped the Investigation by admitting to Joanna Yeates manslaughter, thinking he was helping
   someone...

* Someone set Dr Vincent Tabak up...

* The killer was in Bristol Crown Court at the time of the trial and they wanted them to see what they had done..

We have Dr Vincent Tabak in court sobbing, apologising and unable to answer over 80 questions... Saying that he was responsible... The images of Joanna Yeates are flashed around the court room on several days...

The sentence in the paragraph, suggest that it wasn't Dr Vincent Tabak.... (imo)  It suggest that someone was looking for where Dr Vincent Tabak and Joanna Yeates lived... It brings a question to my mind that it was Dr Vincent Tabak and Joanna Yeates who may have been the couple...

If not knowing the actual date of this search , it makes it difficult to put it into context... Was this before Joanna Yeates went Missing??

Where both Joanna Yeates and Dr Vincent Tabak being stalked??

Or is that sentence proof that Dr Vincent Tabak couldn't have made the searches?

Who's computer did the searches really come from?

What truths are being hidden?? What have we been allowed to believe?? Is Dr Vincent Tabak in prison serving a 20 year sentence for the Murder of Joanna Yeates??

I'll leave you with this last thought :

How and why would Dr Vincent Tabak make a search for: where Tabak and Yeates lived.

Edit...... (1): forensic identification work? That is more of a question a scholar would be researching on the internet....

How and why would Dr Vincent Tabak make a search for: where Tabak and Yeates lived.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3244 on: January 30, 2019, 11:26:31 AM »
The point of the above post, was to try to clarify perception... Context an understanding....

Did the article simply mean that where Joanna Yeates and Dr Vincent Tabak lived there happened to be CCTV.... anyone could search for on the net...

That would have to be traffic cams..(imo) as private CCTV would not be easily to identify, even using google maps, things change...

Or did the article mean it in the context I posted... That there was a separate search, for where Dr Vincent Tabak and Joanna Yeates lived??

If the full information is not available, how can a jury make an informed decision based on MISSING information...  If the context is not known, how can anyone honestly make a decision of someones apparent guilt..

Context is crucial.... The context of the information of this case is crucial... And if information is MISSING, How do we know the context of anything!!

Edit...

Or was I correct in my above post, and the searches did contain a search where Tabak and Yeates lived.??

Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3245 on: January 30, 2019, 01:07:38 PM »
Articles about the trial at the time raise many many question.... And this article is no different...


___________________________________________________________________________________________


Vincent Tabak 'researched killings and sentences after Joanna Yeates's death'
Dutch engineer allegedly searched online for information about jail sentences and the decomposition of bodies

Steven Morris
Wed 19 Oct 2011 12.55 BST First published on Wed 19 Oct 2011 12.55 BST
 This article is over 7 years old

Vincent Tabak did online research on sexual offences after killing Joanna Yeates, Bristol crown court heard on Wednesday.

Among the phrases Tabak Googled were "sexual offence explained" and "definition of sexual assault", the jury was told.

The 33-year-old Dutch engineer, who admits manslaughter but denies murder, also carried out internet searches on the average sentences for manslaughter and for murder, it was claimed.

A police analyst described the online searches Tabak carried out after killing the 25-year-old landscape architect, whose body was found on a snowy roadside verge on Christmas morning last year.


Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
 Read more
Lyndsey Farmery said that on the day after Yeates went missing — December 17 — Tabak was doing research on subjects including the five-day weather forecast.

Next day he looked at online maps and images of Longwood Lane, the road three miles from her Bristol flat where her body was discovered. In subsequent days Tabak looked at news articles on Shrien Dewani, the Bristol man accused of hiring hitmen to kill his wife in South Africa, and the case of Melanie Hall, who was murdered after leaving a nightclub in Bath in 1996.

Later, the jury was told, he researched subjects including: "How does forensic identification work?" and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton, where Tabak and Yeates lived.

He researched "body decomposition time" and an article about a man who strangled his wife and pleaded diminished responsibility.

When police revealed they were sifting tonnes of rubbish he looked up details of household waste collection in Bristol.

Tabak, who denies murder but admits manslaughter, also spent time finding out about prison life in the UK. In addition he searched online for phrases including the "definition of sexual assault", "definition sexual conduct" and "sexual offence explained".

The trial continues.


https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/19/vincent-tabak-joanna-yeates-death?fbclid=IwAR3oovi66vEdYxh1F3zNIIXv5VFubUwbwXnFnXVxkh-4kPGclYjCpMxEBt0
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

The most striking paragraph is this one:

Later, the jury was told, he researched subjects including: "How does forensic identification work?" and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton, where Tabak and Yeates lived.

Three separate points in that paragraph..


(1): "How does forensic identification work?"

(2): and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton,

(3): where Tabak and Yeates lived



(1): Appears that the person who checked this had no- idea  whatsoever about forensics... yet apparently Dr Vincent
       Tabak was worried about DNA

(2): Dr Vincent Tabak didn't need to research for CCTV on Canygne Road seeing as he lived there, he just had to
       walk up and down the road and look...

But the most concerning point is:

(3): Why would Dr Vincent Tabak be searching the internet to find where Tabak and Yeates lived??

A trial I have described as a MOOT TRIAL... A trail that made no sense... A man apparently in prison for 20 years for a crime I have stated i didn't believe he committed....

I get the impression the real killer they could not touch... I get the impression that they wanted to let everyone know what had taken place.... I get the impression the trial was to let the public know what happened....

I think their are 3 options, they may be more....

* Dr Vincent Tabak stopped the Investigation by admitting to Joanna Yeates manslaughter, thinking he was helping
   someone...

* Someone set Dr Vincent Tabak up...

* The killer was in Bristol Crown Court at the time of the trial and they wanted them to see what they had done..

We have Dr Vincent Tabak in court sobbing, apologising and unable to answer over 80 questions... Saying that he was responsible... The images of Joanna Yeates are flashed around the court room on several days...

The sentence in the paragraph, suggest that it wasn't Dr Vincent Tabak.... (imo)  It suggest that someone was looking for where Dr Vincent Tabak and Joanna Yeates lived... It brings a question to my mind that it was Dr Vincent Tabak and Joanna Yeates who may have been the couple...

If not knowing the actual date of this search , it makes it difficult to put it into context... Was this before Joanna Yeates went Missing??

Where both Joanna Yeates and Dr Vincent Tabak being stalked??

Or is that sentence proof that Dr Vincent Tabak couldn't have made the searches?

Who's computer did the searches really come from?

What truths are being hidden?? What have we been allowed to believe?? Is Dr Vincent Tabak in prison serving a 20 year sentence for the Murder of Joanna Yeates??

I'll leave you with this last thought :

How and why would Dr Vincent Tabak make a search for: where Tabak and Yeates lived.

Edit...... (1): forensic identification work? That is more of a question a scholar would be researching on the internet....

How and why would Dr Vincent Tabak make a search for: where Tabak and Yeates lived.

(1): Appears that the person who checked this had no- idea  whatsoever about forensics... yet apparently Dr Vincent
       Tabak was worried about DNA - You don't have to know much about forensics to know about DNA and BECAUSE he wasn't forensics savy, he worried about leaving his DNA!

(2): Dr Vincent Tabak didn't need to research for CCTV on Canygne Road seeing as he lived there, he just had to
       walk up and down the road and look... He clearly needed confirmation where the cameras were, just counting them himself means he might miss one or two. This PROVES he was worried

But the most concerning point is:

(3): Why would Dr Vincent Tabak be searching the internet to find where Tabak and Yeates lived?? Read the sentence again "and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton, where Tabak and Yeates lived." It's not sayig he was researching where he and Joanna lived, it's explaining to the reader that that's where they both lived!

There isn't anything that will convince you that Tabak (who doesn't deserve to be called Doctor anymore) murdered that poor girl because he couldn't control himself. He admitted to the murder and clearly searched the internet because he was worried about being caught. There isn't three options - there's just ONE - the man is guilty, he isn't denying it! I don't think crime detection is your forte!


Offline Myster

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3246 on: January 30, 2019, 01:19:58 PM »
Unless you want to call him Doctor Jekyll.
It's one of them cases, in'it... one of them f*ckin' cases.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3247 on: January 30, 2019, 01:57:13 PM »
Quote
Later, the jury was told, he researched subjects including: "How does forensic identification work?" and the location of CCTV cameras in Canynge Road, Clifton, where Tabak and Yeates lived.

where Tabak and Yeates lived

I am sticking with my view of what that actually meant.... It was meant (imo) as a search.....

Why didn't the journalist have the decency to call Joanna Yeates, either Jo yeates or Joanna Yeates in the paragraph....??

Why would he be so disrespectful about the victim?

Yes... One may accept that the word "TABAK" was acceptable, seeing as he was on trial, but "YEATES"!!

It reminds me of school. when your name was called out on the register, and your name was always your surname name that a teacher would use, when confirming if you were in attendance..

So either it was a search that Dr Vincent Tabak did, which makes no sense....

Someone else made the searches.

The newspaper is being disrespectful about the VICTIM

Or A person with the name of YEATES lived with Dr Vincent Tabak.... (Or knew Dr Vincent Tabak)

Or even, Joanna Yeates was actually Dr Vincent Tabak's girlfriend....

I'll leave you to make your own choice.....



Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3248 on: January 30, 2019, 07:23:49 PM »
where Tabak and Yeates lived

I am sticking with my view of what that actually meant.... It was meant (imo) as a search.....

Why didn't the journalist have the decency to call Joanna Yeates, either Jo yeates or Joanna Yeates in the paragraph....??

Why would he be so disrespectful about the victim?

Yes... One may accept that the word "TABAK" was acceptable, seeing as he was on trial, but "YEATES"!!

It reminds me of school. when your name was called out on the register, and your name was always your surname name that a teacher would use, when confirming if you were in attendance..

So either it was a search that Dr Vincent Tabak did, which makes no sense....

Someone else made the searches.

The newspaper is being disrespectful about the VICTIM

Or A person with the name of YEATES lived with Dr Vincent Tabak.... (Or knew Dr Vincent Tabak)

Or even, Joanna Yeates was actually Dr Vincent Tabak's girlfriend....

I'll leave you to make your own choice.....

And that's why you never move on!


Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3250 on: January 30, 2019, 09:37:29 PM »
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* 

It's all about perception...

Actually, the sentence you highlighted and you're question over it is all about grammar  @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3251 on: January 31, 2019, 12:58:29 PM »
Actually, the sentence you highlighted and you're question over it is all about grammar  @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

So was it deliberately grammatically incorrect??

Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3252 on: January 31, 2019, 07:37:21 PM »
So was it deliberately grammatically incorrect??

It wasn't an error in writing it, it was YOUR error in understanding it!

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3253 on: February 02, 2019, 09:42:16 AM »
I was reading about Peter Sutcliffe on wiki... Of course wiki can be inaccurate, so I do not know if this information is correct..

But, It stated that Peter Sutcliffe had worked for Baird Television...  That made me think about Joanna Yeates and the name 'Operation Braid'. Had this been the reason for the name of the operation?

Is that what this was about... ??

Noel O'Gara has always insisted that there was more than one killer as they had 2 different samples of blood: He had been eliminated twelve times by the police because he was blood group O... the Ripper was known to be blood group B.

Throughout The Joanna Yeates Investigation, there has been a suggestion that a serial killer was in the frame, and the talk of several victims that were mentioned at the time adds to that... DCI Phil Jones stating (killers) as in plural...

Patricia Atkinson.

Quote
I followed her into the flat, she closed the curtains, and I hung my coat on the hook on the back of the door. She took her coat off and sat on the bed, her back was slightly towards me. I went up to her and hit her on the back of the head with the hammer. She fell off the bed onto the floor. I picked her up and put her back on the bed. That was the first time I had noticed the red blood, before it had always been dark, but this time in the light I saw lots of blood on the bed and on the floor. When she was on the floor I hit her another twice, or three times, before I put her on the bed. I pulled the bedclothes back before I put her on the bed."


The fact that this lady had been killed in her home, had always struck me as strange, as other victims had been attacked or killed outside..



Looking at where Patricia lived, it makes it very risky for Sutcliffe to attack this woman in her home, the possibility of witness's is far greater..

When she was on the floor I hit her another twice, or three times, before I put her on the bed. I pulled the bedclothes back before I put her on the bed."

That doesn't make sense to me... Why are you picking the victim up from the floor and then spending the time to pull the bed covers back??

Was the idea of Operation Braid, to catch a serial killer?? 


I have never understood why anyone would remove Joanna Yeates body from her Flat to Longwood Lane.. I have never understood what advantage that would give Dr Vincent Tabak...

But apparently Dr Vincent Tabak isn't satisfied with just moving her once, he moves her several times, even taking her into his own flat, before dumping her on Longwood Lane...

Really.... why on earth would he do that??  Why on earth would anyone do that??

How would that be beneficial to him?... He doesn't know her...  he is going away, he has all weekend, because he had apparently been informed that Greg was away...

If Joanna Yeates is Missing from that weekend, we have the Police at that Flat from day one... they never leave it yet, Joanna Yeates isn't found until days later 3 miles away from her home...  Nothing at this point in time should connect Dr Vincent Tabak to Joanna Yeates... he has plenty of time to distance himself from the crime scene, and he had also been eliminated early on..

A whole weekend in which to make decisions, but an apparent panicked Dr Vincent Tabak, decided to share the crime scene with his flat and his car... He is supposed  to be a very clever ,manipulating individual, yet his stupidity is endless according to the tale on the stand... There must be virtually no-one these days who isn't aware of DNA..

But.. that doesn't stop Dr Vincent Tabak spreading Joanna Yeates DNA and his own DNA everywhere... He had no connection to Joanna Yeates, so why move her?? Doesn't make sense... No physical evidence was ever produced at trial connecting Joanna Yeates to Dr Vincent Tabak's Flat, or Dr Vincent Tabak to Joanna Yeates Flat...
Now that is odd.... there should have been something from this violent assault...

Why would the Police be looking at Dr Vincent Tabak from late December?? He'd been eliminated... he didn't know the victim... he had only just returned from the America days earlier, he was studious, a bit geeky, he was polite, had friends, had no previous convictions of any type, was called Placid by DCI Phil Jones, had not as far as we know given any indication that he could possibly have had anything to do with his neighbours disappearance.. But for some obscure reason, the CPS in late December were wanting to build a case against him... At a time when he wasn't even in the country..

There could not at this point have been any solid evidence to connect him to Joanna Yeates Flat, or I would assume it would have been brought into evidence at trial.... yet it was NOT!

Was Operation Braid a sting to catch a serial killer? Did the Operation go too far?

I do not want to appear unkind, but I question whether or not Joanna Yeates did die? And it is a fair point if looking at this as some type of sting!

Which always brings me back to who is Dr Vincent Tabak and What is this case really about...

Edit... Did Sutcliffe actually write his account of what he did? Or did he just sign a statement?

The reason I ask is this part from the link....

When she was on the floor I hit her another twice, or three times, before I put her on the bed. I pulled the bedclothes back before I put her on the bed."

Shouldn't that be twice more, another twice isn't grammatically correct.. And Caroline had pointed out that issue with the Guardian article...  I'm just thinking about that now... Is that supposed to make him sound more Yorkshire?

Was the statement made from taped interviews? I would have thought that if it was from taped interviews then a Yorkshire man wouldn't pronounce the "H".. he would leave it out and the statement should be 'it 'er another twice'... or even... it 'er anover twice'

Just an observation...

Double Edit... 
Quote
A babby i’ t’hahse
by Emma O'Connell
Read by Stanley Ellis
http://www.yorkshiredialectsociety.org.uk/listen/

My observations....

When he starts to speak to the audience , it is noticeable that he has learnt to speak clearer english, yet when he gets really into the poem, he slips into the dialect and doesn't pronounce the 'H' even in "hahse" because you wouldn't...

Reading the Yorkshire dialect is difficult, it is even harder to write it correctly.. but someone who was from Yorkshire would naturally drop into there dialect without any issue, even when reading it from a script..

I do not know if Stanley Ellis is a Yorkshireman... But that is the impression he gives me... A Yorkshireman who has learnt or is trying to speak the queens english...

http://www.yorkshiredialectsociety.org.uk/listen/

Listen to the poem 'A babby i’ t’hahse'

And oddly enough, I find things as I write, and just found this... I do not know if it is the same person reading the poem, but the coincidences, he is from Bradford Yorkshire and was connected to the Ripper Inquiry... This Stanley Ellis you can read about here...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/culture-obituaries/tv-radio-obituaries/6608130/Stanley-Ellis.html

Quote
Oldfield consulted Ellis, who played and replayed the tape, repeating key syllables, before pinning the voice down to the Castletown district of Sunderland, Tyne and Wear. Police swamped the area, but Ellis and his colleague, Jack Windsor Lewis, also an expert in linguistics, always doubted the authenticity of the tape, and were sceptical that the man who became known as "Wearside Jack" was responsible for the murders.

As I stated I do not know if the poem and the Stanley Ellis who has the article written about him are one in the same...

But I did detect that the reader of the poem was in fact a Yorkshireman... Whom had tried to reign in his accent in his every day life..


NB: I'm not trying to connect Stanley Ellis, that was just coincidence, when I found said article... I was looking for some Yorkshire dialect to show the difference in how something would sound or how an interview would be transcribed...

Stanley Ellis is just an example that was all.... It surprised me when I found the Telegraph article... And no assumptions should be made from my find...



https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16283351-the-real-yorkshire-ripper

https://www.execulink.com/~kbrannen/victim10.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Sutcliffe

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3254 on: February 02, 2019, 12:39:23 PM »
Just back to the article in the Telegraph for a moment...

Quote
Ellis interviewed mainly older farming people to gather data on their vocabulary, verbal constructions and dialect words that had passed into vernacular use but were in danger of disappearing. The work was exhaustive and exhausting: he interviewed each subject for some 18 hours, and asked them to complete a 1,300-item questionnaire.

How illiterate was Peter Sutcliffe?

Were the interviews transcribed?

A Yorkshire man would write differently from how he speaks, the extent would be dependant on his education, even if he attended a secondary school, he would have been taught English, therefore writing in a different manner.. ..

So Ellis having these people from around the country filling in questionnaires is pointless really... (imo) no 1300 page document would really show anyone where these people came from, as the dialect would not be written that way, and only the way in which someone wrote a paragraph would determine their level of education and not where they came from... (And a bell rings again... Sally Ramage is now in my head..... )

So that exercise I am unsure of it's usefulness....

Therefore questioning whether Peter Sutcliffe's interview was transcribed or it was what Peter Sutcliffe actually stated is important.... And who actually wrote said statement...

Every area has its own slang and dialect, interpretation of what something means to one small area and the whole country in general could be quite different and that could be the difference in what a jury may understand in any case...  And that surely is dependant on the interviewers interpretation and maybe their age.....

Example: When I was younger, when someone stated that they had got off with someone, it meant that the person of the opposite sex had taken an interest in them, they may have held hands, or even had a sneaky kiss.. But when asking someone how they would interpret the statement 'Got off with someone".. they interpreted that as they had sex... Which wasn't the case at all....

So interpretation of  language in cases can change the view of anyone... understanding dialect and the nuances within dialects and meanings of said dialects, can change the complexion of any statement...

I am finding the expert quite interesting, because the written word of someone from any region within the UK, would not determine where they came from.... Making the tape from the Ripper inquiry even more interesting, no-one would have known that the Ripper was a Geordie if it hadn't been for the tape, As something written would not make this obvious...

Therefore who sent the Ripper Tape? And why would he?? It would only be of use to someone trying to steer the investigation in another direction...(imo)

No-one at any point at that time could 100% state that the Ripper was a Geordie.... and what was to say, that a Geordie man didn't live in Yorkshire... They don't all live there.... So why not look for a Geordie Man in Yorkshire instead of venturing up to Geordie land??

I'm just listening to the tape.. 'The Hoax Tape'...  It sounds like he is reading it off something... Well (imo) anyway..

I'm serious... whoever is on that tape is reading that message from something that is written, and it (imo) is not someone speaking naturally...

Why would a person need to write down what he would say to George Oldfield, when he should know the case inside out...  The vids I am adding are the Tape from the Hoaxer and 2 videos from a Geordie Lady, whom explains a little about the accent... She admits she has softened her accent, and another point of interest is that Geordies speak fast..

The Hoax Tape is deliberate and slow speaking which also makes me think it was something that a person had read from a script that had be written, otherwise anyone may have difficulty in understanding everything that was stated... Therefore, what was the point of the tape from The Hoaxer? If he wanted to be understood all he needed to do was to send a letter and the postcode marked on the envelope would show the region that it had originated from..

The idea, that The Hoaxer had to prove he was a Geordie, by making the tape is strange to me... If he was making a tape, it should have sounded more natural, he wouldn't need to be reading something, and the Police would have had a more difficult time in understanding the tape, as the speed of how a natural Geordie talks, is fast... And  why would The Hoaxer really care whether or not he spoke so someone could understand his accent...  Especially as it was supposed to be a Hoax anyway...

This is why no-one could identify the Geordie accent of the tape... (imo) Because a Geordie reading something at a slow pace, is different from a Geordie talking naturally and certain words written, would be pronounced differently than certain words naturally spoken, as I have explained about The Yorkshire Accent...

So was The Hoax tape really a Geordie speaking  or a person trying to sound like a Geordie, reading from a script??

That shoves the cat amongst the pigeons... Something else to contemplate....

Edit.. Are there any taped interviews of Dr Vincent Tabak speaking?? We are told he is a Dutch National and his command of the English Language is excellent, but his accent would still be noticeable even if he could speak perfect English.. .. I would be interested to hear any Interview tapes... Even if he states "No Comment"!!
Those two words alone would clearly indicate whether or not he had been born and lived in Holland his whole life... And whether or not it was Dr Vincent Tabak being interviewed... (imo)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2woc46LXkw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22DUclUZiX4

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/culture-obituaries/tv-radio-obituaries/6608130/Stanley-Ellis.html