If the evidence they have presented in court doesn't stand up to scrutiny and nobody objected at the trail of Vincent Tabak, because for what ever reason he made a plea to manslaughter.
His Solicitor could have Objected on many issues but didnt, because they only had to try prove it was manslaughter and not murder.
But if all the so called evidence had been scrutinised in the first place, the ridculous evidence of Vincent Tabaks internet searches would have been thrown out.
With this forum being about Miscarriages of Justice, it gives a platform for people who have misgivings on convictions..
And the more information i read from the trial and how it was used, the more i am worried about it.
Who is going to put the evidence throught the ringer? For most people they are satisfied that Vincent Tabak is locked up, But what if he's not the real perpetrator? I don't believe he is.. And that in itself is a hard thing to say when your aware the majority of the public believe in his guilt.
The prosecution made much of Tabaks Internet searches, which they used to bolster their case.
I find that some of these searches don't make any sense.. For instance..
http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdfThis link has some trial transcript:
On 23 Dec 2010 at 4.00 pm
Tabak searched the Dutch Wikipedia for the words
‘extradition’
‘Yeates’
‘missing persons’
‘% of grey cars in UK’
‘Renault Megan cars in UK’
why would he search a dutch wiki for this when the dutch wiki wouldnt have the information?
Take the % of grey cars...
https://translate.google.co.uk/#nl/en/%25%20Van%20de%20grijze%20auto's%20in%20het%20Verenigd%20KoninkrijkNow if you put that into the dutch wiki you get :
https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speciaal:Zoeken&profile=default&fulltext=Search&search=%25+Van+de+grijze+auto%27s+in+het+Verenigd+Koninkrijk&searchToken=76r9hzzultimrab2igr01du7mThere isn't an entry, why would there be? It's useless information to the Dutch wiki
Again put the word Yeates in the Dutch wiki and you get this:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=yeates&title=Speciaal:Zoeken&go=Artikel&searchToken=ekugxqqdlqri4akdovwrcfq54So how can they say that he was searching for related information to the case on the dutch wiki when realistically the dutch wiki would be useless just as the english wiki, it just writes information, it has sourced from news papers mainly and tv news.
So he might as well have just looked at the news!!
If i can find holes in a couple of examples, why on earth didn't his Lawyer object..!!
Because for starters as regards the Searches, they were only given the timeline document of 1300 page on the day of trail..
He would not have time to go through all the so called relevant searches and other timeline information.
The timeline chart consisted of 566 events, how on earth would a Lawyer have the time to scrutinise the prosecutions evidence?? They had a day!!
Iv'e spent more than a day looking at a few timeline..
How is the defence going to check whether it is possible to even search the dutch wiki for the supposed searches?
https://translate.google.co.uk/#en/nl/extraditionhttps://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speciaal:Zoeken&profile=default&fulltext=Search&search=uitlevering&searchToken=1z737ea7a123nljokk36r47vn did they follow that up with him clicking on the word extradition??
"The Netherlands also usually seeks to request that a national accused of crimes committed abroad is tried, or serves a sentence, in the Netherlands," she says.
So why isn't he spending time in a Dutch prison??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23029814In Fact I think it would have been better for Vincent Tabak if he was in Holland and they had to extradite him:
Article 16, paragraph 4 of the European Convention on
Extradition states that provisional arrest can be terminated
somewhere between 18 days and 40 days if the original
request for extradition and accompanying documents are
not received by the requested state.
Following Dutch legislation, provisional arrest can last no
longer than 20 days without the receipt of the original
request for extradition and accompanying documents. If
the original request for extradition and accompanying
documents (a fax version is not sufficient) are not received
within 20 days after a Dutch judge has ordered the
provisional arrest, this provisional arrest must be
terminated. Only after the original request for extradition
and accompanying documents are received can the
requested person be arrested for extradition again.
http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/pc-oc/Country_information1_en_files/NL%20Extradition.pdfThey would have then had to prove to a Dutch judge that the evidence that they had on him was sound, and personally I'm not sure the Dutch Judge would have agreed.
Ive added this since posting:
Concerning extradition of Dutch nationals the following is
of importance. Article 6 of the European Convention on
Extradition allows states the possibility to deny extradition
of its own nationals. The Dutch declaration to this article
states that the Netherlands can only permit the extradition
of Dutch nationals for purposes of prosecution if the
requesting State provides a guarantee that the person
claimed may be returned to the Netherlands to serve his
sentence there if, following his extradition, a custodial
sentence other than a suspended sentence or a measure
depriving him of his liberty is imposed upon him.
So I cant see Tabak actually leaving holland if he committed the crime.. He was guarented under the extradition Treaty to at least spend his SENTENCE In Holland. If not they wouldn't possibly have extradited him...
If this was supposed to be an extremely calculating man. He would have STAYED
But I now understand why he wasn't given bail originally, when they didn'nt have any real evidence!!!