Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[Alfie]

Alfie, could you tell us why you think the "Tabak is Innocent" blog is a load of rubbish? 

I don't get my ideas from there, either.  I have looked at a lot of different sources: forums, newspapers, etc, BUT most of my ideas come from my brain!!!  There was a time when I assumed VT must be guilty.  I think I started to have doubts when his glasses were taken away from him in prison, and he had to appear in court unable to see properly. As for the trial, I think it was a farce.

I dont agree with a some of the views expressed on that blog, but I do think it is well written and well researched. I would like to know more about why you think as you do!!

I'm surprised you have to ask actually.  Within a few sentences of the front page of the blog we have this

 "His pretty neighbour Joanna Yeates, whom he did not know at all, even by sight, was murdered just before Christmas 2010 (probably after her boyfriend caught her déshabillé with her secret lover)",

This makes the most offensive allegations about the victim and suggests her boyfriend is guilty, which is libellous and completely unsupported by even a shred of evidence.

[[...]]

Alfie, good evening...

Hasn't anything that has been said on this forum made you think differently in anyway?

Not even the post about "internet searches"...

my goodness, if someone used my internet searches against me, when I've been looking at this case, they could construe allsorts from them.. Not forgetting when I leave the room My daughter may use my computer..

Who said Dr Vincent Tabak was at a computer (of which there were 4 they searched) and hadn't left the room, someone pops on for 2 ticks.. Searches weather/ murder/ anything.. Can they prove it was definetley Dr Vincent Tabak who made these searches??

It's difficult to prove intent on a computer search as virtually all these searches are one or two worded.... And is searching google actually a crime? Where are the print off's from the searches.. The searches really mean nothing and should have been questioned in court!!

There is nothing proving he did any searches when Joanna Yeates was in his flat for an hour.. But the prosecution insisted that joanna yeates had been in his flat for an hour..

Was there a record that he watched a film, accessed files to do with work on his computer.. Surely if he was looking for places to get rid of Joanna, he'd of had google earth map up so he could decide of the best disposal site...

There are wooded areas closer to Canygne Road and of course the river, which would have hidden her better.

[mrswah]

Alfie

Yes, the sentences you quote---I would agree with you, as I don't think Joanna had any lovers, and nor do I think she was murdered by her boyfriend, and there is no evidence to support either of these scenarios!!  And, as you say, they are libellous.

However, the blog is very long, and there ARE lots of good things in it---that are not the result of speculation and are not libellous.  The part about the fire engines, crane etc being needed to recover Jo's body is fact (although not well known), and very interesting.  It casts doubt on whether the body was actually found where we have been told it was found. If we have been lied to about that, I wonder what other lies we have been told.  It makes one wonder.

[[...]]

I'd like to look at other evidence that was available:

The shard of console..

Was it a games console??
Was it taken as evidence??
Was it handed in as Evidence??
Was Joanna Yeates playing on the console??

And mostly did it belong to that household ,or did  it get brought into the house, should there have been a console in the house??

There is nothing available about this console i can find apart from it been asked as a question to Dr Vincent Tabak

Having a shard of console may sugest it was broken in the Flat..

Was Tanja Morson asked if they owned a console or if it was broken?

[Alfie]

Alfie, good evening...

Hasn't anything that has been said on this forum made you think differently in anyway?

Not even the post about "internet searches"...

my goodness, if someone used my internet searches against me, when I've been looking at this case, they could construe allsorts from them.. Not forgetting when I leave the room My daughter may use my computer..

Who said Dr Vincent Tabak was at a computer (of which there were 4 they searched) and hadn't left the room, someone pops on for 2 ticks.. Searches weather/ murder/ anything.. Can they prove it was definetley Dr Vincent Tabak who made these searches??

It's difficult to prove intent on a computer search as virtually all these searches are one or two worded.... And is searching google actually a crime? Where are the print off's from the searches.. The searches really mean nothing and should have been questioned in court!!

There is nothing proving he did any searches when Joanna Yeates was in his flat for an hour.. But the prosecution insisted that joanna yeates had been in his flat for an hour..

Was there a record that he watched a film, accessed files to do with work on his computer.. Surely if he was looking for places to get rid of Joanna, he'd of had google earth map up so he could decide of the best disposal site...

There are wooded areas closer to Canygne Road and of course the river, which would have hidden her better.

Regarding the internet searches.  You're right - they prove nothing, however the fact is - Tabak lived in the same building as Joanna Yeates, she disappeared and subsequently Tabak is searching online  about how long it takes for a body to decay but offers no defence for why he did so.  Hmmm.. ..  As far as I'm aware Tabak didn't have a daughter who could have snuck in to use his computer, nor anyone else in his flat who was there at the time, so it stands to reason that he alone was responsible for searches on his own computer.
Why do you necessarily think he would have carried out these searches while Joanna was in his room anyway?

[[...]]

Regarding the internet searches.  You're right - they prove nothing, however the fact is - Tabak lived in the same building as Joanna Yeates, she disappeared and subsequently Tabak is searching online  about how long it takes for a body to decay but offers no defence for why he did so.  Hmmm.. ..  As far as I'm aware Tabak didn't have a daughter who could have snuck in to use his computer, nor anyone else in his flat who was there at the time, so it stands to reason that he alone was responsible for searches on his own computer.
Why do you necessarily think he would have carried out these searches while Joanna was in his room anyway?

Hi Alfie

I like facts.... 

Yes... Dr Vincent Tabak lived in the same building, and so did many more people. The polices original line of enquiry was that it had to be someone that knew her. For her to let them inside when she was afraid to be on her own...seems very unlikely.

Even Greg had said they had not meet him before.. They hadn't lived there very long, so would only know most neighbour in passing.

Lets go back to the searches... What do they actually prove?  Not a great deal really. They were used to imply that Dr Vincent Tabak had looked at various things, that the police believe where all connected to Joanna yeates.

At Line 225 (sic)
Tabak searched using the words
‘Joanna Yeates’
‘Salt supplies in the Netherlands’

What can you imagine from that... He was checking on News about his missing neighbour andso were countless other people, me included.

Salt supllies in Netherlands, how does this help?

At Line 257 of the prosecution Chart
Tabak searched on Google Maps for
‘Longwood Lane’

I think this is probably the one that tipped the jury.... Searching for it implys he knew she was there, if he was driving around aimlessly ,not knowing where to put her and not knowing the area, I'm sure that he could have found a better location. And how can you search for somewhere you don't know where it is??

At Line 311 of the prosecution search
Tabak Googled the words
‘body discomposition time’ (sic)

How does this have anything to do with Jo'???.... 

With his range of searches that they have produced, it could have been anything, i watch alot of crime stuff, It appears to me that he also has a fasination. It doesn't prove he was checking to see how long it would take for Jo's body to decompose.

And that brings another thought.. if he was aware that Jo's was dead and that he had killed her, why check body decomposition time? It was freezing everyone knew that. Does it really mean he was checking for how long it would take for jo?

When he replies he can't remember, he probably can't..

Was he looking at body decomposition to check that something he'd read or heard had the correct information?

Or was he checking that a program for instance had researched their material correctly and he was seeing if the time for a body to decompose was correct.

So how can he say why he searched for it?

Could you explain all your searches from 10 months ago?? Probably not..

So why didn't he move her?  http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf

I look at News, watch Crime, watch Designing show programs etc, I'm sure you have a selection of activities that you also do.

I know I flit from one thing to the next, i look at Twitter, next thing I might put a search in the computer to do with that Tweet. Someone might text me and I'll search again.

What I'm really trying to say is how can a search show intent!!  Intent to do what??

Buy a shed load of Rock Salt and what.............

Sell it ??
A friend asked him about Rock Salt?? 
Prices of Rock Salt
History of Rock Salt in the Netherlands

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Rock+salt+netherlands

What does looking for Rock salt in the Netherlands Prove? Nothing really again it's the intent.

The jury were too Obviously swayed by the searches, I can't see how they are admissible as it doesn't show intent it just implies that it May or Maynot apply to Joanna Yeates the proscution want you to think that it does.

The prosecution’s Internet evidence
On 17 December 2010 at 7.45:54 am
Tabak performed a Google search on the words
‘Weather’
‘Bristol’
‘Bath’

This search was made on a work computer.... who said it was Dr Vincent Tabak, that made this search??

He could have , he probabaly did.. But 2 ticks away from a computer and anyone could search..

So that creates doubt....

And there lies the problem.. I don't know why he pled guilty to manslaughter (but innocent people have done so before)..

And the so called evidence that the prosecution presented would have created reasonable doubt, because internet searches don't prove intent, they only imply what you want them to imply.

If he had not made a plea, with the evidence that they didn't really have.
Not guilty.. would have been the verdict in my opinion.

So you can see how important it was to get Dr Vincent Tabak to enter a manslaughter plea.

 Any good Defence Lawyer would have made mince meat out of the so called evidence.

[[...]]

hi again Alfie...

The prosecution said Dr Vincent Tabak had Joanna Yeates in his Flat for 1 hour before he went to Asda..

So how do thy know???????

[jixy]

You can post theories til the end of time, the fact is he said he did it and even cried in court because he did it and realised what he has done. case closed!

[[...]]

You can post theories til the end of time, the fact is he said he did it and even cried in court because he did it and realised what he has done. case closed!

I haven' t posted theories really Jixy...  Since when have internet searches been proof of committing a crime??

And your entitled to your opinion, which differs to mine.

And i'll reiterate.. I don't know what made him make a plea of guilty to manslaughter..

If he made a plea of guilt.. you still have to back it up with concrete evidence.

If the case is closed...??   " SEND" Dr Vincent Tabak Back to his own country to serve out his sentence.. his family didn't commit any crimes, his mother is  old.. it's called compassion for them... The Tabak family are guilty off nothing!!!

This Country might despise him with a passion, But his family loves him..... 

So what is wrong with sending Dr Vincent Tabak back to Holland to serve his sentence???

You have him in Prison...  The Dutch want there offenders back to their own country, It's part of the stipulation of their EU Treaty...... which I posted the other day...

Maybe there should be a thread on sending him Back to Holland!!!!!!

Quite honestly I'd cry... He's in a hopeless situation..

Think its called Catch22

[jixy]

I have never commented on the internet searches that you seem very keen to focus on. There are some cases available where it is clear there has been a miscarriage of justice and family members are fighting to get their loved one back home.

To me that is far more interesting than constant searching to prove a man innocent when he hasn't said that himself.

I respect you fascination even though I don't understand it.

Have another look on Google and you will be surprised what cases are real clear cut miscarriage of justice

[[...]]

I have never commented on the internet searches that you seem very keen to focus on. There are some cases available where it is clear there has been a miscarriage of justice and family members are fighting to get their loved one back home.

To me that is far more interesting than constant searching to prove a man innocent when he hasn't said that himself.

I respect you fascination even though I don't understand it.

Have another look on Google and you will be surprised what cases are real clear cut miscarriage of justice

So As I said before..... "SEND"'''' Dr Vincent Tabak back to his homeland of Holland to serve out his sentence.

Why has nobody heard him ask that either Jixy??? That is a peculiar question you have risen...


Why has nobody heard Anything from Dr Vincent Tabak,..... As you say he's not Shouting I'm Innocent..

BUT,,... He's not shouting..

"SEND ME HOME"?????????

Ask yourself that!!!!!!!

[jixy]

we don't know him or how he thinks no matter how hard you try to work it out all. Maybe he is serving a sentence that he accepts he deserves unlike some other people

If you accept he is guilty as he says he is, why is it important to you where he is? He is a murderer

[[...]]

we don't know him or how he thinks no matter how hard you try to work it out all. Maybe he is serving a sentence that he accepts he deserves unlike some other people

If you accept he is guilty as he says he is, why is it important to you where he is? He is a murderer

Why does it matter to me... Interesting question Jixy

Things abother me.... lots of things, niggle at me and I keep having to go back to the to work them out..

I followed the case very early on and there were lots of discussion groups about the case... The information on there was vast... `People who live in the building and people who were in close proximity gave information.. which differed from what we know...

I never understood why these Discussion groups were removed, but, they're gone and lost forever..

So when Dr Vincent Tabak come into the frame, he was a most unlikely candidate....As i know longer have access to these Discussion I can't provide you with any "quotes"...

It bothers me because i like Fair.... And this was not a fair fight..
And every so often, something pricks my conscience , and I start looking at it again..
That is what lead me here... (like been lead down the Garden path)...

And a friend of mine once said to me

IF THINGS DON'T ADD UP, SOMEBODY IS LYING

[jixy]

I could understand your dedication if he pleaded not guilty. The ones who we think would never do it can often turn out to be the very ones who do

Serial killers, psychopaths etc still can have a certain charm and interest

I asked you previously why you don't look more towards the cases where someone is maintaining innocence or even more so where its clear they are? a few well known cases fit that mould

[mrswah]

Good evening Jixy

Which cases do you think involve miscarriages of justice, and why?  Not being nosy, just interested! Lots of people using this site seem to believe Jeremy Bamber is a victim of a MOJ, for example,