The Defence Will State Their Case

[[...]]

From a retweet by Sandra lean:

https://twitter.com/Greghampikian/status/1025144111643340800

NIST Buries the Lead on its study of 108 Crime labs.
The real headlines, "65% of Crime Labs Wrongly Include a Suspect in DNA Mixture," and  "DNA match statistics vary by more than a quintillion fold (1 with 18 zeroes)."

NIST Publishes Landmark MIX13 DNA Study
08/02/2018 - 1:25pm

Five years after an interlaboratory study showed that more than a hundred forensic laboratories could not agree on a single forensic riddle—and that a majority of them implicated an innocent person in a hypothetical felony, in error—the federal agency who produced the findings has officially published them in a peer-reviewed journal.

“NIST Interlaboratory Studies Involving DNA Mixtures (MIX05 and MIX13): Variation Observed and Lessons Learned” was published open-access online by Forensic Science International: Genetics this week—potentially making the problems with DNA mixture interpretation easier to cite by defense experts, and even prosecutors.

NIST’s scientists write that the MIX13 results in particular have already influenced the DNA forensics community to increasingly use probabilistic genotyping software programs such as TrueAllele and STRmix in their operations. But the peer-reviewed publication would highlight the need for further improvements, the agency added in a statement.

The publication comes after critics had blasted the agency’s wait to publish the paper, as reported by Forensic Magazine in April. The critics, including Greg Hampikian of Boise State University, have argued that though MIX13 may have been generally known in the forensic community, the results were not readily admitted into some courtrooms, because the PowerPoint slides had not been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal—and judges had thus discounted them for submission in some trials.

Hampikian and others spoke about some court cases which, they argue, could have been impacted by publication of the MIX05 and MIX13 studies over the last decade.

“Shouldn’t this have been an urgent matter, when it was discovered that the vast majority of laboratories are trying to answer questions that they will answer incorrectly?” said Hampikian.

The new paper shows the results of the two interlaboratory studies—which NIST says have been previously available on the agency’s website.

MIX05 was undertaken in 2005, and asked 69 laboratories to interpret DNA data from two-person mixtures from four hypothetical sex assaults.

MIX13, in 2013, posed five increasingly difficult mock crimes involving up to four contributors and related persons of interest to 108 laboratories.

“Case Five” from MIX13 was the flash point for most critics. A ski mask left behind after a mock bank robbery showed a mixture of touch DNA including four people, but due to its complexity, it initially appeared as a mixture of only two people. The labs were given two of the four likely contributors, along with a fifth person.

But that fifth person was not in the mixture, and had never touched the ski mask. The four-person mixture involving equal amounts of genetic material was made to be difficult. Seventy-four laboratories out of 108 got it wrong by including the fifth person in their interpretation. Most were using the method of combined probability of inclusion, otherwise known as CPI, an FBI-approved method of separating out mixtures.

Twenty-three labs deemed the results “inconclusive” in including the three suspects. Three additional labs found it inconclusive for the fifth, and innocent, person—while still including the other two correctly.

Only seven laboratories got the hard problem totally “right”—by correctly excluding the fifth and innocent person from the four-person mixture. But even the reasons they cited were different. Four of the laboratories cited a missing allele at a key location. Two more, using data from the Identifiler Plus (a ThermoFisher PCR amplification kit), showed that the fifth person could not fit.

John Butler, the special assistant to the director for forensic science in NIST’s Special Programs Office, told Forensic Magazine in an interview in April that “Case Five” and the other mock case histories were not only a way to gauge how labs were doing with their mixtures—they were also to provide a “teaching moment.”

“The mixture itself was designed to not show too many alleles,” Butler said. “People would be tricked into thinking there are only two or three people there, instead of the four people that were really there.

“The way that it was designed was on purpose, to kind of help people realize that CPI can falsely include people—that was its purpose,” he added. “And it demonstrated that really nicely.”

One cannot draw real-world conclusions from Case Five, Butler added in the interview earlier this year.

“We asked specific questions of labs, and part of it was a teaching moment,” he added. “It wasn’t to say, here’s your error rate—because that’s not what the purpose of that was. This was a teaching moment to realize you can falsely include somebody with CPI.”

Hampikian and the other critics took it differently, however.

“Out of the (labs) that got this wrong, don’t you think some of them over the past five years—or even before—were doing the same things with actual casework?” said Hampikian. “Is there any reason to believe they were not doing the same thing with casework?"

NIST writes that the study, although it does not show an error rate, has done its job in alerting the forensic community to shortcomings within many of the systems—and particularly with the CPI mixture-interpretation technique.

“The interlaboratory studies described in this paper were conceived and conducted with the goal of better understanding the ‘lay of the land’ regarding analysis of DNA mixtures at the time,” they write. “Findings from both studies have brought awareness of difference in approaches to DNA mixture interpretation and have highlighted the need for improved training and validation, which have hopefully led to improved protocols over the years.”

Credit courtesy of NIST




So what would that say about the mixed DNA that the sample of Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA was apparently found?? does it beg the question..... Where the results incorrect?? How does this information have a baring on other cases were mixed DNA was used?
I don't know... But it would be interesting to see what would be the outcome of some of these samples....

Are UK Forensic Labs aware of this??  Are the using up to date info?? Would it mean that their could be many more challenges to trial conclusions??

Dr Vincent Tabak cannot appeal his conviction, I believe that this is because he plead guilty to Manslaughter...

The question has to be why would he risk so much by taking the stand and saying the tale he did?
Without the story on the stand that he told, he could have only been convicted of Manslaughter..(imo) The only person who put himself anywhere, was himself....

The evidence presented by The Prosecution doesn't prove anything, even with DNA, they cannot say where and when Joanna Yeates died or was put on Longwood Lane.....

Was Dr Vincent Tabak trying to protect someone??

If the DNA is not enough, nor a tiny spot of blood that could have been transferred at anytime, both having a possible explanation, why did he say he did it??

He's supposed to be super clever, cunning and the rest... He must have had an idea of what The Prosecution had, and how easy it would be to explain it all away, especially as they lived at the same address...

The DNA has always been an issue, with people looking at it from both sides....  How many profiles were in the DNA mix?? I know that they had 3.......Did they miss any??

NIST Buries the Lead on its study of 108 Crime labs.
The real headlines, "65% of Crime Labs Wrongly Include a Suspect in DNA Mixture," and  "DNA match statistics vary by more than a quintillion fold (1 with 18 zeroes).

That is quite a statistic.....  So it is possible for Labs to wrongly include a suspect...  that I think is quite a concern....(imo)

https://www.forensicmag.com/news/2018/08/nist-publishes-landmark-mix13-dna-study#.W2NxjPxK1io.facebook

[[...]]

Tweets I find interesting...

UK Criminal Law Blog
‏
 
@uk_criminal_law
Follow Follow @uk_criminal_law
More
Vincent Tabak sentenced to 10 months for indecent images. Why was he prosecuted though? http://ukcriminallawblog.com/2015/03/02/vincent-tabak-jailed-for-child-pornography/ …

9:16 AM - 3 Mar 2015

Click on the link and theres an error .... nothing available to read.... was so looking forward to seeing their take on what happened.

stefi
‏
 
@stefiamico
 3 Mar 2015
More
Replying to @uk_criminal_law
@uk_criminal_law would the children in the indecent images be able to pursue a civil claim against Tabak as a result of this conviction?

0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Reply   Retweet   Like   Direct message

UK Criminal Law Blog
‏
 
@uk_criminal_law
 3 Mar 2015
More
Vincent Tabak sentenced to 10 months for indecent images. Why was he prosecuted though? http://ukcriminallawblog.com/2015/03/02/vincent-tabak-jailed-for-child-pornography/ …

3 replies 3 retweets 0 likes
Reply 3   Retweet 3   Like   Direct message

UK Criminal Law Blog
‏
 
@uk_criminal_law
 2 Mar 2015
More
Vincent Tabak sentenced to 10 months for indecent images. Why was he prosecuted though? http://ukcriminallawblog.com/2015/03/02/vincent-tabak-jailed-for-child-pornography/ …

2 replies 3 retweets 0 likes
Reply 2   Retweet 3   Like   Direct message

Stefi asked a reasonable question, unfortunately she doesn't appear to have received a reply..

Why was he prosecuted though? Shame we cannot read what the blog was about....

Edit...

UK Criminal Law Blog
@uk_criminal_law
Explaining the criminal law. Promoting discussion, transparency and more accurate law reporting.

ukcriminallawblog.com
Joined September 2012

The discussion about Dr Vincent Tabak didn't occur, even though someone asked a question....


https://twitter.com/uk_criminal_law/status/572687002233139200
https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&q=%40uk_criminal_law%20%20tabak&src=typd

[[...]]

Jury chosen in Joanna Yates murder trial

By Rod Minchin
Tuesday 4 October 2011 17:05

The process to select a jury to try the neighbour accused of murdering landscape architect Joanna Yeates began today.

Vincent Tabak, 33, denies the premeditated killing of Miss Yeates, whose body was found on a snowy verge on Christmas morning.

The bespectacled Dutch engineer spoke just twice publicly to confirm his name and to confirm he understood the process of selecting the jury at Bristol Crown Court.

Wearing a dark grey suit, pale blue shirt and dark blue tie, he sat impassively in the dock of court room one to watch as a panel of 32 potential jurors was whittled down.

They had to answer a series of questions, which included whether they knew any of the witnesses due to give evidence in the trial or had links to the firms BDP, Buro Happold or Dyson.

Potential jurors were also asked whether they had any contact with the police during the investigation into the disappearance of Miss Yeates and to confirm they were available for the whole of the trial, which is expected to last four weeks.

A number were excluded and from those remaining, 12 were drawn at random with a further six chosen as reserves.

The trial judge, Mr Justice Field, told the selected six men and six women to consider overnight whether there were reasons, such as a hospital appointment, as to why they could not be one of the jurors.

The judge also warned the 18-strong panel not to carry out their own investigation into the disappearance of Miss Yeates or discuss the case with other people.

"You know who the defendant is and who the deceased is and I must instruct you to avoid undertaking any inquiries at all about the background of this case," the judge said.

"The position is that the defendant must be tried only on the evidence that is heard in this court room."

Mr Justice Field told the jury-in-waiting to return to court tomorrow morning to be sworn in.

Prosecutors will claim Tabak, who lived in a ground-floor flat adjoining her home in Clifton, Bristol, murdered the 25-year-old after she went for festive drinks with colleagues.

She was reported missing two days after disappearing when her boyfriend Greg Reardon returned to their shared flat after a weekend visiting family in Sheffield.

Following a string of appeals by relatives and police, her frozen corpse was found by dog walkers three miles from her home on a lane in Failand, north Somerset.

Mr Reardon and Miss Yeates' parents, David and Teresa, are expected to attend the trial, although none were present today.

Tabak, a trilingual engineer, is being represented by William Clegg QC. Nigel Lickley QC leads the case for the Crown.

The trial was adjourned until tomorrow.

Two interesting points I noticed in that article..... Why ask the potential jury if they had any connection to Dyson??

I can see possibly why BDP or Buro happold, seeing as Joanna Yeates worked for one and Dr Vincent Tabak worked for the other, but DYSON??? We were told in the media that was where Tanja Morson worked, but why is it relevant??

"You know who the defendant is and who the deceased is and I must instruct you to avoid undertaking any inquiries at all about the background of this case," the judge said.

I could be wrong.... would potential jurors be told before they are sworn in, what case they were about to preside over?  In fact, would potential jurors be asked those questions??

I am not sure, someone with court experience, must know what takes place..  And why would the jury know who the defendant is?? Should they?? 

Potential jurors were also asked whether they had any contact with the police during the investigation into the disappearance of Miss Yeates and to confirm they were available for the whole of the trial, which is expected to last four weeks.

Now that is a tricky one.... Did that include social media??  Do they mean just about the disappearance and not when it became a Murder Inquiry??



https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jury-chosen-in-joanna-yates-murder-trial-2365469.html

[[...]]

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/SNATCHED+FEET+FROM+HER+DOOR%3B+JOANNA+YEATES+MURDER+INVESTIGATION.-a0245843218

According to the library.. This article appeared in the mirror on the 6th January 2011

I can't quote from this article, I need permission, but I do remember the article, and talk of Joanna Yeates going to the main house to collect her mail that evening.....

I suppose I can ask a question.....

Who was the person who was younger than CJ mentioned in the article??

Did this person give other interviews to the media??


Of all of the cameras at Clifton Suspension Bridge, we were told that the images were blurred, yet the article suggest that they must have had some success at looking at hundreds of cars trying to get their registration plate number... 


These are the very articles that get removed,  and really there shouldn't be a reason for it (imo)

It goes with the idea of the abduction that was spoken of by Joanna Yeates parents, so why remove said article??

I have just found a similar article, that was partly copied by the 'Daily Mail"

Joanna Yeates 'may have been snatched by her killer lying in wait as she went to check her post'
By ROB COOPER
UPDATED: 22:01, 6 January 2011

Police search old rifle range at Clifton College, opposite flats
Officers also dredge drains outside Joanna's home
Chris Jefferies expects to be cleared as suspect 'in days'
Landlord could sue police for wrongful arrest
Joanna Yeates may have been snatched as she walked round the side of her building to check to see if she had any post.

Detectives are looking into whether the 25-year-old's killer could have been lying in wait on the dark approach to the communal hall where the mail is kept.

The new theory could explain why the landscape architect's coat, mobile phone, and boots were all left in her flat on the night she disappeared - and there was no suggestion the killer had broken in.
A 39-year-old former tenant said he had told officers investigating the murder that he thinks that is what may have happened. Avon and Somerset Police confirmed it was 'one of many' lines of inquiry they were considering.

Alternatively the landscape architect may have left the door to her basement flat on the latch while she walked down to where the boxes are kept - allowing whoever murdered her to sneak in.
The new possibilities emerged today as a photo was released of Miss Yeates in her sixth form badminton team.

The blonde haired teenager, wearing a Nike top, was photographed with 13 over players in the picture taken in Southampton, Hampshire, in 2002.

Miss Yeates went on to become a landscape architect and lived in her flat with boyfriend Greg Reardon, 27 in Clifton, Bristol.

There was no sign of a struggle in the property on the night she disappeared. The flat did have a letter box in the door but the postman drops all mail off in the communal entrance in Clifton, Bristol.

To get there from her basement flat she would have had come up the stairs and then exit through the front door before walking round to the communal entrance.

Other residents, including landlord Christopher Jefferies, 65, use this door to get to their flats.
The ex-tenant, who lived in the flat next to Jo's but did not want to be named, told the Mirror: 'Jo could easily have popped out to get her post that night and I told the police this theory. My wife and I used to do it all the time at all times of day or night.

'If someone was hanging around they could have grabbed her, it's very dark. Alternatively, in the time it took Jo to leave her flat to reach the communal area, a prowler could have sneaked in her unlocked flat and laid in wait.'

Miss Yeates, who was last seen on December 17, was discovered dead three miles from her flat by a walker on Christmas morning.

This morning uniformed police officers were searching drains in the streets surrounding the flat in Canynge Road, Clifton, as they continue to hunt for clues.

An industrial drain cleaner was used to dredge up debris before police used sticks to work through the leaves and mud.

A police officer said they would be searching about 40 drains looking for any evidence that might help in the investigation.

Uniformed police officers were later seen checking an old rifle range in the grounds of Clifton College, which is next door to Miss Yeates' flat.
Joanna's landlord, former English master Chris Jefferies, has told friends he expects to be cleared of any involvement in the death 'within days' - and he may sue police for wrongful arrest.

The 65-year-old was questioned over the disappearance by detectives for three days before being released on bail.

Irving Steggles, a 65-year-old former university friend of the suspect who is a pastor in Johannesburg, South Africa, said Mr Jeffries expects to be eliminated from the investigation.

'Chris emailed me and said he was going to be eliminated from police enquiries in the next day or so,' he told the Daily Telegraph.

'He said: "The ordeal is almost over". He is preparing a case against the media and the police, I believe. This has completely shattered his life.
Yesterday officers revealed Joanna was missing a long thick grey ski sock which could have been removed by her killer as a 'trophy'.

As her coat and boots were found back at her flat, it reinforces the possibility that she was killed there.

Displaying a boxed example of a sock similar to the one they are desperately trying to find, Detective Chief Inspector Phil Jones said yesterday he was keeping an ‘open mind’ about whether it had been used to strangle her.
‘When Jo was found on Christmas Day she wasn’t wearing her jacket,’ he said. ‘She wasn’t wearing her boots and she was only wearing one sock.

‘The jacket and the boots have been found at her home address. That would indicate that Jo had returned home.

‘At this present time the sock has not been found. It is a ski-type sock and would fit a size five, which was Jo’s foot size.’

The number of officers involved in the investigation has increased to 80 after a further ten were brought in to work the case.

A police source added that officers were investigating a theory that Miss Yeates was assaulted on her doorstep in Clifton, Bristol, and the sock was ripped from her foot during an attempted sex attack.

A second line of inquiry is that the murderer could have begun to strip her body on the grass verge where she was found in Longwood Lane, three miles from her flat, and planned to throw it over a wall into a deep quarry below.
Officers believe that the killer might have been disturbed by a passing car and decided to flee the scene quicker than planned.

The source said: ‘Although it has not been ruled out that her sock was taken as a trophy, it is not seen as the most likely cause for it not being left on the body.

Landscape architect Miss Yeates was recorded by cameras at the Hophouse pub in Clifton, Bristol at 8.44pm on Friday, December 1.

She stopped off at Waitrose, an off licence and Tesco Express where she bought a pizza on the night she disappeared.

Landscape architect Miss Yeates was recorded by cameras at the Hophouse pub in Clifton, Bristol at 8.44pm on Friday, December 1.

Friday December 1st ?? error maybe or what??

But the difference between the two article, is the one from the library talks of the CCTV camera and number plates being checked and every motorist on the evening she disappeared on Clifton Suspension Bridge... So they must have been able to see the registration plates if the article is anything to go by....

But The Mail doesn't mention this important detail....

Just to clarify have I understood the permissions for the article from the library... How does one determine using any part of said article?? Does that mean I am not allowed to question of or refer to it??

I am not sure... so could a moderator check what I have posted with this post confirm that it is ok....


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344610/Joanna-Yeates-snatched-killer-went-check-post.html

[[...]]

Sky News..... The date of the upload on youtube is the 2nd January 2011, but part of the footage has to been filmed before..

At 39 seconds, we can see a Forensic tent to the right in the footage, which is next to the entrance to the woods...

This footage date is important,  it was on a foggy morning, the snow has cleared, we therefore have between the 25th December 2010 and the 27th December 2010, for the footage to be shot...

We have the Yeates family walking past the entrance to the woods , when the family visit Longwood Lane on the 27th December 2010, they are allowed past the crime scene tape...

The Sky footage shows the tent just in front of the crime scene tape, what could possibly be under this tent??

I say this footage has to be between the 25th December 2010 and the 27th December 2010, because, we know that the Yeates family have been allowed on said second scene of crime, and said forensic tent is no longer there...

But was it afterwards??

Making the footage even stranger...

On the footage that we see the Yeates walking over the second scene of crime, there is debris all over the road, what is it from? Is it significant? Was there any potential evidence amongst this debris??

Looking at the footage with the forensic tent there is also debris across the road,..

You would have imagined that they cleared all the debris off the road incase there was any thing there...

Is the footage of both taken on the same day??

I still do not understand why The Yeates are walking all over a crime scene, the Police were here over a number of days, we know that they enlisted the help of Avon and Somerset fire service between the 25th December 2010 and the 29th December 2010... So why is anyone walking over this crime scene???


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxnY6Orh2u0

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/family-of-joanna-yeates-visit-spot-where-her-body-was-news-footage/693154970

[Caroline]

The question has to be why would he risk so much by taking the stand and saying the tale he did?
Without the story on the stand that he told, he could have only been convicted of Manslaughter..(imo) The only person who put himself anywhere, was himself....

That is true! He put himself in prison when he murdered JY.

[AerialHunter]

Tricky when a non native English speaker comes up against the interview team trained in the Reid Technique. I must be mistaken but I thought we had banned that in the UK. All my very humble opinion of course, I deny ever seeing any paperwork relating to people, military or otherwise who were sent on courses to the USA.

[[...]]

Part 1...

Tricky when a non native English speaker comes up against the interview team trained in the Reid Technique. I must be mistaken but I thought we had banned that in the UK. All my very humble opinion of course, I deny ever seeing any paperwork relating to people, military or otherwise who were sent on courses to the USA.

You have mentioned this before AH... And really i should have picked up on it, but it wasn't until recently i found an article, and your mentioning of it that it has brought it back to the fore....

Firstly the article...

The North East detective behind some of the country's biggest investigations from Shannon Matthews to Joanne Yeates[/quote]

As police National Interview Advisor, Detective Gary Shaw helped interview some of the UK's most infamous criminals
ByHannah Graham
18:00, 4 NOV 2018

You might not have heard of Detective Gary Shaw, but his cases will certainly be familiar.

From the murder of Bristol architect Joanna Yeates to the suspicious disappearance of Yorkshire schoolgirl Shannon Matthews, Detective Shaw has been behind the scenes of some of the country's most infamous investigations.


Over the course of a 41-year career, he revolutionised the techniques used by police officers when interviewing those accused of the most heinous crimes.

After joining Northumbria Police in 1977, the police officer from from Ryhope in Sunderland, rose through the ranks to become the police's National Interview Advisor, travelling between forces to help them improve techniques to get the information investigators need from their suspects.
He explained: "It was about switching mind-sets from a confession-based form of interview to a more ethical technique by introducing the PEACE interview training programme."

The PEACE method emphasises information-gathering over aggressive demands for a confession, and guides detectives through a system of drawing out their interviewees to get the facts they need.
When it was rolled out across the country, it helped ensure police interviews could offer pivotal evidence in vital cases.

It was these skills which were vital when Detective Shaw, who holds an MBE for services to policing, was called in to help consult on interviewing in the investigation which eventually discovered nine-year-old Shannon Matthews had in fact been concealed by the uncle of her mothers' partner; or with the probe, one of the largest ever conducted in the Bristol area, which eventually found Vincent Tabak to be the the murderer of 25-year-old Joanna Yeates.

Now, he'll be helping produce the next generation of crime-solvers, after accepting a full-time post as Professor of Investigative Practice at the University of Sunderland. He'll be teaching students on the BA in Applied Investigation and MA in Investigative Management programmes.

He said: "At the end of the day, this is all about making detectives better at what they do, helping them solve crimes and arming them with the skills they need."

He added: "I believe in continuous development for investigators. We are in a very different world compared to 15, or even 10, years ago.

"I’m keen to develop the thinking of detectives so that when they go to crime scenes they are able to make informed decisions and take as much away as possible."

University of Sunderland’s head of work based learning, Hazel Rounthwaite, said: “The University has been working with Gary for the last 10 years, but to have him on board as our full-time Professor of Practice in Investigative Practice is an absolute honour.

“Gary not only has an international profile and a wealth of expertise in investigative practice, but he also brings with him innovative approaches to delivery of educational provision, truly embracing the concept of work-based learning by bringing together the academic and practical nature of investigation into both the classroom and working arenas."

* Peace Technique

* The Probe Technique

* Reid Technique

* Dutch Interrogation Techniques

Visual probe technique

Sample page: Visual probe technique
The visual probe technique (sometimes referred to as the dot-probe paradigm) was designed to assess selective attention. This means the technique is used to determine whether an individual is more or less prone to being influenced by certain stimuli. It is a commonly used neuropsychological technique to determine the presence and extent of anxiety type in an individual. The basis is to test reaction speed and assess whether other stimuli influence reaction speed. Macleod, Mathews and Tata introduced the technique in 1986 to assess attention in common mental disorders (MacLeod et al, 1986).

One example of the visual probe technique is where people are asked to read words as they appear one at a time on a screen. They are required to press a button as quickly as possible when a dot appears instead. This measures reaction speed (Kent & Turpin, 1999).

If a threatening word is displayed for people with an anxiety disorder, their reaction time is reduced, most likely because their attention shifts. People without an anxiety disorder do not have this delay in reaction time because they do not selectively attend to the threatening words (Kent & Turpin, 1999). 

Other tasks can also elicit a delayed reaction time in people with anxiety. Using the dichotic listening task, threatening words in the unshadowed ear slowed responses to a visual task on a computer (Kent & Turpin, 1999).

Below is an example of the visual probe technique. Give it a try and see how your attentional bias is influenced.

Police Interrogation – Reid & PEACE Techniques
 December 2, 2015 by   Jeff Laskey

In 2003, while disembarking a GO Bus on his way home, Michael Dixon was arrested for a robbery he did not commit. Dixon, who is black, tall, and was wearing boots and socks that night. Eyewitness accounts of the robbery described a short, white man wearing sandals with no socks as the perpetrator. Despite this, and other clear evidence, Dixon was arrested and spent three-and-a-half-days in custody. While in custody, Hamilton police used the Reid Technique of police interrogation on Dixon, in the hopes of pressuring him to confess. Dixon was then subjected to strict bail conditions for nine months, before his charges were withdrawn.

Michael Dixon successfully sued the police for their conduct, and was awarded $46 000 by a Superior Court judge in 2011.

What is the Reid Technique of police interrogation?
The Reid Technique of police interrogation is a method of interviewing suspects used by law enforcement officials. It is comprised of three stages:

1. The factual analysis;

2. The behaviour analysis interview (BAI);

3. The interrogation.

The factual analysis phase is when the would-be interrogator gathers information about their suspect. When the would-be interrogator identifies their suspect, they conduct a behaviour analysis interview, or BAI, to pinpoint the suspect’s behavioural nuances and build trust with the suspect. In addition, the BAI is designed to identify whether or not the suspect is truthful based on their responses to questions in the interview. The third and final stage is the interrogation, a nine-step accusatory process designed to elicit a confession. Information gathered during the BAI is used against the suspect in the interrogation. During the interrogation, the suspect is informed that his or her guilt has already been confirmed. The suspect is convinced of this though a multitude of techniques, including: interrogators talking over the suspect, interrogators talking in monologues and not letting the suspect speak, and interrogators reminding the suspect that they will surely face a harsh punishment.

Critics have largely denounced the second and third stages of the Reid technique of police interrogation.
What are critics saying about the Reid Technique?
Though Canadian courts have identified the Reid Technique of police interrogation to be an acceptable form of interrogation, critics have decried this method for a variety of reasons. The main reason is that the Reid Technique is manipulative in such a manner that encourages accused individuals to confess to the allegations against them, even if such allegations are untrue. This is backed by studies that highlight that methods like the Reid Technique of police interrogation are actually linked to false confessions. Indeed, of the individuals exonerated by DNA evidence in the United States, 25% had provided a false confession. Furthermore, the assumptions that form the basis for drawing conclusions from the BAI lack scientific support.

A crucial part of the Reid Technique of police interrogation involves informing the suspect that the evidence against them is clear, and that such evidence will surely lead to a conviction, regardless of whether or not that evidence actually exists. The Reid Technique therefore encourages dishonesty on the part of interrogators. In Canada, judges and justices of the peace are the individuals who rule on whether an individual is guilty or not. By telling a suspect that they are guilty, users of the Reid Technique of police interrogation are overstepping the bounds of their authority.

In short, The Reid Technique assumes guilt. This is at odds with one of the principal bases of our justice system, which is that all individuals are presumed innocent until guilt is proven. The Reid Technique of police interrogation circumvents this assumption, and thereby truncates the accused’s right to fairness within judicial procedures by presenting a confession which may be false, or obtained via coercion.

What is the PEACE Technique?
The PEACE technique of police interrogation is a less coercive and less manipulative alternative to the Reid technique. PEACE stands for:

Participation and Planning

Engage and Explain

Account

Closure

Evaluate

In contrast to the Reid Technique of police interrogation, the PEACE of police interrogation model is non-accusatory, and is based on either proving or disproving theories through interrogation of the subject. The end goal of the PEACE technique is to obtain as much information as possible, rather than simply obtaining a confession. In addition, the PEACE technique of police interrogation does not automatically assume guilt, and therefore does not contribute to an environment of resentment during interrogation.

Sources:

John E. Reid & Associates

http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/includes/pdf/snook-2008.pdf

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/youre-guilty-now-confess-false-admissions-put-polices-favourite-interrogation-tactic-under-scrutiny

http://www.durhamcollege.ca/academic-schools/school-of-justice-emergency-services/centre-for-integrated-justice-studies/courses/peace-model-interviewinginterrogating

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2205346-judge-rakes-cops-over-the-coals-for-wrongful-arrest/

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/north-east-detective-behind-countrys-15366927

http://tron.rcpsych.ac.uk/abouttron/trontasters/samplepagevisualprobetech.aspx

https://smordinlaw.com/police-interrogation/

[[...]]

Part 2.... ( An example of Dutch Interrogation Techniques)

The complex relationship between interrogation techniques, suspects changing their statement and legal assistance. Evidence from a Dutch sample of police interviews

Received 03 Sep 2015, Accepted 18 Feb 2016, Published online: 09 Mar 2016

ABSTRACT
This study aims to provide more insight in the complex and dynamic relationships between interrogation techniques, changes in suspects’ statements and the presence of a lawyer. In doing so, it shows the importance of taking into account the conditions under which interrogation techniques can elicit statements from suspects. Based on a Dutch sample of 168 police interviews of suspects in homicide cases structural equation modelling is used to analyse (1) the extent to which interrogation techniques mediate suspects changing their statement and (2) the extent to which the presence of a lawyer moderates the relationship between interrogation techniques and suspects changing their statement. The results show that manipulative interrogation techniques mediate the changing statement of silent suspects compared to suspects who give a statement on personal matters or deny only during interviews without a lawyer. Based on the findings it can be concluded that the presence of a lawyer can change the dynamics of police interviews of suspects. This is an important conclusion given the European developments in strengthening the safeguards of the rights of suspects in police custody. The presence of a lawyer might contribute to reducing false confessions, avoid tunnel vision, and prevent miscarriages of justice.

KEYWORDS: Interrogation techniques, suspects changing statement, legal advice, presence of lawyer

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

The complex relationship between interrogation techniques, suspects changing their statement and legal assistance. Evidence from a Dutch sample of police interviews
Willem-Jan Verhoeven
https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2016.1157594
PUBLISHED ONLINE:
09 March 2016

Table 1 of 7
 
CI 1:   ‘Now we know who the victim is. (Interrogator writes down the name of the victim and shows it to the suspect). Can you read who this is?’
Suspect:   ‘I won't say anything.’
CI 1:   ‘What should we tell his mother? She has a lot of questions. But you won't answer them [P9]. Can you imagine how frustrating that is?’
Suspect:   (Smiles).
CI 1:   ‘How would the family react when they hear you are laughing?’ [P9]
CI 1:   ‘Can you say his name?’
Suspect:   ‘I won't say anything.’
CI 1:   ‘[Name of suspect]. Put yourself in the position of the family of [Name victim]. The autopsy on [Name victim] is today. We have to tell his mother that he will be cut open today. We can only say that the person who knows more about this: Laughs, bites his nails, wobbles his legs, and furthermore makes use of his right to silence. [P9] Would you like to say something? Express regrets? This will work in your advantage in court. [P15] But I don't see it and I don't hear it.’
CI 1:   ‘[Name witness] told us that you are successful in theatre. That won't work with the line: “I won't say anything”. The victim will never speak again. And why? Why did this happen? We won't rule out the fact that you might have spoken with other people. Do you want them to decide over you? You don't want that. Tomorrow you will be brought before the prosecutor. Does it make sense to interrogate you before that?’
CI 2:   ‘A mother has the right to know what happened to her child. Can you imagine how it feels to outlive your own child? The relation between mother and child is the strongest there is.’ [P9]

The complex relationship between interrogation techniques, suspects changing their statement and legal assistance. Evidence from a Dutch sample of police interviews
Willem-Jan Verhoeven
https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2016.1157594
PUBLISHED ONLINE:
09 March 2016

Interrogation techniques   Description
[P4] Confrontation with (circumstantial) evidence   This may concern: showing photographs, playing or reading fragments from telephone taps or MSN conversations, and discussing blood trails on clothes or walls.
[P5] Confrontation with statements of witnesses or other suspects   Interrogators refer to witness statements or statements made by other suspects. For example: ‘They say the weapon is yours.’ ‘People say you did it.’ ‘You get it that people are pointing at you considerably. Your buddies are grassing on you, aren't they?!’ ‘Others say that you are involved somehow. We don't conjure it out of mid-air.’ ‘Your own girlfriend, even your own girlfriend saw the pictures and said it was you.’ ‘You do get it by now that we spoke with a lot of people who stated all sorts of things.’
[P6] Present hypothetical scenarios   Interrogators present possible ways of how things might have happened, hoping suspects go into it. Examples are: ‘Suppose it's because you wanted something from the house or talk to someone then we get information about when it possibly happened.’ ‘Interrogator supposes that he doesn't want to say that the suspect wanted to kill the victim with the screwdriver but that he perhaps only wanted to stop him with it.’ ‘I don't know if the blood is from the victim, but if so, it's going to be hard.’ ‘If you are involved I would remain silent indeed, not if you are innocent.’
[P7] Leading questioning   The remarks and questions posed by the interrogator give the impression that the suspect is involved or knows something. Examples are: ‘Are you afraid to tell it because it is incriminating?’ ‘You don't like someone. Then it's nice that the problem is solved now, isn't it?’ ‘Now the girl is dead so problem solved.’ ‘If you have nothing to do with it, why use your right to silence? You can't give wrong answers, can you?’ ‘Would the victim be seeing a stranger at midnight?’ ‘Because of everything, all you have been through, you want to hurt someone too.’
[P8] Make promises   ‘If you give good information and specifically about who is responsible for what, than we can do something with it.’ ‘Then something will happen, if your information is true.’
[P9] Moral appeal   Interrogators trifle with suspect's feelings of guilt and his conscience. In most cases they refer to suspect's parents, spouse, children, or friends. Examples are: ‘It concerns others as well. You are making it very easy for yourself now. Your mother, your girlfriend, your child. How will it affect them?’ ‘If you are close to your mother, your mother wouldn't say all these things if her son didn't do anything.’ ‘Your wife didn't sleep for one moment. You don't give that a moment's thought.’ ‘Who will read to the child now?’
[P11] Give moral justifications   ‘I think that it is a mugging gone wrong. This wasn't supposed to happen.’
[P12] Challenge inconsistencies in suspect's statement   This concerns suspects being inconsistent during the questioning. Interrogators use this in an attempt to corner suspects. Examples are: ‘First you say you are drunk and that you don't know it anymore because of that. And now you say that you know for sure that you were with [name victim].’ ‘So, there hasn't been a bed in that room ever? Why do you say it differently every time?’ ‘You are inconsistent. You want the offender being caught, but you won't cooperate.’ ‘Ah! So they did tell you!’ ‘You have been lying from the beginning. You are not open and you are dishonest. It is about time you start telling the truth.’ ‘All the time, you adjust your story! What should I believe?’
[P13] Interrupt suspect's statement   Sometimes interrogator and suspect interrupt each other. Furthermore, interrogators don't let suspects finish by interrupting them in several ways: ‘Wait, this is important.’ ‘Yes okay, so nothing special.’ ‘Clear. We are going to put your story on paper now.’ ‘[ … ], we know all about those financial problems now. I don't think that is the most important part.’
[P14] Show impatience, frustration, and anger   Interrogators raise their voices as well. Examples are: I am not dealing with a small child, am I?!’ ‘At least, you can say why not?!’ ‘Around 7pm the interrogator yells out again … ’ ‘ … shouts that she and the suspect are not retarded … ’ ‘You are here for murder! You are disrespectful and detached! Unbelievable!’ Interrogators also show their frustration by sighing repeatedly.
[P15] Stress consequences of non-cooperation   Interrogators often refer to what the judge will think. For instance: ‘What will the judge say about this?’ ‘It is strange that you won't state where you are from, isn't it? Not even where you were born. I think you need to keep your credibility. In this way you will lose it.’ ‘Experience shows that silence does not work in your favour.’ ‘The judge doesn't have time to talk to you. You can tell it here so the judge can read it.’ ‘Because you are silent you don't put any effort into proving your innocence and you don't cooperate in finding the truth.’ ‘Do you realize that you don't prove your innocence by keeping silent? That you frustrate finding the truth?’ ‘As a consequence of that I will advise to prolong your stay here.’ ‘A judge can also watch this footage. What will he think of it?’ ‘The examining judge also isn't retarded. He will also wonder why you haven't said anything until then.’
[P16] Physical intimidation   This concerns specifically physical movements towards the suspect. Examples are: ‘The interrogator gets up, takes the photo album, moves towards the suspect, and stands beside him. He opens the album on a page with a picture of the suspect. He raises his voice and points at the picture using a lot of gestures.’ ‘When the interrogator reconstructs the situation he attempts to persuade the suspect to tell more about what happened. Meanwhile the interrogator walks up and down the questioning room.’

2.1. Overarching categories of interviewing methods

In the literature, interrogation techniques are often divided into two overarching categories (Kelly et al. 2013 Kelly, C.E., et al., 2013. A taxonomy of interrogation methods. Psychology, public policy, and law, 19, 165–178. doi: 10.1037/a0030310
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
, Walsh et al. 2015 Walsh, D., et al., ed., 2015. International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation. Volume 2: suspects. London: Routledge.
 [Google Scholar]
). On the one hand, there are the accusatorial, maximisation/minimisation, dominant and control-based methods. On the other hand, there are the information-gathering, humane and rapport-based methods (see, e.g. Holmberg and Christianson 2002 Holmberg, U. and Christianson, S.-Å., 2002. Murderers’ and sexual offenders’ experiences of police interviews and their inclinations to admit or deny crimes. Behavioral sciences and the law, 20, 31–45. doi: 10.1002/bsl.470
[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
, Vrij et al. 2006 Vrij, A., Mann, S., and Fisher, R.P., 2006. Information-gathering vs accusatory interview style: individual differences in respondents’ experiences. Personality and individual differences, 41, 589–599. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.02.014
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
, Häkkänen et al. 2009 Häkkänen, H., et al., 2009. Police officers’ views of effective interview tactics with suspects: the effects of weight of case evidence and discomfort with ambiguity. Applied cognitive psychology, 23, 468–481. doi: 10.1002/acp.1491
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
, Horgan et al. 2012 Horgan, A.J., et al., 2012. Minimization and maximization techniques: assessing the perceived consequences of confessing and confession diagnosticity. Psychology, crime, & law, 18, 65–78. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2011.561801
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
, Meissner et al. 2012 Meissner, C.A., et al., 2012. Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions. Campbell systematic reviews, 2012, 13.
 [Google Scholar]
, Alison et al. 2014 Alison, L., et al., 2014. The efficacy of rapport-based techniques for minimizing counter-interrogation tactics amongst a field sample of terrorists. Psychology, public policy, & law, 20, 421–430. doi: 10.1037/law0000021
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
).6
6 For reasons of readability, ‘accusatory methods’ will henceforth be used to refer to the first category and ‘information-gathering methods’ will henceforth be used to refer to the second category.
View all notes
 The methods in the two categories differ in terms of their primary goal. In general, the accusatorial methods are aimed at obtaining a confession from the suspect. The ‘Reid technique’ (Inbau et al. 2013 Inbau, F.E., et al., 2013. Criminal interrogation and confessions. 5th ed. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
 [Google Scholar]
) is the most familiar and most frequently used model in the accusatorial methods category. In short, this model consists of two phases. During the first phase, the criminal investigator takes a relatively neutral approach in an attempt to assess the guilt or extent to which the suspect is telling the truth/lies and to retrieve general information which can then be used against the suspect during the interrogation. The interrogation goes into its second phase if the criminal investigator is convinced that the suspect is lying/guilty. The interrogation consists of nine steps and is essentially based on three main elements: (1) custody and isolation from the outside world increase anxiety, nervousness and insecurity and the need to free oneself from the situation, (2) confrontation in which the suspect is accused of the crime and sometimes (manufactured) evidence is used to stress the certainty of the accusation and (3) minimisation means that the criminal investigator adopts a sympathetic attitude and morally justifies the crime, implying to the suspect that he/she may be treated leniently and a confession therefore seems the best way out (Kassin and Gudjonsson 2004 Kassin, S.M. and Gudjonsson, G.H., 2004. The psychology of confessions: a review of the literature and issues. Psychological science in the public interest, 5, 33–67. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00016.x
[Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]
, p. 43).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10439463.2016.1157594

[[...]]

Part3..

From Part 1 where Detective Gary Shaw, has allowed us to know that he was apart of this Investigation, to part 2 where examples of  Dutch Interrogation techniques are used, we have a wide array of options:

* Peace Technique

* The Probe Technique

* Reid Technique

* Dutch Interrogation Techniques

Legally in the UK The Reid Technique isn't used.....

Detective Gary Shaw is an enigma, was he the colleague whom accompanied DC Karen Thomas to Holland?? Who accompanied her to Holland??  And why was it so desperately important that they interviewed Dr Vincent Tabak in Holland??? It cannot have been about a car changing position.... That has to be rubbish....

Ann Reddrop has told us how she was looking at Dr Vincent Tabak in Late December 2010...

Did they go to Holland so they could use whatever Technique they liked on Dr Vincent Tabak and no-one would know any different???

The Dutch have their own Interrogation methods, and they were on Dutch soil at the time.....  So it is extremely possible that all of the fore mentioned techniques I have highlighted could have been used in a combination of ways...

Dr Vincent Tabak didn't have a lawyer present...

Dr Vincent Tabak's interview apparently lasted for 6 hours.... (Could it have been longer??)

We do not know what took place in Holland with the Interview that Dr Vincent Tabak attended, we have no concept of what techniques may or may not have been used upon him... False memories could have been planted when he was in Holland... we simply do not know... But there is no video evidence of this Interview, DC Karen Thomas makes out that alarm bells started to ring, and that was why she was suspicious... she forgot to tell us The head Of The Complex Case Unit already had Dr Vincent Tabak in her sights..... !!

There is no video evidence of any of Dr Vincent Tabak's Interviews with the Police.... they were not presented at trial as far as I am aware... We also have a man whom assumed the role of Chaplain, visiting Dr Vincent Tabak, who i believe to be a prison officer... Did this Chaplain use any Techniques on Dr Vincent Tabak on his visits to him whilst he was in prison?? We have no idea.... But anything is possible with this case...

Because everyone forgets that Dr Vincent Tabak is a Dutch National, most have no realised the importance of this... Most have only considered that the rules that apply in this country where applied to Dr Vincent Tabak, and have sadly forgotten that he was interviewed in his own country by British Police, whom could have used a variety of techniques on Dr Vincent Tabak, that are not allowed in this country...

The idea that Dr Vincent Tabak was somehow brain washed, therefore doesn't seem that far fetched, when you are applying the laws of the land of England and Holland at the same time...  When a colleague that accompanies DC Karen Thomas isn't named, when they should be .....  And we do not know what experiences said colleague has or uses...

Even if it wasn't Detective Gary Shaw that accompanied DC Karen Thomas to Holland, it really doesn't matter, because it is possible for them to use virtually any Interrogation Technique on Dr Vincent Tabak , because they interviewed him in Holland!!

So did Detective Gary Shaw accompany DC Karen Thomas to Holland for the interview that she calls The Process with Dr Vincent Tabak?? If he didn't go what exactly was his role and when did they decide to use his assistance??

I have never been able to understand why Dr Vincent Tabak took the stand to state how he killed Joanna yeates, it has never made any sense to me.... If he was so clever , why did he just not stay quite....

But if these Interrogation techniques have and had been used on Dr Vincent Tabak, then he would say just about anything.....


And maybe he was only told the basics.... a story like I have said all along, and when it came to the other 80 questions, he simply didn't know the answer, because he hadn't been told!!

It's a theory... a plausible theory....  and one worth considering (imo)

In short, this model consists of two phases. During the first phase, the criminal investigator takes a relatively neutral approach in an attempt to assess the guilt or extent to which the suspect is telling the truth/lies and to retrieve general information which can then be used against the suspect during the interrogation. The interrogation goes into its second phase if the criminal investigator is convinced that the suspect is lying/guilty. The interrogation consists of nine steps and is essentially based on three main elements:

(1) custody and isolation from the outside world increase anxiety, nervousness and insecurity and the need to free oneself from the situation,

(2) confrontation in which the suspect is accused of the crime and sometimes (manufactured) evidence is used to stress the certainty of the accusation and

(3) minimisation means that the criminal investigator adopts a sympathetic attitude and morally justifies the crime, implying to the suspect that he/she may be treated leniently and a confession therefore seems the best way out

Looking at those three points from the Reid technique and Interrogation techniques in general, it is possible to see a fit or pattern in the way in which Dr Vincent Tabak was treated

(1): Dr Vincent Tabak was arrested on the 20th January 2011, where he was cut off from everyone he knew, he was
       moved to 3 different prisons in 48 hours that being Bristol, to Gloucester then to Long Lartin.... Did not get
       visited by his family or girlfriend until the 11th February 2011..

(2): The DNA evidence that Dr Vincent Tabak had originally stated was tampered with,

(3): His "Confession" or his "Guilty Plea at the Old Bailey, a guilty plea to manslaughter, a plea where everyone has
       stated he did only because he wanted a more lenient sentence..


Just using these first 3 steps it is clear to she how using The reid technique or an Interrogation technique could be used on Dr Vincent Tabak, it would illicit a confession.... And having the ability and opportunity to use these techniques, in a country that has their own  Interrogation Techniques, having no real boundaries in this "Holland" interview, And continuing with the same said techniques when they are back in England, as the 3 steps clearly indicate... (imo)

Every part of this case is unfair and in just (imo), Dr Vincent tabak stood no chance of ever having a fair trial... I have pointed to many issues, but this with thanks to AH reminding me about the Reid technique, which was discussed early in this thread, has brought back to the fore, how we can find an INNOCENT MAN... pleading guilty/ confessing, to a crime he diid not commit.... A crime I have never believed he was guilty of....

And how it was possible to use these techniques between countries.... Being England and Holland!

Where no-one would ever be aware that such techniques could possibly be used....

I think the 3 steps tell us differently.....(imo)

[[...]]

From this post of mine: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg503630#msg503630

[P4] Confrontation with (circumstantial) evidence   This may concern: showing photographs, playing or reading fragments from telephone taps or MSN conversations, and discussing blood trails on clothes or walls.

Does that not Ring any Bells...... !!!!

The court heard that blood stains on a wall where Yeates's body was found suggested Tabak had tried to lift her over the wall into a neighbouring quarry.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/11/joanna-yeates-slow-painful-death

From another post:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg503631#msg503631

(1) custody and isolation from the outside world increase anxiety, nervousness and insecurity and the need to free oneself from the situation,

(2) confrontation in which the suspect is accused of the crime and sometimes (manufactured) evidence is used to stress the certainty of the accusation and

(3) minimisation means that the criminal investigator adopts a sympathetic attitude and morally justifies the crime, implying to the suspect that he/she may be treated leniently and a confession therefore seems the best way out

Again:.... from the media ....

The court heard that Tabak first confessed to killing her during a conversation with a Salvation Army chaplain while he was in custody. He had previously disputed police evidence on a string of occasions after his arrest in January. But while in prison, he was said to have told the chaplain he was sorry.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/11/joanna-yeates-slow-painful-death


My Post: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg503630#msg503630

You are here for murder! You are disrespectful and detached! Unbelievable!’

From the media report at trial:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vincent-tabak-knew-joanna-yeates-would-die-2375747.html

Mr Lickley rejected Tabak's claims he panicked after killing Miss Yeates and suggested he was "cool", "calculating" and "detached".

From my post: as above....

‘The judge doesn't have time to talk to you. You can tell it here so the judge can read it.’ ‘Because you are silent you don't put any effort into proving your innocence and you don't cooperate in finding the truth.’ ‘Do you realize that you don't prove your innocence by keeping silent? That you frustrate finding the truth?’ ‘As a consequence of that I will advise to prolong your stay here.

Well Dr Vincent Tabak's stay was prolonged, his council never asked for bail and he never got bail....

Is it just coincidence that the evidence and responses coincide with the techniques that can be used to illicit a confession and plant false memories in an Innocent man's mind??

I believe we all should challenge what happened to Dr Vincent Tabak, and what took place when incarcerating  this Dutch National known as Dr Vincent Tabak..... (imo)

[justsaying]

The points regarding interview techniques are irrelevant on the basis Tabak did not confess whilst under interrogation. Tabak confessed to a person acting as a prison chaplain!

[jixy]

The points regarding interview techniques are irrelevant on the basis Tabak did not confess whilst under interrogation. Tabak confessed to a person acting as a prison chaplain!

just more clutching at straws in an attempt to make a guilty man innocent. Its never gonna happen! As for the comments about why should he have got charged for the indecent images, I find that totally disgusting

[jixy]

Tricky when a non native English speaker comes up against the interview team trained in the Reid Technique. I must be mistaken but I thought we had banned that in the UK. All my very humble opinion of course, I deny ever seeing any paperwork relating to people, military or otherwise who were sent on courses to the USA.

I think you need to remember he is a very intelligent man ... this has been stated over and over again. He had  no problems with the language while interviewed and didnt need assistance. Head hunted for his job so im sure he was ok during the interview As Ok as anyone else in a murder investigation

As justsaying as highlighted, he didnt confess during this fake interrogation people are assuming took place!

[[...]]

just more clutching at straws in an attempt to make a guilty man innocent. Its never gonna happen! As for the comments about why should he have got charged for the indecent images, I find that totally disgusting

I was thinking about this yesterday oddly enough, in the middle of shopping....
When was Dr Vincent Tabak actually charged for the images??

Jo Yeates' murderer Vincent Tabak had child porn on his laptop
VINCENT Tabak had sick images on his laptop showing children being sexually abused, police have revealed.
ByMirror.Co.Uk
17:14, 1 NOV 2011UPDATED19:10, 12 MAR 2012

VINCENT Tabak had sick images on his laptop showing children being sexually abused, police have revealed.

The 33-year-old killer was jailed for life on Friday after a jury found him guilty of throttling 25-year-old architect Joanna Yeates in Bristol.


Following his conviction it was revealed that the Dutch engineer was obsessed with images of women being strangled during sex and had perversions for violent pornography and prostitutes.

It also came to light that Tabak faced further questioning by police relating to material discovered on the hard drives of computers he used.

It has now been reported that Avon and Somerset Police discovered 30 images of youngsters being sexually abused.

The 30 images I had also noticed the other day:

Mark Williams-Thomas
‏
Verified account
 
@mwilliamsthomas
Following Following @mwilliamsthomas
More
Jo Yeates killer: 30 images of child sexually abused were found on Tabak’s computer 2 yrs ago- just investigated now http://mirr.im/1dH6glP

9:01 AM - 17 Nov 2013

The link that MWT has made doesn't exist.... strange....

Police find 30 sick images of child porn on murderer Vincent Tabak's laptop
All the images showed sexual activity between an adult and a child - the second worst kind of child porn

By LUKE SALKELD FOR THE DAILY MAIL
UPDATED: 00:03, 2 November 2011

Vincent Tabak kept a hoard of child pornography on his laptop, it emerged yesterday.

Joanna Yeates’s murderer was found to have a stash of up to 30 images of children being abused, according to a police source.

The 33-year-old Dutchman is already known to have been obsessed with pornographic images of women being strangled and abused.

So 3 sources saying 30 images... The Daily Mail having updated said article, which originally was published on the 1st November 2011 according to the google entry..

Vincent Tabak child porn: Police found 30 sick images on murderer's ...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Vincent-Tabak-child-porn-Police-30-sick-images-murder...
1 Nov 2011 - He said: 'During the examination of Vincent Tabak's computer, other material was found. We have referred this matter to the Crown Prosecution Service for initial ...

For years the amount of images has changed.... I originally believe I had read it was in the region of 40ish, then by the time he appeared at court it had jumped to around 140ish....

The problem I had yesterday, was I was trying to understand when they actually charged Dr Vincent Tabak...  Did they charge him before the trial for instance??

Did they charge him immediately after the trial??

When was he actually charged??

If it was a live investigation, how on earth did the details appear in the media before a court case had taken place??

How did the media have the information and the type of images that apparently were on Dr Vincent Tabak's laptops??

I find it rather strange that MTW has the same amount of images in his tweet two years later, and that the link he provides no longer exists...

It still begs the question how they all were given this information... again.. MWT

Mark Williams-Thomas
‏
Verified account
 
@mwilliamsthomas
 
Vincent Tabak should def be prosecuted for making child abuse images - It is in the publics interest & vital for future Risk Management

12:57 PM - 1 Nov 2011

He has published on the same day as the media, a tweet about Dr Vincent Tabak "making" child abuse images....  How have these 3 sources been given such information, before a thorough investigation into the welfare of these children has been established??

How does anyone know this information.... I thought that it was just the apparent porn that was not allowed at trial, the child images are a seperate issue and I cannot understand how within a couple of days of Dr Vincent Tabak being found guilty, this information has been made public....

Wouldn't such information stop people coming forward?? Wouldn't these apparent childrens parents not want a proper investigation to take place... Would the parents want to know that this info was going to be leaked??

It appears that it is only when someone is famous/infamous that their names are published in the media, before the facts have been established, before charges have been laid against said accused...

I'll go back to this from The Daily mail..

All the images showed sexual activity between an adult and a child - the second worst kind of child porn

That suggests that Dr Vincent Tabak photographed these images (imo) But we then look MTW's statement

Vincent Tabak should def be prosecuted for making child abuse images - It is in the publics interest & vital for future Risk Management


He states making images also.....  But because The Daily Mail changed there time and date on the article, what time they posted said article online... Who is giving who information?? I have no idea...

But..... Vincent Tabak should def be prosecuted for making child abuse images - It is in the publics interest & vital for future Risk Management

12:57 PM - 1 Nov 2011

The tweet from MTW is posted at 12:57 pm on 1st November 2010

And... The Mirror's originally posted:

VINCENT Tabak had sick images on his laptop showing children being sexually abused, police have revealed.
ByMirror.Co.Uk
17:14, 1 NOV 2011UPDATED19:10, 12 MAR 2012


The Mirror originally posted at 17:14 1st November 2011

Leaving me not knowing the time The Daily Mails article was posted on the same day.... I have said many times before , who is the original source??

As I have stated... why has this info been released before any risk management of the children involved was assessed??
Was someone hoping that a barrage of people would come forward to accuse Dr Vincent Tabak of something untoward??

There has been many people who over the years have capitalised on making accusations, Dr Vincent Tabak would be an easy target for those who knew of his charges and apparent likes.... But we never heard of anyone coming forward in relation to Dr Vincent Tabak about anything.... Not even for his original trial in October 2011...

It takes the Police until 2015 to take Dr Vincent Tabak to court for these images.... and again we just get a guilty plea...

From The Guardian 2015:
Vincent Tabak admits possessing indecent images of children
Joanna Yeates’s killer pleads guilty to four charges at Bristol crown court over images found on his laptop
Press Association

Mon 2 Mar 2015 17.51 GMT Last modified on Wed 29 Nov 2017 22.31 GMT

Tabak, dressed in a black suit, white shirt and blue tie, was flanked by five security officers in the dock as he entered guilty pleas to the four charges. He admitted four counts of possessing indecent images of children on his laptop between January 2009 and 2011. The charges relate to 145 images, the majority of which are classed at the lowest category in terms of seriousness. Two counts of making indecent photographs between 2009 and 2011, relating to 23 images found on external hard drives, were ordered to lie on file.

Opening the case for the prosecution, David Bartlett said detectives discovered the images after examining Tabak’s laptop in 2011. “This case concerns 145 indecent images,” Bartlett said. “All of which were found on the laptop computer of this defendant which was seized on 20 January 2011. On that occasion he was arrested and cautioned and the Dell laptop was seized.”

Bartlett said the majority of images related to two teenage girls of “relative maturity” and were in the least serious category. “But some of the most serious category are not, they are of pre-pubescent girls,” he added.

Bartlett said Tabak had been interviewed in prison in March 2012 but refused to answer any questions. “He said there had been such serious leakages in information that he couldn’t have a fair trial and he couldn’t trust the security and integrity of information that he gave to the police,” Bartlett said.

This article states that Dr Vincent Tabak was not interviewed until March 2012 yet we have 3 sources giving us this information in November 2011

Again Dr Vincent Tabak has refused to answer any questions, we know nothing of how his laptop was processed, we know nothing of the chain of command.... we know nothing of whom analysed this laptop....

This is amongst the reasons I have questioned the validity of the purported images on Dr Vincent Tabak's laptop.... the dates are between 2009-2011... who had access to this laptop between this time....

Tanja Morson also used this laptop... did she not stumble across these images?? Who else could have had access in those years??

I will say Jixy, the charges for the child images have always struck me as odd... taking 4 years plus to actually take him to court for this crime, an unusual length of time for a man sat in prison doing nothing...  And we not knowing the actual date of the original charge for this crime..

The amount of images changing also has struck me as odd.... But not as odd as the whole case against Dr Vincent Tabak...

Just looking again at The guardian article...

Temporary assistant chief constable Julian Moss, of Avon and Somerset police, said it was “crucial” that Tabak was brought to justice for possessing the images. “Vincent Tabak is a dangerous, calculating and manipulative offender who is already serving a life sentence for the murder of Joanna Yeates,” Moss said. “During the course of the investigation into Joanna’s murder, indecent images of children were found on Tabak’s laptop. These offences did not form part of the initial murder trial.

This has me again questioning how these 3 sources had the information about the apparent images on Dr Vincent Tabak's laptop?? If during the course of the Investigation these offences didn't form part of the initial trial...

Maybe the sources are the ones who need to answer questions about how they came across this information, before any questioning or charges were brought against Dr Vincent Tabak... (imo)

I have been confused as to how this had always unfolded in the media before any protection measures could be put in place for the children that had been exposed..

Just like the trial, I have questioned the validity of these charges... It's easy to make a monster out of someone after the fact and that secures in the public's mind the monster that everyone wants to believe Dr Vincent Tabak is ... 
It sealed everyones belief after trial that the must have had the right man for the crime....

I will question and if I am proved wrong , so be it... But the original trial has never sat right with me, so the guilty plea to the child images has had the same effect on me...

And before fingers get pointed.. I do not condone anyone abusing children....  I am just trying to understand how the case against Dr Vincent Tabak came about...



https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jo-yeates-murderer-vincent-tabak-276472

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/401998427921199104

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056041/Vincent-Tabak-child-porn-Police-30-sick-images-murderers-laptop.html

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/02/vincent-tabak-admits-possessing-indecent-images-of-children

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/131354079879380992