Leonora, we can't just guess at what happened at the time of the weekend unless we have something to back it up... I don't wish to sound disrespectful, but there are any amount of scenario's that could be attributed to what took place....
There's evidence to question various aspects of the case... Her different attire for instance.. would suggest she was at home long enough to at least change her clothes..
The Piece of CONSOLE.... now that's the one that beggar's me... what happened to the Console???? who did it belong to... Had someone come round and they played computer games?????
I agree that GR behaviour was most peculiar and his statements do not add up... But I can't point the finger because of it....
You would need her diary to gather info as to how her life was....
Maybe GR and JY life wasn't as rosie as has been said.... maybe he was covering something up... Maybe it's his lack of being at home with her that weekend... It could be all put down to guilt unless you have evidence on the contrary to prove otherwise.
All I am here for is to try and prove that it wasn't Dr Vincent Tabak... And look at aspects of the case that do not add up...
Personally I would rather not speculate, but find information that would get Dr Vincent Tabak a re-trial.. or at least have other people changing there opinion that he committed this crime.
Edit:.... I will add... There are some interesting blogs and information on the internet with regards this case, and alot of research has obviously gone into producing them... Some good solid info...
But.. when every you ask people what they think they just say that people are off their heads... Now I believe the possible reason for this, is when speculation has diverted from fact....
Having people look at the information is difficult enough, because they think only crazy people believe Dr Vincent Tabak is Innocent.. So add speculation to that and they will probably not bother reading any further.
Then the opportunity is missed on informing the public to the evidence in this case and what happened to the Dutchman..
I agree that guesswork does not necessarily deserve respect, but I would hope that you take inference and probability seriously. There are only a limited number of scenarios that can be inferred for that weekend, since each of them has to result in the victim's death, and none of them should be based on "tosh". I don't know when she died, though it is a relief to be in discussion with someone else who accepts that it may not have happened on the Friday. If the police thought her boyfriend was implicated, then it would have had to take place in the six or seven hours on the Sunday evening when he had no alibi.
On the role of the landlord, I am on much surer ground than you give me credit for. The very least that we know with certainty about his 2nd witness statement, from his Leveson testimony, is that he told the police that he saw and heard two or three persons on her front path. That is quite sufficient to PROVE that he was witness to something and someone that the police already on the Wednesday wanted to conceal for ever. At the very least, the police would have made a public appeal for the persons seen by the landlord. If the police already knew who the persons were, they would have eliminated them, and this would have been revealed, either publicly at the time, or eventually in the many documentaries about the case.
I cannot for the life of me understand what importance you attribute to the piece of console.
I don't find the behaviour of the boyfriend especially peculiar nor inconsistent. Since you found that priceless video of the CIO's first press conference, and we learnt about all the questions that he evaded, and were therefore not even reported by the journalists who posed them, we can infer that journalists would have asked repeatedly why she did not accompany her boyfriend to Sheffield - and that no answer was received. I find this very surprising, as I can think of several innocent excuses that could have been brought forward.
However, it is fact that the police DID arrest the landlord, yet did not even suspect the much more obvious person, who, statistically, ought to have been the starting point for their investigation. This is solid evidence on which we can build a case about the motives and actions of the police, not guesswork to be ignored.
In my opinion, you are on a fool's errand that is totally out of character, when you posted that all you want to do is prove Vincent Tabak innocent. This is because everything you need for that is interconnected. What the police did before the body was found is interconnected. Newspaper articles published before VT was arrested are interconnected.
Believe me, the press-conference called by the "pizza cop" on the Thursday is the first sign that VT had been marked down as the scapegoat. This is because it made a mystery where there was none. Obviously, she bought that pizza because she was hungry. However, they couldn't take the risk that the pizza would reveal that she had died after Friday evening, when VT had no alibi.
On the contrary, only crazy people could believe Vincent Tabak guilty of THIS murder. As you say, it is tosh.
