Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[[...]]

I found out WHY CJ wasn't let off the hook immediateley after Dr Vincent Tabak's arrest...

After I watched.......

 Judge Rinders Crime channel on Jo Yeates...  CJ explained why he was not freed  from the bail ......

In CJ's own words.....

 Around 39:25 mins of the Programme CJ says:

Under Suspicion.. Now I gather that one of the reasons for the delay was that Vincent Tabak when he was arreated.... refused to say anything...And therefore the police continued to entertain the suspicion that possibly there had been some sort of collusion... Between myself and Vincent Tabak

I had always wondered why CJ hadn't been cleared when they arrested Dr Vincent Tabak.... They still believed CJ had done it!!!

There was obviously no real investigation into what happened to Joanna Yeates, they decided early on it had to be someone in that building... Anyone in that building....

So lets say instead... That Joanna Yeates let Dr Vincent Tabak into the flat instead...(Why on earth would she do that!!!)

They probably believed it would have needed two people to move the body from the flat as there were no drag marks... (IMO)
They probably believed that CJ had to let him in with his keys... (IMO)


What on earth did they use to CHARGE him with then???? because this was before the confession, and in CJ's words they thought he'd helped!!!!


So we then have the Chaplain's so called confession and as far as I am aware the Chaplain did not testify to the fact that Dr Vincent Tabak confessed he'd killed Joanna Yeates...

At 38:25 mins the police officer says...

In February 2011, he disclosed to a prison chaplain erm... that he had killed Joanna and that he was going to admit it in court

So why did it take till March to release CJ finally!!!!

But at 33:32 mins: The Officer in charge of the casse says:

It was around the 20th January that erm.... we positively identified, that there were components, in mixed DNA of Vincent Tabak

Components?????? So it wasn't a full DNA match....!!!! (what the hell are components when they are at home..)

 The Police then describe him as : At 35:05 mins

 

Vincent Tabak was a professional guy ..Well educated over in the Netherlands... He had no police convictions....Very placid individual to deal with..

Easy target then..(IMO)

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4htq8y


EDIT:....

The Police are basically saying that they had no real evidence on Dr Vincent Tabak, because the DNA, were Components of Dr Vincent Tabak, and not a full profile(Said in the polices own words..)

The still believed that CJ had something to do with it... The  supposed CONFESSION was all they had to use..... And needed to find anything they could misconstrue into supposed evidence (IMO)...

So why didn't they give him Bail??

Because up until the confession, they had nothing......

And in the polices own words... he was PLACID.... (is it an acronym ?)

P: Prosecution

L: Like

A: Alienating

C: Civilians

I: In

D: Detention...... In my opinion

The police always described him as a monster before!!!

[[...]]

Had the Police ever thought that maybe Joanna Yeates actually left the building with someone she possibly new?

Or someone who convinced her to leave the building for a reason??

It would have been just as easy for someone to kill her else where and put her things back into the flat...

Did Greg ever say that both door locks were locked??

I don't remember him ever saying that...

[mrswah]

I have just watched that video---hadn't heard of that series before.

I always understood that they kept Chris Jefferies on bail for so long because they had found a pair of trainers with a bloodstain on them while searching his flat, and so they didn't release him from bail until forensic tests had been done on these trainers, and come back clear.

I suspected that they were hedging their bets, though:  they were not sure whether or not he was involved with VT, and also they had someone to fall back on, had they not been able to get anywhere with VT.  That is my opinion, but then I am a cynic.

A placid murderer, eh.  Would make a good title for a book about VT.  I have not heard this description of him by a police officer before.

[mrswah]

The police must have wondered whether Joanna left the flat with somebody she knew, as Chris Jefferies had told them that he saw and heard two or three people, one of whom might have been Joanna, leaving the building.

So, they must have thought about it.  The police would have been open to all possibilities:  they would not have been so naive as to think that, because Joanna's essential belongings were left in the flat, then she MUST have been killed in her flat. They must also have been perfectly aware that there was no trace of VT in her flat.

However, VT signed a statement saying that he killed her in her flat, and he pleaded guilty to manslaughter, so they didn't have to think about this aspect of the case any more.  That made their job a lot easier, and let's face it, very few people have asked questions, making it easier still.

[[...]]

Just cross referencing the statements made about Dr Vincent Tabak:

CrimeWatch story part 2 Andrew Mott Forensic Coordinator: says at 5:05 mins

IN the boot of the car, we were able to find minute traces of blood that was erm.. That was a match to Joanna Yeates

Judge Rinder program Joanna Yeates: At 36:25 mins The Policeman in charge says:

When we examined the boot of the car a spot of blood was identified on the rubber seal....... around by the boot, came back as being 1 in a billion belonging to Joanna Yeates

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4htq8y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0


A few interesting points there:

Officers who worked at the spot in Longwood Lane, Failand, where the body of
Jo was left are banned from Canynge Road, Clifton, where she lived.

A separate team has been operating at her flat to keep any forensic evidence
intact.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/300493/jo-crucial-clue-found/

Andrew Mott!!! the same Andrew Mott... whom:

Andrew Mott, a forensic officer who reached the scene after police arrived shortly after 9am, told how he tried to prevent Miss Yeates's body thawing out.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/277423/Killer-weeps-over-images-of-Jo-body

It was either a minute trace of Joanna Yeates blood......

OR..... A spot????  Can they not make their minds up...

Did Andrew Mott conduct the test on Dr Vincent Tabak's car??? 

Remember the police said they were keeping the too scenes seperate??

Was it in the BOOT as Andrew Mott infers??? or have we changed to the RUBBER SEAL????



Is....... ERM... an offical term????

Question:  How Did Andrew Mott go from being just a Forensic Officer to A Forensic Coordinator????


EDIT:  Why is it that when ever I try to find out what Andrew Mott has to say the only comment you get is

Forensic officer Andrew Mott, who reached the scene after police arrived shortly after 9am, told how he tried to prevent Miss Yeates’s body thawing out.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/10/14/killer-vincent-tabak-cove_n_1010686.html

You would think as the Forensic Co-ordinator, he would of had a much bigger role in COURT!!!

Extremely perplexing... And being at two different Events (IMO)




EDIT:

Follow
 
Rupert Evelyn
‏@rupertevelyn
Forensic Scientist still giving evidence. Confirming blood in boot of Tabak's car came from Joanna Yeates.
3:38 AM - 18 Oct 2011

So not on the rubber seal then!!

From the trial Twitter:

So... not Andrew Mott then?????

[[...]]

Was gonna EDIT:

But decided to reply instead:

Andrew Mott.... The illusive Andrew Mott.....

Senior investigating officer Andrew Mott, of Avon and Somerset Police, said: "This was a desperately sad case in which a young person's life was cut tragically short.

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/teenager-jailed-life-murdering-18-year-old/story-27909364-detail/story.html

1 - Crown Court Commendation – Melanie Road investigation team

Detective Chief Inspector Julie Mackay, Case Review Criminal Investigation Officer Gary Mason and civilian Senior Investigating Officer Andrew Mott were recognised for their relentless pursuit of justice for Melanie’s family.

https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/newsroom/commitment-and-tenacity-celebrated-at-force-awards-ceremony/

Is this the same Andrew Mott... Forensic Co-ordinator?????

Andrew Mott, a forensic officer who reached the scene after police arrived shortly after 9am, told how he tried to prevent Miss Yeates's body thawing out.

Tabak's QC, William Clegg, questioned why photographs were not taken of a broom being used to arrange straps underneath the body so her body could be taken away.

"I can't comment on why that was the case," Mr Mott said.

AFTER POLICE... that sounds like he's seperate from them!!! (sounds like he's with the pathology lab)..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-34413947

Silly me I was under the impression that he was Some sort of Forensic Specialist???? Thought he'd come from the Pathologist lab...

But he's a Police officer...... Big difference!!!

What was he doing then trying to stop Joanna Yeates body from thawing out????

I thought that they put up a tent to preserve the scene of crime so that nobody touched the body... No cross contamination... Until Dr Delaney examined it???

But....  the reason they gave for not putting up a tent was to stop contamination... (are they barking!!)

Why was Andrew Mott allowed to be near the body of Joanna Yeates!!!! 

[[...]]

The quotes below are from Twitter, from Journalists who were in court Tweeting as it happened.....
At Dr Vincent Tabak's trial..

Follow
 
Rupert Evelyn
‏@rupertevelyn
Because of the snowy, icy conditions Mott was concerned about putting tent over the body in case it changed conditions surrounding body

He said it was Thawing.....
Temperatures inside the Forensic Tent wouldn't be any different as it was freezing outside!
He decided not to do it because of his knowledge in pathology..... that is so extensive...erm....

Follow
 
Rupert Evelyn
‏@rupertevelyn
Because of the conditions Mott says the recovery of the body was "always going to be problematic"
2:41 AM - 14 Oct 2011

Shouldn't the pathologist suggest how to move it?

Follow
 
Julia Reid
‏@juliareid5news
Mott says the body and ground were frozen. Defence asks about a broom handle used to help feed straps under the body.
2:42 AM - 14 Oct 2011

Hang on a minute.... I thought you said it was thawing??

Did they not free joanna Yeates body fully or did they yank with the straps....
They could have caused allsorts of problems with straps and broom handles..
Was it them whom ruffled Joanna Yeates clothes as they poked and prodded at her to release her from the frozen ground????

How did they actually remove Joanna Yeates body???

Follow
 
Julia Reid
‏@juliareid5news
Mr Mott says contamination of the frozen body with the broom handle was minimised.  #Vincenttabak  #Joannayeates
2:49 AM - 14 Oct 2011

Oh.... So there was contamination....

So they are saying they chipped away with broom handles to release Joanna yeates from where she had lain??


That doesn't sound very professional to me.... So why all the Fire engines
How many people where chipping away with broom handles??
The 27 Fire men they had there , Plus Andrew Mott... what are we talking????

Follow
 
Rupert Evelyn
‏@rupertevelyn
Def "you can't eliminate the real possibility there may have been contact" between broom and body? Mott agrees
2:49 AM - 14 Oct 2011

And  maybe you hit the wall with the broom handle?????

Follow
 
Rupert Evelyn
‏@rupertevelyn
Mott noted blood staining on the wall. #joyeates
2:29 AM - 14 Oct 2011

Was that after struggling with an unwieldly broom handle????



These above quotes are from Twitter: Just search and you can find them:


Again Andrew Mott......  Now why is it him who finds the blood on the wall when he was supposed to be protecting the body????????

If the body was thawing as he says... (we have loads of quotes of him saying that.)

Then him being any where near anything else could cause cross contamination....

He should have had one job, and one job only!!!!

Where was there...... At the second scene anywhere  for Andrew Mott to clean himself down and change into a new set of coveralls??? or anyone else involved in the removal??

Don't think there were any proper hand washing fascillaties available...

This the same Andrew Mott who mentions about Joanna yeates blood being inside the boot of the car...

Now call me cynical... But how is it that Andrew Mott finds the blood on the wall.... Is looking after Joanna Yeates because she's thawing.. and miraculously, talks about her blood in the boot of Dr Vincent Tabak's car!!!!!

Why 3 forensic Tents then??

The only pictures available of police officers with broom stick's are the ones searching the verge... The definetaley didn't have protective clothes on..... Did they share sticks????

So they managed to free Joanna Yeates with broom sticks before Dr Delaney examined her making sure no injuries had been caused with people in constant contact with her body.....

Oh what a tangled web we weave..........(IMO)

[[...]]

Lets look at the blood on the wall......

Forensic scientist Tanya Nickson, who examined bloodstains found on a wall next to where Miss Yeates had been found on Christmas morning on Longwood Lane, in Failand, said the pattern indicated smearing rather than splattering.

Pattern indicated smearing:

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8834133/Vincent-Tabak-confessed-Joanna-Yeates-killing-in-emotional-meeting-with-prison-chaplain.html

Mr Lickley said blood stains were found on a wall close to where Miss Yeates's body was found,

Now is that a spot like before??

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-15257562

A smear of heavily clotted blood on the top of the wall had dripped downwards but there was no "blood splatter", suggesting that no assault took place in the vicinity.

Clotted Blood.....


http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/joanna-yeates-fought-killer/story-13538504-detail/story.html#vzuvXmTEMYGa7Y4I.99


So........ It was Tanya Nickson the FORENSIC SCIENTIST, who examined the blood stains on the wall..

Not the Forensic Co-ordinator Andrew Mott!! who was weilding a broom Handle...

They have varying descriptions of this stain???? which one was it??

I always wondered how Joanna Yeates continued to loose blood after being dead for so long??

She wasn't stabbed or shot.....

Wouldn't it have clotted by the time Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to have disposed of her there ????

She's been dead for Two hours at this point according to the prosecution....


Well who would have believed it... I can't find anything on Tanya Nickson...

I've done a range of dates from: 20th Dec 2008  to 6th Dec 2016...
 The only reference is this case of Joanna Yeates:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Tanya+Nickson+forensics+scientist&biw=1920&bih=1006&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A20%2F12%2F2008%2Ccd_max%3A06%2F12%2F2016&tbm=#tbs=cdr:1%2Ccd_min:20%2F12%2F2008%2Ccd_max:06%2F12%2F2016&q=Tanya+Nickson+forensics+scientist

Where are Tanya Nicksons credentials as a Forensic scientist???

[[...]]

Just had another thought:

If Joanna yeates was covered in leaf debris, and that was frozen to her body, where was the Forensic Scientist, collecting any available evidence that could be used..

Before any Police Officers go near her......

Why do we go to Andrew Mott.... And his trusty Broom handle....

Shouldn't the Forensic scientist  have been assessing the scene of crime before Mr Plod waded in with his trusty broom handle...

He obviously had difficulty discerning the weather temperature and the effects on a frozen body...

No: I Know.....He used the power of the broom handle stuck up in the air to tell him which way the wind was blowing...

Shouldn't the forensic examiner, be carefully collecting evidence, layer by layer...

Next question: Did the forensic examiner use a Broom Handle!!!!

[[...]]

Tanja Nickson:

On Tuesday, it was shown during the evidence of forensic scientist Tanya Nickson.
She had examined bloodstains found on a wall next to where Miss Yeates was found on Christmas morning in Failand, near Bristol.

Ms Nickson said the blood pattern indicated smearing rather than splattering - meaning it was unlikely that Miss Yeates had been assaulted there.
She told the court: "The presence of the blood on the top of the wall may indicate that an attempt was made to deposit the body over the top of the wall."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-england-bristol-15350510

The mortuary image was shown to Bristol Crown Court as part of the evidence presented by forensic scientist Tanya Nickson who examined blood satins found on the wall next to where Miss Yeates' body was found on Christmas Day last year.

Is that all this woman did... examine bloods stains on the wall!!!

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/vincent-tabak-joanna-yeates-parents-weep-cried-photo-shown-trail-latest-murder-miss-yeates-tabak-lat-233191

  As the image of 25-year-old Miss Yeates was shown, Teresa Yeates looked away and was comforted by her husband David.

The photograph - along with others - had been shown to the jury already on Friday, but Mr and Mrs Yeates were not in court.

Why would she need to show these images, as obviously Jo's parents had made sure that they were not present when they were first shown... How awful.....

Now: I thought the blood was found half way down the wall??

And has it been established as to what Tanja Nicksons qualifications are??

Why is she showing Mortuary images.... Is it to get the juries sympathy, whilst forgetting she has Joanna Yeates parents in front of her distraught...

Why did she feel the need to bolster the wall evidence by showing mortuary pictures????

Was she from the Mortuary???? Not as far as i can find her.....

Who is Tanja Nickson!!!!!!

This is quite worrying... It appear that they allowed an unqualified woman to explain Scentific Evidence, whilst also upsetting Joanna Yeates parents...

That cannot be right!!!

Edit:

I was thinking maybe I was being unkind to Tanja Nickson...
Maybe she works in some Lab somewhere...

Then I remembered she was given Mortuary photo's, which I cannot see how she would have had access too if she was just a Forensic Scientist.. who was not connected to the Mortuary for instance..

How DID she get those photographs???

Still not convinced she has any qualifications in relation to Forensic Science!! (IMO)

[[...]]

More from Tanja Nickson: (Apologies in advance for the long post: But it's worth a read....)

Tanya Nickson, also a forensic scientist, said blood found on the wall next to where Miss Yeates' body was found was consistent with her being killed elsewhere, and could have been deposited in a failed attempt to push her over into a quarry below.

As Ms Nickson gave details of how Miss Yeates was found in a state of partial undress, the 25-year-old landscape architect's mother closed her eyes.

 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/mum-s-tears-joanna-yeates-murder-trial/story-13598437-detail/story.html#gsVEvgIcbiMWo9zb.99

Forensic scientist Lindsay Lennen explained how she examined DNA samples taken from Miss Yeates's body, her clothes and from the boot of Tabak's Renault Megane car.

It gets so interesting:

It started as a missing person inquiry on December 18, 2010, says Lindsey Lennen, a body fluids and DNA specialist (who, like many forensic scientists, says the work is "all I ever wanted to do"). The team started by examining items from Joanna's home, looking for foreign DNA. Then on Christmas Day, Yeates was found dead, on a country road.

A colleague went down to supervise the removal of her clothing and preserve any body fluids: "The body was frozen, so that was quite tricky." Under the media glare, the work was flat-out: clothing, swabs, suspect's clothing, all analysed and turned round in 48 hours.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/17/csi-oxford-lgc-forensics

oanna Yeates
It started as a missing person inquiry on December 18, 2010, says Lindsey Lennen, a body fluids and DNA specialist (who, like many forensic scientists, says the work is "all I ever wanted to do"). The team started by examining items from Joanna's home, looking for foreign DNA. Then on Christmas Day, Yeates was found dead, on a country road.

A colleague went down to supervise the removal of her clothing and preserve any body fluids: "The body was frozen, so that was quite tricky." Under the media glare, the work was flat-out: clothing, swabs, suspect's clothing, all analysed and turned round in 48 hours.

"Eventually, we found something," Lennen says. "On swabs and tapes from her breasts, and tapes from three areas of her jeans. There were DNA components that matched one of the suspects, Vincent Tabak." But there wasn't enough, of enough quality, to evaluate – perhaps because of the high salt levels where the body was found, following heavy snowfall.

So the team deployed an LGC technique known as DNA SenCE, which purifies, concentrates and enhances otherwise unusable DNA: "We couldn't say whether the DNA was from saliva, or semen, or even touch. But we could say that the probability of it not being a match with Tabak was less than one in a billion."

With the killer's confession, Lennen's DNA evidence was not further tested. "It happens, in court," she says. "You get called biased, in the police's pay. You have to tell the truth, not stretch what you have. If you don't know which of two alternatives is more likely, you must say so."

http://www.theforensicforum.co.uk/Board/index.php?PHPSESSID=aa25c9141f14a6f81947f9e53125ed37&action=recent;start=70

So..... they went to see Dr Delaney and help him remove Joanna Yeates clothes????

The body was frozen????

Hang on a minute:..... Why are they removing the clothes of Joanna Yeates before her body had thawed???

Where they at the mortuary Or the second scene of crime???

OK.... How did they have the suspects clothes at the same time as Joanna yeates...
Because she says in the next breath:

Under the media glare, the work was flat out: clothing swabs, suspects clothing, all analysed and turned round in 48 hours

WHAT... Now I'm sure on the :

Crimewatch The Full story Part 2 at 4:00 mins

Then shortly before the reconstruction was due to air.... They made a dramatic breakthrough...
Forensics Scientists had spent weeks enhancing the tiny DNA sample on Jo's body.. enabling them to now establish a link...To Vincent Tabak

So was it 48 hours or weeks????

How did they have anything from Dr Vincent Tabak at that time????

Oh yes... doesn't Cj say on the Rinder programe.. At 13:11

All the people who lived in 44, Canygne Road... were interviewed, statements were taken... So... my statement was taken along with everyone else...
DNA samples were taken, finger prints, were taken.... It was all entirely Voluntary..But obviously nobody had anything to hide....
So nobody was in the least bit concerned.. erm.... about co-operating in that way...

Well Well Well.......

So they had already taken DNA samples from the tenants and finger prints!!!!!

This would explain Lyndsey Lennons comment on turning the suspect and Joanna yeates DNA round in 48 hours..

NOW.... we have a question!!!

Why the SONG AND DANCE with going to Holland???

On Joanna yeates.. Crimewatch the full story part two:

The Police woman who went to hollland says.... This was Dec 31st 2010 when they went to Holland:

And.. Then his reluctance to give his  DNA at the end of the process.... Started to ring alarm bells

OK... we have:

(A): Lyndsey Lennon.. who states they had Joanna Yeates clothes and the suspects clothes to test at the same   
       time.....

(B): We Have CJ... who says that all the tenants gave statements, DNA and finger print samples...

(C): And the Police woman... who claimed that Dr Vincent Tabak was reluctant to give his DNA.....

Now it's not a trick question....
But which two statements fit together here???????

I'm going (A) and (B)..... any takers???

Lets go back to Lyndsey Lennens quote...

 

There were DNA components that matched one of the suspects, Vincent Tabak." But there wasn't enough, of enough quality, to evaluate – perhaps because of the high salt levels where the body was found, following heavy snowfall.

There's that word again: COMPONENTS!!

There wasn't enough.. not enough quality..... because of the high levels of salt where the body had lain??

Come again: SALT...  Doesn't salt get rid of ICE!!! (YES.. the gritters had been out)..(always wonder why it never looked that snowy)

Why didn't anyone think about the gritters... they would have sprayed the verge and the road where Joanna Yeates body had lain, the body would have thawed, the body cannot have been there all that time??
Someone ..SURELY ..would have seen Joanna Yeates  if the gritters were out salting the road...

This is too confusing.... In The words of the experts:

So she frozen solid, frozen to the ground, whilst thawing with salt interfering with the quality of DNA available....

(oh my god... I've just fallen off my chair laughing at them... are they for real!!!)

Sorry for the long post... But crying out loud... what is this case saying!!!!!

Forensic scientist Lindsay Lennen explained how she examined DNA samples taken from Miss Yeates's body, her clothes and from the boot of Tabak's Renault Megane car.

Edit:

Officers who worked at the spot in Longwood Lane, Failand, where the body of
Jo was left are banned from Canynge Road, Clifton, where she lived.

A separate team has been operating at her flat to keep any forensic evidence
intact.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/300493/jo-crucial-clue-found/

What's the point of keeping the crime scenes seperate... If the foresenic expert is testing from both crime scenes?????

Had she been at two crime scenes...?? Remember she turned everything around in 48 hours??????

The Police said that they kept both crime scenes seperate!!!

From the same guardian piece:

Because the thing about DNA evidence, strong as it is, large as it looms in the public's imagination, is that it connects a human and an object. It doesn't prove when the two came into contact. Nor does it necessarily prove they were actually in direct contact at all.

There you go.......

[[...]]

Let carry on with Lyndey Lennen:

So the team deployed an LGC technique known as DNA SenCE, which purifies, concentrates and enhances otherwise unusable DNA: "We couldn't say whether the DNA was from saliva, or semen, or even touch. But we could say that the probability of it not being a match with Tabak was less than one in a billion."

Where have I heard that before?


Judge Rinder program Joanna Yeates: At 36:25 mins The Policeman in charge says:

When we examined the boot of the car a spot of blood was identified on the rubber seal....... around by the boot, came back as being 1 in a billion belonging to Joanna Yeates

Is this a standard answer?? Less than a Billion???


Did Lyndey Lennen Testify to the fact that Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA was less than a Billion to one chance of being anyone else???

With the killer's confession, Lennen's DNA evidence was not further tested. "It happens, in court," she says. "You get called biased, in the police's pay. You have to tell the truth, not stretch what you have. If you don't know which of two alternatives is more likely, you must say so."

Hello............

That statement is a none statement!!!   

With the killer's confession, Lennen's DNA evidence was not further tested.

Why Lyndsey Lennen, would you need to test Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA further???? I thought it was 1 in a Billion??

Or were you gonna make damn sure and test it so it said one in A Trillion Billion!!! (Erm....)

Ah..... Dr Vincent Tabak confessed...  I see..

So are you saying it really needed further testing???

But surely your statement of:

But we could say that the probability of it not being a match with Tabak was less than one in a billion."

Now... Is that a fact that it was 1 in a billion match to Dr Vincent Tabak ..
Or... You could say???
Is 1 in a billion a number that sounds good???
Was the match to Dr Vincent Tabak 1 in a billion??? Because I think i remember you saying..

But there wasn't enough, of enough quality, to evaluate – perhaps because of the high salt levels where the body was found, following heavy snowfall.

So... degraded then...


You turned it around in 48 hours... Now I thought painstaking testing was done...
Sounds a bit rushed to me...

LGC Forensics have had problems in the past with cross contamination.... Is that with turning things around in 48 hours...???

 LGC Forensics whom in Oct 2011

Mr Scott was charged in 23 October 2011 after a plastic tray containing a sample of his DNA was re-used in the analysis of a swab from a rape victim in Plant Hill Park, Blackley. The result of that test linked him to the crime.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19782917

This massive case of Joanna Yeates was so important to turn around, did they just get sloppy...???
They had to change their standards after they were found to have contaminated evidence.. And this was after Dr Vincent Tabak's testing!!!!

What qualifications does Lyndsey Lennen have....

The reason I ask, is the in a Lab they could have anyone testing... Doesn't mean that they are qualified...

I've got an example of labs and no qualifications, where testing is done by any Tom Dick Or Harry that walks off the Unemployment line...

From me:
My son had been unemployed for a while and the local Mirco lab that tests food samples, were looking for staff..So he has no qualification to speak of... especially in science..But they employed him and he tested for Salmonella etc etc.... Now.... the thing that made me giggle was he had a white coat and a staff ID badge saying MICRO BIOLOGIST..... looked good... But he is no more a Micro biologist than I am Beyoncey!!

So are these people fully qualified FORENSIC SCIENTISTS or BEYONCEY?????????

Isn't it time these people explained themselves, instead of boasting in newspapers what there role was in the Joanna Yeates trial......

Another example from the LGC lab,... an interesting quote, that leaves me cold..

"KM screening," pronounces Caroline Sheriff, forensic scientist. "You drip the solution on to your filter paper, then hydrogen peroxide. If it goes pink, it indicates the presence of blood." Down the corridor, lengths of clear sticky tape are patted patiently on to a blouse, and removed again, lifting off fibres. A woman stares into a microscope. "Sperm heads, probably," Sheriff says.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/17/csi-oxford-lgc-forensics

A woman stares into a microscope "sperm heads, probably," Sheriff says.

Now... YOU are supposed to be a FORENSIC SCIENTIST!!!!! Do you not know what Sperm Heads look like under a microscope???

How many people at this Laboratory are fully qualified Forensic Scientists.. Or do they just do a bit of testing??




Titles always make it sound like you have qualifications coming out of your ears.... But the title doesn't mean that your qualified:

For Instance the job my friend does could be classed as:

An Off Turf Accountant....

Sounds quite qualified, sounds like she has it all going on upstairs:

ACCOUNTANT.... that word conjures up thoughts of Mathematics, problem solving, skill sets that have had years of education.....

But No ... I'm afraid to say... she's extremeley down to earth and doesn't call herself an.... OFF Turf Accountant...

She says" I'm A Till Tart  in A Bookies!!!!!





Again a range of dates for Lyndsey Lennen: 1st Aug 2008 to 7th Dec 2016 and guess what..... Nothing but the Joanna Yeates Trial..

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lyndsey+lennen%27s&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=962&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A01%2F08%2F2008%2Ccd_max%3A07%2F12%2F2016&tbm=


EDIT:

Ms Lennen also examined DNA samples taken from Miss Yeates's body, her clothes and from the boot of Tabak's Renault Megane car.

Maybe thats how Joanna Yeates blood got in the boot sample???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-england-bristol-15350510

Wouldn't it make more sense that one person tested Joanna Yeates Samples...

And another tested, Dr Vincent Tabak's items.....

Might stop cross contamination.....
Just a thought....

[[...]]

Lets look at components:

Quote
There were DNA components that matched one of the suspects, Vincent Tabak." But there wasn't enough, of enough quality, to evaluate – perhaps because of the high salt levels where the body was found, following heavy snowfall.

We also have The Policemans statement of:

It was around the 20th January that erm.... we positively identified, that there were components, in mixed DNA of Vincent Tabak

Now which one is the most qualified to explain what components are???? And where you look for them????

Neither (IMO) As far as i'm aware , they were never asked what their qualifications were!!!!

Did Lyndsey Lennen explain to the jury what  components they found????

What are the components of DNA?
A:
QUICK ANSWER
DNA is a long molecule composed of two chains of smaller molecules called nucleotides, each which contain a region of nitrogen called the nitrogenous base, a carbon-based sugar molecule called deoxyribose and a region of phosphorus called the phosphate group. There are four types of nitrogenous bases: adenine (abbreviated as A), thymine (abbreviated as T), guanine (abbreviated as G) and cytosine (abbreviated as C).

Thats a difficult one to understand.....

So we have nucleotides:

What are the three components of a nucleotide?
The three components of a nucleotide are the nitrogenous base, the five-carbon sugar and the phosphate group. In turn, the nucleotides are the building components of both DNA and RNA.

The nitrogenous base molecules in DNA are the amino acids adenine, thymine, guanine and cytosine, while in RNA the guanine is replaced with uracil. The sugar molecules are different in the nucleotides of DNA and RNA; they are 2-deoxyribose and ribose, respectively. The final molecular component of the nucleotide is the phosphate group, or in some cases up to three phosphate groups. In addition to being the subunit of DNA and RNA, nucleotides are also important in cell metabolism, cell signaling, enzymatic reactions and the transfer of energy within a cell.

https://www.reference.com/science/three-components-nucleotide-ad89e1f6f0f1d664?qo=contentSimilarQuestions#

Now I'm sure you didn't even bother reading that... I'm not suprised, there's alot of info there that's hard to understand.....

So does the Policeman know:   

The three components of a nucleotide are the nitrogenous base, the five-carbon sugar and the phosphate group. In turn, the nucleotides are the building components of both DNA and RNA.

Or did he just use the word COMPONENTS to make himself sound good?????????

The Policeman's Scientific qualifications are as follows...........................................
   ................................

I think that's none existent !!!!

Why on earth make a statement that you cannot quantify????

Forensic scientist:

1. Entry requirements

You’ll usually need a degree or postgraduate award in forensic science. You may also be able to get into this career with a science-based degree like chemistry, biology, life sciences, applied sciences or medical sciences.

If you want to specialise in electronic casework (recovering data from computers, mobile phones and other electronic equipment), you may need experience and qualifications in computing, electrical engineering, electronics or physics.

To start as a forensics lab support assistant, you’ll need A levels, a BTEC or an HND in science.

You’ll usually need colour-normal vision

https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/job-profiles/forensic-scientist

Are any of the Forensic Scientists members of:

The Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences..... http://www.csofs.org/


Did the Forensic Scientists that gave evidence that I mentioned have: "A Degree or Postgraduate award in Forensic Science"

Or were they just assistants with possibly: "Forensics Lab Support Assistant, you’ll need A levels, a BTEC or an HND in science.

Do Not Forget.... These are ENTRY Requirements......

To get to take your Degree you need these requirements:

Forensic Science BSc(Hons): Entry requirements

Entry requirements for 2017
English language requirements
Entry requirements for 2017

Typical offer

Points: minimum 104/112, depending on qualifications, and on joint honours combination
Units: to include two A-levels or equivalent
Subjects:
A-levels 104 points. Subjects: one A-level or equivalent required in Biology, Chemistry or Science (32 points); two science A-levels desirable; General Studies not accepted. BTEC in appropriate subjects accepted (112 points).
Plus GCSE A*–C (or comparable numeric score under the newly reformed GCSE gradings): five subjects including English Language, Mathematics and Science.
Tariff points for AS levels completed but not carried forward to A2 level are included in points total.

http://www.kingston.ac.uk/undergraduate-course/forensic-science/entry-requirements.html


Now.... who out of them lot, has the basic minimum requirement to attend a University in the first place to Gain their degree.....

Come on down.... lets see those qualifications......

[[...]]

Now when Dr Vincent Tabak appeared on the Witness stand, it was made clear what his qualifications were:

Fluent in Dutch, English and German, after school in 1996 he began studying at Eindhoven University of Technology, where he gained a degree in architecture, building and planning.
Between 1999 and 2003 Mr Tabak worked as a research assistant and part-time teaching assistant at the university before embarking on a PhD on ‘User Simulation of Space Utilisation’ – a research project looking at developing a system exploring links between buildings and the movement of humans within offices.

In his thesis the Dutchman had warm words of praise for his partner, saying: ‘I want to thank my girlfriend Tanja Morson for her support in the last difficult month of my PhD. I am very happy that she entered my life.’

So he didn't finish his PHD till 2008 at the earliest.....

So nearly 10 years of intense study....


So has either Tanja Nickson or Lyndsey Lennon got a degree in Biology.. Chemistry "Forensic Science"???

How long did they train for them to become Fully Qualified??

I'm positive if you asked Dr Vincent Tabak, to quantify anything in the fields that he has studied, he could give a full comprehensive answer...

Which would probably loose most of us!!!

But the question is could:  Tanja Nickson or Lyndsey Lennen?????

Did either of them get questioned in COURT to their Qualifications and Experience in the field of "Forensic Science"...

[[...]]

I have just watched that video---hadn't heard of that series before.

I always understood that they kept Chris Jefferies on bail for so long because they had found a pair of trainers with a bloodstain on them while searching his flat, and so they didn't release him from bail until forensic tests had been done on these trainers, and come back clear.

I suspected that they were hedging their bets, though:  they were not sure whether or not he was involved with VT, and also they had someone to fall back on, had they not been able to get anywhere with VT.  That is my opinion, but then I am a cynic.

A placid murderer, eh.  Would make a good title for a book about VT.  I have not heard this description of him by a police officer before.

A PLACID MURDERER: 

Now where in the realms of Psychology Does a Placid Murderer fit in..????

Types of Serial killers.. the psychologist in the Documentary inferred that Dr Vincent Tabak was a serial killer in the making.....

The Medical Killer
Although this type of killer is very rare, there have been some people who have become involved in the medical industry as a way to carry out their nefarious deeds. This type of killer feels they have the perfect cover because it is very common for people in a hospital to pass away. They are usually highly intelligent and know how to carefully and cleverly conceal their murders. As long as it appears that a victim has died a natural death, there will be no reason for anyone to suspect foul play and search for the guilty party. A few doctors in history have managed to kill dozens of people before others began to catch on.

Well he doesn't fit that description... No access to medical facilities...

The Organized Killer
This type of serial killer is the most difficult to identify and capture. They are usually highly intelligent and well organized to the point of being meticulous. Every detail of the crime is planned out well in advance, and the killer takes every precaution to make sure they leave no incriminating evidence behind. It is common for this type of psychopath to watch potential victims for several days to find someone they consider to be a good target. Once the victim is chosen, the killer will pick them up, often through some sort of ploy designed to gain their sympathy, and take them to another location to commit the murder. Once the person has been killed, the perpetrator will usually take precautions to ensure the body is not found … until they want it to be. A criminal like this usually takes great pride in what they consider to be their “work” and have a tendency to pay close attention to news stories about their deeds. One of their motivating factors may be just to attempt to stump the law enforcement officers who are trying to solve their crime.

Now they did say  Dr Vincent Tabak was was oraganised....
Was this crime planned out well in advance???
But did they say, that he watched his victim??
Did they say that he took Joanna Yeates to another location to commit the murder???
Did they say he took precautions for the body not to be found??
Gain their sympathy....
No incriminating evidence... better take the Pizza!!
Was every detailed planned out well in advance ???


What ploy could Dr Vincent Tabak have used to gain Joanna yeates sympathy???

The body was not concealed... How could it be there was Salt on the road and the verge from the gritters.. Drivers who had travelled up and down that road depositing Salt!

When was he supposed to have been watching Joanna Yeates?? He only got back from the USA on the 11th Dec 2010, and he was back at work on the 14th Dec 2010... So when did he have time to watch her??

The Disorganized Killer
These individuals rarely plan out the deaths of their victims in any way. Most often, the people they kill just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. This type of serial killer appears to strike at random whenever an opportunity arises. They take no steps to cover up any signs of their crime, and tend to move to different towns or even states regularly to avoid being captured. Disorganized killers usually have low IQ’s and are extremely [ censored word]ocial. They rarely have close friends or family, and do not like to stay in one place for too long. These killers are prone to have no recollection of their deeds, or to confess that they were motivated by voices in their heads or some other imaginary source.

Was the murder planned by Dr Vincent Tabak???
 Did he move to Holland???
Did he take no steps to cover up the crime???
Has he got a low IQ??
Is He Anti social??
Has he got no close friends or family??
Did he confess to voices in his head??

Well he doesn't fit that Profile:

The Psychologist on Joanna Yeates gave her assessment of Dr Vincent Tabak:
Joanna Yeates Murder at Christmas part Two : 11:30 mins

The presenter says first:

Some experts believe that Vincent Tabak was a serial killer in the making

Followed by the Psychologist saying:

He does present an unusual profile to be a one offence killer... when he is this organised and this systematic, And this apparently..erm.... Emotionally disconnected from the tragedy he has caused

I reckon she'd fit him in the The Organized Killer catergory.. (IMO)

Well is he a Serial Killer or Not!!!

Maybe he was emotionally disconnected because he didn't do it????

How Organised was he??

It was supposed to be an opportunistic attack on his neighbour who, he apparently waved to as he passed the window..


Anyone who knew Dr Vincent Tabak had only positive things to say about his calm demenour...

He was never described in those terms of a serial killer...

The policeman called him Placid.....

How can you be Placid and a Murderer in the same context.... Don't think thats possible!!!!!!

And again I'll say... what are the statistics of a Stranger Killer moving the body.... No less than 3 times

Why not leave it where it was and use the time to clean the scene of crime..
If he was supposed to be so meticulous:
He didn't need to move her... nobody would have suspected he had been inside the flat...
If every detail had been planned out well in advance, surely....
Removing any evidence of himself from the flat would have been the best option in concealing his act.. Rather than risking more contamination from moving a body several times....


Why would he need to put himself on CCTV.... in Asda???

He wouldn't... he'd text Tanja.. that would give his location...
He could have left his laptop running at home with a program on..
He could have left his mobile phone at home to show his location....

He didn't need CCTV footage as an Alibi!!!





http://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/types-of-serial-killers/