Lady of Shallott.. Digital spy
What is often forgotten, too, is that any trial connected to Joanna's murder could have been compromised because of the press coverage. If Tabak had denied killing Joanna, the coverage of Jefferies might have created doubt in jurors' minds - it it had even gone to a jury. As it was, he admitted manslaughter so that element of doubt was removed but it could have been very different.
An interesting point made by said poster....
Everything was tied up neatly in a bow before Dr Vincent Tabak went to trial in October 2011...
* We have the attorney general talking contempt December 2010
* We have CJ's arrest December 2010
* We have press coverage of CJ Dec 2010/ Jan 2011
* We Have CJ Released on Bail January 2011
* We have Parliament discussing CJ February 2011
* We have CJ being released from Police Bail March 2011
* We had a libel action taking place in April 2011,
* We have Dr Vincent Tabak apparently admitting to Manslaughter in May 2011
* We have the paper taken to court for contempt July 2011
* We have Dr Vincent Tabak been named as guilty in contempt of court July 2011
* We have CJ named as core participant at the leveson in August 2011
The libel action is taken before Dr Vincent Tabak apparently admits Manslaughter, how that was possible is beyond me...
But as the poster had pointed out all that needed to happen was for Dr Vincent Tabak to deny killing Joanna Yeates and doubt would have been created in the juries mind because of the coverage of CJ...
This has me questioning why Dr Vincent Tabak didn't deny killing Joanna Yeates if he was so cunning??
It makes me question who wanted Dr Vincent Tabak in prison so badly?? And for what reason... ??
People scoff when I have made scenario's, and they come from things like this... How would everyone interfere in one way or another with the case against Dr Vincent Tabak, surely such things shouldn't happen before a trial..
Why hasn't anyone said anything about this??
CJ should have been a witness at Dr Vincent Tabak's trial, if only to tell us Dr Vincent Tabak hadn't lied about the car changing position, but he didn't... He could have told us he'd seen Dr Vincent Tabak the evening before on his way to the gym... He could have told us if Dr Vincent Tabak was one of the people at the gate....
This is why I do not understand this case..... CJ being made a core participant before a trial... everything for CJ wrapped up tidily in a bow before the trial of Dr Vincent Tabak, and no-one bats an eye lid as to how all the coverage of CJ would effect the trial of Dr Vincent Tabak....
Therefore yes I have come to the conclusion before in other posts that this cannot be a real story, as I haven't been able to comprehend how everything to do with CJ was done and reported before Dr Vincent Tabak faced trial....
I have stated that I believe that Dr Vincent Tabak could have withdrawn his Manslaughter plea, and I have been astounded that, everyone already knew that Dr Vincent Tabak had apparently admitted Manslaughter in May 2011 and it was emphasised in the media all through the trial....
All making me ask questions as to what this case was all about....
And what is the real truth about The Joanna Yeates Case, and the apparent trial of a Dutchman named Dr Vincent Tabak???
Edit.... It makes me question WHY, Dr Vincent Tabak would admit to MANSLAUGHTER at all, if the coverage of CJ was enough to cast doubt in the juries mind...
Why would Dr Vincent Tabak admit any responsibility whatsoever??? That is beyond me!
https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussion/comment/75991129#Comment_75991129