https://ruthdavies.wordpress.com/tv-credits/
A fast turnaround?? Who commissioned it? To coincide 'with' the trial, shouldn't that be after the trial?
The first thing I noticed when I looked at this program, and I really hadn't taken much notice of it before, was at 7 seconds of the video, there is someone putting up a poster, that was not the official poster of Joanna Yeates Missing poster, it wasn't the poster that people who joined facebook were asked to use...It was this poster
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs
The poster that has the CID phone number upon it....
So the question has to be... How did they manage to film someone putting up that poster? When this commission is made after the trial... when everyone else knew of a different poster,
A little odd..
Edit... From the person who made this commission LinkedIn blurb
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/ruth-davies-8b014244
So Oct 2011- Nov 2011... Why October? The trial was happening in october, all those people to interview, more revelations coming out after trial, yet it appears whilst the trial was going on this was being filmed...
Odd again.... No-one knew what the outcome maybe.. Yet we are happily making a commissioned film that might have got chucked in the bin...
How fast do these things take to make?
I see two distinct possibilities here. Your need to dot "I's" and cross "T's" suggests A) You're pedantic in the extreme. In which case, get over yourself, B) You're on the Asperger's spectrum, which would be an explanation, and which, incidentally, I don't have a problem with as my late partner and his son both had a place there.
You seem unable to grasp -regarding reporting/writing books/making films about crimes- the fact of "Licence". People will present 'facts' in a way which attracts readers and viewers. They are free to do so because the victim(s) are deceased and the perpetrator is behind bars. Books without number have been written and sold about a crime committed in Essex 30+ years ago. You'd think that some of the authors had been present when the crime was committed, such was their 'insight' into the characters of the victims. Every one of those books tells a slightly different story. In this particular case, the perpetrator, unlike Tabak, protests his innocence. Do you not find it strange that Tabak, who you claim to be innocent, has never claimed it for himself? On this man's behalf, you've trawled the internet -well, FB and Twitter- and crawled through every sentence written, and picked holes in what you've found, looking, fruitlessly, for clues to it. Thus far, all you've achieved are 'gems' such as arriving at the conclusion that his message to his girlfriend was coded which signaled that he was in contact with Joanna. I'm fully aware that you rarely make claims, preferring to say you don't know so you ask questions. However, despite copious answers, there is never a response. More, a segway. A sidetrack.
I wonder how many more times you'll tease us by saying you'll leave? Actually, you've been rather sly, haven't you? You DO leave, ie in your current incarnation, but you return, having reinvented yourself. I'd be very interested to know how many forums you've attached yourself to and how many have supported anything you've said. My guess is, not many. None? You wouldn't be here if they had, would you?
