The Defence Will State Their Case

[[...]]

Once the police had set the bandwagon rolling by inviting the national media to cover the disappearance of a missing person, everyone wanted to get in on the act. Local suppliers of storage containers lobbied the police to buy packing cases for all the evidence they were going to collect, so, having bought all these packing cases, detectives had to send their men out to find evidence to put into them.

Having lured all these journalists to Bristol, the police felt obliged to organise goings-on to keep them interested. I am sure that every intelligent witness/suspect who was questioned by the police felt obliged to ask polite questions about the progress of the case, such as, "Why did you remove her front-door?"

As Noel O'Gara always used to say, "You couldn't make it up even if you tried".

My problem is it's supposed to be a "Crime Scene"... So Bob The Builder shouldn't even be there ....(IMO)... !!!!

Does this also support that Joanna Yeates did not arrive home ????

[mrswah]

So, does anyone know if removing a front door IS normal police practice?  I have never heard of such a thing before.

[[...]]

So, does anyone know if removing a front door IS normal police practice?  I have never heard of such a thing before.

I believe it was for show mrswah... other people may know differently.... Doesn't really matter either way..(IMO).... You don't have 'Bob The Builder " at a crime scene... they even go into the flat as well...

[Leonora]

So, does anyone know if removing a front door IS normal police practice?  I have never heard of such a thing before.

It may well be "normal police practice" when intending to entrap a suspect in the full knowledge that the task will be captured by news photographers.

[[...]]

It may well be "normal police practice" when intending to entrap a suspect in the full knowledge that the task will be captured by news photographers.

But Again...... Why employee "Bob The Builder" to do this "FORENSIC" task???? shouldn't the crime scene be free of members of the PUBLIC?????

[[...]]

It may well be "normal police practice" when intending to entrap a suspect in the full knowledge that the task will be captured by news photographers.

In all honesty leonora.... The Defence should have been all over that piece of Evidence of "Bob The Builder" using his mouth to rip gaffer tape... And "Bob The Builder " being at a Crime Scene"... So much so... it would cast doubt in the juries mind.. that the Forensic's had been compromised... Also casting DOUBT on Dr Vincent Tabak's charge he was facing!!!!! (IMO)....

How can any of the FORENSIC's be trusted... If the basic's are not followed ???????

[[...]]

Here's a challenge......

Give me a list of evidence that proved Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates.... Evidence that supports what he said in Court!

[mrswah]

Here's a challenge......

Give me a list of evidence that proved Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates.... Evidence that supports what he said in Court!

This is what most people will say:

He said he did it and told the court how he did it.

He isn't protesting his innocence, and nor is his family.

His DNA was found on Joanna's body.

Joanna's blood was found in the boot of his car.

The police would not have arrested him without good reason.

He is a big bloke, and therefore, capable of moving a body.

Oh, and, as one person on another forum said, "his eyes are too close together."

Oh, and as another person on a forum said, "he is probably an Aspie, and they are weird people."


The last point infuriates me, the one before is just plain stupid, and I think us few on here have challenged all the others----------!

[[...]]

This is what most people will say:

He said he did it and told the court how he did it.

He isn't protesting his innocence, and nor is his family.

His DNA was found on Joanna's body.

Joanna's blood was found in the boot of his car.

The police would not have arrested him without good reason.

He is a big bloke, and therefore, capable of moving a body.

Oh, and, as one person on another forum said, "his eyes are too close together."

Oh, and as another person on a forum said, "he is probably an Aspie, and they are weird people."


The last point infuriates me, the one before is just plain stupid, and I think us few on here have challenged all the others----------!

Yes mrswah.... nothing really...

But as leonora has always said... where was the "Motive"???


Another thing that really bothers me... Is that he is charged between dates.... Is that even possible legally???

How can he be charged between the 16th December 2010 and the 19th December 2010 and originaly between the 16th December 2010 and the 26th December 2010..

If they are happy he killed her on Friday 17th December 2010.. then why isn't he charged for that date ???

She was supposed to be alive on the Thursday 16th December 2010.....  Was she ???

And if the only thing they have changed is to shorten the time between... Then in my mind whether I am correct or not is... She died on the 16th December 2010 or was Missing from the 16th December 2010 and by the 19th December 2010... They knew she was dead !!! (IMO)....

The date span appears weird... don't know of another case when this has been used as a charge date for Murder!!....

[[...]]

This little clip... shows the Police  checking the Manhole cover directly outside Joanna Yeates front door... The is one Officer with a Crowbar and another with a long pole with a V shape cut out from it....

The Officer with the long pole proceed to lift the cover and the Officer with the crow bar goes around the back of the property to do?????

Because I don't see how this happened in an area being Dr Vincent Tabak's back yard... Did they get a warrant??? Dr Vincent Tabak was away in Cambridge at the time.... Is this the reason DC Karen Thomas rang Dr Vincent Tabak... wanting his OK for them to search outside the back of his property???   Hardly shouts Murderer trying to hide stuff does it???

Part way through the clip.. the same Officers come back out from Canygne Road... and one is carrying a oblong bag.... Have they retrieved this bag from one of the drains ??? The Officer with the bag then disappears... The other two continue to search at 43, Canygne Road opposite Joanna Yeates house ...

There is also a drain underneath Joanna Yeates bedroom window and one outside the bay window of Dr Vincent Tabak's flat...

This event happens on the 24th December 2010...   I wonder what's in the bag...??  what type of bag is it???

http://www.gettyimages.ca/license/688841636



[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

Another thought past me by watching that video clip....

There isn't a lot of room between the building and the shed... How did Dr Vincent Tabak manage to carry Joanna Yeates in his arms past the shed ??? He doesn't say he gives her a Fireman's lift in fact he describes carrying her ...

Defence Counsel: Accepting that she was dead, what did you do?
Tabak: After a couple of minutes I lifted the body and carried it over to my flat.
Defence Counsel: Your hand being on what part of her body?
Tabak: One arm was underneath her knees.

So how did he manage to carry her past the Garden Shed  with her going across his body ????? They wouldn't fit past the gap ...

The Officers just appear to manage to get past comfortably....

Edit... Why do we never see them Forensically Testing the SHED???.... They pass it all the time... If Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to have taken her that way or any one else you would think that they would test the SHED!!!.... (IMO)...

http://www.gettyimages.ca/license/688841636


http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf

[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

Another thing I noticed was missing in this video clip.... The Policeman who was guarding the gate, didn't have a log book to sign in and out the Police Officers attending the "Crime Scene"...

I thought ALL people who attended the 'Crime Scene" were supposed to sign the visiting log!!!

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Leonora]

... Why do we never see them Forensically Testing the SHED???.... They pass it all the time... If Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to have taken her that way or any one else you would think that they would test the SHED!!!.... (IMO)...

You need to consider the chronology. Not until nine months later did VT sign his enhanced statement declaring that he had carried Joanna's lifeless body along the path around the back of the house. So the police back in December wouldn't have dreamt of testing the sides of the shed where her head or feet might have brushed it if they had known she was dead. Nobody told the jury to examine the space between the shed and the house to decide if it were wide enough for a man carrying a body to pass that way, so they didn't do this. If any forensic evidence had been found at the house to back up VT's enhanced statement at all, the jury would certainly have been told about it. So we are bound to conclude that that part of the statement was a complete fabrication, and that he didn't kill her at 44 Canynge Road.

Nice video clip, though!

[[...]]

There are many factors to consider in this case, but I want to start at the begining...  The bit when the Police are alerted to Joanna yeates being Missing...

The Police have always maintained that Joanna yeates was killed on Friday 17th December 2010... They never shift from this... The only indication that a different day is possible is when I believe that they wanted CJ in the frame... I believe that it was possibily CJ's car going over Clifton Suspension bridge...  And they used that to put pressure on him to confess to Joann Yeates Murder... That.. and the fact he had keys....

I am not going back over the CJ debarcle... Just refreshing and putting things into context...

So..... why "Friday 17th December 2010"????

Why without a shadow of a doubt, did the Police say that Joanna yeates was "Murdered /Missing" on this particular day???

Put Dr Vincent Tabak aside for one moment..... and lets really ask our selves why.. 17th December 2010??

That date starts very early on....

We can go to the:    https://www.facebook.com/groups/169097479794933/  That page says Missing since 17th December 2010.

Also:  https://helpfindjo.wordpress.com/page/4/

Every article... every statement says clearly that she was 'Missing".. from Friday 17th December 2010

When she hadn't responded to text.. everyone said it wasn't unusual... So because she didn't reply on Friday 17th December 2010... How does that make her "Missing" on that date ???

Her bed could have been slept in.....as an earring is found under the duvet...

The flat was untidy... Is that enough to indicate that someone was Missing since Friday 17th December 2010???

Greg was away... she hadn't planned to meet anyone as far as we know... So how were the Police positive that it was Friday the 17th December 2010??

They have so much information to process before they can make a claim as to the fact she went Missing on Friday 17th December 2010... The have to interview Greg... They have to establish his alibi.. It's normal procedure.. The will need to check his phone.. Everything about his time and travel will need to be scrutinized..

But that information will only tell them what Greg did over that weekend... It will not tell them what Joanna Yeates did over that weekend...

If Dr Vincent tabak was able to get from Canygne Road to Bedminster and then Longwood lane without being caught on CCTV... what's to say that Joanna Yeates didn't make a similar journey?? I am not saying she did... Just pointing out the possibility that it was easy...apparently to leave Canygne Road undetected...

There nothing in the Flat to indicate a struggle.... There's nothing in the flat to indicate forced entry... there's nothing in the flat to say anything... Yet a lot of time was spent there processing it.... Her clothes... One of the most important pieces of evidence needed when establishing when someone has gone "Missing".. A description, of what they were last seen wearing normally accompanies, 'The Missing Person Poster"....

Yet we find NO DESCRIPTION.... We have instead an image of her in a shop.... An image of her wearing a white coat... But the white coat is in the flat still... This information that the coat is in the flat emerges by the 22nd December 2010...

So what about the rest of her clothing??? Greg and everyone at the pub knew what she was wearing... why not a description of her clothes ??

Even the distinctive watch she was wearing when she was found wasn't used as part of the description of he 'Missing"...

Greg says he went round the flat checking things... He at first thought she was doing fun things... To me that indicates she had changed her clothes... And nothing really was out of the ordinary when he arrived home... He may have felt a little annoyed she wasn't there to see him on his return... But obviously,.. nothing over the weekend had alerted him that anything was wrong at home in Canygne Road....

Her Coat being in the Hallway... didn't un-nerve him... which to me says she must have had other coats to wear besides the white coat... Same with the footwear... Nothing in the flat immediately gave him grounds to panic...

He went around tidy as he goes... He drank beer, he ate tea... he did everything normally that one would expect upon his immediate arrival... Nothing in the FLAT INDICATED ANYTHING WAS WRONG.... at that point...

He must have noticed the clothes.... He never says she was wearing the same clothes as she did on the Friday 17th December 2010... Thats why I believe he at first thought she had gone to do fun things... So you have to question that.... What else had gone from the flat that indicated to Greg that she had gone to do fun things ????

Something else must have been "Missing"... for him to think she was doing 'Fun Things"... I also wonder about the phone.. Now if Joanna Yeates wasn't one for answering texts etc.... Did she always take her phone with her ??? It obviously wasn't her lifeline, like some girls are with their phones, if she didn't always answer texts... Did she regularly leave her phone behind ??

This would make more sense to Greg's initial reaction and why it takes so long for him to alert anyone... Even when he rang the phone at 9:00pm.. It took a while before the penny finally dropped...  So I believe her phone being in the flat possibly wasn't a huge red flag... maybe it was... But it's something to think about...

So we are still on the 17th December 2010... Nothing there to indicate that this is the day she disappeared... So why all the posters and TV interviews saying she went Missing on Friday 17th December 2010??

That's a definate date... nothing to say... sometime over that weekend we believe she was Missing.. we have a sighting of her in... etc etc etc ... No... we have a date... and a date that they stick too no matter what... I am not saying that they are wrong... From the first TV interviews we are told it's the 17th December 2010.... all of the Missing posters says the same .... The Police at this time haven't had time t collect and check every CCTV in Bristol... Who's to say at this time she hasn't been seen in a shop elsewhere...

How did they definatly know that she was going home on Friday 17th December 2010.. when her flat was empty and Greg was away...  Who's to say she didn't take a detour and pop off to someones house she knew.... No-one can forsee what someone is thinking... Until every single avenue had been investigated.. they could not determine that she went "Missing" on that friday...

They could summise that this was a probability... but without proof how would anyone know ....

So we come back to the Polices action... they are at the property in no time... They treat this case very differently from the start... Because what??? what is it that makes them get straight onto this case as a "Missing/Murder inquiry from the very moment Greg calls them...


Lets pretend it's not Greg and Joanna Yeates.. makes it easier for me to explain.... A boyfriend away for the weekend calls the Police because his girlfriend isn't at home when he returns...  He had tried to contact her... But.... and this is where details matter... She didn't reply... But for her that isn't unusual... I at first thought she had gone off to do fun things... The Flat looked no different from when I left... The dishes were still in the sink... Her white coats is on the hook... her bag is here.... There is no sign anyone has been in the flat.... But I don't know where she is and i am starting to worry.....


Now... at what point does the Policeman/woman on the other end of the phone drop everything and rush around to Canygne Road to check everything... Not only that start to do door to door inquiries of the neighbours ???

Are they not at first busy quizzing said boyfriend??? Are they not bombarding said boyfriend of his whereabouts?? Are they not checking this is not some type of domestic?? Are they not checking that the boyfirend and girlfriend fell out and she just left...

No they're not.... The are banging neighbours out of bed to see if they have seen anything of Joanna yeates... Or noticed anything unusual....

That speaks volumes..... Remember the headlines.... 'NOT A SUSPECT"... he's a WITNESS...... when talking about Greg.... The question really has to be , what did Greg witness?? What did Greg see to make him a WITNESS... because he has to have seen something... just like CJ's second witness statement... There has to be something that Greg Reardon actually WITNESSED for him to be a witness.. So what was it?? Did he see someone leaving via the gate also...??? what did he see....

It has to be in the flat.... He didn't notice anything in the flat for nearly 4 hours... So what did he find??? I believe he had to find something that shouldn't have been there... Was it the trainers that were found under the sink... where there other items in the flat that shouldn't have been....??

Joanna Yeates mother from the very start says she has been abducted... There has to be something in that Flat that indicated that she was abducted... It is not the first thing that would pop into someones head.... You have to remember that Greg didn't know Joanna Yeates parents very well...

She was my future. This Christmas was going to be our first together. I was going to spend it with her family, which is always a big deal for a boyfriend.

At this point it's 20 question to the boyfriend you don't really know too well... Not... banging on car doors trying to find her.... Something in that flat or someone was seen, for Greg Reardon to be considered a witness by the Police and for Joanna Yeates mother to insist that her daughter had been abducted .....(IMO)

So was there a note ????? The police said when they got the Pizza packaging and note that was sent to the pub... that they had the killers handwriting.... is this what they had??? Is this what they meant?? A  written note saying that they had Joanna Yeates ?? Was there a note left in the flat??

Because realistically when you look at my "Lets Pretend" paragraph.... there is nothing there that would indicate or warrant the full force of The Avon and Somerset Police to respond in such a way as to fear that Joanna Yeates life was in danger from day one....  Not only respond to it nationally... But, have virtually every cold case detective play his or her part visually on the TV for someone to see that they are working this case .....

It was never a "Missing Persons Inquiry"...(IMO).... The Police had to have evidence that Joanna Yeates was last alive on Friday 17th December 2010... For them to come out from the very minute the phone call was made by Greg Reardon on Monday 20th December 2010 and Investigate this immediately with all of their resources and attention...  Not ever wavering from any other stance and not ever changing the date of her absence being from Friday 17th December 2010!!!

Edit......Was a clue left about the trainers under the sink. behind the kickboard?? These trainers never get mentioned until DCI Phil Jones reveals this information at The Leveson Inquiry!!

You would have thought they were a vital piece of evidence seeing as they had what apparently was a spot of blood on them.... If they were of no evidential value.... DCI Phil Jones does not need to mention this piece of evidence no-one knew about...

So who is he letting know he has got the trainers ??? Who did the trainers belong to??


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8230065/Joanna-Yeates-murder-timeline.html

[[...]]

TV news clips are useful... Yet they can also be confusing... This clip I have found gives me more questions than answers....
This is from a News report dated 23rd December 2010


Said at :3:14 of video The search and rescue guy says....

The helicopter and I, totally agree original search, Isn't just appropriate, because there could be snow on top

What is he talking about???? Snow on top of what ??????

Do they know she isn't alive... They don't want to disturb the snow.... What does he mean????



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de4f8OqwJPU

Edit.... If The search and rescue guy means what I think he means and they are looking for a body, then they must have some information that she has been left somewhere... Information maybe her abductor has given police... So if they knew something like this so early on... Why did they arrest Dr Vincent Tabak ???