The Defence Will State Their Case

[[...]]

You should read up on Mark Williams Thomas and Jonathon Kings case. As well as people like Jim Davidson, Jimmy Tarbuck, Cliff Richard, Paul Gambaccin etc

And look at the role Mark Williams Thomas played in the Jimmy Saville fiasco as well as the role of the media

Operation Yewtree, Operation Ravine, Operation Arundal etc

I'm guessing contempt doesn't factor after someone dies?

I don't know what to make of Mark Williams Thomas to be honest, there are conflicting view points of this person.... But one thing you mention that I have always found odd, is how can claims be made about a dead man without supporting evidence??

I do not know the whole facts relating to Jimmy Saville... I know it was in the media after he died, But found it weird in a sense ,it is easy to say anything about a dead man whether it's true or not, he is not able to face his accusers in court, obviously being as dead as a door nail....

There could be evidence to support the claims made about Jimmy Saville, But I have not seen any and do not know what the facts are in the case that came through the media after his death....

But Jimmy Saville isn't a case I have taken much notice of to be honest, purely because dead men don't talk and can't answer questions... I can rely on the gossip that has gone around the media about him and chose from that whether I believe that he was guilty of what was stated or not....

But I stick with the case that has bothered me from the beginning, the case that for some reason doesn't leave me, which I cannot fully explain why??  It's just there in my head.. sitting there and questions suddenly pop into my head about it from time to time, or more regularly as my posts will demonstrate....

[jixy]

Please dont you dare say there was no evidence for the Jimmy Saville cases. People did report him at the time and it was covered up

Others may have joined in since his death and who knows how valid their claims are

Jimmy had plenty of questions  that he could and should have answered well before he died, just a sickening shame he wasnt made to!

[[...]]

Please dont you dare say there was no evidence for the Jimmy Saville cases. People did report him at the time and it was covered up

Others may have joined in since his death and who knows how valid their claims are

Jimmy had plenty of questions  that he could and should have answered well before he died, just a sickening shame he wasnt made to!

You could be correct Jixy.... I am just not commenting on the Jimmy Saville case because I do not know enough about what has or has not been stated....  There as I have stated could be evidence to support such claims made against him, but it's difficult to confirm or contradict these claims, if the accused is dead... That is all I am saying....

So lets stick to topic of Dr Vincent Tabak and The Murder of Joanna Yeates and not bring Jimmy Saville here, when there is no connection ....

unless you know different...

[Nicholas]

I don't know what to make of Mark Williams Thomas to be honest, there are conflicting view points of this person.... But one thing you mention that I have always found odd, is how can claims be made about a dead man without supporting evidence??

"the man is an unmitigated liar who is the business of promoting sensational child abuse hysteria for money.
He lies through his teeth. He was never 'involved' with the McCann case although he claimed to be in interviews until the McCann people told him to back off. I'm sure he would have loved to have got his mitts on the money.
Shrinks would have a field day with blokes like this with their pre-occupation with children.
http://www.kingofhits.co.uk/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=65&func=view&catid=2&id=88196

IMO he's another who's not to be trusted. A self serving opportunist. I'd like to know what he scores on hares psychopathy checklist?

[jixy]

I'll say what I want thank you very much!

You are coming across as controlling Jixy. Please try and refrain from aggressive posts!

If i want to post that Saville had real victims its because he DID. No control needed.

He was a Paedo just like Tabak.

End of chat

[justsaying]

Wow! I wish we had known about the laundry at the beginning! It has undoubtedly changed my view of the whole case. How dare they not feature it in the trial - it certainly could have helped the jury with the issues of murder or manslaughter! How dare Gregg not mention it at a time when he was bereft about his girlfriend! Case closed now, Tabak must be innocent! 

[Nicholas]

And I'm sure Jixy and justsaying do not fool Nine either! 

[[...]]

"

IMO he's another who's not to be trusted. A self serving opportunist. I'd like to know what he scores on hares psychopathy checklist?

for ease of moderating it had already gone wrong and off topic by this point...

See you in the naughty corner Stephanie, You lead the way in taking things off topic then attack

What is the worse that can happen?

I could say what "Hares"  being mentioned springs to mind with me.... 


"Hares" psychopathy checklist... Now I haven't heard of that check list but what springs to my mind when you mention that, is the talk that has been on twitter about "Hares" having myxomatosis... Now a disease jumping a species should be huge news.... But I now wonder if it is someone just making such comments and are really  underhandedly taking about "The Hares" check list you mention....

But that is how my brain works on occasion, I see something and make a connection sometimes... But I really would need evidence to prove this point to be honest... So it is just a random thought that has popped through my head now that you have mentioned "Hares"..

And if i thought about it I was wondering why scientist have not been called upon to state how grave the consequencies of a disease jumping a species could be.... That is all....

[justsaying]

I am sure Nine won't be fooled by you either Stephanie... She may want to look over some of your past posts where you have said her thinking is distorted etc... Changed your mind again? I am sure you have a different personality for every day of the week. I wonder how you would score on that checklist you mentioned?

[justsaying]

People do not hold you in contempt merely because you campaigned for someone whom you believed to be innocent. People treat you the way you treat others and you do not like it! Still up on that high-horse!

[justsaying]

You may be correct there JustSaying and you have a right to your opinion... But do I just take the comment you have made as an answer, or do I try and understand what you mean by such a comment.... What is it based on.... `is it based purely on a comment I made ,several comments I made, or my belief that I believe that Dr Vincent Tabak is Innocent.... The variables that are available to the statement you have just made could be many...

Nine, I think what I said in my comment is self-explanatory. I have been straight forward with you and my thoughts on this case. Your new friend on the other hand is with you one day and against you the next, now she is back with you. It is amusing to see which head she has on each new day! Do not worry yourself, she will be against you again soon enough, when it suits her.

[[...]]

Manipulators and the double bind tactic  see though 

This is another reason I believe I have been frustrated and confused.... There has been plenty of double bind tactics been used on the forum and in the media... And for someone like me, it take even longer, to process said information, because I do not know with which statement within a post or article for instance, that I should take note of.....

[Nicholas]

This is another reason I believe I have been frustrated and confused.... There has been plenty of double bind tactics been used on the forum and in the media... And for someone like me, it take even longer, to process said information, because I do not know with which statement within a post or article for instance, that I should take note of.....

Good point/observations Nine and yes not surprising. I've been there myself but that's a story for another time maybe.

But of course in REALITY there's no way of knowing who is behind the forum posts and media articles nor of their actual factual motives and agendas? History shows us that not everyone is who they say they are.

For example, I know for a fact the amount of members here (past and present) outweighs the actual factual amount of real people that exist. 

I haven't always posted here under my own name. There was once a time when I thought "the real killers" were watching this forum.

Of course the real killer was watching this forum via me. 

It was an extremely confusing time back then and it wasn't just Simon Hall who was manipulating me!

[[...]]

Do not worry yourself Nine. Dr Stephanie PhD will help you.

Well is that sarcasm on your part, Or is it a statement built on fact??  You see when someone states something I am not sure of I will search the internet to find out what something may mean....

Which for the point you have just made I am not going to do.... It isn't important to me at the mo... It may visit me again, but who can say..

So according to that point you telling me not to worry makes me then wonder if there maybe is something I have missed that maybe I should be worried about....

Or do I take it in the way I first thought and you are telling me not to worry because you are being sarcastic about Stephanie and see it as a joke??

I sometimes over analysis everything.... Not all the time, just when something that has been stated hasn't quite sat correctly with me and I question it.....

[[...]]

Good point/observations Nine and yes not surprising. I've been there myself but that's a story for another time maybe.

But of course in REALITY there's no way of knowing who is behind the forum posts and media articles nor of their actual factual motives and agendas? History shows us that not everyone is who they say they are.

For example, I know for a fact the amount of members here (past and present) outweighs the actual factual amount of real people that exist.

Well I have wondered that before, but then am told that members cannot have more than one username....  So do I believe you when you state that as fact, do I believe what I have questioned myself or do I believe what the forum states.....

See how simple things become complexed....

I have no idea, who is who on here.... And if the people are whom they claim to be ,i have to take on some type of trust, that the claims people state are in fact true about themselves.... 

But I could then right a whole topic on whether or not someones statements are to be trusted based on whether or not you trust said person....  And what is the trust you have placed in said person based on.....

So I'll stick to the topic, and carry on from there....