I went looking for this video and nearly failed to find it, the links to the ITN webpage say that the video doesn't exist.
https://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-09-16/christopher-jefferies-joanna-yeates-exoneration/https://www.itv.com/news/topic/christopher-jefferies/But fortunately I did find it on youtube... And decided to transcribe it incase that video goes Missing..
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Transcript of Interview CJ and Chief Constable Nick Gargan..
CJ:
The Letter certainly acknowledges that they could have done things differently, err.. one of the things which they could have done differently, was to make it absolutely certain at the time that I was released from Police Bail, that they accepted that I was entirely innocent and played no part whatsoever , erm... In the Murder Of Jo Yeates.
Erm.. They could probably at that point also have acknowledged the very considerable distress which I had to experience as a result of the length of time that I remained on Police Bail, which was some 6 weeks after Vincent Tabak was originally arrested and charged.
Nick Gargan:
It's not a letter of apology, it is a letter that acknowledges that things might have been done differently. The situation is very clear, the arrest of Christopher Jefferies was integral and necessary part of the investigation and I've no criticism of that decision. Er.. Nor indeed the way in which it was carried out.
On reflection, in the light of our conversation with Mr Jefferies since, what we have come to realise, is that we might have been quicker in making it clear that he was no longer a suspect.
Now it's not ordinary Police practice, to release details, a press release to say that someone isn't a suspect anymore. But then again this wasn't an ordinary case and Mr Jefferies, had been subjected to a campaign of vilification in the press,. It was within our gift to reduce that by making an earlier announcement that he was no longer a suspect and on reflection we think that er.. we think that might have been done.
CJ:
There are several things, it erm.. first of all provides the public exculpation, which is the equivalent of the apology the newspapers that I sued had to make when they appeared at the High Court in the Summer of 2011,.. Urm... That acknowledges, it is something the Police had not done before. It acknowledges er, the very considerable distress, which all this caused. Erm... and it someway I think, at least implicitly, towards acknowledging that it did just effect me, it effected members of my family, it effected friends. So they were also to a degree, victims as well as i was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6waChhMuRUBut then again this wasn't an ordinary case There you go... no ordinary case.... What was so extraordinary about it?? Everyones happy with the story on the stand, murder or manslaughter..... Yet Chief Constable Nick Gargan tells us some years later that this was no ordinary case... Why is that then?? Sounds ordinary enough if you believe the tale on the stand and the admission of guilt..
Why all this hoo har surrounding this case, if it is ordinary, if a Chief Constable is telling us to camera that it wasn't an ordinary case.
Gives more reason to question why!! (imo)
