Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 360129 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline nina

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #375 on: July 17, 2017, 05:01:39 PM »
Quite honestly Mrswah I don't know. I wasn't arguing, but Nine seemed I don't know to get the wrong idea. Seems to think that I am Sally R et al.

Posting to you, I was trying to work out if 7.10pm could be counted as `just after 7pm' and all hell broke loose

Offline nina

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #376 on: July 17, 2017, 05:05:20 PM »
Actually I shall retire from this Joanna Yeates murder thread.

When I am accused of being other people its just not worth it.

I shall read though.

Bye

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #377 on: July 17, 2017, 06:06:35 PM »
 I came hear for one reason only... !

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #378 on: July 17, 2017, 06:09:20 PM »
What is going on here???

I started this thread on the forum because I suspected (no, I didn't know, and still don't) that Vincent Tabak's conviction was dodgy.

I don't really have much more to say on the subject, to be honest----but I would love the thread to be preserved on here, so that people can read it.

I don't understand why posters are arguing with each other, and I don't believe any of us are anyone other than who we say we are.

If the moderators read all this, they will take the whole thread  down, and I wouldn't blame them, to be honest. . This is all getting very silly, and it was not what I intended when I started the thread nearly a year ago.

We have had a lot of useful, constructive discussion, so why spoil it?

As they say on "Dragon's Den", if we cannot have a reasonable discussion with all kinds of people with all kinds of views, i'm out.

?


Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #379 on: July 18, 2017, 04:04:51 PM »
I'm just going to start with this twitter quote:

Quote
Twitter
skynewsgatherer
@skynewsgatherer
DC Richard Barnston now called to give evidence #TabakTrial

2:48 PM - 18 Oct 2011Twitter
skynewsgatherer
@skynewsgatherer
DC Barnston carried out tape recorded interview with #Tabak following his arrest. Transcripts run to 200 pages.


And this ......
Quote
Twitter
skynewsgatherer
@skynewsgatherer
DC Paul Derrick in the witness box. He denies there was tension between him and the duty solicitor acting for Tabak.

Quote
Twitter
skynewsgatherer
@skynewsgatherer
DC Derrick asked if he thought Tabak's first lawyer was "out of her depth" . He replied "No"

3:26 PM - 18 Oct 2011

Quote
Twitter
skynewsgatherer
@skynewsgatherer
No more evidence today in #TabakTrial. Prosecution case expected to be completed in the morning. Trial resumes at 1030.

Ok... I'll need these people for a future post... just establishing their part in trial...  Interesting that there were 200 pages of "Transcript" that DC Richard Barnston says statements /interview runs too...

Now where the Jury given access to these 200 pages of Transcript?? Did DC Barnston bring these 200 pages of Transcript to court ????

DC Richard Barston called to give evidence at 2:48pm 18th October 2011 (Rough Time he is in court)

Court retires for the day at 3:26pm 18th October 2011 according to the tweet..  We also in this time have DC Paul Derrick give his evidence ....

We have not even 1 hour of testimony from DC Richard Barnston... who apparently has over 200 pages of  transcript... What happened there ????

http://live-news.sky.com/Event/Live_Updates_Vincent_Tabak_Trial3?Page=2

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #380 on: July 18, 2017, 04:38:52 PM »
Part 1....  Three different types of witness .....


I have been trying to establish what witness's actually appeared in court, and what witness's just had their statements read out:  So starting with a list of people who appeared in court and gave evidence themselves...

Witness's who appeared in court

(1): * Darragh Bewell  (Friend of Joanna Yeates)

(2): * Andrew Mott      (Forensic Officer )

(3): * Lyndsey Lennen (Forensic Specialist)

(4): * DC Mark Luther  (Officer In charge of Case )

(5): * Tanja Nickson   (Wall Analyist)

(6): * Lindsey Farmery ( IT Power Point Expert)

(7): * Dr Delaney  (Pathologist)

(8): * Dr Carey (Pathologist)

(9): * Greg Reardon (Joanna Yeates boyfriend)

(10) * DC Karen Thomas ( Holland Interview)

(11) * Father Henwood (Dog walker who met Joanna Yeates )

(12) * Brotheron (Asummed role of Chaplain)

(13) * DC Geofrey Colvin (Arrested Dr Vincent Tabak)

(14) * Rebecca Scott (Joanna Yeates friend )

(15) * Harry Walker ( neighbour who heard screams )

(16) * Florian Lehman (Neighbour who heard Screams )

(17) * Zoe Lehman (neighbour who heard screams )

(18) * Dr Jennifer Miller ( Examined Joanna Yeates stomach contents )

(19) * DC Richard Barnston ( 200 page  transcript?? Interviewed Dr Vincent Tabak)

(20) * DC Paul Derrick ( asked about Dr Vincent Tabak's first lawyer ).



Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #381 on: July 18, 2017, 04:40:12 PM »
Part 2...  2nd Type of Witness....

 There is another type of physical witness....  and they are those who appeared but just read out their statements

(21)  * Karl Harrison (Forensic Archeologist)

(22)  * Maria Brown (Held the Party on Canygne Road)

(23) * Peter Brown (Held Party on Canygne Road)



Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #382 on: July 18, 2017, 05:17:19 PM »
Part 3..... 3rd Type of Witness

The list below are witness's who had their statements read to the jury and didn't appear in Court

(24) * Nurse Ruth Booth Pearson (examined Dr Vincent Tabak when he was arrested )

(25) * Daniel Birch ( Dog walker who found Joanna Yeates)

(26) * Samuel Huscroft (Friend Joanna Yeates ) (text received from Joanna Yeates )

(27) * Mathew Wood (Chris Yeates Friend... Joanna Yeates (text Received from Joanna Yeates )

(28) * Sarah Maddox (At Dinner  Party Dr Vincent Tabak attended )

(29) * PC Steve Archer ( Was there when Dr Vincent Tabak was arrested )

(30: * Mathew Phillips (Heard a shreik... was at party on Canygne Road )

(31) * Louise Althrope (Attended Party with Dr Vincent Tabak)

(32) * Geofrey Hardyman (Tenant of 44 Canygne Road )

(33) * Elizabeth Chandler ( Office Manager at BDP)

(34) *  Shrikart Sharma ( Dr Vincent Tabak's Boss )

(35) * Glen O'Hare ( Hosted Part Dr Vincent Tabak attended ).

(36) * Anneleise Jackson, (PC... Greg's Phone Call statement )

(37) * Peter Lindsell  ( Friends of Joanna Yeates .. at Bristol Mead Station ( Text received from Joanna Yeates )

(38) * Andrew Lillie (Attended a Dinner Party with Dr Vincent Tabak )

(39) * Linda Marland (Attended Party Dr Vincent Tabak attended ) (party was in a bar in Bristol)


Don't think I have missed anybody... But these 'Part Posts"  will help with 'Part 4'.....

Edit...
(40): Micheal Breen... Not sure where to put him

(41): PC Martin Faithful

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #383 on: July 18, 2017, 06:21:03 PM »
Part 4 ..... What did the "Read Out in Court Witness Statements".. say

These witness statements were many.... many statements making many claims.... On either Joanna Yeates or Dr Vincent Tabak... The helped form the basis of The Prosecution Case.... Without these statements "The Jury" would not know quite a lot of information....

Take Daniel Birch for instance... He and his wife Rebecca.. apparently found Joanna Yeates Body... I'll say apparently for 2 reasons... I believe Dr Delaney has already explained it was the Officers who put Joanna Yeates on the Verge (Roadside)... And Daniel Birch wasn't in court to verify his claim ...... And this is where I am taking you...

Definition of Statement

Quote
A 'statement' is defined as "any representation of fact or opinion made by a person by whatever means"; and it includes a representation made in a sketch, photo fit or other pictorial form.

Matter stated: implied insertions

A 'matter stated' is one where the purpose or one of the purposes of the person making the statement appears to have been to cause another person to believe the matter or to cause another person to act or a machine to operate on the basis that the matter is as stated  (section 115).

Definition of Hearsay

Quote
Hearsay" in criminal proceedings is "a statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings that is evidence of any matter stated" (section 114 (1) Criminal Justice Act 2003).


Matter stated: implied insertions

The effect of this definition of statement is to enable evidence to be admitted of 'implied assertions'. This reverses the decision made in R v Kearley (1992) 2 AC 228 in which police answered telephone calls and personal calls to the defendant's home from people asking about drugs that the defendant had for sale. The prosecution wished to adduce the evidence to prove that the intended recipient of the calls was a dealer in drugs, without evidence from the callers themselves. The House of Lords decided that, as evidence of the fact that the defendant dealt in drugs, the caller's words were hearsay and thus inadmissible.

I'm trying to understand how all those people in "Part 3... of my post on this matter.... evidence was allowed in court.... because realistically I believe it could be hearsay....  And some of the statements had other people brought into these statements.. (eg: Daniel Birch mentions his wife)..

So are the read out statements classed  as "Matter Stated" Or are they classed as Hearsay ???

Admissibility of hearsay evidence

Quote
(1)In criminal proceedings a statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings is admissible as evidence of any matter stated if, but only if—
(a)any provision of this Chapter or any other statutory provision makes it admissible,
(b)any rule of law preserved by section 118 makes it admissible,
(c)all parties to the proceedings agree to it being admissible, or
(d)the court is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice for it to be admissible.
(2)In deciding whether a statement not made in oral evidence should be admitted under subsection (1)(d), the court must have regard to the following factors (and to any others it considers relevant)—
(a)how much probative value the statement has (assuming it to be true) in relation to a matter in issue in the proceedings, or how valuable it is for the understanding of other evidence in the case;
(b) what other evidence has been, or can be, given on the matter or evidence mentioned in paragraph (a);
(c) how important the matter or evidence mentioned in paragraph (a) is in the context of the case as a whole;
(d) the circumstances in which the statement was made;
(e) how reliable the maker of the statement appears to be;
(f) how reliable the evidence of the making of the statement appears to be;
(g) whether oral evidence of the matter stated can be given and, if not, why it cannot;
(h) the amount of difficulty involved in challenging the statement;
(i) the extent to which that difficulty would be likely to prejudice the party facing it.
(3) Nothing in this Chapter affects the exclusion of evidence of a statement on grounds other than the fact that it is a statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings.

So are all the statement in Part 3.. classed as hearsay... not having anything to establish

(A): Their Truth

(B): Their Validaty

(C): Their Accuracy

(D): The extent to which that difficulty would be likely to prejudice the party facing it.

Realistically I do not believe that The Witness's who's statements where read out in court should have been admissible (IMO)... as they prejudiced the Jury as to Dr Vincent Tabak's .. Mental State... Conversation's he may or may no have had .... Conversations people say they had with Joanna Yeates that cannot be verified ... Parties attended as to screams  heard ...  Injuries Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to have had on arrest... Irrelevant..(IMO)..

How can so many witness's give statements that basically are hearsay as far as I can tell....

With so many statements telling us how Joanna Yeates mood was in The Ram Pub differing... How can that be  accepted as true and accurate in these written statements ??

PC Martin Faithful (I believe he didn't appear) is described as a Forensic's Officer... his statement make claims To Joanna Yeates thawing... Yet PC Martin Faithful is a Beat Bobby.... How can what he say be accepted??

People who attended parties with Dr Vincent Tabak making assertions as to his mood and what he was supposed to have said ... Hearsay... They are NOT in COURT to makes such statement that could be challenged ...

You have 16 written statements read out in court without these peoples attendance... And 3 statements read out without challenge..

So 19 statements that make all kinds of claims that are unsubstantiated by anyone ..... Martin Faithful supports that Joanna Yeates jeans pocket was visible.... as Daniel Birch had claimed.... Both are statements that are read out How is that evidence ???

You basically have the evidence of a Beat bobby who is not there as far as I am aware backing the statement of a witness that wasn't at court also!!!  That can't be right !!!!

Is it normal to have So many witness statements read out at a "Murder Trial" ??????

As far as I am concerned... their statement mean nothing... How trustworthy are these people ?? we know nothing about these people whatsoever.... Yet they all star in The Trial Of The Year..... And everything they have seen or heard has been accepted as Gospel... without anything to prove what they have stated as being True

Is this what our justice system has come to... Filling the court time with unsupported witness statements, to imply whatever they like, just by simply making such a statement and the prosecution using these statements to convict somebody..

So if we get rid of 19 pointless witness's ..... who have not really added to anything proving that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates... We can then look at what the Live witness's actually gave to this trial (IMO)....


Edit... I nearly forgot... Geoffrey Hardyman... The Defences only apparent witness for Dr Vincent Tabak ..(excluding Dr Carey)..... Who says absolutley NOTHING.... Apart from not being able to hear anything and Joanna Yeates had a Cat .... Well that written witness statement really put paid to the Prosecutions case... NOT!!!!

Pointless.... Pointless statement not saying anything..... (IMO)....


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/section/114


Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #384 on: July 18, 2017, 07:16:09 PM »
Part 5..... The live witnesses...who witnessed nothing...

Looking at the live witnesses and what they added to this trial...

Darragh Bewell...

Well he says he's with Joanna Yeates... there's CCTV of them in the Pub... But what has he witnessed ?????? Nothing)... (IMO)... He hasn't witnessed anything to do with her disappearance or anything in relation to Dr Vincent Tabak....

Greg Reardon 

Again... what did he witness....  A Cat that needed feeding ??? He witnessed Nothing.... He didn't speak to Joanna Yeates from when he left for Sheffield... he cannot add to anything as far as Dr Vincent Tabak is concerned because he didn't know him and wasn't there on Friday 17th December 2010..

Harry Walker

He witness nothing also.... He witnessed a party and heard screams that could have been anyones ...

Florian Leham

He also witnessed Nothing... He witnessed a party and screams were heard ... He didn't see anything..

Zoe Lehman

Again witnessed a party and heard screams.... she witnessed "Nothing"...

Father Henwood

He witnessed a woman on the Friday 17th December 2010... it could have been Joanna Yeates it may not have been .... So what did he actually witness ???? Nothing !! (IMO)..

Rebecca Scott Had a telephone conversation with Joanna Yeates .... What did she witness... Nothing....


So out of the 20 live witnesses at court 7 of those witness's... Witnessed "Nothing" that would add in the conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak... Having not either arrested him... Collected and tested Forensics.... Been at the Second Scene of Crime .... Seen the Murder .... Or Interviewed him....

None of the above witnesses witnessed anything in relation to Joanna Yeates disappearance... as they weren't even there ... Not of them saw her or Dr Vincent Tabak over that weekend...

So we have 13 witness's left.....

I may sound like I am being harsh... But witness's should witness events that happen.. eg:..

(A): An arguement that lead to an assault

(B): Seeing someone stab someone else

(C):Being an accomplice

(D): Being at the scene of crime as the offence is committed

(E): Someone who videoed the incident

These examples are witness's... they witnessed an event....

So the above witness's I have listed didn't witness anything at all in this crime.... They were simply used to establish that Joanna Yeates was alive on Friday 17th December 2010...

Which makes me question why Dr Vincent Tabak was charged between Thursday 16th December 2010 and Sunday 19th December 2010....

I will say again... these people witnessed "Nothing"...(IMO)..


Which leaves us with 13 witness's !! (NEXT).....


Edit:... I started with 39 witness's I have 13 left....


Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #385 on: July 18, 2017, 08:04:40 PM »

Greg Reardon 

Again... what did he witness....  A Cat that needed feeding ??? He witnessed Nothing.... He didn't speak to Joanna Yeates from when he left for Sheffield... he cannot add to anything as far as Dr Vincent Tabak is concerned because he didn't know him and wasn't there on Friday 17th December 2010..
While the tendency of your posts is 100 percent correct, you are quite mistaken in dismissing Greg's testimony. It was crucial in securing the guilty verdict. The boyfriend testified to "strange movements in the flat", which he tidied up before Joanna's parents arrived. He described these in detail, and the jury, as you and I would have done, took them to signify that a struggle had occurred. When Vincent Tabak declared "there was no struggle", the jury, understandably, did not believe him.

So I think you are unfair on Greg. I think he was a good witness, and I prefer to believe that there WAS a struggle - though he could also have invented these strange movements, without fear of being proved a liar. It is just that Vincent Tabak, as we on this forum can now see with some confidence, was not party to that struggle at all. It may have been the real killer who struggled with Joanna in the flat - or Greg himself - or all three of them.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #386 on: July 18, 2017, 08:37:27 PM »
Part 6...... Witness's with Evidence ....

Andrew Mott

A Forensics Officer who didn't say where Joanna Yeates was ...... A Forensic Officer who witnessed a body thawing and tried to stop this body thawing... A Forensics Officer who by his statement of said thawing body.... backs up another witness statement of a PC Martin Faithful, who didn't appear in court either, I believe ...  PC Martin Faithful in turn backed up the statement of The Birches, who didn't appear in court who found Joanna Yeates ....

Andrew Mott doesn't ever explain The Fire Services help in the recovery of Joanna Yeates and is evasive in his reply as to why there are NO Photographs of Joanna Yeates been recovered using straps and Broom Handles...

Peter Brotherton

A man who assumes the role of Chaplain... A man whom I believe to be a Prison Officer .. A man that could not substanciate any claims he made about the defendant Dr Vincent Tabak.... A man who first suggest that Dr Vincent Tabak confessed to him that he had killed Joanna Yeates ... A man that had absolutley NO PROOF that this conversation took place...

DCI Mark Luther

The DCI in charge of this case whom I had never heard of and had been made to think that it was DCI Phil Jones who was in Charge of the Joanna Yeates Murder Investigation.... DCI Phil Jones Never appears in court !!!

DS Karen Thomas

The very same Karen Thomas who interviewed Dr Vincent Tabak in Holland... knowing that the Complex Crime Unit where putting a case against Dr Vincent Tabak and therefore should have cautioned him as a suspect... Her statement only adds to what they did to Dr Vincent Tabak in Holland and nothing more ....

Tanya Nickson

Who found blood evidence apparently on the wall above the verge... We do not know if this blood on the wall was deposited as they brought her from behind the wall as I believe she was already placed.. Dr Delaneys testimony suggests that she was brought from one place by Officers and then placed by the roadside (VERGE).. The very same Tanja Nickson who had no business showing the Jury photographs of The Dead Joanna Yeates whilst Joanna Yeates parents were in court... They had avoided court earlier in the week because they knew these images were going to be shown... This was a stunt on Tanya Nicksons Part.... to gain a reaction from the jury...(IMO)

Lyndsey Lennen

The Forensics Analyst who always knew that the DNA evidence was partial...1000/1 yet she allowed the jury to think that there could be NO OTHER CONTRIBUTER other than Dr Vincent Tabak...

Lyndsey Farmery

Officially The IT Expert.... But a Power Point Pointer.... Showing the jury "Pointless slides of presumed searches that Dr Vincent Tabak was alledge to have made on various home and work computers... Evidence that should not have been allowed in court ...(IMO)...

DCI Geoffrey Colvin

Arresting Officer...  Only witnessed Dr Vincent Tabak' shock at being arrested ...

DC Richard Barnston

And his 200 page transcript of Interviews with Dr Vincent Tabak that didn't say anything.... Notice no videoed Interviews of Dr Vincent Tabak were shown to the Jury... when in most murder trials they are ...

DC Paul Derrick

Who's soul purpose was to make reference to Dr Vincent Tabaks first lawyer who was female ... adding Nothing to this case ....

Leaving me with 3 witness's .. I appear to have lost one... Think is PC Steve Archer... add no value... was there when Dr Vincent Tabak was arrested.

Dr Delaney An accredited pathologist whom preformed Joanna Yeates Autopsy... whom has allowed us to learn from his testimony... that Joanna Yeates clothes were different than what she wore in the Ram.. And explained how 2 Officer... who more than likely were Fire Officers... Manovered Joanna Yeates and placed her on the 'Roadside ...

Dr Carey Another accredited Professional who carried out the second post mortem... And was the Defences medical expert...

Dr Jennifer Miller Another accredited medical professional who analysed Joanna Yeates stomach contents... These contents were sent to Scotland to be analysed by her ... (Odd) (IMO)....

"So out of 39 witness's you have 3 whom can make constructive factual evidence as to what happened to Joanna Yeates ..

So what were the other witness's ????? Flim Flam ??? they did nothing they did nothing to prove that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates ...

There evidence only added to the "Written Statement" Dr Vincent Tabak signed in September 2011...

No-one other than Dr Vincent Tabak supports "HIM" actually killing Joanna Yeates ... It is 'The Manslaughter Plea at the Old Bailey".. That seals his fate...

A manslaughter Plea that was never entered into as being "voluntary" or Involuntary" Manslaughter... Intent that was never established as to it being "Direct Intent" or "Oblique Intent"..

A whole Case built on Nothing...(IMO)... Nothing Physical putting Dr Vincent Tabak in Joanna Yeates Flat... Nothing Physical putting Joanna Yeates In Dr Vincent Tabak's flat....

No CCTV Footage of Dr Vincent Tabak driving around with Joanna Yeates supposidly in the boot of his car... No Physical Witness who saw Dr Vincent Tabak commit this Crime...

And no exact time of death established by the Medical professional.... As Joanna Yeates death ranges between Dates

So we have what.... A Media Circus ????  Because I cannot see how these witness's proved that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates.... As there was NO Evidence to support this ...(IMO)...


EDIT:... We actually have 4 Medical professional.... One just slipped under the radar... Have posted about it further down....

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #387 on: July 18, 2017, 08:39:18 PM »
While the tendency of your posts is 100 percent correct, you are quite mistaken in dismissing Greg's testimony. It was crucial in securing the guilty verdict. The boyfriend testified to "strange movements in the flat", which he tidied up before Joanna's parents arrived. He described these in detail, and the jury, as you and I would have done, took them to signify that a struggle had occurred. When Vincent Tabak declared "there was no struggle", the jury, understandably, did not believe him.

So I think you are unfair on Greg. I think he was a good witness, and I prefer to believe that there WAS a struggle - though he could also have invented these strange movements, without fear of being proved a liar. It is just that Vincent Tabak, as we on this forum can now see with some confidence, was not party to that struggle at all. It may have been the real killer who struggled with Joanna in the flat - or Greg himself - or all three of them.

leonora... All I am establishing is that (IMO)... These people should not have given evidence ...as they witnessed nothing (IMO)..

Gregs statement establishes what Greg did and Nothing else ....


All of the witness statements were crucial in returning a guilty verdict... Greg's just held more weight...

I was pointing out that virtually all the witness statements where there for the reason you say Gregs statement was therefore.... To Secure a Conviction against Dr Vincent Tabak... They proved nothing..... (IMO)...


Edit:.... Greg's statement doesn't prove if a fight happened in the Flat.. If he saw blood when he got home....

Nothing in Greg's statement tells us if something happened to Joanna Yeates in Flat 1... Because he tidied up and the flat was already contaminated with the people who had been in and out of it.. When they said that Joanna Yeates was Missing.... Adding to the fact he saw nothing.... So literally he is a useless witness.... (IMO)...

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #388 on: July 18, 2017, 09:24:00 PM »
I have found my last witness... and it wasn't PC Steve Archer who was one of the 20 witness's who had statements read...

* Anneleise Jackson, (PC... Greg's Phone Call statement )

She informed the court as to the fact that Greg Reardon had rung at about 1:00am on Monday the 20th December 2010 to report Joanna Yeates as a Missing Person.....

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #389 on: July 20, 2017, 08:08:17 AM »
Just to add.... their could be 20 read out statements:.... I amended my post because i had named someone twice... But on reflection I may have to go back and change it back to 20.. Statements that were read out...


The other person that was in this collection of invisible witness.... Was a Person by the name of Dr White... All I know about Dr White was that he/she was in attendance at an autopsy... So on saying that a statement must have been read out at court, to include Dr White as a witness....


OMG... I have read it wrong.... Dr White did an Autopsy... So where was Dr White in court???

Quote
Twitter
juliareidsky
@juliareidsky
Dr Delaney did further examination on 31 Dec and observed another on Jan 17 by Dr White #Vincenttabak #Joannayeates

Dr Delaney watches Dr White Do an autopsy on the 17th January 2011....

So before anyone has been charged... They perform an Autopsy on Joanna Yeates for what I believe must be an Autopsy for "The Defence"..

Aren't they jumping the gun a little..... This is horrendous.... 3 days before they arrest Dr Vincent Tabak they have another Dr Performing an Autopsy on Joanna Yeates which can only be described as an Autopsy for a defendant...(IMO)....

This is extremely important.... Where was this Dr White In Court ??? Why wasn't Dr White in court, is more to the point....

They managed to slip that one in nearly unnoticed.... "Lord have mercy"!...

The 20 statements that are read out in court... are bad enough...
But one particular persons statement amongst all of the statements should have attended court.. (IMO)

And that is Dr White !!!!!


http://live-news.sky.com/Event/Live_Updates_Vincent_Tabak_Trial2

These live update pages take a while to load .....