UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Other High Profile Cases and Persons of Interest => The murder of landscape architect Joanna Yeates in Bristol in December 2010. => Topic started by: mrswah on May 25, 2017, 08:29:14 PM
-
As we know, there have been a number: the Judge Rinder programme, "The Lost Honour of Christopher Jefferies", "Murder at Christmas", to name three, but tonight, I watched "Countdown to Murder", made in March 2015, just after VT's conviction for possessing indecent images of children. The programme is one of a series. It features interviews with Mr and Mrs Yeates, Chris Jefferies, Ann Redrop, and DCI Phil Jones, as well as a journalist (can't remember his name) and Professor David Wilson.
I thought this programme contained a number of "inconsistencies."
It begins with the following:
Vincent Tabak "fantasised about having a relationship " with Joanna Yeates.
While Jo was walking home from the Bristol Ram, VT was "waiting for her, fantasising about abusing her."
"Tabak played out his fantasies with prostitutes, but when he returned from abroad, he realised he had a pretty new neighbour."
He "lusted after Joanna Yeates."
Is there any evidence for any of this??????
The commentator then goes on to say that while Jo was on her journey home, "Vincent Tabak was stroking Bernard the cat whom he had grabbed from the hallway."
I have heard theories that VT may have used the cat as an excuse to call on Jo, but honestly, there is no evidence, and the above comment is pure speculation------just as speculative as anything any of us have done on this forum!!!
According to the programme, Jo went into her bedroom, took off her boots, and put on a pair of her boyfriend's ski socks. Apparently,after murdering her, VT removed one of the socks and kept it as a trophy.
This documentary tells us that VT grabbed Jo, forced himself onto her, the fight continued in her bedroom, where he killed her.
So, where is the forensic evidence from her bedclothes?????
He is then "thought to have" gone back to his flat, grabbed a bicycle cover, dragged Jo into her lounge, put the body in the cycle cover, and then lifted it into his boot. No mention of taking her to his flat, note.
DCI Jones tells us that VT was captured on CCTV in ASDA at 10.30pm. (I thought there was no timestamp????)
There are several other aspects of this documentary that made me rather cross! I would call it propaganda !
32
-
...I would call it propaganda !
We are now looking at a golf-playing serial killer who not only owns chains of pubs and favours attractive young women as victims, including Joanna Yeates, but who also has corporate financial interests in a range of TV production companies and can pull strings to influence their output.
-
As we know, there have been a number: the Judge Rinder programme, "The Lost Honour of Christopher Jefferies", "Murder at Christmas", to name three, but tonight, I watched "Countdown to Murder", made in March 2015, just after VT's conviction for possessing indecent images of children. The programme is one of a series. It features interviews with Mr and Mrs Yeates, Chris Jefferies, Ann Redrop, and DCI Phil Jones, as well as a journalist (can't remember his name) and Professor David Wilson.
I thought this programme contained a number of "inconsistencies."
It begins with the following:
Vincent Tabak "fantasised about having a relationship " with Joanna Yeates.
While Jo was walking home from the Bristol Ram, VT was "waiting for her, fantasising about abusing her."
"Tabak played out his fantasies with prostitutes, but when he returned from abroad, he realised he had a pretty new neighbour."
He "lusted after Joanna Yeates."
Is there any evidence for any of this??????
The commentator then goes on to say that while Jo was on her journey home, "Vincent Tabak was stroking Bernard the cat whom he had grabbed from the hallway."
I have heard theories that VT may have used the cat as an excuse to call on Jo, but honestly, there is no evidence, and the above comment is pure speculation------just as speculative as anything any of us have done on this forum!!!
According to the programme, Jo went into her bedroom, took off her boots, and put on a pair of her boyfriend's ski socks. Apparently,after murdering her, VT removed one of the socks and kept it as a trophy.
This documentary tells us that VT grabbed Jo, forced himself onto her, the fight continued in her bedroom, where he killed her.
So, where is the forensic evidence from her bedclothes?????
He is then "thought to have" gone back to his flat, grabbed a bicycle cover, dragged Jo into her lounge, put the body in the cycle cover, and then lifted it into his boot. No mention of taking her to his flat, note.
DCI Jones tells us that VT was captured on CCTV in ASDA at 10.30pm. (I thought there was no timestamp????)
There are several other aspects of this documentary that made me rather cross! I would call it propaganda !
I'll have to re watch that mrswah... but in the meantime.. I have just posted about her journey home... it doesn't even allow for Dr Vincent Tabak to wave at Joanna Yeates ...
I posted this on "Is it possible to work out The time of death'... topic
-
We are now looking at a golf-playing serial killer who not only owns chains of pubs and favours attractive young women as victims, including Joanna Yeates, but who also has corporate financial interests in a range of TV production companies and can pull strings to influence their output.
Or they are actually three different..."Cases ...
(1): Maybe Golf playing Corporate finance person
(2): Serial Killer
(3): The Person who is responsible for Joanna Yeates death...
Or...
(1): Corporate finance Person..
(2): Golf playing serial killer
(3):The Person who is responsible for Joanna Yeates death...
They are probably all seperate Cases ..... unless someone know differently???
-
Ok, on to the "Judge Rinder" programme, again one episode in a series of true crime documentaries. This was first aired in the summer of 2016.
This programme features some of Joanna's relatives, as well as her parents, and we learn a fair amount about what Joanna was like as a child, for example, she loved the outdoors, horse riding, painting and designing. Also, we learn that her father worked abroad quite often, so Joanna and her mother were particularly close. She was also particularly close to her cousin, who was only eighteen months younger than her.
Joanna had lived, studied and worked in Hampshire before going to Bristol, and studying for her second degree in Landscape Architecture. She was popular and enjoyed rowing.
According to the programme, Jo and Greg did not live together before moving to Canynge Road.
To avoid long posts, I will continue this in a separate one!
-
"Judge Rinder" continued.
Mrs Yeates confirmed that it was not unusual for Jo not to reply to text messages.
Jo's parents said that when they arrived at the flat, it "wasn't in the state they expected." They felt sure that Jo had been taken from the flat "either dead or alive". The state of the flat indicated that nobody had been there all weekend, it was untidy, and the washing up had not been done.
My comment: by the time Jo's parents arrived at the flat, Greg had been home for several hours, and had done some tidying up (he said this in court). So, not quite true that nobody had been there all weekend.
Mrs Yeates said she found the Tesco receipt in Jo's coat pocket.
The programme states that Vincent and Tanja came round to the flat at 6am, to find out what was going on, and to see if they could do anything to help.
According to CJ, who was also interviewed for this programme, everyone in the house was interviewed, all gave statements, all had their DNA and fingerprints taken. This was all voluntary, and nobody was concerned about co-operating, as nobody had anything to hide.
-
Judge Rinder-----continued---
There was concern for Joanna from the start because her disappearance was out of character.
Jo's parents, brother and Greg took part in a press conference on 21st December.
Jo left the Bristol Ram at 8pm, and nobody was following her.
Both parents thought she was dead, and her father admits that it was a relief when her body was found.
CJ says that he had been to the gym on the Friday evening, arrived home at about 9pm, and was parking his car when he thought he heard and saw people walking up the driveway.
After giving his second statement to the police, the press kept pestering him, and he refused to talk to them.
He was arrested the following day at 7am, and the police took his car (the Chrysler).
CJ felt he might have been framed because:
He had access to all the flats.
He had given the police a further statement.
He arrived home at around the same time as Jo, and had no alibi for the rest of the evening.
The police were under a lot of media pressure.
-
Judge Rinder (continued)
Vincent Tabak called the police from Holland after seeing the news of CJ's arrest on television.
He implied that CJ's vehicle had been moved overnight.
CJ was released on bail late on 1st January, and went to stay with friends.
VT aroused suspicion when he was interviewed in Holland because he asked a number of questions pertaining to the forensic investigations. He admitted to having walked past Joanna's front door on Friday 17th, and had slipped on the ice.
"DNA was all that they needed" (ie to arrest VT, although I don't recall who said that).
VT was "clearly surprised" at being arrested, and so was CJ, who described VT and TM as "pleasant, self possessed and extremely polite." CJ thought the police had made another mistake.
When arrested on 20th January, Vincent denied any knowledge of Jo's murder.
However, one spot of blood was found on the rubber seal of Tanja's car boot.
At 8pm on Sunday 19th, VT was googling Longwood Lane, and zooming in on the very spot where Jo's body was found.
My comment: do we know whether VT and TM were elsewhere at 8pm on Sunday 19th??
He was charged on 22nd January.
-
Judge Rinder (continued)
It became obvious that VT had a lot of pornography on his computer, some featuring strangulation, and that he "enjoyed violent, extreme pornography."
In February 2011, VT disclosed that he had killed Jo, and was going to admit it.
CJ remained on bail because VT refused to say anything during his police interviews, so the police thought CJ might still have some involvement in Jo's death.
According to DCI Phil Jones, Jo was killed by 9pm on the Friday night.
VT deliberately "put himself on CCTV to text his girlfriend"
Jo's aunt and uncle comment on seeing VT in court, noting his size, and realising that Jo would never have stood a chance.
Mr Yeates says that VT apologised for moving Jo, but not for killing her.
-
"Judge Rinder" continued...
The programme states that Vincent and Tanja came round to the flat at 6am, to find out what was going on, and to see if they could do anything to help.
If the defendant himself actually accompanied his girlfriend voluntarily on a 6am visit to Mr & Mrs Yeates, Greg Reardon and officer Anneleise Jackson, into the flat where he was charged with carrying out the murder, and where he was alleged to have been afraid of his DNA being discovered, why did none of the witnesses (Greg, Anneleise and Vincent himself) even mention this visit in court? Why were Mr & Mrs Yeates, who were in court already, not called into the witness box to tell the jury how the defendant behaved during this astonishing visit? The jury heard plenty of silly nonsense about his behaviour and remarks after the crime in statements from witnesses who had attended parties with Vincent read out in court.
-
Judge Rinder (continued)
...
"DNA was all that they needed" (ie to arrest VT, although I don't recall who said that).
...
Judge Rinder is the only source that states that everyone in the house had their DNA and fingerprints taken. This HAS to include Vincent Tabak. It is Christopher Jefferies himself who says it in this programme, so it must be true!!! In that case, why should DC Karen Thomas take these samples AGAIN in Holland? Why should nurse Booth-Pearson taken them YET AGAIN on 20th January 2011? Apart from that, Christopher Jefferies also "knew" that Vincent Tabak "had" something to hide, when he talked to Judge Rinder in 2016.
-
Judge Rinder is the only source that states that everyone in the house had their DNA and fingerprints taken. This HAS to include Vincent Tabak. It is Christopher Jefferies himself who says it in this programme, so it must be true!!! In that case, why should DC Karen Thomas take these samples AGAIN in Holland? Why should nurse Booth-Pearson taken them YET AGAIN on 20th January 2011? Apart from that, Christopher Jefferies also "knew" that Vincent Tabak "had" something to hide, when he talked to Judge Rinder in 2016.
I had never even heard of the Judge Rinder series, until I watched this on You Tube. Yes, it is Christopher Jefferies who says it: watch it, and you will see !!! But, is it true? I don't know. Do you? Does anyone?
-
I had never even heard of the Judge Rinder series, until I watched this on You Tube. Yes, it is Christopher Jefferies who says it: watch it, and you will see !!! But, is it true? I don't know. Do you? Does anyone?
In the light of what has been said... I'm starting to watch this program again.... The first 16 second are revealing... Joanna Yeates father is extremely angry and her mother devastated....
Which is hardly surprising.... considering the circumstances ...
-
If the defendant himself actually accompanied his girlfriend voluntarily on a 6am visit to Mr & Mrs Yeates, Greg Reardon and officer Anneleise Jackson, into the flat where he was charged with carrying out the murder, and where he was alleged to have been afraid of his DNA being discovered, why did none of the witnesses (Greg, Anneleise and Vincent himself) even mention this visit in court? Why were Mr & Mrs Yeates, who were in court already, not called into the witness box to tell the jury how the defendant behaved during this astonishing visit? The jury heard plenty of silly nonsense about his behaviour and remarks after the crime in statements from witnesses who had attended parties with Vincent read out in court.
This may well not have happened at all, Leonora. There are many "inconsistences" in the media reports--both in these documentaries and in the newspapers. I am about to write about the "Murder at Christmas" documentary---which, at least, was made in 2011.
-
The Crimewatch Documentary and "Murder at Christmas."
A Crimewatch appeal was being prepared to help find Jo. As we all know, the Crimewatch series exists to help the police solve crimes, particularly crimes that are proving difficult to solve, and not cases that have been solved (or which are thought to have been solved). I believe the programme about Jo was due to be aired on 26th January 2011. by this time, Vincent Tabak had been charged with Jo's murder, and so the programme was not aired.
The "Murder at Christmas" documentary was made shortly after VT's conviction. It is available on You Tube (in three parts), and there are several versions of it, not necessarily with the same title. One version is introduced by the Crimewatch team.
-
"Murder at Christmas" continued.
Mr and Mrs Yeates, DCI Phil Jones, Ann Reddrop and Christopher Jefferies were interviewed for this programme. So was Rebecca Scott, Joanna's friend, DCI Joe Goff, a neighbour of the Tabak family, and a Dutch journalist who followed the case.
Joanna is presented as a "beautiful and talented" young lady who was interested in sports, and who had been in a relationship with her"great boyfriend" Greg for two years.
Contrary to what we have been led to believe in other reports, Greg was worried when Jo did not respond to his calls.
My comment: this is probably not true. We have heard time and time again that Jo did not always answer her phone, and Greg would not have waited so long before contacting the police and Jo's parents, had he been worried from the outset.
Mrs Yeates says that she looked over walls, and banged on the boots of cars, just in case Jo had been abducted and was trapped inside one. Mr Yeates speaks of two pairs of footprints going diagonally across the lawn, and then he notices Vincent and Tanja, so assumed that the footprints were theirs. Apparently, Tanja asked if she could do anything to help, while Vincent stood back and said nothing.
-
"Murder at Christmas" continued.
Unlike the other documentaries, this one tells us a fair amount about Vincent's background.
He came from a small, quiet, traditional town in the South of Holland, is the youngest of four children, seems "normal" but "a little bit introvert". He goes to Eindhoven to study, and proves to be an exceptionally able student, gaining a PhD. Like his fellow students, he spends most of his time in front of a computer" designing stuff". His family describe him as shy, steady and calm. whereas his colleagues describe him as outgoing. The Dutch journalist describes him as a "geek", who spends little time with people but a lot of time in front of a computer screen-----as do other students in the same field of study. He is systematic and methodical.
Chris Jefferies describes Vincent as "civilised and courteous, the ideal tenant." He also speaks very warmly of Jo and Greg, who, apparently, were the first people to apply when CJ advertised the flat for rent. They were looking to set up home together, and CJ was very happy to help them do that.
-
"Murder at Christmas" continued
CJ was the secretary of the Management Company for 44 Canynge Road, and , in this capacity, had a copy of every tenant's keys. He handed these over to the police early on in the investigation. After arriving home at around 9pm on Friday 17th December, he spent the rest of the evening alone, reading.
VT arrived home from work, ate a pizza and drank a beer, then went on his computer to look at pornography: it is violent porn, that shows the degrading of women. He has an "online life obsessed with violent sex".
When Jo's parents arrived in Bristol, one thing they did was visit VT and TM's flat to see whether or not they knew anything regarding Jo's whereabouts. She seemed helpful, but he stepped back.
He was organised, calm and rational. He convinced everyone that he didn't know Jo, and knew nothing about her disappearance. He even walked a fellow guest home from a party during the following week, as she was afraid of walking home alone.
My comment: perhaps this was genuine, and he was telling the truth! (But, then I would say that, wouldn't I).
Vincent and Tanja left Bristol for Cambridge on the evening of 23rd December, and left Cambridge fro Holland on the 28th, travelling through the Channel Tunnel.
-
"Murder at Christmas" continued
Jo's body was discovered at 8.45am on Christmas Day.
Mr Yeates says that Jo had not been sexually attacked.
There were no broken windows, or any sign of a break in, so the police concluded that Jo must have let someone in: the killer had to be someone she either knew or recognised.
CJ knew Joanna was alone for the weekend, and he had a key to her flat, so he was arrested, and his car searched for evidence.
At 10am on the day of CJ's arrest, Vincent and Tanja telephoned the police from Holland and said that the landlord's car had changed position overnight (17th-18th December).
DCI Jones states that a team was sent to Holland to interview VT as a witness.
He was reluctant to give a DNA sample, and this was relayed back to the police in England.
They found a DNA match and then planned to arrest him (why didn't they arrest him straight away, in that case?).
-
Murder at Christmas---continued.
People in Holland could not believe it when VT was arrested, and they thought the police must be under a lot of pressure.
VT's family did not understand what was going on, and were pestered by the British media (this kind of thing doesn't happen in Holland). They thought he was innocent.
The family was "fully convinced he had nothing to do with it. They knew him very well."
Once in custody, he made no comment. but he made a written statement, saying that he did not know Jo.
. When told that minute traces of blood had been found on the rubber seal of his car boot, he still made no
comment.
On 8th February, while on remand at Long Lartin prison, he told a chaplain that he was going to plead guilty.
-
Murder at Christmas-----continued.
According to the police, VT was a man with secrets. He liked extreme pornography, and led a secret life, also seeking the company of escorts while working away from home . At 10.30 pm on the 19th December, he was on his computer looking at maps of Longwood Lane.
Ann Reddrop thought it very suspicious that he should go shopping at ASDA in Bedminster, which was a 15 minute drive, when he could have obtained his beer, crisps and rock salt in Clifton. She thinks it was a deliberate attempt to give himself an alibi, by putting himself underneath a CCTV camera while texting his girlfriend.
My comment: I would very much like to know whether or not Vincent was actually at home on 19th December at 10.30 pm.
In addition, I cannot see anything strange about someone preferring to visit a large supermarket---I often do so. Somebody in VT's line of work might be particularly interested. He might even have preferred a certain type of beer that he could not obtain locally----perfectly possible.
I think I have probably written enough -----the documentaries are there on You Tube for people to view----and yes, I suppose I have left out a lot of important stuff!!!!
-
Ok, on to the "Judge Rinder" programme, again one episode in a series of true crime documentaries. This was first aired in the summer of 2016.
...
Joanna had lived, studied and worked in Hampshire before going to Bristol, and studying for her second degree in Landscape Architecture...
She LIVED (grew up) in Hampshire, but Judge Rinder tells us (correctly) that she STUDIED for three years in Chelmsford (which is in Essex) for her FIRST degree.
Her cousin Jacqueline told Judge Rinder that she and Joanna used to read each other's diaries out to each other. They had no secrets. Thus confirming that Joanna was a diarist.
-
She LIVED (grew up) in Hampshire, but Judge Rinder tells us (correctly) that she STUDIED for three years in Chelmsford (which is in Essex) for her FIRST degree.
Her cousin Jacqueline told Judge Rinder that she and Joanna used to read each other's diaries out to each other. They had no secrets. Thus confirming that Joanna was a diarist.
Apologies for the mistake---I dare say I have made others!!
-
Questions and Conclusions from the three Documentaries:
All three documentaries seem anxious to portray Vincent Tabak as a man with a secret life consisting of watching violent pornography and contact with escorts. There is (seemingly ) no other reason why he should murder Jo (or anyone else), so it is implied that sex was the reason: he moved from spectator to perpetrator. Yet, his "secret life" did not form part of his trial, nor were any escorts ever identified or interviewed by the police.
Following on from this, nobody who appears in any of the documentaries has anything adverse to say about VT. People from Holland are interviewed, but nobody comes forward to say he was anything more than a "geek"! There is no evidence that he ever "tried it on" with a woman: in fact, it seems that he was in a normal, steady, loving relationship.
So, no previous "form" and no incidences of sinister behaviour around women. However, nobody murders without a motive, so the porn allegedly found on his computer, and his apparent contact with escorts is used to form the motive.
It is repeatedly affirmed that VT was "smart" and "clever", but this is used not to highlight how good he was at his work, but how good he was at covering up what he had done, staying one step ahead of the investigation, and deceiving /fooling everybody into thinking he was a "goodie" when, in fact, he was a "baddie."
Jo is always depicted as being the life and soul of the party, everybody's friend, very popular and outgoing, in oontrast with VT being something of a "nerd" and an introvert. I am sure that this was true to some extent, but I think it is over-emphasized in the documentaries, so that the public sees the contrast between the victim and her alleged murderer. People are always more comfortable with those who are friendly and outgoing! Jo being completely "normal" and being killed by somebody who just pretended to be normal, but who was anything but, is just the sort of thing the public is ready to hear!
There are various inconsistencies with timings, such as when Jo arrived home, when Vincent looked at his computer, etc .
Well, that's a start on my comments. Plenty more to say----------------
-
Apologies for the mistake---I dare say I have made others!!
No mistake, mrswah - We discussed earlier on this forum whether Joanna had a 2nd degree, and I was sceptical, but here we have it from the horse's mouth that she did. I think it is also interesting that we hear, in "Judge Rinder", for the first time, that Joanna and Greg lived together at the same address only for the last month or two of her life. Since Rebecca Scott told the jury that "she knew it was the real deal when Joanna got her kitten Bernard", we have always got the impression that she and Greg had been living together for a much longer time than that.
-
No mistake, mrswah - We discussed earlier on this forum whether Joanna had a 2nd degree, and I was sceptical, but here we have it from the horse's mouth that she did. I think it is also interesting that we hear, in "Judge Rinder", for the first time, that Joanna and Greg lived together at the same address only for the last month or two of her life. Since Rebecca Scott told the jury that "she knew it was the real deal when Joanna got her kitten Bernard", we have always got the impression that she and Greg had been living together for a much longer time than that.
I was actually surprised to discover that Judge Robert Rinder is actually a real person--I thought he was fictional!!
I have certainly heard that Jo and Greg had previously lived together (although I can't remember where I read/heard it), so it could be true. it seems obvious that not everything in these documentaries is one hundred per cent accurate!
-
I was actually surprised to discover that Judge Robert Rinder is actually a real person--I thought he was fictional!!
I have certainly heard that Jo and Greg had previously lived together (although I can't remember where I read/heard it), so it could be true. it seems obvious that not everything in these documentaries is one hundred per cent accurate!
Why not write to him, mrswah, to ask him who first suggested this a case as a topic for his TV series? Since he is a real person, he might be sufficiently concerned about his part in disseminating fake news to want to trace the source back to the complex entity pulling the strings in this case.
Mystery has always surrounded WHERE Joanna lived and where Greg lived before they moved into 44 Canynge Road. Why would Teresa Yeates herself tell us now, 5 years afterwards, that it was their first home together, if it were not true? Have the police told Mr & Mrs Yeates to make peace with Greg?
-
Why not write to him, mrswah, to ask him who first suggested this a case as a topic for his TV series? Since he is a real person, he might be sufficiently concerned about his part in disseminating fake news to want to trace the source back to the complex entity pulling the strings in this case.
Mystery has always surrounded WHERE Joanna lived and where Greg lived before they moved into 44 Canynge Road. Why would Teresa Yeates herself tell us now, 5 years afterwards, that it was their first home together, if it were not true? Have the police told Mr & Mrs Yeates to make peace with Greg?
I don't know that they ever actually fell out with Greg. Mr and Mrs Yeates tend to talk to one of the Bristol papers around Christmas time each year, and in one article, I read that they never hear from Greg and that "he has moved on with his life."
No 44 may well have been their first home together, since the media make all sorts of mistakes in their reporting.
-
I don't know that they ever actually fell out with Greg. Mr and Mrs Yeates tend to talk to one of the Bristol papers around Christmas time each year, and in one article, I read that they never hear from Greg and that "he has moved on with his life."
No 44 may well have been their first home together, since the media make all sorts of mistakes in their reporting.
I think it was their first home together as a couple... I'm sure Mrs Yeates or said that she first lived in digs, then a shared house...
-
I think it was their first home together as a couple... I'm sure Mrs Yeates or said that she first lived in digs, then a shared house...
Yes, I heard she lived in digs too.
-
The Crimewatch Documentary and "Murder at Christmas."
A Crimewatch appeal was being prepared to help find Jo. As we all know, the Crimewatch series exists to help the police solve crimes, particularly crimes that are proving difficult to solve, and not cases that have been solved (or which are thought to have been solved). I believe the programme about Jo was due to be aired on 26th January 2011. by this time, Vincent Tabak had been charged with Jo's murder, and so the programme was not aired.
The "Murder at Christmas" documentary was made shortly after VT's conviction. It is available on You Tube (in three parts), and there are several versions of it, not necessarily with the same title. One version is introduced by the Crimewatch team.
I did write something before about what I believed regards The Crime Watch Program... I'll post it here again...
CrimeWatch....
Well seeing as I mentioned it.... I thought I had better explain my reasoning on this "CrimeWatch Documentary"...
We all are aware how CrimeWatch works.... Now it is there to help Catch A Killer!! correct.... But again miraculously they caught "THE KILLER" before 'The CrimeWatch Program" was due to air...
A couple of days before Dr Vincent Tabak's arrest we get "An emotional Appeal" from The Poor Yeates family... who are desperate to find out who killed there daughter.... And who can blame them.....
But there are TWO things we need to remember here before I go off half-cocked...
"Ann Redropp stated.."The Planned Arrest" of Dr Vincent Tabak..... in her Government statements made on the government website... (So we are in agreement.. on that at least)....
So all through "January" according to Ann Redrropp"... they are gathering "Evidence" and "Planning " Dr Vincent Tabak's Arrest!!!!!
Can you see that little Devil sat on my shoulder at this point..... he's waving 8()-000(
This all brings us NICELY back to "The Crimewatch Program"..... All the time... The Police used "The media"..And I mean USED THE MEDIA..... (IMO)... for us all to plainly see that they were indeed pursuing "The Killer Of Joanna Yeates.".. .. And we all waited in anticipation for "CRIMEWATCH"... In the vain hope some "EXTRA DETAILS" would be Divulged.....
But the "Police" can't produce "This CRIMEWATCH DOCUMENTARY".... (IMO).... So to deflect from having to show it.... and this is the "Clever bit"... "The Program is scheduled to be "SCREENED" After "The Police Review of "The Joanna Yeates Case".... On thinking about that... They never intended to show it..... The Head of the Complex Case Unit Was Busy "PLANNING" Dr Vincent tabak's Arrest"... (IMO)...
They (IMO)... Never made a "CrimeWatch Documentary".... not of the type we believe that they did... (IMO).... They had at various Times got "The Media" gathered together to "Film... Photograph and report on The said "CRIMEWATCH" Documentary" So in the Public's mind they were doing their bit....(IMO) I believe this is "The More Likely reason That they never used "Mrs Yeates to Play The Role of her daughter".... because they would need to run past her... her appearance in said.."CRIMEWATCH" Program.... (IMO)...
So we see The "Photographs of The Longwood Lane reconstruction.... We see all "The Camera's at Tesco's where The young lady who looks similar to "Joanna Yeates" in appearance... has her starring role....
But the Cunjouror's trick are not complete ...(IMO).. We then have The by now... "Infamous" "Sobbing Girl"... who apparently rings the Police after seeing Joanna Yeates Parents heart felt appeal...to catch the killer of their beloved Daughter... (IMO)...
Now out of "Everyone in the "ENTIRE" country that doesn't even "SMELL" of Distasteful and Unusual Behaviour is...... "Our Placid Dutchman" ...Dr Vincent Tabak"... whom until now has been pulling his hair out...disorientated... unsure why the "Police have made his life a mysery"... But out of The Whole Population... he miraculously becomes there "Prime Suspect",... Or at least that is what they want us to believe.....
Giving them the excuse they need to Promptly Arrest This Placid Dutchman and get him off the street of our Glorious Country and make him never darken our doorsteps again.....
Quick step forward... he is charged ....More Importantly No review from Another Force who could see :StraightThrough" the Trickery... (IMO)... Dr Vincent Tabak is Banged To Right... The world and his sheepdog are now happy.....
But.... we still have "The Crime Watch Program that we started and didn't complete"... (IMO).... What better use than to drag it back out when we have put Dr Vincent Tabak away "FOR LIFE"... where we can all say our piece and not only that... explain to a "PUBLIC"... What we had been doing and How we came to the conclusion 'That Dr Vincent Tabak is INDEED 'THE MAN"....
That's why we never see a lot of The Material that they were supposed to have filmed about "The Joanna Yeates Murder"...Because (IMO).... They never really filmed anything... "They Just did their usual and allowed us "The Public" to fill in the blanks in our OWN MINDS ... as to what they had filmed and WHAT Might have been in 'The CrimeWatch" Program that was due to be aired in January 2011.... (IMO)...
And another reason I can safely say this is because:... Whilst No-one Noticed that The reconstruction in 'The Flat" was NOT at 44 Canygne Road.. No-one paid heed... 'But Of Course I Did".... They (IMO)... Filmed those scenes about the flat and outside the flat.... AFTER They had released .. CJ from Bail....
and they who therefore need CJ permission to use his property to continue with the filming.... As CJ still wasn't getting his named cleared... He probably told the "To Take A Long Walk off A Short Pier'.. (IMO).. Hence why "The Actress is "Never Actually seen "In The Basement Flat of 44 Canygne Road....(IMO)
Go on... check out all the "Documentaries"... And Unless it is "The Lost Honour of CJ".... 44 Canygne Road is never used in The reconstruction.... Unless it was a little bit of taping they had before....
I believe I have reasoned "The CrimeWatch Program Also.... (IMO).....
-
In 2015 and 2016, why wouldn't they have been able to use no 44? Chris Jefferies was well cleared by then, and was taking part in the documentaries.
-
"Crime Watch"
The site is one of six scenes being reconstructed as police appeal to the public for further information regarding the architect's murder.
So they filmed SIX SCENES...
(1); Tesco
(2): Longwood Lane
(3): Walking Home
(4): ???
(5): ???
(6): ???
Ok... not sure where these "SIX" Scences were supposed to be filmed ... as we know the media were always there when anything to do with Joanna Yeates Murder was reconstructed or Police appealing for information...
So where are these "SIX" Scenes ??????
I've looked online and the only ones I can find are "The Tesco's Reconstruction".. And Images of "Longwood lane "!!!!
Reconstruction on "Crime Watch Part 1"
(1):Tesco's Express
(2): Inside The Ram Having Drinks
(3): Inside Kitchen Flat... (NOT Canygne Road).. even though it's supposed to be there..
(4): Greg in flat (NOT In Canygne Road).. even though it's supposed to be ..
(5): Longwood Lane... (The Birches finding Joanna yeates )..
(6): ?????
I have said and I'll say it again... they never made "The Crime Watch Program to be aired in January 2011".. (IMO)..
The difference between the two sets of scenes...
Longwood Lane for instance... When The images were made available to the media showing the snow on LONGWOOD LANE....... The area that the use is right next to a "FENCE".... yet the images on the "BELATED" Crime Watch Documentary" show .. The Wall That she was supposed to be found at....
That is interesting in itself... They CHANGED THE LOCATION... of where her body was found in The "BELATED" Crime Watch Program... To fit with their LIES... (IMO)... that Dr Vincent tabak had tried to put her over the wall !!!!!
The Reconstruction in "January 2011".. clearly shows plenty of trees over hanging at the location.. That Joanna yeates was supposed to be ...
Yet the November 2011 "BELATED EDITION" shows the clear wall area were we have been told Joanna Yeates was found !!!
More than One Paper reported that they were filming "
The Longwood Lane scene is one of six being reconstructed.
So for the reconstruction in the "January 2011" Crime watch.... 200kg of fake snow was used ...
Snowbusiness has provided 200kg of snow to the BBC crew to accurately recreate the grim conditions when the 25-year-old’s snow-covered body was found on Christmas Day.
The November 2011 reconstruction.. appears to have a lot more snow being used .... Is the 200kg snow just for snow flake effects or for everything???
I think the main interest here... Is the "LOCATIONS"... they are defineatley TWO different Locations filmed for two Seperate "CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMS"... (IMO)...
So does this mean that they changed the "Location".. To fit with The supposed "Statemnet made at Trial"????
And therefore spent even more money reconstructing this "EVENT"???
I really do think someone with THE RELEVANT LEGAL CREDENTIALS.... could contact the BBC... And find out "what the "Original" LONGWOOD LANE SCENES were !!! because they look to have changed !!!
(IMO)..
And were "The BIRCHES" In The Original "CRIMEWATCH" reconstruction that was due to air in January 2011???
I bet they weren't ...(IMO)....
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/224158/Fake-snow-scene-created-in-hunt-for-Joanna-Yeates-s-killer
http://swns.com/news/jo-yeates-murder-crimewatch-crew-use-hollywood-techniques-for-reconstruction-13913/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1348832/Joanna-Yeates-murder-Vincent-Tabaks-flat-searched-man-32-arrested.html#ixzz4jmI9Wd6v
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
This is for AH...
I managed to find the image I was telling you about... On Judge Rinders program.. This image is large ... But you can see the metal object in the gap... right next to the forensic tent!!
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
It's not actually in the gap... it's attached by the wall... The Forensic tent is covering a drain? Is it in one of the drains that the Police find the significant piece of evidence ??
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Opposite to where they say she was on the verge, on the other side of the road is a metal object on the floor... it may be another drain or something similar...
It's starting to make me wonder about all the drains and paving slabs that were moved at 44, Canygne Road.... Has something been put down drains for the Police to find ????
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Image 1: Where the Forensic tent is situated... The area seems changed... Now at the location of the edge of the curb..
Image 2: The tarmac has been added which covers part of the curb... There seems no reason for this...(IMO)..
Bit strange??
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
The CrimeWatch Program..... Odd it is aired after the event... when they never actually featured this program...
Two things i noticed was on the Perspex Board behind them they have an image of Dr Vincent Tabak's Car outside Canygne Road..(The one I pointed out).. next to an image of the car in the Police lockup....
But also on the wipe board to the right... Is some writing which is difficult to distinguish exactly what it says... But what I can read makes me wonder what else they found.....
To the right of an image of what is supposed to be Dr Vincent Tabak it says in white marker...
Tried to incriminate Jo's Now the next line is hard to identify... But they have definatley found something because on the line below it then says....
???? Blood we found Then it says Arrested on 20th j....
It difficult to see... But going back to the Important line where I know they found something else..... This is what I can make out.....
TM and ?Y DNA found on
Did they find Tanja Morson's DNA on Joanna Yeates ?????
I'm not implying she did anything... It could quite easily be transfer.... Is this why they thought it ws Dr vincent Tabak ????
What else could it be ??
-
Another thing I noticed on that wipe board was that it says that Dr Vincent Tabak was found Guilty on....
25th October 2011 ????
Now thats not correct.... The Verdict was the 28th October 2011
How has The Crime Watch program which was supposed to have been made after the Trial got the date of the Guilty Verdict as 25th October 2011???
What is it with the date 25th October ??? That was the date Joanna Yeates and Greg were supposed to have moved into the flat... but we know they were there by the 16th October 2010...
-
TM and ?Y DNA found on
Did they find Tanja Morson's DNA on Joanna Yeates ?????
Cross-examining Lindsay Lennen, Mr Clegg asked her if the DNA of any unidentified persons was found in the Renault Megane. Her answer was "No". If it really were Tanja Morson's car, as we have all been led to believe, then it would be very surprising if her DNA were not found in it. So it is most probable that "TM" is one of the identified persons whose DNA was found in the car.
Reports of strange behaviour in Canynge Road may well include someone rummaging in the dustbins at No. 44 after dark to retrieve used condoms. A single condom used by the occupants of Flat 2 would provide samples of body fluids from both Vincent Tabak and Tanja Morson, which could have been smeared on the body in order to incriminate one or both of them. I am very grateful to the person who only recently told me about this method of stitching up an innocent person for a serious crime.
-
Cross-examining Lindsay Lennen, Mr Clegg asked her if the DNA of any unidentified persons was found in the Renault Megane. Her answer was "No". If it really were Tanja Morson's car, as we have all been led to believe, then it would be very surprising if her DNA were not found in it. So it is most probable that "TM" is one of the identified persons whose DNA was found in the car.
Reports of strange behaviour in Canynge Road may well include someone rummaging in the dustbins at No. 44 after dark to retrieve used condoms. A single condom used by the occupants of Flat 2 would provide samples of body fluids from both Vincent Tabak and Tanja Morson, which could have been smeared on the body in order to incriminate one or both of them. I am very grateful to the person who only recently told me about this method of stitching up an innocent person for a serious crime.
It very strange that they didn't mention this DNA sample leonora... Don't you think so???
-
Cross-examining Lindsay Lennen, Mr Clegg asked her if the DNA of any unidentified persons was found in the Renault Megane. Her answer was "No". If it really were Tanja Morson's car, as we have all been led to believe, then it would be very surprising if her DNA were not found in it. So it is most probable that "TM" is one of the identified persons whose DNA was found in the car.
Reports of strange behaviour in Canynge Road may well include someone rummaging in the dustbins at No. 44 after dark to retrieve used condoms. A single condom used by the occupants of Flat 2 would provide samples of body fluids from both Vincent Tabak and Tanja Morson, which could have been smeared on the body in order to incriminate one or both of them. I am very grateful to the person who only recently told me about this method of stitching up an innocent person for a serious crime.
But... as Joanna Yeates was supposed to covered in a bicycle bag,... there should be NO DNA transfer from the car....
So what was it that the DNA refers too???
-
The CrimeWatch Program..... Odd it is aired after the event... when they never actually featured this program...
Two things i noticed was on the Perspex Board behind them they have an image of Dr Vincent Tabak's Car outside Canygne Road..(The one I pointed out).. next to an image of the car in the Police lockup....
But also on the wipe board to the right... Is some writing which is difficult to distinguish exactly what it says... But what I can read makes me wonder what else they found.....
To the right of an image of what is supposed to be Dr Vincent Tabak it says in white marker...
Tried to incriminate Jo's Now the next line is hard to identify... But they have definatley found something because on the line below it then says....
???? Blood we found Then it says Arrested on 20th j....
It difficult to see... But going back to the Important line where I know they found something else..... This is what I can make out.....
TM and ?Y DNA found on
Did they find Tanja Morson's DNA on Joanna Yeates ?????
I'm not implying she did anything... It could quite easily be transfer.... Is this why they thought it ws Dr vincent Tabak ????
What else could it be ??
Looking at the image again... It says... TM and ?Y DNA found on J
So who initial are they???
It looks like LY ??
EDIT.... If the J at the end of the sentence was for Jo.... then the car wouldn't come into it.....(IMO)
Double Edit.... AH.... Does the initial TM & LY mean anything to you ???? It could be "RY"
A simple yes or No will do....
-
But... as Joanna Yeates was supposed to covered in a bicycle bag,... there should be NO DNA transfer from the car....
So what was it that the DNA refers too???
Somebody - I don't remember who it was - explained at the time that the bloodstains found in or on the car were so minute that VT wouldn't have noticed them. The bicycle bag would have prevented much larger amounts of blood from being transferred. The police had speculated publicly about the use of a large bag or holdall just after they had started to interrogate VT and examined the car. It is standard procedure because so many killers move the body in a large bag or holdall!
-
Somebody - I don't remember who it was - explained at the time that the bloodstains found in or on the car were so minute that VT wouldn't have noticed them. The bicycle bag would have prevented much larger amounts of blood from being transferred. The police had speculated publicly about the use of a large bag or holdall just after they had started to interrogate VT and examined the car. It is standard procedure because so many killers move the body in a large bag or holdall!
The suitcase was mentioned in this report on the day Dr Vincent Tabak was arrested .....
http://www.gettyimages.ca/license/655515830
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg421768#msg421768
-
Somebody - I don't remember who it was - explained at the time that the bloodstains found in or on the car were so minute that VT wouldn't have noticed them. The bicycle bag would have prevented much larger amounts of blood from being transferred. The police had speculated publicly about the use of a large bag or holdall just after they had started to interrogate VT and examined the car. It is standard procedure because so many killers move the body in a large bag or holdall!
Would there have been `large amounts of blood'? Joanna was already dead when put into the bicycle bag wasn't she?
Doesn't death stop blood from flowing?
-
A curious clip from CrimeWatch program....
The Presenter says at :55 seconds...
But when Detectives had knocked on the door of Jo's immediate neighbour Dutch National Vincent Tabak ,he claimed he hadn't seen
It makes me question when it was made??? This reconstruction was supposed to be recorded after Dr Vincent Tabak's arrest and trial... But I think the majority was made before.....
What caught my eye, was when the actress playing The Policewoman is at Dr Vincent Tabak's door... The Flat he lives in looks like it is in the main house....
He has a wooden door open and opposite is another wooden door in a Hallway....
Now... having to use a different location is one thing but you would have thought that when Dr Vincent Tabak was stood at his door to the Police woman... It would be a FRONT DOOR.....
So I'll ask again.... Did Dr Vincent Tabak Live in The Main House ?????
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0&t=54
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Still with CrimeWatch.... It's just talking about CJ being arrested .. Then....
At 1:58 of video..... It says
But amazingly just 3 hours after his arrest an Officer received a call from Vincent Tabak in the Netherlands,
claiming to have new information
Well thats a revelation....
So there Must be a recording of this Phone Call that was made at 10:00am on the 30th December 2010
When did the TV Media first air the arrest of CJ??? At what time was the arrest of CJ aired???
Dr Vincent Tabak is away visiting his family in Holland... And the first thing he thinks of is ringing the Police ???
I don't think so..... He had been wanting to keep away from all of the upset.... He hasn't seen his family in a while...
Now another thing on the video.. It shows the actor playing Dr Vincent Tabak, making this phone Call from a Landline....
Well if they rented accomodation for all the family... Dr Vincent Tabak is hardly likely to make a phone Call from a Landline....(IMO)
If the Crimewatch Program was made back in January 2011, it would indeed be incorrect as they would have assumed that Dr Vincent Tabak was in a Family House...... But he wasn't...
But then you have to ask how Crime Watch knew all of the information before it even happened ??? Leading to the arrest and conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak!
Maybe we need to Scrutinise The Crime Watch Program more and see what else it reveals..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0&t=54
-
Crimewatch is simply a cheap way of creating entertainment for the gullible masses. It follows the same pattern for a reason, it works. The light toned airy, fairy introduction, followed by the dropped vocal tone, followed by a double pause, then a verdict delivered. Then some facts are put together to support the argument just concluded. The dumb audience already has a subliminal answer and can now piece the bits together as they come up on screen creating the notion that they can see the obvious whilst everyone else flounders. "Obvious, innit" is oft the cry from the settee overloaded to breaking point by half the number of individuals it was designed to seat when a clear cut case presented at the end matches perfectly the carefully crafted, easy to remember clues they have been suckered into believing as the visual reinforcement of video provides the only mechanism left to move microscopic bits of information into their easily aroused empty heads. All they need to momentarily satisfy their limited needs, and bring the evenings entertainment to a most acceptable conclusion is the round up of the cases being delivered with some cleavage on display and an unlimited supply of chips and coke.
Quite recently the programme re-ran an old episode. Several viewers rang in to say they knew who this was and gave the same name. It was the actor who took part in the reconstruction. The police arrested him and awaited the outcome of a DNA test before releasing him. I despair, and so should we all.
AH
-
AH... Now I know The CrimeWatch full story is on YouTube... Was it ever aired ??? Or was it just put on Youtube...
Now I know the original was never aired... So what about this one ???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtOST33-LjU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0
Was this ever on TV????
-
So it was uploaded on the 6th November 2011 by XCrimeUK, whoever he is ...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOlc72vuIAdqKyZ6G_bF-9w
Now I went to the CrimeWatch website for that time and it doesn't mention Dr Vincent Tabak... or Joanna Yeates ....
03/11/2011
Crimewatch
Detectives from across the UK appeal for help in solving some of the UK's biggest cases. These include the young teenager 'kneecapped' on his doorstep with two blasts from a shotgun in a shocking case of mistaken identity. Plus the inside story of how detectives caught a murderer by staging an elaborate bluff - fooling him into revealing where he'd buried his victim's body.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016ylt8
Does anyone remember it being screened ???
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
So it was uploaded on the 6th November 2011 by XCrimeUK, whoever he is ...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOlc72vuIAdqKyZ6G_bF-9w
Now I went to the CrimeWatch website for that time and it doesn't mention Dr Vincent Tabak... or Joanna Yeates ....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016ylt8
Does anyone remember it being screened ???
Ok.... Was This episode of Crimewatch ever screened??/ Did Crimewatch actually happen on this date??
26/01/2011
Crimewatch
Crimewatch features the latest on the Joanna Yeates murder case, as well as asking viewers to help identify the murderer of 23-year-old Londoner Ricardo Cunha. He was shot dead in his own home with a 1924 Webley revolver, in what police believe is a shocking case of mistaken identity.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y4815
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
The original Crimewatch programme was not screened on the planned date, as they had charged VT by then.
Whether or not the You Tube version was on TV after the trial, I cannot recall.
-
The original Crimewatch programme was not screened on the planned date, as they had charged VT by then.
Whether or not the You Tube version was on TV after the trial, I cannot recall.
But why not go ahead with it anyway??? There were other stories that were to have appeals made ??
-
But why not go ahead with it anyway??? There were other stories that were to have appeals made ??
There may well have been a Crimewatch programme on that date (think it was 26th January), but it did not include the Joanna Yeates case.
-
Simple question....
If The crime watch Documentary was made after Dr Vincent Tabak trial finished on the 28th October 2011 why are the leaves on the tree in the image I have attached depicting the outside of the Police station still Green??
If it was from what was supposed to be their original airing the would be no leaves.... And if it was after the trial, they wouldn't be Green as it would be late Autumn...
So when did they record this program???
-
Simple question....
If The crime watch Documentary was made after Dr Vincent Tabak trial finished on the 28th October 2011 why are the leaves on the tree in the image I have attached depicting the outside of the Police station still Green??
If it was from what was supposed to be their original airing the would be no leaves.... And if it was after the trial, they wouldn't be Green as it would be late Autumn...
So when did they record this program???
I don't know exactly, but a friend of mine was abroad that winter and didn't come back to the uk until 1st April 2011.
I remember sending her a "Bristol Blog" keeping her updated on what was happening. This would have been somewhere between January and March 2011.
I saw them filming at Bargain Booze, which was and still is our post office and Tesco's with what seemed to me to be the world's press on the opposite side of the road, on the steps of my bank, now sadly gone.
As I passed Tesco's they were filming the Joanna Yeates look alike buying her pizza.
I'm sorry I can't pinpoint the date more accurately for you, but I guess that's life.
-
I don't know exactly, but a friend of mine was abroad that winter and didn't come back to the uk until 1st April 2011.
I remember sending her a "Bristol Blog" keeping her updated on what was happening. This would have been somewhere between January and March 2011.
I saw them filming at Bargain Booze, which was and still is our post office and Tesco's with what seemed to me to be the world's press on the opposite side of the road, on the steps of my bank, now sadly gone.
As I passed Tesco's they were filming the Joanna Yeates look alike buying her pizza.
I'm sorry I can't pinpoint the date more accurately for you, but I guess that's life.
January they were filming at Tesco's...
Most of The Crimewatch program is filmed in January 2011 ... I think it was around the 18th....
Other parts I guess should have been filmed later.... After the trial... But I am not sure about that... As I have said a bout the tree...
The scene on Longwood lane was filmed in January I am assuming... as The presenter doesn't know how many days Joanna Yeates lay there for and says several days .....
But did they put this program together well before Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction???
When they talk of CJ... they show images from papers of that date... Even the paper states Police think That Joanna Yeates was followed home....(image attached )
Surely they wouldn't use that newspaper after Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction if they know she wasn't followed home by him!!
This program is off.... It depicts the man whom is playing the part of Dr Vincent Tabak, grabbing Joanna yeates and dragging her into a room.... Now if it was made after the trial then whether they believed what he said on the witness stand or not... it should depict what took place in the kitchen!!! Not him attacking her as soon as he enters the house.... (video at 5:40)..
Play the video a little more and we have The Prosecutions claim that he was driving around with her body in the boot of the car.... Not only that they show the image of the car on Park street when he goes past the college... when it is at 1:40am ish in the morning of the 18th December 2010... (image attached).. They then follow this with the man playing Dr Vincent Tabak at ASDA.... trying to make it look like he drove past Park Street then went to Asda in Bedminster.....
Are they off their heads !!!!!
When did they make this program!! They have events incorrect.... That shouldn't be possible if they did it after the trial....
So... where The makers of 'CrimeWatch" in Cahoots with the "Police"??? Because it appears so to me.... Otherwise they would have Dr Vincent Tabak's version of events, whether they believed them or not!!! (IMO)[/b]
This was made before his conviction .... (IMO)... That's disgraceful.... Did they make the rest of it in May when Dr Vincent Tabak apparently plead guilty to Manslaughter...... (I don't even believe he did that anymore either)....
They can't have "Green Tree's" in the video... and they certainly can't have his car Parked in the Carpark at Canygne Road..... Not only that... They Cannot say that his Car on Park Street was him driving with Joanna Yeates body in the car boot..(IMO) because that is a God Damn lie!!!
So Crimewatch... do you also want to explain yourself as to why you have this production of pure fiction !!!!
I always wondered why the girl playing Joanna Yeates wasn't actually in Flat 1 at 44, Canygne Road.... it's because it was all done before trial.... All the Yeates Interviews are done before trial... you can see that because of the clothes they are wearing .....
I believe the Interviews with the Police and Forensic Civilian Coordinator are done before trial... that's why he doesn't mention that he was there when they found her... So was DC Karen Thomas's Interview done before trial also ????
I would like some Lawyer to take a look at The Crime watch program and see the date of when it was made... I am sure they would have time stamp on the video film before editing... Be interesting to see how much of it was made before Dr vincent Tabak went to trial !!!!
I bet all of it was .........
Did CrimeWatch play a part in the conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak??? If they filmed all of this video before his trial in October 2011 they certainly did (IMO)....
And what did they know about the supposed content of his computer.... ?
I did notice one thing... They didn't talk of taking his work computer... when at trial that apparently is what they had also searched .... So Crimewatch... what happened to the Buro Happold Computers ?????
At 6:30 of the video... It shows the man playing the part of Dr vincent Tabak dragging Joanna yeates body on the road at Longwood Lane.... Now we know that there we're NO DRAG MARKS on Joanna Yeates.... So why are they showing him doing that !!!! Obviously like I have been saying all along... A dead body is hard to lift!!!
But... CrimeWatch should not have that DETAIL INCORRECT... (IMO)... None of their DETAILS should be incorrect if they made this program after Dr Vincent Tabak's trial !!!!
They couldn't possibly have known before hand that he would be found guilty... As far as I am aware ... The manslaughter plea no longer stood once he entered trial so I am under the impression that he would have been a free man...
Again....When did Crimewatch make this program???
The time that they have him on Longwood lane in the program has to be the 18th December 2010... because it didn't snow on Friday 17th December 2010 before midnight ... So why have we snow falling when he dumps the body ???
How can a Program have so many details wrong if it was made after a conviction ???? And if it was made before ... who decided Dr Vincent Tabak did it ??
Edit... Nina ... do you still have the link to the Bristol Blog??
Double Edit Phil was this part of you building your case against Dr Vincent Tabak????
Please take a look at the picture of him supposedly driving around with Joanna Yeates in the boot of the car... The date of the CCTV is the 18th December 2010
Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to have gone to ASDA on the 17th December 2010 and was also supposed to have killed her on that date ....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
January they were filming at Tesco's...
Most of The Crimewatch program is filmed in January 2011 ... I think it was around the 18th....
Other parts I guess should have been filmed later.... After the trial... But I am not sure about that... As I have said a bout the tree...
The scene on Longwood lane was filmed in January I am assuming... as The presenter doesn't know how many days Joanna Yeates lay there for and says several days .....
But did they put this program together well before Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction???
When they talk of CJ... they show images from papers of that date... Even the paper states Police think That Joanna Yeates was followed home....(image attached )
Surely they wouldn't use that newspaper after Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction if they know she wasn't followed home by him!!
This program is off.... It depicts the man whom is playing the part of Dr Vincent Tabak, grabbing Joanna yeates and dragging her into a room.... Now if it was made after the trial then whether they believed what he said on the witness stand or not... it should depict what took place in the kitchen!!! Not him attacking her as soon as he enters the house.... (video at 5:40)..
Play the video a little more and we have The Prosecutions claim that he was driving around with her body in the boot of the car.... Not only that they show the image of the car on Park street when he goes past the college... when it is at 1:40am ish in the morning of the 18th December 2010... (image attached).. They then follow this with the man playing Dr Vincent Tabak at ASDA.... trying to make it look like he drove past Park Street then went to Asda in Bedminster.....
Are they off their heads !!!!!
When did they make this program!! They have events incorrect.... That shouldn't be possible if they did it after the trial....
So... where The makers of 'CrimeWatch" in Cahoots with the "Police"??? Because it appears so to me.... Otherwise they would have Dr Vincent Tabak's version of events, whether they believed them or not!!! (IMO)[/b]
This was made before his conviction .... (IMO)... That's disgraceful.... Did they make the rest of it in May when Dr Vincent Tabak apparently plead guilty to Manslaughter...... (I don't even believe he did that anymore either)....
They can't have "Green Tree's" in the video... and they certainly can't have his car Parked in the Carpark at Canygne Road..... Not only that... They Cannot say that his Car on Park Street was him driving with Joanna Yeates body in the car boot..(IMO) because that is a God Damn lie!!!
So Crimewatch... do you also want to explain yourself as to why you have this production of pure fiction !!!!
I always wondered why the girl playing Joanna Yeates wasn't actually in Flat 1 at 44, Canygne Road.... it's because it was all done before trial.... All the Yeates Interviews are done before trial... you can see that because of the clothes they are wearing .....
I believe the Interviews with the Police and Forensic Civilian Coordinator are done before trial... that's why he doesn't mention that he was there when they found her... So was DC Karen Thomas's Interview done before trial also ????
I would like some Lawyer to take a look at The Crime watch program and see the date of when it was made... I am sure they would have time stamp on the video film before editing... Be interesting to see how much of it was made before Dr vincent Tabak went to trial !!!!
I bet all of it was .........
Did CrimeWatch play a part in the conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak??? If they filmed all of this video before his trial in October 2011 they certainly did (IMO)....
And what did they know about the supposed content of his computer.... ?
I did notice one thing... They didn't talk of taking his work computer... when at trial that apparently is what they had also searched .... So Crimewatch... what happened to the Buro Happold Computers ?????
At 6:30 of the video... It shows the man playing the part of Dr vincent Tabak dragging Joanna yeates body on the road at Longwood Lane.... Now we know that there we're NO DRAG MARKS on Joanna Yeates.... So why are they showing him doing that !!!! Obviously like I have been saying all along... A dead body is hard to lift!!!
But... CrimeWatch should not have that DETAIL INCORRECT... (IMO)... None of their DETAILS should be incorrect if they made this program after Dr Vincent Tabak's trial !!!!
They couldn't possibly have known before hand that he would be found guilty... As far as I am aware ... The manslaughter plea no longer stood once he entered trial so I am under the impression that he would have been a free man...
Again....When did Crimewatch make this program???
The time that they have him on Longwood lane in the program has to be the 18th December 2010... because it didn't snow on Friday 17th December 2010 before midnight ... So why have we snow falling when he dumps the body ???
How can a Program have so many details wrong if it was made after a conviction ???? And if it was made before ... who decided Dr Vincent Tabak did it ??
Edit... Nina ... do you still have the link to the Bristol Blog??
Double Edit Phil was this part of you building your case against Dr Vincent Tabak????
Please take a look at the picture of him supposedly driving around with Joanna Yeates in the boot of the car... The date of the CCTV is the 18th December 2010
Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to have gone to ASDA on the 17th December 2010 and was also supposed to have killed her on that date ....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0
Okay the Crimewatch filming I described was done on the 17th or 18th January in Regent St, Clifton.
I have some vague memory of L/wood Lane being filmed later. Not much, but a bit later. There was no snow around so they had to get a company in that makes fake snow. That's what makes me think it was later than the Regent St filming.
Maybe they didn't film the look alike girl at no. 44 was because they knew that the programme was not going to be aired.
I'm afraid Nine that the Bristol Blog is something I made up to keep my friend informed about goings on in the uk, she spends a lot of time abroad. Sensible lady.
So are you really sure that Crimewatch has got their facts wrong? Normally if there is hard evidence like CCTV it's shown, just witness statements etc., acted. I tend to think that the BBC would not knowingly put out false evidence IMO of course.
-
Okay the Crimewatch filming I described was done on the 17th or 18th January in Regent St, Clifton.
I have some vague memory of L/wood Lane being filmed later. Not much, but a bit later. There was no snow around so they had to get a company in that makes fake snow. That's what makes me think it was later than the Regent St filming.
Maybe they didn't film the look alike girl at no. 44 was because they knew that the programme was not going to be aired.
I'm afraid Nine that the Bristol Blog is something I made up to keep my friend informed about goings on in the uk, she spends a lot of time abroad. Sensible lady.
So are you really sure that Crimewatch has got their facts wrong? Normally if there is hard evidence like CCTV it's shown, just witness statements etc., acted. I tend to think that the BBC would not knowingly put out false evidence IMO of course.
Nina..... If we are to go from what was said at Trial then Crimewatch got there facts wrong... The CCTV footage they show of what is supposed to be Dr Vincent Tabak's car is proof in itself....
That footage was taken when he went to pick up Tanja and got lost on Park Street after 1:38am on Saturday 18th December 2010... The footage has the 18th December 2010 and is not on the Friday night when the murder was supposed to have occurred ....
According to the trial statements made by Dr vincent Tabak , he spoke to Joanna Yeates in the kitchen for 10 minutes... apparentley he even took his coat off... they depict him on the Crimewatch program as attacking her as soon as she opened the door....
Wouldn't he need a motive for that??? if he had gone out taking pictures earlier it would have been easier for him to attack a random female in the street, if that is what Crimewatch are trying to get us to believe... That Dr Vincent Tabak was desperate to attack someone....
Interesting they have him sending Tanja a text whilst he's on the crossing in the carpark at ASDA.... we never saw any evidence of him in the Carpark.... (which i wish they had shown the car parked there)...
Why they are showing "Kenneth Steele House" is beyond me.... As apparently Dr Vincent Tabak was taken to "Trinity Road".....
It also says that Dr Vincent Tabak used "Google" street view" which is an untrue he used google maps... Theres a difference ..
At Line 257 of the prosecution Chart
Tabak searched on Google Maps for
‘Longwood Lane’
Where is the search for "Google Maps" ????? He has to bring that up as a search first !!!! why is it missing!!
So he couldn't do what DC Joe Goff says, which is look at the exact same spot Joanna Yeates body was supposed to have been left... There were "NO" images to support what Dr Vincent Tabak apparently did just a load of searches that could have been anyones...
Presenter says:at 4:40mins
Tabak had been using google street view
DC Joe Goff He was looking at Longwood Lane and in particular, at the bit of Longwood Lane, where he had left Joanna's body
Now show me images of where Dr Vincent Tabak looked ... because they were not presented in court... That is utter tosh....
Now line 257 of the Prosecution chart does not say he looked at Google Street View!!!
Now on line 347
At Line 347 of the prosecution chart
Tabak searched Google maps for
‘maps to Longwood lane’
‘Mirror newspaper website’
‘BBC news’
‘alcohol –police limits’
And again... what use is this... This search is after 26th December 2010.. when the whole country was checking out Longwood Lane ...
Edit... When did the "Zoom" feature of Longwood lane appear in any of Dr Vincent Tabak's google map searches?? How was he supposed to have go to the exact spot Joanna Yeates was lying on Longwood Lane .. for the Police to be able to say that is what he did....???
http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Joanna Yeates: Murder at Christmas Part 1 11:55 of the video:...
Here's a quote from CJ in this program... Now I am being to wonder if Greg was back earlier than they say he was ..
I got up on the Monday morning noticed that I had a Missed Call on my phone from Greg at about half past twelve on the Sunday, so that was very, very , unusual.
CJ is not a stupid man ...And I cannot see how he would mistake 12:30am Monday for 12:30pm Sunday.. His phone would not register the call as 12:30 Sunday if it was AM... it would become Monday..
So when did "Greg" contact CJ....
Was it 12:30am Sunday 19th December 2010 and if so why had Greg rang CJ before he had returned from Sheffield..
If not it has to be 12:30pm Sunday that Greg rang CJ.... Again why did he ring CJ at this time ??
CJ was not called to be a witness, which I'm sure we all agree he should have been...
If Greg as rung CJ at either of these times on the Sunday, he must have been concerned for Joanna Yeates welfare... So why did it take so long to inform people ??
I can only go from what is available on video and as Greg has never made an appearance we can refer too.. I can only use what I have .. And question what I see and hear...
So... would CJ mistake the day that Greg rang him???? For an educated man such as CJ.. I don't think it likely... Which leaves us with even more confusion...
Or does this go with that she was missing possibly before 'Friday 17th December 2010... As they charged Dr vincent Tabak from the 16th December 2010.. And that never made sense to me....!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs
-
In The Lost Honour of CJ... There a scene where Greg goes to the main door and rings the buzzer... CJ(man playing him) opens the door and talks of who's in which Flat...
The Interesting part is when he is about to invite Greg inside... he says:
Why don't you come .. Actually don't I'll just erm I'll just go and get a coat....
He then closes the door on him...
Now if this was the main shared entrance for Greg ,Joanna Tanja and Dr Vincent Tabak to get there mail, why didn't Greg just walk inside ???? Why wait on the door step... CJ didn't invite him in!!!!
If he wanted to talk to CJ.. he should have been able to walk inside that main Door and Knock on CJ's flat door... The Police do that later on when they go to arrest CJ.... But CJ has Greg hanging on the door step....
So is there another shared entrance ????
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Found this on facebook from The Crime and Investigattion Channel
CI UK
20 December 2013 ·
Joanna Yeates was murdered on Christmas Eve in 2010. Find out more about her story in Joanna Yeates: Murder at Christmas, for free online, for a limited time only!
Murdered Christmas Eve ??
-
Looking at The Lost Honour of CJ...
When the shots are done of the Flat that Dr Vincent Tabak, was supposed to have lived in .. we get footage of the real flat outdoors/indoors etc....
But when the footage of what is supposed to be Joanna Yeates Flat, it looks nothing like it should... The Access Panel is on the wrong side , the door opens the opposite way and when you see CJ stood outside, The path dosen't lead to the little gate. It turns right,,,
If CJ owned that Flat what we know as Joanna Yeates Flat, then why wasn't the scenes shot there ????
Did CJ own other properties???
Images attached ...
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Finding what is written on the Reading Glasses of the woman who plays Mrs Yeates in the Judge Rinder program, I find slightly disturbing..
The word Dead Is on the arm of these glassses.... Why would someone dress the woman playing Mrs Yeates with a pair of Glasses that say "Dead"
I believe that they are supposed to be be a designer pair of glasses from "Red or Dead"
How inappropriate.... Or like many images is it meant to be there ????
Image attached .....
This can be seen at 7:41 of the video
Edit Just checking the logo for Red or Dead and what appears on the arm of the glasses isn't their logo... The Font is different..
So who would write the word "DEAD: on The Arm of the Glasses of the Woman playing Mrs Yeates in The Judge Rinder Crime Program about Joanna Yeates ???
I have attached an image of another pair of glasses from Red or Dead
I am starting to question....
Who are these programs actually aimed at???
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4htq8y
-
The Judge Rinder program about Joanna Yeates, I hadn't realised when it was made/aired...
22nd June 2016
How comes they made this program then???
The Interview with the parents looks a lot older...
The summary about episode 3 for the first season of this program has nothing to do with Joanna yeates... But that is the episode that Joanna yeates story is featured..
Season 1 Episode 3
SUMMARY
Barrister Robert Rinder examines the case of 20-year-old hair stylist Hollie Gazzard, who was fatally stabbed by former boyfriend Asher Maslin in her Gloucester salon in the presence of customers. Maslin had proved to be a controlling character, and had a record of violent and criminal activities. He had threatened that if Gazzard left him, there would be `hell to pay', prior to the incident in February 2014.
But on the IMDb website is says:
Add Image S1, Ep3
22 Jun. 2016 Joanna Yeates
Know what this is about?
Be the first one to add a plot.
I don't believe that all these interviews happened for the program.. maybe Phil Jones did.. But I don't know...
I had just assumed that it was made after the trial..
http://www.radiotimes.com/tv-programme/e/fmmzgx/judge-rinders-crime-stories--series-1-episode-3/
-
......................
-
Edit... The information at trial NEVER proved that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates..... The Staging of The Crime scene should tell you that....!!!
-
Hi Nine,
I’m a long time lurcker but a first time poster. I’ve been reading this forum for years and years but especially, in the last year, this thread.
Firstly, I have a lot of respect for the tenacity you have shown in your search for information and the amount of time you have obviously spent on this. It’s genuinely incredible to me.
However, I find myself disagreeing with almost all of your posts. It seems to me that you find the slightest piece of information that piques your interest and then through supposition (hence the infinite number of times you have to write “imo”) blow it all out of proportion in the hope that it will lend support to your belief in Mr Tabak’s innocence. Some examples that come to mind are a couple of days ago when you took “he telephoned his mother, her friends, her mother and later” to mean that Greg phoned his mother’s friends, even though he clearly mean’s Jo’s friends, and the time you started try to find meaning in Coldplay’s lyrics with regard to the murder (I didn’t imagine that did I??)
Here’s my take. The reason that the trial doesn’t reveal everything you want it to is because Tabak pled guilty to taking Jo’s life and the trial became about the motivation. The Crown did not need to prove he did it and so a lot of the information they would have required was no longer necessary. And a lot of the ‘holes’ or ‘inconsistencies’ you find are because there isn’t access to information you need so you go to any source you can find and build off of that i.e. the accuracy of a reconstruction on an ITV daytime tv programme.
Something that nothing has ever refuted for me is Tabak’s confession and guilty plea. Now as a True Crime addict I am well aware of the phenomenon of false confessions and have no trouble believing that they do happen. The West Memphis Three was one of my first True Crime addictions and that is a case with a clearly false confession. However, in all the years I have been reading about these sorts of things I have come to understand that false confessions are generally given by those with low IQs and are in most cases immediately retracted. Neither of these things are true of Tabak. Also, even if he did confess under stressful conditions from police, why did he still plead guilty and why is he, apparently, not fighting now?
I do have a question, the photo of Tabak that you claim isn’t him. What makes you say that? It clearly looks like him. Is there something there I have missed? You also mentioned that he is photo shopped into photos with his girlfriend but I have never seen any proof of this!
Anyway, I could keep writing for ages but I won’t.
Just thought I would say, on your anniversary, you have given me hours of entertaining reading, even if I don’t agree with any of it, for which I am grateful. I doubt i will be posting again, but you never know.
Baz
P.s. Have you tried getting in touch with Tabak directly?
-
Baz, you are a genius. I knew I kept overlooking something. Welcome to the forum. Keep it coming.
AH
-
Some interesting points Baz, we are always grateful to readers that get involved occasionally.
Nine has posted a huge amount of material and appears to be entirely convinced that Tabak is innocent but the evidence would appear to tell a different story. Certainly, Tabak's attempt to plead guilty to the lesser offence of accidental killing or whatever else you want to call it appeared to have been futile. Personally, I don't believe for a moment that he set out to murder Joanna but once he had assaulted her, something in him took over and he continued to strangle her. That in law is murder. Had he stopped and left her shocked but alive he would have been charged with assault and probably lost his job. As it was, and this is only known to him, he persisted and killed her.
-
...The reason that the trial doesn’t reveal everything you want it to is because Tabak pled guilty to taking Jo’s life and the trial became about the motivation. The Crown did not need to prove he did it and so a lot of the information they would have required was no longer necessary. And a lot of the ‘holes’ or ‘inconsistencies’ you find are because there isn’t access to information you need so you go to any source you can find and build off of that i.e. the accuracy of a reconstruction on an ITV daytime tv programme...
If you are prepared to believe in the authenticity of Tabak's guilty plea, then I fear you are prepared to believe anything. This case has nothing in common with any other case you or I have ever come across. If you had read my posts, you would know that the plea was almost certainly faked, probably by the use of an actor (imposter) on the video-link. There is an astonishing amount of evidence to back up this contention.
Even if it really was Tabak who entered the plea, it doesn't alter the fact that he had nothing to do with the killing of Joanna Yeates.
It isn't a question of what some of us "think". It is a question of hard facts - first and foremost the testimony in the witness box of Peter Brotherton - who didn't even tell the jury the most important fact about himself, namely that he was a senior officer from another prison. Not once did this witness actually state that the prisoner had confessed the crime to him. It was all in the minds of the jury, the press and the public. The incriminating sentences were actually said by Counsel for the Defence, cross-examining the witness. It was a clever trick carried out in full public gaze by a conjuror and his assistant.
It PROVES beyond a shadow of doubt that the Defence, the Prosecution and the Judge were in collusion to stage the trial. Judges are trained to stop this kind of trickery, but this judge was silent. So too was the defendant, thereby proving that he was part of the conspiracy.
The judge, the defence QC and the prisoner were also silent during the testimony of the Detective Constable who travelled to Schiphol. This is astonishing, as she quite obviously omitted nearly everything - certainly everything of importance - that was discussed during the 6 hour interview of the defendant.
The third concrete proof of Tabak's innocence never came to court - Christopher Jefferies's 2nd witness statement. This is important because he has been the subject of so much publicity, yet not one single journalist nor documentary film maker has elicited the contents of this vital statement. The secrecy surrounding it PROVES that there is a big cover-up - and the landlord himself is party to it.
EDIT - By the way, all the full media accounts of the testimony of Brotherton in the witness box have been removed from the internet, quite recently, so it isn't all that easy for you to verify how he and Mr Clegg deceived us all. You would need to get a printed copy of one of the newspapers from a central library, preferably in the Bristol area. But you can just as well trust me.
-
If you take a step back and look at everything from Nine, Leonora, Mrswah and now Baz, and then try and build a model that fits all, there appears to only be one solution.
Working backwards, the police “officers” standing outside the court are utterly despondent, the statements read out were delivered in such a manner as to indicate that something is seriously wrong, nothing is delivered with the normal cocky gusto.
Leonora perceives that the confessions were false and, more to the point, staged and completely out of place.
Nine’s epic research points out that at every turn a kind, thoughtful, extremely intelligent man has suddenly become a cold, thoroughly dismissive killer that could strangle a pretty young woman, dump her body and go shopping for crisps, a situation that is as about as likely as winning the lottery without buying a ticket.
Baz’s observations are unintentionally astute in respect of the model, but highlight the where the cement needs to be put between the blocks.
Put yourself into Tabak’s place, imagine you are so intelligent you are probably six questions ahead and going round the same pointless loop of argument day after day after day, wondering when these morons are going to take a hint and go and do something useful instead of high fiving each other after each pointless day.
Sitting in front of you are the comparative academic equivalent of a pair of Troglodytes, trying to be the story twisting experts the police hold up as an example of genius coppers. Their reputations are on the line with this one and they are not going to give an inch, Yeates uncle was a copper so there is an additional pressure to get Tabak to “crack” under their amazing powers of persuasion. And so they keep going, round and round, round and round, until the victim, who’s been exposed to the same stuff over and over again, starts to remember things as they come up in conversation again, and again, and again.
But the Troglodytes are up against a brain that can see them coming and can see the weakness in this petty system developed to persuade your average simpleton to confess to all, and Tabak walks them into the void. All he’s done is shove the system straight up their own arses by simply confessing to manslaughter. As he will have pointed out the Trogs have got a killer out there and he struck fast, hard and with the ability to avoid detection, and he’s probably going to do it again. But now the Trogs can’t touch him, because the inquiry ends here, it stops, and they are the ones who will have to answer in the long term to the queue of bereft parents wanting to know why they let this continue.
And the Trogs became the victims of their own system.
This might account for the behaviour of Clegg, he’s part of the system too and realised that Tabak had damaged them beyond repair, he needed to be made an example of, hence the Judges complicity by handing out an unusually long sentence. The apology to Yeates parents wasn’t for killing Joanna, it was for preventing the Trogs going after her killer.
They don’t like it up ‘em.
AH
-
If you take a step back and look at everything from Nine, Leonora, Mrswah and now Baz, and then try and build a model that fits all, there appears to only be one solution.
Working backwards, the police “officers” standing outside the court are utterly despondent, the statements read out were delivered in such a manner as to indicate that something is seriously wrong, nothing is delivered with the normal cocky gusto.
Leonora perceives that the confessions were false and, more to the point, staged and completely out of place.
Nine’s epic research points out that at every turn a kind, thoughtful, extremely intelligent man has suddenly become a cold, thoroughly dismissive killer that could strangle a pretty young woman, dump her body and go shopping for crisps, a situation that is as about as likely as winning the lottery without buying a ticket.
Baz’s observations are unintentionally astute in respect of the model, but highlight the where the cement needs to be put between the blocks.
Put yourself into Tabak’s place, imagine you are so intelligent you are probably six questions ahead and going round the same pointless loop of argument day after day after day, wondering when these morons are going to take a hint and go and do something useful instead of high fiving each other after each pointless day.
Sitting in front of you are the comparative academic equivalent of a pair of Troglodytes, trying to be the story twisting experts the police hold up as an example of genius coppers. Their reputations are on the line with this one and they are not going to give an inch, Yeates uncle was a copper so there is an additional pressure to get Tabak to “crack” under their amazing powers of persuasion. And so they keep going, round and round, round and round, until the victim, who’s been exposed to the same stuff over and over again, starts to remember things as they come up in conversation again, and again, and again.
But the Troglodytes are up against a brain that can see them coming and can see the weakness in this petty system developed to persuade your average simpleton to confess to all, and Tabak walks them into the void. All he’s done is shove the system straight up their own arses by simply confessing to manslaughter. As he will have pointed out the Trogs have got a killer out there and he struck fast, hard and with the ability to avoid detection, and he’s probably going to do it again. But now the Trogs can’t touch him, because the inquiry ends here, it stops, and they are the ones who will have to answer in the long term to the queue of bereft parents wanting to know why they let this continue.
And the Trogs became the victims of their own system.
This might account for the behaviour of Clegg, he’s part of the system too and realised that Tabak had damaged them beyond repair, he needed to be made an example of, hence the Judges complicity by handing out an unusually long sentence. The apology to Yeates parents wasn’t for killing Joanna, it was for preventing the Trogs going after her killer.
They don’t like it up ‘em.
AH
ah.. know I understand.... The feeling of responsibility and saying sorry.... Honestly sometimes I don't see what is right in front of me .....
-
Leonora,
Thanks for the overtly condescending response.
As you argued that it isn’t about what people “think” but about “hard facts” and then cited the Salvation Army Chaplain Peter Brotherton not disclosing his employment by another prison, I figured I’d do some research to test this “hard fact”.
I started with your blog post about it. Here is a quote:
“Issue 5 of the Butler Trust’s magazine “Insight” reported the award of a Commendation for 2012–2013 to a Peter Brotherton, Supervising Officer at Whitemoor Prison, Cambridgeshire. The citation refers to his work with the transport of dangerous prisoners to and from court, and to contact with the CPS. Perhaps he received this Commendation as a reward for tricking Vincent Tabak.”
So, I decided to try and prove you were right in your presumption that the man at Tabak’s trial and the award winning prison officer were one and the same by finding a picture of the prison officer in a picture associated with the prison and compare it to the picture on your blog of the man from the trial.
Well, I managed to track down the Butler Trust “Inspire” magazine regarding the awards and here is a link:
http://www.changinglivestogether.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Inspire-5-Book.pdf
If you scroll to page 17 of the PDF you’ll see a picture of Pete Brotherton and Anthony Richardson of HMP Whitemoor. Neither of these men is the man pictured in your blog and therefore I think we can come to the conclusion that the Chaplain Peter Brotherton is not the same man as the Prison Officer Peter Brotherton, which explains why he didn’t reveal to the jury that he was a prison officer, because he wasn’t one.
Anyway, hope that helps.
Baz
-
Leonora,
Thanks for the overtly condescending response.
As you argued that it isn’t about what people “think” but about “hard facts” and then cited the Salvation Army Chaplain Peter Brotherton not disclosing his employment by another prison, I figured I’d do some research to test this “hard fact”.
I started with your blog post about it. Here is a quote:
“Issue 5 of the Butler Trust’s magazine “Insight” reported the award of a Commendation for 2012–2013 to a Peter Brotherton, Supervising Officer at Whitemoor Prison, Cambridgeshire. The citation refers to his work with the transport of dangerous prisoners to and from court, and to contact with the CPS. Perhaps he received this Commendation as a reward for tricking Vincent Tabak.”
So, I decided to try and prove you were right in your presumption that the man at Tabak’s trial and the award winning prison officer were one and the same by finding a picture of the prison officer in a picture associated with the prison and compare it to the picture on your blog of the man from the trial.
Well, I managed to track down the Butler Trust “Inspire” magazine regarding the awards and here is a link:
http://www.changinglivestogether.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Inspire-5-Book.pdf
If you scroll to page 17 of the PDF you’ll see a picture of Pete Brotherton and Anthony Richardson of HMP Whitemoor. Neither of these men is the man pictured in your blog and therefore I think we can come to the conclusion that the Chaplain Peter Brotherton is not the same man as the Prison Officer Peter Brotherton, which explains why he didn’t reveal to the jury that he was a prison officer, because he wasn’t one.
Anyway, hope that helps.
Baz
It was me who believed I had found Peter Brotherton and thought he was a prison officer, I wasn't sure about the man that they had a photograph of out side the Court of Bristol, was actually Peter Brotherton or Just a Overweight Policeman...
With every photo telling a different story in this case, i couldn''t be sure that The Person they said was Brotherton leaving the court was really him....
-
Here's Leonora's blog about him:
http://vincent-tabak-is-innocent.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/salvation-army-chaplain.html
Here is the Daily Mail using showing the same picture and saying it's Peter Brotherton:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2050518/Vincent-Tabak-trial-Joanna-Yeatess-mother-Teresa-weeps-dead-body-photo.html
Here's the BBC showing his photo:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-15350510
Which is a picture of the same man being referred to as the Chaplain Peter Brotherton but a different photo.
-
If you take a step back and look at everything from Nine, Leonora, Mrswah and now Baz, and then try and build a model that fits all, there appears to only be one solution.
Working backwards, the police “officers” standing outside the court are utterly despondent, the statements read out were delivered in such a manner as to indicate that something is seriously wrong, nothing is delivered with the normal cocky gusto.
Leonora perceives that the confessions were false and, more to the point, staged and completely out of place.
Nine’s epic research points out that at every turn a kind, thoughtful, extremely intelligent man has suddenly become a cold, thoroughly dismissive killer that could strangle a pretty young woman, dump her body and go shopping for crisps, a situation that is as about as likely as winning the lottery without buying a ticket.
Baz’s observations are unintentionally astute in respect of the model, but highlight the where the cement needs to be put between the blocks.
Put yourself into Tabak’s place, imagine you are so intelligent you are probably six questions ahead and going round the same pointless loop of argument day after day after day, wondering when these morons are going to take a hint and go and do something useful instead of high fiving each other after each pointless day.
Sitting in front of you are the comparative academic equivalent of a pair of Troglodytes, trying to be the story twisting experts the police hold up as an example of genius coppers. Their reputations are on the line with this one and they are not going to give an inch, Yeates uncle was a copper so there is an additional pressure to get Tabak to “crack” under their amazing powers of persuasion. And so they keep going, round and round, round and round, until the victim, who’s been exposed to the same stuff over and over again, starts to remember things as they come up in conversation again, and again, and again.
But the Troglodytes are up against a brain that can see them coming and can see the weakness in this petty system developed to persuade your average simpleton to confess to all, and Tabak walks them into the void. All he’s done is shove the system straight up their own arses by simply confessing to manslaughter. As he will have pointed out the Trogs have got a killer out there and he struck fast, hard and with the ability to avoid detection, and he’s probably going to do it again. But now the Trogs can’t touch him, because the inquiry ends here, it stops, and they are the ones who will have to answer in the long term to the queue of bereft parents wanting to know why they let this continue.
And the Trogs became the victims of their own system.
This might account for the behaviour of Clegg, he’s part of the system too and realised that Tabak had damaged them beyond repair, he needed to be made an example of, hence the Judges complicity by handing out an unusually long sentence. The apology to Yeates parents wasn’t for killing Joanna, it was for preventing the Trogs going after her killer.
They don’t like it up ‘em.
AH
So, to clarify because I'm not sure I understand your argument here, the police kept on accusing Tabak no matter how much he insisted he was innocent and so he eventually confessed to get back at them or to make them look stupid... because he's so clever?
-
Here's Leonora's blog about him:
http://vincent-tabak-is-innocent.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/salvation-army-chaplain.html
Here is the Daily Mail using showing the same picture and saying it's Peter Brotherton:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2050518/Vincent-Tabak-trial-Joanna-Yeatess-mother-Teresa-weeps-dead-body-photo.html
Here's the BBC showing his photo:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-15350510
Which is a picture of the same man being referred to as the Chaplain Peter Brotherton but a different photo.
That two Peter Brothertons could be active in the prison service is a coincidence too far. The alternative explanation is that photos have deliberately been used that depict someone other than Peter Brotherton, either by the press at the time of the trial, or in "Insight" magazine. Both are quite plausible. This witness received so much media criticism for his behaviour in divulging what the prisoner had told him, that the prison authorities were obliged to add a warning on the internet that prison chaplains could not guarantee confidentiality. It is quite likely that he does not want to be recognised.
Whether there are two Peter Brothertons or just one does not diminish the evidence that this so-called confession was no such thing, nor the solid evidence that this trial was staged.
-
That two Peter Brothertons could be active in the prison service is a coincidence too far.
Neither Peter or Brotherton are rare names. There must be thousands of people employed by the prison service. So it really doesn't seem like "a coincidence too far" that there could be a prison officer in one prison called Peter Brotherton and that in a completely different prison there could be a volunteer with the same name. It doesn't even seem remotely odd to me.
It certainly seems infinitely more likely than a septuagenarian Prison Officer (would someone that old really be a prison officer??) was co-opted to pretend to be a Chaplain in the Salvation Army to go in to a different prison to pretend to get a confession from someone so that they can incorrectly convict a man of murder. Why wouldn't the Salvation Army have said "He's not one of ours?" Why wouldn't Tabak say "I didn't confess to him?"
-
In Response to what you seem to think I have made an error, I will go your way instead.... And explain to me why He didn't ring Rebecca Scott, when it says he rang her friends...
Because she wasn't a local friend and so is unlikely to have been of any use. Maybe your mind would be put at ease if he had said "I rang some of her friends" or "I rang local friends to see if I could find where she had gone/who she was with" or if he listed exactly which people he rang and when and why and exactly every detail of what they spoke about. But the truth is you have Greg saying "he rang her friends" and found a friend who lived miles away that he didn't phone and are now using that as proof of.... what exactly?!?
Rebecca Scott should "NOT" have known that information,(imo) because in an Investigation the Police do tell families etc... not to divulge critical pieces of info.. And her coat being in the flat was a critical piece of info in my book..
Just because the police say that doesn't mean that Gregg didn't divulge it to her, perhaps it wasn't as critical in his book or that her best friend would be allowed to know. She rang him after getting the message from Police perhaps he mentioned the coat in that conversation when telling her the story of that night i.e. "I came in and her coat and all her stuff was there so I was obviously worried!"
-
Neither Peter or Brotherton are rare names. There must be thousands of people employed by the prison service. So it really doesn't seem like "a coincidence too far" that there could be a prison officer in one prison called Peter Brotherton and that in a completely different prison there could be a volunteer with the same name. It doesn't even seem remotely odd to me.
It certainly seems infinitely more likely than a septuagenarian Prison Officer (would someone that old really be a prison officer??) was co-opted to pretend to be a Chaplain in the Salvation Army to go in to a different prison to pretend to get a confession from someone so that they can incorrectly convict a man of murder. Why wouldn't the Salvation Army have said "He's not one of ours?" Why wouldn't Tabak say "I didn't confess to him?"
Brotherton is an uncommon name, concentrated in worcestershire and nearby shires. The Salvation Army has the contract for pastoral care at Long Lartin prison, and are no doubt fully aware that they are not allowed to claim client confidentiality in that role. I see no reason to suspect Peter Brotherton of perjury in telling the jury that he was from the Salvation Army. (Nine...Again asserts that he had to be an "Adherent".)
That Vincent Tabak didn't intervene to refute Brotherton's testimony proves that he too (like the judge) was party to the cover-up. This is presumably because he was guaranteed a secret amnesty and a new identity in return. Counsel for the Defence DID, however, "challenge" Brotherton's version, and this is even mentioned in the short accounts of this witness's testimony that are still available on the internet. Counsel made this challenge on the basis of a statement he claimed Brotherton had signed on 16th February 2011, yet this statement was not produced in court to be examined by the judge and the jury. It may well exist, though I suspect that Brotherton was carrying a little tape recorder hidden under his cassock instead. Be that as it may, the failure to resolve the challenge in court by reference to the statement proves that the confession was faked in court by these two parties, with the consent of the defendant.
-
There are thousands of Brothertons in this country. So not that uncommon I'm afraid.
What would Tabak want secret amnesty from? Why on earth would he want to take the blame for a murder he had nothing to do with to get a new identity? There is no reasonable reason for Tabak to assist in his own demise. It makes no logical sense that I can see.
However, admitting to killing Jo and then pleading guilty to manslaughter because he did it and wanted to avoid a murder charge does make sense, even if it was ultimately futile.
The answer that requires the least supposition is usually the correct answer.
-
There are thousands of Brothertons in this country. So not that uncommon I'm afraid.
What would Tabak want secret amnesty from? Why on earth would he want to take the blame for a murder he had nothing to do with to get a new identity? There is no reasonable reason for Tabak to assist in his own demise. It makes no logical sense that I can see.
However, admitting to killing Jo and then pleading guilty to manslaughter because he did it and wanted to avoid a murder charge does make sense, even if it was ultimately futile.
The answer that requires the least supposition is usually the correct answer.
Indeed they are Baz.... And which Brotherton appeared at court???? Was it actually The "Brotherton who spoke to Dr Vincent Tabak... Or just a random Brotherton who made an appearance ????
He had assumed the role of a volunteer chaplain in January this year, just a month prior to his first meeting with Vincent Tabak. Tabak, he said, was on 24-hour watch, with a perspex door fronting his cell.
So The Brotherton we saw at Trial was NOT, the Chaplain that Dr Vincent Tabak had spoken too.... Because according to The Sally Ramage papers.......
It is alleged that Tabak made a confession2
to an unlicensed prison chaplain, who was not
called to give evidence, a most pertinent point
That Brotherton didn't appear in court! And must be the over weight Policeman I joked about!
The same with Father Henwood... She is alleged to have been seen by a vicar on her way home in the
snow. Father George Henwood had said that he saw Joanna Yeates and exchanged
pleasantries. He was not called to give evidence in court.
Who were these people at trial......
It now transpires that Vincent Tabak was the last person to see Miss Yeates alive.
Nevertheless, the vicar was not called to give evidence.
He didn't give testimony... So who were the people who assumed these roles????
That last quote..... It now transpires that Dr Vincent Tabak was the last person to see Joanna Yeates alive...
Was it Dr Vincent Tabak who told the Police that he had seen Joanna Yeates alive and that is why they Flew to Holland??
I could therefore understand the urgency of The Police flying out to Holland... and not going because of some car moving position.... As that has never made sense to me .....
Back to Brotherton....That is why the media call him "Mr". Because that was all he was ... a random 'brotherton" whom they put on the stand.... Otherwise if he had been a salvation army chaplain they would have called him "Brother Brotherton"..(imo)
So Baz... Brothertons appear to 2 a penny...
But will the real "Peter Brotherton Please stand Up ... Please stand Up.... Please stand up...
Edit... It says unlicensed Chaplain..... Was this Chaplain even called "Brotherton????
I believe I understand... Peter Brotherton... assumed the role of Chaplain... But he wasn't' the Chaplain..... so who was he....?? Who was the man who appeared at trial??
https://www.channel4.com/news/tabak-planned-to-plead-guilty-trial-hears
http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf
-
Hi Nine,
I’m a long time lurcker but a first time poster. I’ve been reading this forum for years and years but especially, in the last year, this thread.
Firstly, I have a lot of respect for the tenacity you have shown in your search for information and the amount of time you have obviously spent on this. It’s genuinely incredible to me.
However, I find myself disagreeing with almost all of your posts. It seems to me that you find the slightest piece of information that piques your interest and then through supposition (hence the infinite number of times you have to write “imo”) blow it all out of proportion in the hope that it will lend support to your belief in Mr Tabak’s innocence. Some examples that come to mind are a couple of days ago when you took “he telephoned his mother, her friends, her mother and later” to mean that Greg phoned his mother’s friends, even though he clearly mean’s Jo’s friends, and the time you started try to find meaning in Coldplay’s lyrics with regard to the murder (I didn’t imagine that did I??)
There are many times i may interpret what I read differently to others. It doesn't mean that I am wrong, I could be, but I don't think so... This case is weird... end of.. It never has added up.. The information that has been given over the course of the investigation has differed greatly.. many article have been removed, some are very hard to find..
Coldplay for instance.. That article I referred too, was dated 16th January 2011, the original article was about the DNA on Joanna Yeates lips... Don't know how and when they changed it, But they did... This article i am quoting.. The important information is difficult to read on the site it is hidden within the article....
But copy and paste and all is revealed..
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Greg Reardon phoned HIS OWN mother on returning to the flat saying 'Jo's not here'
Family's plea over Jo murder
THE ILFRACOMBE family of Greg Reardon, whose girlfriend Joanna Yeates was found murdered on Christmas Day, have appealed for help solving the killing.
Architect Joanna, 25, who lived with Greg in Bristol, was strangled.
Her body was found by walkers eight days after she went missing on December 17.
Greg, 27, reported her missing on Sunday, December 19, after he returned home from a weekend away in Sheffield. Police said on Tuesday they are not treating him as a suspect.
Greg's parents, Lydia and John Reardon who moved to Ilfracombe in 2004, have appealed for "every last scrap" of information to be given to police.
Lydia Reardon, 67, said: "Someone, somewhere may know the one crucial thing that helps the police solve this dreadful crime. Please just pick up the phone and tell them."
Earlier Mrs Reardon had spoken of when Greg called her when he arrived home.
She said: "He phoned me on Sunday and said 'I've just got home and Jo's not here'.
"At the time, I told him not to worry as she must have just nipped out. Then he said all her stuff was still there and later reported her missing."
The Ilfracombe family are believed to have joined the search for Jo before her body was discovered in the snow three miles from her home.
Mrs Reardon said it was love at first sight for her son, who is working towards his professional chartership.
The couple met at work at the Building Design Partnership in Bristol.
She described Jo as "very intelligent and popular".
Mrs Reardon told reporters: "She was a lovely, gorgeous girl. Greg brought her home and she stayed with us a few times. They had been together for a couple of years.
"Greg was so fond of her. We thought when he finished getting the last of his qualifications they would get engaged."
Greg told police he had tried to call and text Jo during the weekend he was away, but had not got a response.
He said he returned home to find Jo missing, but discovered her coat and bag containing keys and her purse inside their home, when he rang friends and family.
Greg appeared at a police press conference before her body was found, alongside Jo's parents, David and Teresa.
Greg told reporters: "I desperately want her back – I thought we would be together forever."
http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/regionalnews/Family-s-plea-Jo-murder/article-3047139-detail/article.html
Posted by SteelMagnolia at 7:11 AM
http://steelmagnolia-gossips.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/greg-reardon-phoned-his-own-mother-on.html
-
Continued.....
This part of the quote from the article is most Interesting..
Earlier Mrs Reardon had spoken of when Greg called her when he arrived home.
She said: "He phoned me on Sunday and said 'I've just got home and Jo's not here'.
"At the time, I told him not to worry as she must have just nipped out. Then he said all her stuff was still there and later reported her missing."
So Greg did ring his own mother first, and maybe I wasn't incorrect that he also called her friends... The most noticeable part of the article is the time he called his mother..
The time of events we had been told at trial and on "TV programs" was he arrived home, hadn't seen Joanna Yeates there, thought she was doing "fun" things.. And around the time "The Apprentice" was due to start, he rang her mobile phone and heard it ringing in her pocket.. This was at 9:00pm
He had Pizza and went out to his car, (now that could be before he rang Joanna Yeates phone) he went around tidying up, found her Rucksack or bag.. (no-one can make their mind up about that) On the table and her keys, purse glasses and I think stripy Jumper were inside..
He told the court he arrived home at 8:00pm.. Now this is where things get weird.... Why would he ring his mum as soon as he got home at 8:00pm??
He didn't know she was missing at that point apparently... He only got concerned according to Ann Reddrop when he rang her phone and found it in her pocket... This was at 9:00pm.
CJ said at the Leveson that Joanna Yeates had been reported "Missing" on the Sunday 19th December 2010... Now was he referring to the fact that Greg had rung his own mum?
We have him ringing Mr and Mrs Yeates at 12:36am on Monday 20th December 2010 and CJ around midnight... He rang the Police around 1:00am and they arrived at 2:00am...
What made Greg ring his mother at 8:00pm with concerns that Joanna Yeates was not at home ?? He must have been in a right flap if his mother is giving him suggestions of "nipping out" This too is a reason that Greg's mum should have been in court...(imo)
We did have articles around the time that Joanna Yeates may have nipped out to get her mail from the main house.. So did that idea come from what Greg's mother had said??
But it is still worrying that we have this report that Greg Reardon phoned his mother as early as 8:00pm when he had just arrived home looking for his girlfriend... Had he been looking for her before ?? Apparently he wasn't unduly concerned when Joanna Yeates hadn't answered his texts and calls and as he told the court he thought she had gone to do fun things....
But the article contradicts that... According to his mother, He phoned her at 8:00pm because Joanna Yeates wasn't there when he arrived home...
If he phoned his Mother... why wasn't she at court to say he had rung her?? I don't even remember ever seeing her at court, he's always with Frank...
The time that Greg rang his mum as soon as he got home, must be accurate... i say this because "Why" remove the articles?? There is NO need...
The only way to to challenge what the article says, is to have Greg Reardon's phone records at the time... then there could be NO dispute..
Edit... If the time that Greg Reardon called his Mum was 8:00pm.. What day was it?? I'm not just assuming it was Sunday, because nothing adds up in this case... So was it a different day?? Only the phone records and Greg's mum could answer that question!...
http://steelmagnolia-gossips.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/greg-reardon-phoned-his-own-mother-on.html
-
From the article above....
"Greg was so fond of her. We thought when he finished getting the last of his qualifications they would get engaged."
What happened to being madly in Love?? "Fond" is a word used to describe a close friend.. an acquaintance.. a relative maybe..
But not the girl you are apparently planning to marry!!
-
I notice Countdown to Murder was aired on Channel 5 again yesterday but having read much of the information posted on here I can now see it in a new light.
12:05am
Countdown to Murder
Season 2 Episode 1 of 8
The Killer Next Door: Countdown to Murder The events leading up to the killing of landscape architect Joanna Yeates by Vincent Tabak in Bristol on the night of December 17, 2010. Featuring dramatic reconstructions and interviews with Joanna's parents David and Teresa Yeates, her landlord Christopher Jeffries and CPS prosecutor Ann Reddrop
-
I notice Countdown to Murder was aired on Channel 5 again yesterday but having read much of the information posted on here I can now see it in a new light.
12:05am
Countdown to Murder
Season 2 Episode 1 of 8
The Killer Next Door: Countdown to Murder The events leading up to the killing of landscape architect Joanna Yeates by Vincent Tabak in Bristol on the night of December 17, 2010. Featuring dramatic reconstructions and interviews with Joanna's parents David and Teresa Yeates, her landlord Christopher Jeffries and CPS prosecutor Ann Reddrop
I remember watching it when it was first broadcast and thought it a reasonable depiction of what occurred. Chris Jefferies has certainly reinvented himself IMO.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2kpoos
-
I notice Countdown to Murder was aired on Channel 5 again yesterday but having read much of the information posted on here I can now see it in a new light.
12:05am
Countdown to Murder
Season 2 Episode 1 of 8
The Killer Next Door: Countdown to Murder The events leading up to the killing of landscape architect Joanna Yeates by Vincent Tabak in Bristol on the night of December 17, 2010. Featuring dramatic reconstructions and interviews with Joanna's parents David and Teresa Yeates, her landlord Christopher Jeffries and CPS prosecutor Ann Reddrop
Ok ... I understand it takes me a while to look at some thing because I am busy with something else..... But I am here at last.... I must admit I had never seen that program 'countdown to Murder Joanna Yeates... and with everything I had up in the air at the time i didn't take much notice when the posts were made.... But ........ On saying that I will and am on my way to picking it apart ....
There are aspects of that program that are a revelation... there are ideas that shouldn't exist.... But what i plan to do is to number the entire program based on comments and statements and my observations as to what is revealed... Each number is when someone speaks. be it DCI Phil Jones...... Ann Redrrop.. Mr and Mrs Yeates,, The narrater. Etc etc ...Or an observation by myself.. which you can see,.. I will do this so i can comment at any time on the statements that have being made at the time, and have a reference point to go to and forth from........
I did think I had seen it before and it was just a rehash of the other TV programs... But when I watched it ... I realised I had never seen it before....
I don't know where I am at with this case... questioning why I started it in the first place... And with something else to chew over... I will wait, for my own understanding, as to where I am at....
I haven't fully digested the program... but will be able to find a little more understanding with what I have posted...
hopefully....
-
Countdown to Murder
(1) * Joanna Yeates was a Landscape Architect from Hampshire
(2) * I can't understand how people can forgive people who have killed
(3) * He was interested in extreme pornography that showed violence towards women
(4) * When he overheard that his neighbours boyfriend was going to be away the weekend before Christmas, he
saw his opportunity
(5) * He was rejected, and that was his trigger for Murder
(6) * When her frozen partially buried body was discovered on Christmas day.
(7) * At the same time Jo was leaving school Vincent Tabak was travelling from the country of his birth The
Netherlands
(8) * My memory of her was scatty, I realised that she had changed from being a girl to a young professional
woman
(9) * Vincent Tabak very polite
(10) * Top Floor lived Christopher Jefferies
(11) * He owned the 2 ground floor flats
(12) * The flats were adjacent to each other they were not connected by a hallway each had seperate front doors
(13)* When they moved in to the Flat in October Tabak was away on a business trip
(14) * Vincent Tabak was born in February 1978 a Dutch Engineer who had lived and worked in the United Kingdom
since 2007
(15) * He was tall and lanky he was 6'4" he was the youngest of 5 syblins
(16) * At the time he was working for a company in Bath
(17) * Whilst living in Bath he developed a relationship with a woman he met on an online dating website.. At 33
she was his first serious girlfriend
(18) * They moved to Flat 2 44.Canygne Road in June 2009
(19) * He was a fitness fanatic he would cycle from his Flat to Temple Mede Station and get the train from there to
Bath
(20) * But when at hoe alone Tabak took part in darker activities
(21) * We examined his laptop Computers and his hard drive, erm more intensely and what we identified from that
he viewed adult pornography
(22) * Joanne and her boyfriend moved into a Flat next door to Tabak in October 2010 he was working over seas
(23) * Joanne and her boyfriend moved into Clifton in October 2010, he was away in The United States of America
working and he didn't return until the Monday prior to her death, so the contact he would have had with
Joanna would have been minimal.
(24) * Whilst in America he would search out escorts whilst he was in California
(25) *We also know whilst in Newcastle he contacted an escort agency from a business telephone.
(26) * I remember she would have friends round from time to time I remember her having barbeques on the patio
in front of there sitting room window, erm very pleasant couple obviously, very much in love with each other
(27) * Ordinary young lady nothing remarkable, which made it one of the key aspects of the case, she was such a
normal girl living a normal life
(28) * On the 12th December 2010 Vincent Tabak returned home from his business trip from the USA, Joannas Cat
was particularly interested to meet his new neighbour
(29) * Many of the people in this building are quite fond of Cats, so it was quite nice to have a cat around
(30) * I'm told although i didn't know this at the time, that the cat would get into other flats.
(31) * Vincent Tabak was never formally introduced to Joanna Yeates he became acquainted thanks to Bernard the
Cat
(32) * Her Cat had got into Vincents Flat and they meet because f that incident
(33) * Although Tabak fantasied about Joanna he had limited opportunity to meet her on her own.
(34) * But when he heard that Joannas boyfriend was going away for the weekend he started to plot
(35) * And when his own girlfriend revealed that she was going away for that weekend, it was the begining of his
countdown to Murder
(36) * Throughout that week Tabak would listen and watch Joanna studying her movements
(37) * Tabaks use of pornography had increased in the days since his return from the USA
(38) * In Tabaks case we have someone who socially awkward some whos started to use sex workers and most
important of all we have someone who is using violent pornography
(39) * 13 hours to Murder Flashes on screen ( Image from high up shows Canygne Road.. looks summery)
(40) * Vincent Tabak left on his bike, Joanna left for work about 8:30am on the Friday morning she left for work
with her boyfriend, her boyfriend and Joanna worked in different parts of the building although they worked
for the same firm
(41) * 8 Hours to Murder Flashes on screen.. Joanna and Greg stat in pub, she has a glass of water in front of her,
she has a flower patterned top on
(42) * Tabak''s work mates reported him as being somewhat distracted, they could attribute that to any reason at
the time
(43) * 5 hours to Murder flashes up
(44) * At 4:00pm that day Greg left the Office, he'd seen his girlfriend Joanna Yeates for the last time
(45) * Her boyfriend returns to the Flat to fill up car to make his journey to the north
(46)* 3 hours to Murder flashes on the screen
(47) * 6:00pm tabak left for work to board a train for 20 min journey back to Bristol
(48) * Jo left work at 6:00 0clock.. It was a Friday so it was the end of the week and it was close to christmas it was
the 17th December
(49) * she didn't drink very much because she had joined a rowing club down there and erm.. I think she wanted to
get as fit and strong as she could so that she could be a candidate for some Regatta.. I think was being held
in Guernsey...
(50) * 2 Hours to Murder Flashes up
(51) * She had told friend in the pub that she wasn't looking forward to that because it was the first time she had
been on her own
(52) * Image of Joanna with large white watch on her left wrist and pink flower patterned top , shes sat in the pub
with her friend with a coke in front of her..
(53) * She was planing a quiet weekend baking cakes and bread
(54) * She's taken the opportunity to tidy things up... For starters she had organised the washing, you know Clothes
washing and erm... washing up the stuff in the kitchen, things were nice and tidy..
(55) * 30 minutes to Murder Flashes up on the screen
(56) * At 8:10pm Joanna left her friends at the pub to wander home
(57) * What we know is Joanna left the Bristol Ram Pub at 10 past 8 she took a route up park street, she walked
into Clifton (shows a shot outside shop with CCTV outside to the left of the door)
(58) * She went into the Bargain Booze off license where she purchased 2 bottles of cider
(59) * 15 minutes to Murder Flashes on Screen
(60) * Back in Canygne Road Vincent Tabak was stroking Bernard the Cat whom he'd grabbed from the hallway
(61) * Joanna continued the walk home then at 8:25 used her mobile phone to ring her best friend to arrange to
meet on Christmas eve
(62) * 6 mins later ( flashes an image of her in waitrose)(Then straight to Tesco's) CCTV shows her in Tesco'a
buying dinner
(63) * She bought a Pizza for £4.50 Tesco's finest Mozzerella and basil Pizza
(64) * 10 minutes to Murder Flashes upon the screen
(65) * A witness was walking his dog when he saw Joanna return home.
(66)* A priest came forward probably half past eight twenty to nine that evening he spoke to a female that matched
Joanna's description as she was entering Canygne Road ,spoke about the cold weather, it was icy and she
briefly glanced at him.
(67) * That would have been the last sighting of Joanna and we believe that she made it straight back to her flat
(68) * Joanna Yeates let herself into her flat made her way to the kitchen put the Pizza on the work top and turned
on the oven.
(69) * (You see Joanna Yeates open the bottle of cider takes a swig)
(70) * She goes into the bedroom and then kicked off her shoes and put on a pair of her boyfriends ski socks.. (clip
shows hot water bottle on side of bedside cabinet)
(71) * At 8:40 pm there was a knock at the door
(72) * (Mr Yeates) The thing is about Jo she was quiet predictable, she didn't do walk abouts. (shakes head) Go of
and tell nobody where she was going..
(73) *Joanna yeates lived in fashionable Clifton she moved in with her boyfriend in October 2010
(74) * Their neighbour was Vincent Tabak who had a girlfriend but also viewed pornography on the internet Joanna
hardly knew him.
(75) * (CJ) As far as I was aware they didn't know each other except in the most casual way.
(76) * On Friday the 17th December Tbak learned that Joanna's boyfriend was to be away for the weekend.. (shows
tabak listening through the wall...)
(77) * Tabak decided to introduce himself he grabbed Bernard and used it as an excuse to knock on Joanna's door...
(78) * 5 Minutes to Murder Flashes on the screen..
(79) * Shows tabak entering the flat when Joanna Yeates opens door ( Flat Number says Number 20)
(80) * Joanna took Bernard from Tabak... Bernard ran off ... Tabak lunged at Joanna and tried to Kiss her
(81) * Outside the Flat a couple were walking past on they're way to a Christmas party in another house on
Canygne Road
(82) * As they were walking into Canygne Road and stood outside the Flat, the lady noticed the security light was
on which would have been outside Joannas Flat.. (shows main entrance..not Flat 1)
(83) * They heard what they believed to be a a scream.. We know that they were specific about the time because
they were stood outside there friends address and they sent a text message telling their friend to let them
in.. That was around twenty to Nine (8:40pm)
(84) * Joanna's screaming forced Tabak to act.
(85) * She screamed he panicked he put his hand over her mouth and erm.. around her throat
(86) * Tabak slipped his free hand around Joanna neck and started to squeeze
(87) * There an instrumental reason he puts his hand to silence her and a psychological reason as well, because
that the type of pornography he's been using.
(88) * You see tabak dragging Joanna into the bedroom ( tabak has a tattoo on his left bicep)?
(89) * The fight ran into the bedroom where tabak finally drew the energy from Joanna as they landed on the bed
one of her earrings was ripped off..
(90) * Joanna was strong and she fought with every last breath in her body
(91) * Joanna's brain was starved of oxygen , she became unconcious and was dead in minutes.
(92) * Joanna had 30 to 40 minor injuries on her body (DCI Phil Jones)
(93) * (You can see her wrist have restraint marks on them and blood from her left nostril scratches on her face.)
(94) * The cause of death was strangulation , but the pathologist couldn't rule out that a soft ligiture hadn't been
used.
(95) * Also what was significant, was that there had been a slight discharge from her nose and the likely cause of
that was the asphxcial process, that became relevant later on in the investigation.
(96) * Tabak was calm throughout he left Joanna's body in the bed, and went back to his Flat to consider his next
move.
(97) * (JohnColes) Tabak is thought to have gone and got a large bicycle cover which he carried into Jo's Flat
(98) * Tabak went straight for the kitchen, where he switched of the oven and took the untouched Pizza.
(99) * He then dragged Joanna's body into the lounge where he crammed her into the bicycle cover.
-
(100) * Before zipping it up Tabak removed one of Joanna's ski socks
(101)* Tabak took Joanna back to his Flat with the fresh Pizza, he sat with the body and picked up his mobile
phone.(shows a Blackberry)
(102) * What we know is that at 9:25 pm on the Friday evening he text his girlfriend.And in his text he said..
Missing you loads I'm bored V XXX
(103) * Then Tabak carried Joanna's Grey Renault car where he bundled the body into his boot. 25 minutes later
Joannas boyfriend Greg Reardon sent her a text.
(104) * Jo's boyfriend had gone to Sheffield in the afternoon , he text her to say he had arrived there safely as
she'd asked him to do because the weather wasn't particularly good at the time of year.He got no response
to that text .
(105) * Tabak drove to an ASDA supermarket 4 miles from his flat and bought some rock salt beer and crisps.
(106) * He was on CCTV at that supermarket at 10:30pm on that Friday evening. And whilst he was at the
supermarket he sent another text message. Stating again that he was bored" I am at the supermarket
buying a packet of Crisis.. Missing you loads Vxxx
(107) * Whether Crisis was genuinley Crisis or predictive text we dont know.
(108) * Tabak was due to pick up his girlfriend at 1:00am, but he had Joanna Yeates in the boot of his car.. he had
to get rid of it. ( Show s the park street CCTV clip)
(109) * So he drove out of the city to Longwood Lane
(110) * Longwood Lane is a cut through it's a commuter area, and its on the other side of Clifton suspension bridge.
(111) * On eitherside of Longwood Lane is a quarry ( aeril view)
(112) * Tabak parked by a walk dividing the road from the quarry opened the boot of his car and grabbed Joanna
body
(114) * The Police and The forensics had noticed he made a couple of failed attempts to lift her body over a stone
wall by the side of the country lane. Behind the stone wall is a quarry, so he left it by the roadside of the
grass verge. And made an attempt to cover it with some dead leaves and left it there.
(115) * The bike cover used to carry Joanna body has never been found, Tabak then drove back to Canygne Road
(116) * (CJ) As I was on my way out to the gym I met Vincent Tabak and we had a very brief conversation and he
seemed to be in quite an elated mood , he said what a beautiful evening it was there was a light dusting of
snow.
(117) * 5 Hours after he had killed Joanna, Tabak collected his girlfriend and drove home, that night it snowed.
(118) * We know from local CCTV at sports clubs that it started to snow at 2:30am on the Saturday morning and it
was heavy snow fall then up until around 8'O'clock.
(119) * By the following morning Joanna's body was covered in snow and was hidden from view
(120) * The snow had also covered the drive of 44, Canygne Road.
(121) * (CJ) Vincent Tabak helped me move the car that morning because there was snow on the drive and I
needed some help. When I thanked Vincent his reply was.. well what are neighbours for.
(122) * That Saturday he went to another party and was drinking champagne.acting normally to all intense.
(123) * At 10:30am on that Sunday after the murder Vincent Tabak was in his flat and back surfing the net
(124) * He was searching maps and pacifically looking at Longwood Lane. In addition to that he started looking at
searches on Google looking at body decomposition. He put other searches in such as extradition, CPS,
comparison between Murder and manslaughter and what you get if you go to prison.
(125) * While Tabak was on his computer Joanna's boyfriend returned to the Flat.
(126) * The thing about Jo was that she was predictable, she didn't do walk abouts.. Go off and tell anyone where
she going. (Mr yeates) Greg was going away for the weekend and we knew that Jo would be there, um..
er.... to be there when he got back. Her not being there when he got back set all sorts of alarm bells.and
erm... he knew something was seriously wrong. We didn't know what.
(127) * Jo hadn't responded to any texts or phone calls that he'd left.and he found the flat with Jo absent with no
apparent reason for it... her purse all her personal bits and pieces was still there.
(128) *(Mrs Yeates) Greg phoned us and said is Jo Wizz you and I thought well thats a funny question. And then it
all evolved and I knew when (shakes head) I knew immediately she was dead.There was No how or why or
whatever.It was just a feeling.
(129): * The Police considered her disappearance so unusual that they swept the place with CSI teams.
(130) * Forensics of the Flat have continued all morning but now said to have been completed.
(131) * searches are going on elsewhere some 30 detectives have been assigned for this case and another 40 staff
have been deployed with what remains still a Missing Persons inquiry.
(132) * After 8 days of searching all that changed... On christmas day morning there were 2 dog walkers around
about 9:00 o'clock walking their dog and they identified a mound. On the side of the road on a verge.
(133) *On closer inspection they could see underneath snow a body of a person.. Forensic experts were called to the
scene, it was identified it was a body and it was believed early on that it was the body of Joanna yeates.
(134) * Her body was so cold, it had frozen to the ground beneath
(135) * (David Yeates) We were woken up by erm.. Police liaison Officer phoning us saying a body's been found, we
believe it to be Jo... I was overjoyed.. we had talked things over and fairly certain in our minds whatever
happened to her she was now dead.
(136) * It was now a murder inquiry and Detectives sealed of Joannas Flat and Interviewed everyone who knew her,
but vincent tabak was not at home. He'd spent Christmas day in Cambridge with his girlfriends parents. and
travelled to Holland ready to spend New Year with his...
(137) *(Ann Redrrop) When he got there he made a telling phone call.. whilst he was out of the country there was
telephone contact with The Police and Ballack (Who's Ballack??) 33:54 in which he with hindsight quite
cleverly sowed the seeds of possibly his landlord Chris Jefferies being more involved in the disappearance of J
Jo.. Than was actually the case.
(138) * Mr Tabak came onto the phone and wanted to provide what was important information to the
Investigation.And that was that on the Saturday morning that was the 18th December He saw.. when he
came out in the morning he saw. Christopher Jefferies car was parked in a different position
(139) * So I was arrested on the 30th December only a few days after Jo's body had been discovered. erm it was
7:00 o'clock in the morning
(140) * Jefferies was taken in for questioning had tabak seemingly diverted Police attention away from himself.
(141) * I sent two of my Officers across to The Netherlands because, Vincent tabak was now in the netherlands with
his girlfriend, for the new year.
(142)* A detective meet with tabak in a hotel, near Amsterdams skripol Airport
(143) * Tabak is an educated very well educated man, when they spoke to him in the Netherlands. He came across
as very nervous. very concerned asking unusual questions. Around Forensics, leaving forensic traces and
DNA, he'd also mentioned he'd been in the Flat when Christopher Jefferies was cleaning it or decorating it...
(144) * The suspicious detective asked tabak to give a sample of his DNA and he reluctantly agreed.It was his
downfall. But he would deny murder claiming he killed Joanna by accident.
(145) * He knew what he was doing ... The correct charge is Murder... And that is why we proceeded to the trial.
(146) * Joanna Yeates frozen body was discovered on Christmas day 2010 by a road south of Bristol . On News
years day her landlord Chris Jefferies was released on Police Bail.
(147) * well they um.. released me after 3 days in custody, because it was pretty obvious to everyone, that they
had no evidence .. None of the Forensic test which they had conducted were in anyway positive.
(148): * Tabak came back to the UK after his break in Holland on the 2nd of January to a stalling Police
Investigation .
(149): detectives called a Police Conference, to reveal that Miss yeates body was Missing a sock, when it was found
near Bristol
(150) * But behind the scenes the Forensics teams were making gradual progress..
(151) * The fact that Jo's body was effectively deep frozen , meant the Police couldn't run no form of examination of
her body..So it took quite alot of time... Meaningful time to get any forensic results.'From Her"... ( when
Ann Redrrop says 'From Her".. she emphasises .. The .. "From Her as two deliberate words .. whilst her chin
moves out to emphasise the fact.)
(153) * But eventually clues began to emerge they found tiny amounts of DNA on Jo's body, and it wasn't her's
(154)* The area's where these profiles were on the back of her knees, which her knees were folded, which is were
she would have been carried... and it was also on the chest area... So there is a likelyhood that they could
have been left there by the offender carrying Joannas body..
(155) * But... The positioning was such that it was... could only have been the person either who murdered her or
moved her body . That would have their DNA there and that was Tabak's..
(156)* Having seen the plan to frame Chris Jefferies backfire , Tabak had been expecting to be arrested when he
returned from Holland, but the knock on the door hadn't come.. And he had passed the time
uncharacteristically popping pills. He said he even considered suicide, but the Police caught up with him
before he could try.
(157)* When Tabak was arrested he wasn't staying at Flat 2.. his norma address with his girlfriend , but they were
staying at another address in Bristol.In The Redland area of Bristol which is a couple of miles away from
Bristol. We arrived there around 6 O'clock in the morning.. erm and er , he was in a state of shock as was
his girlfriend.
(158) * Tabak was questioned for 96 hours.
(159):* At no stage did he admit Murdering Joanna Yeates. What is of significance is that when he was in custody,
we seized his.. The Renault Megane car.. We knew hed been driving on the Friday evening , that was his
girlfriends car.. When we examined the car we found specks of blood on the rubber seal just inside the
boot..
(160) * Vincent Tabak was charged with the Murder of Joanna Yeates,and his trial date was set.. But.. he was taken
to london To The Old Bailey for a preliminary hearing where he entered a plea..
(161) * he actually pleaded guilty to her manslaughter...... That day... Now that was the first time that Vincent
Tabak had taken any responsibility at all for the death of Jo.. And (shaking her headand noding at the same
time) he admitted that he was the person that killed her....
(162) * But all concerned wanted a murder conviction
(163) * our case was... he knew what he was doing ... (head nodding) The correct charge is Murder and thats why
we proceeded to the trial then took place in Bristol in October
(164) * Each and every step in this murder investigation has been followed, showed little sign of letting up as the
man accused of killing Jo Yeates arrived in court..Inside the queue to see Vincent Tabak appear was so long
court staff struggled to accomodate the visitors..
(165) * During the trial Tabak showed little emotion... most of the time he spent in the dock with his hhead in his
hands or with his head bowed below the level of the doc... Er.. But... when he came to give evidence in his
defence.. He broke down... and cried and apologised across the court room to Jo's parents.. and family
who were sat just feet from him.. Moments earlier he'd explained and showed with his hands how he had
gripped her neck and throttled her .. And begged for their forgiveness.
(166)* I can't understand why people forgive people who have killed... chosen to kill somebody.. I mean it's not a
car accident which is pretty dreadful.. He chose to kill Jo he could have walked away... he chose to kill her
(167) * he had the power of life or death.. to act as god towards my daughter. He took away Jo's primary Human
right... How can you forgive somebody for that... I do not understand..
(168) * And the jury were in No mood for Clemency... They took 2 days to reach their verdict.. On the 28th of
October 2011 Tabak was found guilty of Joanna Yeates Murder.. He was jailed for life , with a minimum
term of 20 years..
(169) * We knew he'd killed Jo.. he sort of admitted killing Jo.. and erm... No.. I really wasn't... My feeling towards
him was cold. Whether he exists or doesn't exist.... . I don't care ( Mr Yeates speaking)
(170) * If I though that he cared ,i'd have a feeling towards him, but I don't think he does so...
(171) * ( DCI Phil Jones) I think it was David Yeates said to me , that Vincent Tabak's trial for us coming to Bristol is
like walking into a soap opera.. it was a particular difficult time for them and it always will be...
(172) * The media circus had been intense.. after the trial both the Police and the press faced critisisim..
(173) * well during the time that I was in Police custody.. all sorts of extraordinary articles and erm.. Alligations
appeared in the press.. At the time I certainly (CJ has a wry smile on his face) wasn't aware that the press
was the least bit interested ( almost laughing) in the fact that I had been arrested . The libels were so
extreme in many cases that no of the papers that were sued contested.
(174)* Following the release of her body.. Joanna Yeates family held her funeral at St marks Church of Ampfield
Hampshire.. And had her buried in the church yard..
(175) * It now pans to a shot of a small cross in the ground with the inscription " Joanna Claire Yeates, died 25th
December 2010 aged 25 years"
(176) * Life does go on for people who didn't know Jo.. our family I feel sure that all my family think about Jo over
Christmas because that was when she was found.... There's not a case of the world stopping , just
remembering..
Then it shows a flash card that says...
"On The 2nd march 2015 Vincent Tabak was convicted of possessing indecent images of children that were on his computer at the time of his arrest for Murder. He was sentenced to 10 months to run concurrently with his life sentence..
The odd thing then is that they run the credits , and it finishes with... Crackit productions for channel 5... crackit Production LTD 2014... ( how does that work???)
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2kpoos
-
Two things that immediately struck me... `one an observation and the other what Ann redrrop say:
(88)* The man depicting Dr Vincent Tabak has a tattoo
(88) * You see tabak dragging Joanna into the bedroom ( tabak has a tattoo on his left bicep)?
And this came out of left field for me... I had to get my hubby to check I heard it correctly
(137) * Who on earth is 'ballack"... I don't know if i have spelt it correctly... But ann shouldn't be making errors and if she had it should have been edited out... Is it an error??
(137) *(Ann Redrrop) When he got there he made a telling phone call.. whilst he was out of the country there was
telephone contact with The Police and Ballack (Who's Ballack??) 33:54 in which he with hindsight quite
cleverly sowed the seeds of possibly his landlord Chris Jefferies being more involved in the disappearance of J
Jo.. Than was actually the case.
-
(175) * It now pans to a shot of a small cross in the ground with the inscription " Joanna Clare Yeates, died 25th
December 2010 aged 25 years"
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8239.0;attach=13223;image)
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8239.0;attach=13223;image)
I cannot explain that.... But.... Initially when Dr Vincent Tabak was in court he was charged between the 16th December and the 26th December 2010
He replied: “That’s correct” and was then asked to give his home address. He replied: “Flat 2, 44 Canynge Road, Bristol.”
Asked: “Were you born on February 10, 1978?” he replied: “That’s correct.” The clerk went on: “It is alleged that between December 16 and 26 last year that you did murder Joanna Yeates.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vincent-tabak-makes-first-court-106532
-
(102) * What we know is that at 9:25 pm on the Friday evening he text his girlfriend.And in his text he said..
Missing you loads I'm bored V XXX
25:08 of video we get this image..
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8239.0;attach=13233;image)
I had to modify this post because I wanted the image there so you can see what I am referring too.....
Look at the Blackberry screen..... The information tells us quite a lot....
I believe that is Blackberry messenger that is being used... You can see the amount of Characters left for the first message. (127) I think it says that..
On the top left you cannot make out the image of the contact... But the contact/contacts name is O
Another interesting point of the Messenger being used is I noted was the camera/video app is open... I think this is an important piece of information.... I am aware it's from a apparent reconstruction, but whom is that chat supposed to be with....??
It is not a reply to an on going chat history.. there is only Dr Vincent Tabak apparently sending the message for what could be the first time... unless chat history has been deleted...
So why is the contact named O?? Is it a group chat??
This program shows us many things that we never see images of but they have been reported in the papers....
Tabak is believed to have used his company BlackBerry and computer to engage in live chat with strippers and to surf hardcore porn sites.
Was the image of the blackberry screen with camera/video app open, him apparently "live" messaging with strippers/or hard core porn sights?? Was it a stripper with the initial "O"?
Doesn't Tanja's name start with "T" and not "O"??
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2055167/Vincent-Tabak-Girlfriend-Tanja-Morson-saved-fate-Joanna-Yeates-guardian-angel.html#ixzz5Cq0Sat6z
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
'I didn't immediately think that anything serious was wrong. I was starting to feel quite worried. I was quite annoyed that I had not been told what her plans were.
'I noticed an open bottle of cider on the right by the microwave.
That is the only time I have found anything about a Mcrowave... But the Program shows us, a Microwave and a bottle opener to the right hand side of the microwave.. also The rucksack is in the kitchen....
This program is supposed to be made after Vincent tabak's trial... surely they should have got some details correct... most seem incorrect..
The time on the oven clock also says 12:00 O'Clock??
You can see this when apparently Dr Vincent Tabak switches of the oven.... You can find that at: (12:11 of the video.)
I would love to see when this program was originally filmed and all of the bits they didn't use when they edited it....
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8239.0;attach=13237;image)
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8239.0;attach=13239;image)
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8239.0;attach=13241;image)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2050063/Vincent-Tabak-strangled-Jo-Yeates-20-seconds-stifle-scream-arm-her.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg428065#msg428065
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Joanna Yeates Landlord Christopher Jefferies's Living Hell after Being Wrongly Accused Of Murder
12,499 views
LIKE
DISLIKE
SHARE
Bren Ryan
Published on Oct 28, 2011
Category
People & Blogs
License
Standard YouTube License
This little clip published on the 28th October 2011, shows CJ being interviewed, not only that it shows in the right hand corner of the clip the title of where the interview was from..... And would you Adam and Eve it.....
'Murder at Christmas'.... Crime and Investigation Network...
So come on everyone... The Crime and Investigation Network cannot have made the MURDER AT CHRISTMAS program before Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted....
When were these interviews originally made ??? It's complete poppy-cock...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFgGbNtF0wA
-
"Judge Rinder program" From 6:36 of video.
Mr Yeates
We had somebody round on the 18th, which was the Saturday. And it was just.. It was a normal weekend.
Mrs Yeates
I'd actually texted her on the Saturday afternoon, usually when I'm cooking and preparing for things I like to send her a little message. And the fact she didn't reply was not unusual to me.
Mr yeates
Well Greg sent texts as well over the weekend and and , message on the answer phone and so forth.And there was still... No answer at all.
Where was the answer phone??
Why have we not seen or heard of this Answer Phone with the important message on it...??
There were No images of this answer phone in the Flat, and it didn't appear at trial, which you would have thought so.... Other texts and messages were heard about... But NOT this one!
-
From 9:20 of the Judge Rinder program...
Mr Yeates says...
Jo's keys, phone and money was in the Flat. All of Jo's external clothes and shoes were still in the flat. She'd gone out, it was freezing cold that night with nothing on her feet no warm clothes, no phone , no keys , no money
How could Mr Yeates possibly know what footwear Joanna Yeates may or may not have had on that night??
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4htq8y
-
Reminder to all members!
Forum Rules
You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.
Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of posts. Please remember that we do not always actively monitor the posted messages, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted messages express the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to remove objectionable content, within a reasonable time frame, if they determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, please realize that they may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.
You remain solely responsible for the content of your posted messages. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint or legal action arising from any situation caused by your use of this forum.
You have the ability, as you register, to choose your username. We advise that you keep the name appropriate. With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password out to another person except an administrator, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason. We also HIGHLY recommend you use a complex and unique password for your account, to prevent account theft.
After you register and login to this forum, you will be able to fill out a detailed profile. It is your responsibility to present clear and accurate information. Any information the forum owner or staff determines to be inaccurate or vulgar in nature will be removed, with or without prior notice. Appropriate sanctions may be applicable.
Please note that with each post, your IP address is recorded, in the event that you need to be banned from this forum or your ISP contacted. This will only happen in the event of a major violation of this agreement.
Also note that the software places a cookie, a text file containing bits of information (such as your username and password), in your browser's cache. This is ONLY used to keep you logged in/out. The software does not collect or send any other form of information to your computer.
Please treat all members with respect and accept gracefully that other users may not necessarily share your point of view. Debates should be structured and constructive, they should not be used as a mechanism to disrupt or goad or provoke other users. In the event that a breach of these rules occurs, moderators can invoke sanctions which can include pre authorisation of posts and a temporary ban.
These rules will be amended periodically as the need arises.
ADMIN
-
Just noticed this from the Judge Rinder program about the case.... at 11:02 0f the video
The door they show is a glass panelled door, which should be Flat 2... But you can see that this door is at the side of the building... which is Joanna Yeates Flat..
Still visible is the hanging Plant... and houses and windows at the bottom of the path.. Also a plant can be seen at the front of the building on the ground..
When did the doors get switched about?? The Intercom panel is also there.... You can see the kitchen window and no other windows ,which if you look at the back of the building there are 2 windows visible.... Which door did Joanna Yeates originally have ??
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4htq8y
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1019699619419238400
Why's CJ still courting the media??
BBC Newsnight
Verified account
@BBCNewsnight
Follow Follow @BBCNewsnight
More
You have to remember that "one is kept in limbo for a considerable time still in the public eye while waiting to know whether one is going to be charged," says Chris Jefferies, who was villified by the press over his wrongful arrest for the murder of Joanna Yeates #newsnight
0:09
BBC Newsnight
Subscribe to BBC Newsnight on YouTube. Like us on Facebook. Catch up on iPlayer bbc.co.uk/newsnight - BBC
10:45 PM - 18 Jul 2018