Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 30898 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1320 on: February 04, 2018, 02:43:41 PM »
Part 3...

So who is the Person/organisation that reported Joanna Yeates "Missing" Why does her brother know that she is "Missing" by the 19th December 2010.. But the parents do not receive the phone call from Greg until the 20th December 2010 at 12:36am.. has someone else informed them about their daughter??

If Chris is in a surreal hole of despair on the 19th December 2010... what has Greg Reardon got to do with this episode?? He hasn't told the Yeates till the day after... So what is his part in this?? When did they decide he needed to play his part?? It cannot have been her phone ringing in her pocket at 9:00pm on Sunday the 19th December 2010 that first alerted greg Reardon something was amiss... Because Chris Yeates know something untoward has happened to his sister on that very day, and as we know there is no record of Greg Reardon ringing Chris Yeates to inform him that Joanna Yeates isn't at her Flat after he has been away....

There has to be more to this than Dr Vincent Tabak killing his next door neighbour he didn't know, (which they want us to believe.) Dr Vincent Tabak is away when DCI Phil Jones takes over.. Nothing has changed.. .. Apart from DCI Jones being in charge.. The fact that Chris Yeates is already aware that his sister is "Missing " on the 19th December 2010, before Greg Reardon contacts the Police at 12:45am on Monday the 20th December 2010 makes me believe the Police already knew of her disappearance before... If not the Police, what body had informed Chris Yeates that his sister was "Missing on the 19th December 2010? Other phone calls or text messages had to have happened with The Yeates family before Greg called them.. Or did Chris Yeates decide not to tell his parents?? I don't think so...

It is the mystery caller of the 19th December that is more important than CJ's second witness statement (imo) even though i agree with leonora that the contents of CJ's second witness statement is important, did it only contain information saying nothing more than he saw people at the gate, but couldn't identify them as the bushes were in the way... Is CJ's witness statement just that.... He says exactly that at The Leveson... he tells Sky News that what he had told the Police was far vaguer than that! Did the Police create the myth that CJ's second witness statement had far greater value than it had... Did they want us to concentrate on that statement?? And forget that Joanna Yeates had actually been reported Missing in exceptional circumstances for her brother Chris to be in a surreal state of despair from the 19th December 2010....

It is DCI Jones who puts in his log book that they will arrest CJ on the 30th December 2010, he has written this note on the 29th December 2010.. That's why we know it's staged.. The media outside Canygne Road questioning CJ... Dr Vincent Tabak is away not saying anything... Nothing in the Flat to indicate that Dr Vincent Tabak had been there.. i say that because that information should have come to trial....

So the cover-up starts before CJ's 2nd witness statement and the Police using the media and the media are helping to carry these stories ...... (Whether they are aware or not)

All the other information comes after the Police first inform the Public that Joanna Yeates is Missing on the 20th December 2010.. They have to have had enough time to formulate a strategy before they put the information on there website on the 20th December 2010, that why I believe someone did indeed report her Missing on or before the 19th December 2010.. we just don't know who... If Greg is telling us at trial he didn't call the Police before the 20th December 2010.. And Chris Yeates is saying on the helpfindjo web page , that his sister was reported "Missing on the 19th December 2010.. Then there had to be a call from someone who has not yet been identified...

Rebecca Scott telling us that she spoke to Joanna Yeates and that her things were in her Flat.. she tells us this on the 22nd December 2010 in a newspaper interview...  We shouldn't really know this stuff... But we do.. And it's because they are setting a scene to hide the truth..(imo)

Virtually everything that was reported or said after the 19th December 2010 was some sort of "Smoke and Mirrors" to make us believe a story that obviously isn't true... As Chris Yeates had said.. he was in a surreal hole of dispair from the 19th December 2010...

It brings me back to why the Police knew that tJoanna Yeates was 'Missing" from the Friday the 17th December 2010.. And I believe it is highly likely that someone had informed them of this on Friday 17th December 2010 and they had followed procedure and waited 48 hours before her being an Official "Missing Person".. And I think it is very possible that it was the Police themselves who contacted the Yeates family about their daughters disappearance on the 19th December 2010 and that is why we have Chris Yeates, being in a "Surreal hole of despair" from that date...

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1321 on: February 04, 2018, 02:44:19 PM »
Part 4...

Even if the Yeates had set off earlier than we believe on Sunday 19th December 2010, they would not have been able to gain access to Flat 1 as Greg had his keys and Joanna Yeates keys were inside the Flat...

But it has brought a possibility to mind... Did CJ allow the Yeates into Joanna Yeates Flat?? Is that what is contained in his second witness statement?? Is that when Mrs Yeates grabbed Joanna Yeates diary??  Is that when she found the receipt in Joanna Yeates pocket??

The actions of the Yeates when they arrive at Canygne Road do NOT include Greg... They are the ones looking in the Flat.. They are the ones searching the streets ...They are the ones banging on car boots... Had Greg left the Flat at some point on the 19th December 2010? Where were The Yeates family when Greg called them??

I believe it is very possible that CJ omitted plenty... Were the Yeates waiting at CJ's ?? They never sayGreg opened the door to them or Greg helped search... Did the Yeates only go into the Flat  after the Police arrived.. Or had CJ let them in??

There is a blurred line between the arrival of The Yeates and what took place with Greg.. And nothing is filling it in...
The Yeates have already left for Bristol before Greg rings I believe... Because someone (I believe the Police) besides Greg had to inform the Yeates that Joanna was already Missing on the 19th December 2010...

And maybe CJ's role is that he too knew that Joanna Yeates was Missing because her parents had arrived in Bristol... followed shortly by the Police..  We assume Greg's phone calls are made when he is at the Flat... But that doesn't have to be the case... I can't see him sat there for nearly 4 hours before he tells the Police she is "Missing"...

They obviously already know this info.... So where was Greg Reardon when the Yeates family arrived at Canygne Road?? Did the Yeates go to see CJ.. Or did they just use the time to search until the Police arrived??

Maybe it was CJ who let the Police and the Yeates into the Flat?? I could be wrong... But there is information Missing between "The Yeates knowing that their daughter has been reported "Missing" by the 19th December 2010 and Greg Reardon phoning them on the 20th December 2010..

And it is between the hours of The Yeates finding out that she is Missing on the 19th December 2010 and The Police arriving at Canygne Road on the 20th December 2010 that the important missing detail... The information may be contained in CJ's second or even first witness statement... And that is the reason why we don't know the content...

Dr Vincent Tabak has not had time to be considered any type of suspect at this juncture... That is why I believe he has been scapegoated.. The only reason that Dr Vincent Tabak could be seen as a suspect, is whoever originally reported her Missing on what I believe could be the 17th December 2010 has some how implicated Dr Vincent Tabak.... But I don't think that is the case...

There has to be far more to Joanna Yeates Murder than a Placid Dutchman happening upon his neighbour when he passed her kitchen window on the 17th December 2010...

It cannot be coincidence that The Yeates and the Police are at Canygne Road at around the same time...  Was it the Police whom had arranged with The Yeates family to meet them at 44,Canygne Road and that was the reason they set off from Southampton... To me it seems the most logical solution as to what made The Yeates family rush to Bristol that weekend come Monday Morning panicking ... And banging on Car Boots telling everyone they believed she had been abducted!!

And not the apparent phone call from Greg Reardon, who appears to be a bit late in the day informing The Yeates family that Joanna Yeates is not at the Flat... Because we already know they knew this information as Chris Yeates said...

“From December 19th onwards I entered into a surreal hole of despair".

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1322 on: February 04, 2018, 03:09:24 PM »
Is the importance of Greg's phone call about Joanna Yeates possessions being at the Flat when he calls and tells the Yeates and the Police on Monday 20th December 2010, more do do with the fact that they were not at the Flat when she was originally reported "Missing"

Remember on the helpfindjo website ...  DCI Phil Jones does say that they found her coat and boots in the Flat "AFTER" they found her on Longwood Lane"..

So does the same apply to her "Phone", Keys and Purse"??  Were they put in the Flat after she was reported "Missing"...

It's something to consider... And I am not making any inferences to any individual I am trying to understand what their role was and how it played out... And how much info the Police twisted so we did not really know what happened and when it happened...

Did someone have a set of keys to Joanna Yeates home?? Someone who had the ability to put into the flat at various times, various items...

That would indeed give cause for the Police to suspect CJ... and how important him having a set of keys was... It wasn't his second witness statement that made them arrest him... Rather I believe that items had been returned to the Flat after the time she had:...

(A): been reported Missing

(B): been found on Longwood Lane..

That is what is important.. How did someone manage to access her flat when there was a Police presence at ALL times ?????

CJ, we know was proven Innocent... And they knew he was... But that also tells us they also knew who did this... Because they had to work out who had accessed Flat 1 on more than one occasion to keep returning items back there...

And i don't think it was Dr Vincent Tabak!!  Or else that information would have come to court too......

Edit.... Ann Redropp says that when Joanna Yeates phone rang in her coat pocket... that was the start of Greg's nightmare...

Now Greg does say he comes home and then leave to go to his car.....

Had someone entered the Flat in between that time and returned Joanna Yeates mobile phone ??

That would cause concern, to anyone.. Especially if you had been ringing it prior and you hadn't heard it...

Is the real reason the Police only ever concentrated on 44, Canygne Road, because someone returned and entered the property on more than one occasion, returning items and maybe moving things in the Flat also....

It never occurred to me till now that someone could have come back to Canygne Road.. There had to be a reason why they Police presence was always there.. And why they never shifted there Investigation beyond that House...
 With the prospect that someone returned items on more than one occasion.. we can see the frustration with the Police... And why they believed that it had to be someone in that house that was doing it!!!!!

Double Edit.. If someone has the ability to return items to Flat one, then maybe that is why we have Dr Vincent Tabak saying that the DNA/Blood evidence was planted... Did he know that items had been returned to Joanna Yeates Flat?? had he been told ?? or did he work it out????

Is this the reason Greg keeps adding items to what was at the Flat in the original articles?? We get a stripy Jumper.. we get a green fleece.. all later..

Even the information about the rucksack... That comes in later... we have her items originally found in her bag... Did that also get returned??

Are the Police just getting Greg to say these statements or are the Police reporting in the media that this is what Greg saw... Is this why Greg's statement keeps changing?? Because items are getting returned to the Flat after she is reported Missing??

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1323 on: February 04, 2018, 04:29:19 PM »
Taking seriously the idea that someone was returning items to Flat one... Is this the reason that the Police allow Rebecca Scott to say that her coat was there??

Because it wasn't ??

By revealing information to the media they are telling the killer that items left at her home to try to indicate she had arrived home were not enough to prove she did, because there were still "Missing" Ingredients.. And only the killer, who was following ever step of the Investigation, could know that they hadn't returned her coat home...

Therefore making sense of DCI Phil Jones saying her coat and Boots were found in the Flat "After " she was discovered on Longwood lane....

Only the killer would try to play the Police ta there own game, by returning the items... Because as far as we were aware, those item should have already been in the Flat....

I never understood why the Police gave away so much Information in the early stages.... Information under ordinary circumstances should not have been given away by the Police....

Back to the Pizza... were they hoping that the killer would return that also?? Same with the "Missing Sock" are these items mentioned because they want to see if someone will return them??

On the 27th December 2010, The Ram received a note and a Pizza label...  This item was never linked to Dr Vincent Tabak...He also was away on that date and the post I imagine would have had to be delivered by hand seeing as the 25th and 26th of December Christmas and Boxing day fell on a weekend, giving Monday as a none postal day...

Is the reason that Ron Hansen ACC, gets involved to install camera etc?? he is know for his surveillance and under cover work... Did he set up a recording device inside Flat One , hoping to catch someone returning any more items to the Flat... Is this the reason that they decided to arrest CJ and keep him for 3 days?? It gave them the opportunity to put the hidden cameras inside Flat One?? Because no member of the public is going to suspect anything different happening at that house other than them collecting supposed evidence from CJ's Flat... And when they see police re-entering Joanna Yeates Flat the public suspect nothing!

Was the Pizza the Missing Sock the Police goading the killer?? Same with the bottles of Cider.... When did Greg first tell us about Joanna Yeates having a sip from one of the bottles...

Did the killer remove Joanna Yeates Christmas Tree??  That too should have been in the Flat that was Frozen in time...

Does this explain why the images we see on the internet keep changing... Because the Flat and its contents kept changing??

The killer therefore has to have close contact with the Police in some shape or form, to stop returning items after a certain time .....
They know what originally was inside Flat one, on the first day Joanna Yeates was reported "Missing"... Not only that but know what they themselves had left behind...

Ann Reddrop says that the killer was clever , cunning and manipulative... trying to keep one step ahead of the investigation... Well returning items would certainly keep them one step ahead...

But thinking about that does that and could that really apply to Dr Vincent Tabak???

I don't think so!!

Edit... Just another thought... we see someone removing the panel from the outside of the house on the 29th December 2010, the same day as they remove Joanna Yeates door... Was this the day that the Police were installing surveillance did they place something in the panel area to try to catch someone out?? And couldn't replace the panel later because the media may ask questions???

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case/ This.. is the Eureka moment??
« Reply #1324 on: February 05, 2018, 09:50:17 AM »
Christopher Jefferies witness statement to the Leveson..  I have normally used Christopher Jefferies second witness statement, and went looking for his first.. Can what it says be true or have they made an error...

Christopher Jefferies first witness statement was made in November 2011

Mr Jay
We, of course, know about the horrific murder of Joanna Yeates which led to the conviction for murder of Vincent Tabak in July this year. Joanna Yeates disappeared, so we have our bearings, on 17 December of last year; is that right?

Did they have a trial in July that we didn't know about??
Was the trial in October even more of a show trial than we know it was??
Was that the reason that the media could tweet so fast what had taken place??

CJ States in the Leveson"
I was startled to hear the editor of the Scotsman, one of the papers sued by me for libel and himself a member of the PCC, describe his paper's coverage of my arrest as a mistake.

So I went to the Scotsman to see if I could see there apology..

Yesterday The Scotsman and other newspapers apologised in court for having wrongly suggested that Mr Jefferies was involved in the killing of Joanna Yeates. We had also wrongly suggested that he had acted in an inappropriate, oversexualised manner with his pupils in the past and that he invaded he privacy of his tenants in his capacity as a landlord of two flats. We accepted in court that these allegations were untrue and that Mr Jefferies had no involvement in Ms Yeates' killing. In recognition of the distress caused, we have agreed to pay substantial damages to Mr Jefferies plus his legal costs.

The timing of CJ's suing of the media is important.. Mr Jay had stated that the trial was in "July" and Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted of "Murder"...

That statement must be true.... I will say, how on earth would CJ, be able to sue the papers if there hadn't already been a conviction in 'July" ?? Until there is a conviction there is no evidence to catergorically state that CJ is an Innocent man!! (No offence meant CJ..)
Mr Jay
We know there was a statement in open court on 29 July of this year.

Mr Christopher Jefferies

Mr Jay
The newspapers admitted liability, gave the standard apologies on these occasions --

Now I cannot find the pdf of CJ's first witness statement and luckily the statement is available through the link at the bottom... But is the reason that CJ's statement is sealed for 84 years, because they actually held Dr Vincent Tabak's trial in "July 2011"?

It would make sense that a trial had already taken place...

The Scotsman could not state on the 1st August 2011 that CJ was an entirely Innocent man... As the trial we were told was to take place in October 2011..

The Police had believed there to be an accomplice, and until someone else was convicted of this crime, CJ could always potentially have been implicated...

In August 2011, Dr Vincent Tabak still hadn't said anything....  He didn't sign his enhanced statement until September 2011, nothing as far as I am aware stated how he had entered Flat 1.... It is not until the apparent trial in October 2011, that Dr Vincent Tabak gives his version of events...  And of course he apparently was invited in....

So... CJ still could have been seen as a suspect by the Police right up until October 2011 as he was the landlord with the keys to Joanna Yeates Flat and they had no idea how entry had occurred...!

The Police did not apologise until 2012 to CJ and cleared him at that time Officially...

I'm aware CJ could confidently feel he could take the papers to court, but he would need something concrete to establish that the hole fiasco in the newspapers was outrageous and he had proof that he was indeed an Innocent man...

After the apparent trial of Dr Vincent Tabak's it did not stop the media from totally vilifying him, with talk of Porn.. prostitutes and his interest in child porn...

So the media's attitude hadn't changed.

CJ wouldn't and couldn't take the media to court at the end of July 2011, without having Dr Vincent Tabak convicted..(imo) The papers would not bow down and just pay him any cost and then state that he was wholly Innocent... They would fight their corner and state that until a trial and conviction, he still could be a suspect..

Is this the reason that No-one wants to talk about Dr Vincent Tabak's trial and conviction?? Because they had already had a trial and convicted him??

Did the "Manslaughter Plea" stand??  Was Dr Vincent Tabak convicted of "Manslaughter" in July 2011 and The October 2011 trial was just for show??

CJ.. has to be confident that he can win his case hands down!! And The apologies to CJ start in court on the 29th July 2011...

Article dated 29th July 2011

"Christopher Jefferies is the latest victim of the regular witch hunts and character assassination conducted by the worst elements of the British tabloid media.

Many of the stories published in these newspapers are designed to 'monster' the individual, in flagrant disregard for his reputation, privacy and rights to a fair trial.

These newspapers have now apologised to him and paid substantial damages."

I missed a trick... Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction had to be settled before CJ took the papers to court, he wouldn't have won and no apology would have been made.. He has to have everything in the bag to be able to stand up in court and say, that there is proof I did not have anything to do with the Murder of Joanna Yeates...!!

I am not surprised that No-one will talk of this case, I am not surprised that the media do not say anything... They probably all got a gaging order in July 2011.. It has been staring us in the face all this time.. CJ.... CJ who has tried time and time again to show us that the case against Dr Vincent Tabak is false... 
Not only does he sue the paper, he appears at the Leveson and then the documentary.. But we the public are not listening ...we the public are waiting on a selacious trial.. And we got one... With bells on it...

Now I understand why there were 20 written witness statement that were read out.. Why would you go to a trial if you have already been... That is why Tanja Morson was away on holiday... She didn't need to be there.... It wasn't real...(imo)... Every person whom you expected to take the stand didn't... 

* No DCI Phil Jones...
* No CJ...   
* No Tanja Morson
* No Peter Stanley
* No Good Character witness's
* No work Colleagues
* No tenant or resident of 44, Canyne Road
* No Firemen

 Nobody who should have been at the October trial was not there!! And that I believe is because the trial took place in July... But the papers cannot tell us, this is what happened.. But CJ does in his 'First Witness Statement at The Leveson"... No wonder that trial made no sense at all....

Talked about behind closed doors... Well I am not surprised in the least!!!!!

"Oh what a tangled web we weave.."  They got that right!

I would just like to add, and I am not being rude to CJ... But.... Why would the media apologies, pay him money and then a documentary is made about "The Lost Honour of CJ"???

At the end of the day.. CJ is simply a retired teacher, who owns a couple of properties, basically a nobody... Yet he manages to wield so much attention his way... Attention that he did not want apparently... I believe all the CJ reports from the Leveson and the documentary .. where to get us to sit up and take notice....

Well CJ... "I Have".... !!!

Read more at:

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1325 on: February 06, 2018, 10:58:40 AM »

"I think she was abducted after getting home to her flat ... I have no idea of the circumstances of the abduction because of what was left behind ... I feel sure she would not have gone out by herself leaving all these things behind and she was taken away somewhere". Her keys, phone, purse and coat were left behind at her flat.

The coat, keys, phone and purse, i do not believe that they were the reasons that they thought she had been abducted. Their insistence that Joanna Yeates had been "Missing" from Friday 17th December 2010

The possible conclusion for why The Yeates knew that there daughter had been abducted or felt that she had been adbucted, has to be in what was left behind..

The Bruises that were not all attributed to Joanna Yeates being attacked on that day...

Ignoring cameras.. ignoring everything else I believe it comes down to her taking medication.. And possibly "Insulin"
Having to take Insulin Injection daily would cause concern if it had been left behind..

The bruises on her body could easily be explained by site marks for the Injections.. 

There has to be something that was inside the flat, that she "Left" behind.... And I believe The Coat, Keys. Mobile Phone and purse could easily be explained away... And they would not give the Police a date of her disappearance..

But "Insulin" would....

Could explain the headaches
Could explain the diary and why The Yeates were allowed to keep it
Could explain possible heart condition , reaction to medication

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1326 on: February 10, 2018, 07:32:14 AM »
Tweet from 20th October 2011

Follow Follow @ALL_THINGS_PORN
#ADULT #NEWS - Vincent Tabak: Sex with Joanna Yeates was not on my mindVincent Tabak ...  - #porn #sex

3:37 PM - 20 Oct 2011
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes

A subtle way of informing everyone about porn... Attach to an adult porn site and add a couple of names, and everyone will know...
I did click the link and that link is dead.. images attached.

And they tell us no one knew about the porn??

That tweet was never removed, So how many more tweets were there about "Porn"!

20th October 2011... Wasn't that the day that Dr Vincent Tabak was on the stand when he apologised to The Family

The attorney general is considering whether to take action over a tweet revealing Vincent Tabak's interest in hardcore pornography that was posted during his trial.

During the four-week trial orders were in place to stop the media reporting Tabak's interest in pornography depicting women being strangled during sex.

It was feared that if the jury knew of Tabak's interest in such material it would be unfairly prejudiced against him and make a fair trial impossible.

But during the trial a man was arrested after he posted a tweet revealing the existence of the pornography.

Here the tweet link:

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1327 on: February 10, 2018, 08:54:22 AM »
Now this changes the timeline of phone calls ... Steven Morris of The Guardian..

Edit... If Greg called the Yeates at 12:36am and the Police around 1:00am... The Yeates were travelling from Southampton to Bristol....

What made the Police turn up at the Flat at 2:00am, before The Yeates arrived???? 

What was said to the POLICE about this Missing adult??
What was said to the Police to make them arrive within an hour???

Did the Yeates ring the Police to tell them of their concerns.... ???
The questions you pose are very pertinent indeed, but we have known the timings of Greg's calls and the police's response ever since Counsel for the Prosecution opened his case on the trial's first two days. There is nothing new there.

In the course of Mr Lickley's speech, a recording perporting to be Greg Reardon's 999 call (which allegedly lasted 12 minutes) was played to the court. A transcript of a small part of what he said was reproduced by some of the news media, but we don't know how they got it. If the recording were a complete fake, no one would be any the wiser. Greg was not in court himself until he came to testify, several days later. None of the police witnesses testified to the authenticity of the recording. Neither Mr & Mrs Yeates nor the police officer who came to the flat testified in person (though he statement was read out).

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1328 on: February 11, 2018, 08:25:15 PM »
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sat, Jan 22, 2011

However, yesterday, Tanja’s Harvard-educated US attorney father Geoffrey branded the claims “absurd”.

A blue Ford Mondeo arrived at his house in Cambridge at around 9.30am yesterday morning.

Two men dressed in smart suits, believed to be police officers, went into the house clutching papers before leaving at 10am and driving away.

Why did the Police attend "The Morson's" family home in Cambridge??

The media must have been camped out at The Moron's home to know that at 9:30am a blue Ford Mondeo with two men dressed in smart suits, whom the paper believes to be Police... where at the Morsons home in Cambridge.. Yet parently no-one in the media knew that it was Dr Vincent Tabak that had been arrested .... odd that... !

On his website, Tabak has spoken of his fondness for Tanja.

Does anyone know what website they are referring too??

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1329 on: February 12, 2018, 07:26:02 PM »
From The Criminal Law and Justice Weekly....

This is a new one on me....

A case in point is that of Christopher Jefferies, the unfortunate landlord of murder victim Joanna Yeates, who faced a media circus of innuendo following his arrest as the result of a hate comments started by Vincent Tabak, the man subsequently convicted of her murder.

What hate comments did Dr Vincent Tabak say about CJ??

Does this support Dr Vincent Tabak and Tanja Morson being the couple who told the papers about CJ letting himself into their Flat?? But it was supposed to be EX- Tenants... But If they rented from someone else in the building then they would be EX- Tenants..

Otherwise I do not know what they are referring too in this article!

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1330 on: February 12, 2018, 09:59:09 PM »
I have found this recording of DCI Phil Jones in 2014.. He is on the radio...


DCI Phil Jones speaks to BBC Somerset's Ben McGrail about a hit and run in Bruton in which a man in his 80s was killed.

Now it doesn't sound like the DCI Phil Jones we know....

I did say before That the man we see isn't the real DCI Phil Jones..(imo).. Did that man just assume the role of DCI Phil Jones for TV purposes?? Reminds me of "Brotherton" assuming the role of Chaplain!!

When I did the linkedIn of DCI Phil Jones, The image of him was completely different.. (images attached)..

To me they sound like 2 different people ....

I know they look like 2 different people..

I'll imagine that the audio link will get removed....

How many DCI Phil Jones are they in Somerset??

I found the link for the interview here:
BBC Somerset‏Verified account
Follow Follow @bbcsomerset
The police have given us more details about the hit and run in Bruton - listen here to DCI Phil Jones:

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1331 on: February 12, 2018, 10:30:09 PM »
How many DCI Phil Jones are there in that vicinity??

South Wales Police‏Verified account
Follow Follow @swpolice
#swpawards the final award at Cardiff City Hall goes to DCI Phil Jones who has stepped down after more than 30 years of great police work.

1:16 PM - 30 Sep 2011

Notice the date ?

South Wales Police‏Verified account
Follow Follow @swpolice
#swpawards the final award at Cardiff City Hall goes to DCI Phil Jones who has stepped down after more than 30 years of great police work.

1:16 PM - 30 Sep 2011
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Reply   Retweet   Like   Direct message

How many Phil Jones... can't be this one because he got sent to prison.... Or is Phil Jones just a generic name that gets used????

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1332 on: February 13, 2018, 11:15:37 AM »
"Killer kept Sock as a Trophy"

The Police had this as an idea from the begining.. The only person who would keep a sock as a trophy would be a "Serial Killer"

Did The Avon and Somerset Police believe that there was a Serial Killer in their midst??

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1333 on: February 13, 2018, 12:44:49 PM »
leonora you like your idioms..

From The guardian...
Christopher Jefferies, the retired school teacher caught up in the Joanna Yeates murder case, has told the Leveson inquiry that he was forced into a "hole-in-the-corner existence" by the hostile press coverage that followed his arrest at the end of 2010.

Shady and secretive, typically to hide illicit activity. Primarily heard in UK. You can be sure there's some hole-in-the-corner activities going on in that private club.
Farlex Dictionary of Idioms. © 2015 Farlex, Inc, all rights reserved.

hole-in-the-corner or hole-and-corner BRITISH, OLD-FASHIONED
If you describe an activity or an event as hole-in-the-corner or hole-and-corner, you mean that it is kept secret, usually because it is dishonest or shameful. You deserve better than a hole-in-the-corner relationship like this. His visit was a hole-and-corner affair, and treated like a guilty secret.

Did CJ actually say that??

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1334 on: February 26, 2018, 12:27:34 PM »
Joanna Yeates suspect Vincent Tabak faces her parents in court

 Metro News Reporter Wednesday 21 Sep 2011 8:54 am

David and Teresa Yeates were at Bristol crown court for a pre-trial hearing for Vincent Tabak. Tabak admits manslaughter but denies murder (Picture: London News Pictures) The couple have not seen Tabak in person in court before as the defendant has appeared by videolink from prison at previous hearings.

They arrived and left court hand in hand, accompanied by two police officers. Tabak, a Dutch engineer, has admitted the manslaughter of Miss Yeates, a 25-year-old graduate, but denies her murder. The charge states that he ‘unlawfully killed’ her between December 16-19.  Tabak, who sat hunched in the dock, spoke only once during the hearing. The clerk asked him: ‘Are you Vincent Tabak?’ He replied: ‘Yes I am.’ He was remanded in custody. The four-week trial will begin on October 4.

Why are Mr and Mrs Yeates attending a pre- trial court hearing??

That is twice that they have attended a court hearing for Dr Vincent Tabak... Here it is stated they never saw him before... But They have since said on video interviews that they meet (him) and Tanja on the Grass at Canygne Road..

Why is everything opposite of what it is supposed to be ??


Det Chief Inspector Phil Jones, who led the Avon and Somerset investigation, sat behind the barristers but immediately in front of the defendant.

Why is DCI Phil Jones in court as well as The Yeates being in court at a hearing for Dr Vincent Tabak..  surely none of them should be there??