The Defence Will State Their Case

[jixy]

Not really surprising, as he was living in England at the time.

Exactly !! neither is searching in English either

[[...]]

You dismiss the facts with words like apparently but then make up stuff that you have no idea about. Strange that

You're right Jixy ... I know nothing about anything... I was just about to write a different,,post, then saw what you had posted.... Then thought better of it....  I know nothing!!

[jixy]

Maybe its helpful to stick to the established facts instead of ignoring them all to make up your own

[[...]]

Maybe its helpful to stick to the established facts instead of ignoring them all to make up your own

Which established facts would they be?? 

Look...  Don't mind me... Everyone here appears to have it covered... I on the other hand, will stick with my belief, and the rest of you can agree, with your established facts that you know..

Maybe someone else will come along, you can all agree is stupid...

[jixy]

Which established facts would they be?? 

Look...  Don't mind me... Everyone here appears to have it covered... I on the other hand, will stick with my belief, and the rest of you can agree, with your established facts that you know..

Maybe someone else will come along, you can all agree is stupid...

Not sure why you always turn this back on yourself like its personal to you, when it isnt. There was a trial there was evidence there was a confession... he has never once spoken up to dispute any of this and yet you choose to know better than Tabak!

No one makes you do this! You said you tried to make contact with Tabak. he didnt bite your hand off desperate and alone  waiting for help did he? He ignored it

[mrswah]

And he was living in England when he killed Joanna Yeates

Yes, he certainly was.  And??

[jixy]

Yes, he certainly was.  And??

Instead of asking And? why dont you ask Nine why they imply they know Tabak inside out and how his searches appear are wrong?

[Real justice]

Yes, he certainly was.  And??

I don’t know what more I can add to it mrswah, other than Vincent Tabak was living in England when he murdered Joanna Yeates.

[Caroline]

Which established facts would they be?? 

Look...  Don't mind me... Everyone here appears to have it covered... I on the other hand, will stick with my belief, and the rest of you can agree, with your established facts that you know..

Maybe someone else will come along, you can all agree is stupid...

Not stupid - delusional.

[[...]]

You just PRESUME what he would do and how he would speak and search. Just like you presume he is innocent.

Correct, I presume too much.. Rather I should have said, the likely hood of a mixture of English, and Dutch should have been found upon Dr Vincent Tabak's computer. I wonder why there appears to be only English text, in anything that appeared in what has been stated as Dr Vincent Tabaks searches. In His text messages and in his emails.

I do not know for a fact what he wrote, so therefore you are correct... But The idea of me writing on here, was to question what appears not be have been asked...

If we have a summary of searches and a summary of texts and emails that Dr Vincent Tabak made, then are there more text and searches he made in Dutch? Are there more texts and emails in Dutch, that may have been relevant?
Or possibly in German seeing as he was tri-lingual... If a history of the entire searches and text that were made was not available for the jury to see, how do we know the full picture, how do we know the truth.. Omitting any of the searches and only using those that appeared relevant, may have given the jury only one impression.. Where as the whole truth could lie within the rest of the searches and text...

If i am not presuming, I cannot presume, how the computers were examined... I cannot presume the person who examined, the computers and mobile phone/phones, had a command of the Dutch language and was forensically trained for this task, I cannot presume, that any Dutch text that may have been withheld within any devices, was translated by anyone.

There may be reams of information that was not processed, the searches were just presented at trial, in a slide show presentation I think..

My post was ill thought out, he may not speak Dutch at all, how do I know... But a presumption of the likely hood any person from another country, would at some point use their native language, was a safe bet I believed..

I do not know of any printouts of the texts, or if anybody was responsible for translating any text.

I do find it strange, that there should be only one Dutch word held within the entire collection of devices that were apparently examined thoroughly by the police.. Or is that a presumption?

What I will say is that I glean from what was said at trial and what was reported, there was no mention made of the forensic examination of these devices... I am unaware if each device was individually identified at trial, which text came from which device  on what day and time, if each devices clocks were set to Greenwich Mean Time. And if they correspond with where ever Dr Vincent Tabak may have been at the time.

I believe at one point, it was stated that Tanja was on the computer, when read out at trial, It appeared unscientific, How it could be differentiate who used the computer at anytime in that household, was never made clear, just like the computer they accessed somehow from Buro Happold...

The text and searches are combined into one, yet they come from a variety of devices and hard-drives, no seperation of the information detailing where the information came from... Just a list of apparent searches made, as well as emails and texts..

Therefore which device yielded which information? And who else had access to these devices... were the work devices taken from Buro happold, or were these devices kept at Dr Vincent Tabak's home? And were these work devices shared at any time?

[Real justice]

Correct, I presume too much.. Rather I should have said, the likely hood of a mixture of English, and Dutch should have been found upon Dr Vincent Tabak's computer. I wonder why there appears to be only English text, in anything that appeared in what has been stated as Dr Vincent Tabaks searches. In His text messages and in his emails.

I do not know for a fact what he wrote, so therefore you are correct... But The idea of me writing on here, was to question what appears not be have been asked...

If we have a summary of searches and a summary of texts and emails that Dr Vincent Tabak made, then are there more text and searches he made in Dutch? Are there more texts and emails in Dutch, that may have been relevant?
Or possibly in German seeing as he was tri-lingual... If a history of the entire searches and text that were made was not available for the jury to see, how do we know the full picture, how do we know the truth.. Omitting any of the searches and only using those that appeared relevant, may have given the jury only one impression.. Where as the whole truth could lie within the rest of the searches and text...

If i am not presuming, I cannot presume, how the computers were examined... I cannot presume the person who examined, the computers and mobile phone/phones, had a command of the Dutch language and was forensically trained for this task, I cannot presume, that any Dutch text that may have been withheld within any devices, was translated by anyone.

There may be reams of information that was not processed, the searches were just presented at trial, in a slide show presentation I think..

My post was ill thought out, he may not speak Dutch at all, how do I know... But a presumption of the likely hood any person from another country, would at some point use their native language, was a safe bet I believed..

I do not know of any printouts of the texts, or if anybody was responsible for translating any text.

I do find it strange, that there should be only one Dutch word held within the entire collection of devices that were apparently examined thoroughly by the police.. Or is that a presumption?

What I will say is that I glean from what was said at trial and what was reported, there was no mention made of the forensic examination of these devices... I am unaware if each device was individually identified at trial, which text came from which device  on what day and time, if each devices clocks were set to Greenwich Mean Time. And if they correspond with where ever Dr Vincent Tabak may have been at the time.

I believe at one point, it was stated that Tanja was on the computer, when read out at trial, It appeared unscientific, How it could be differentiate who used the computer at anytime in that household, was never made clear, just like the computer they accessed somehow from Buro Happold...

The text and searches are combined into one, yet they come from a variety of devices and hard-drives, no seperation of the information detailing where the information came from... Just a list of apparent searches made, as well as emails and texts..

Therefore which device yielded which information? And who else had access to these devices... were the work devices taken from Buro happold, or were these devices kept at Dr Vincent Tabak's home? And were these work devices shared at any time?

Interesting Billy your post is quite revealing, you make a long post on things that have already been explained about Computers, surprisingly you never mention CONTENT.  The content of the Computers doesn’t seem to bother you, the fact he’s a paedofile and admitted to this possession, (Vincent Tabak admits possessing indecent images of children) now my Old friend Jim Clemente would rip your post apart, he’s a profiler, your only worry in all this, He never searched in the Dutch language only for one word?

Your not suggesting, his girlfriend knew about his dirty sexual pervertion are you Billy, Nah Nah Nah Billy no woman with half a brain would be that stupid, well other than the evil Myra Hindley of course.

Anyway I’ve got to dash over to Amsterdam to see my Dutch sister in law, I’ve got to be back for Footie this afternoon 

[[...]]

Interesting Billy your post is quite revealing, you make a long post on things that have already been explained about Computers, surprisingly you never mention CONTENT.  The content of the Computers doesn’t seem to bother you, the fact he’s a paedofile and admitted to this possession, (Vincent Tabak admits possessing indecent images of children) now my Old friend Jim Clemente would rip your post apart, he’s a profiler, your only worry in all this, He never searched in the Dutch language only for one word?

Your not suggesting, his girlfriend knew about his dirty sexual pervertion are you Billy, Nah Nah Nah Billy no woman with half a brain would be that stupid, well other than the evil Myra Hindley of course.

Anyway I’ve got to dash over to Amsterdam to see my Dutch sister in law, I’ve got to be back for Footie this afternoon 

Why is A profiler relevant? 

How could any profiler determine the why for of what I write and why I write it? based upon what?

What other information have I viewed which maybe warranted said response?

How could any profiler determine at what point someone may have made a comment to me, ?

Did someone ask me to search for something?

As for the links to the youtube music. for which reason did i do this??

Was I trying to convey something else??

What influences during my time writing on here, have I had in relation to said music video's?

Are the music video meant as a joke?

There could be many many factors...

Profilers appear to me to be generalisers, who have been dramatised world wide, who make decisions (imo) based on what they believe they know, and everyone ends up in a box.....

It is easy to box everyone up, and present said people to juries as a certain type of person, it appears to add weight, to the evidence that is presented at trial,.. profilers belong on TV, and a warning should be given, it's entertainment, it's car crash TV.. (imo)

Profilers do not and should not belong in a court room, what ever influences said profiler and any profilers decision making, should be scrutinized....


Many people have agenda's.. many people have experiences in life, that may or may not influence their thought processes, timing and tragedy may also play a part in any event, pressures and stressers may have an influence, and a person may or may not behave out of character.

Boxing everyone up is not helpful, and if it wasn't for the TV profilers, may people opinions as jurors at a trial would change. They would think for themselves instead of being possibly influenced by someone else ideas of a person or persons...

Profiling like anything is not an exact science....

Wasn't it reported about the CSI effect... How jurors apparently wanted DNA as proof of a defendants guilt..

DNA like anything is a tool, it depends where it originated from,  it depends on the correct process, it depends on whether it can be established as to when it was deposited...

Unfortunately it is used in most cases, and the relevance may not be accurate,.. Take Dr Vincent Tabak and Joanna Yeates, two people living in the same building using the same gate.. etc etc..

The transfer of DNA is highly likely, when and how said DNA is deposited ,is another matter, but how can that be determined, without exploring every avenue.

All countries have their own processes and ways in which to determine the guilt of any individual, I may not agree with some of the method's used, but i am not here to argue about other countries laws etc..

Evidence needs to be based on fact and not opinion, and yes I can see where you see coming from, I am not presenting fact, but questioning the process... And wanting to understand how the decisions about Dr Vincent Tabak were established..

Searches on the internet, do not equate to fact... The fact only that can be established about said internet searches, is that they were made... but made by whom, and in what context is not established, merely by the presence of a computer search.. A computer search is not evidence of a crime...

Texts too are not evidence in that way either, understanding the context of said text is just as important, and the interpretation of said texts, is dependant on who's presenting said text and in what context.... Not knowing what someone was responding too, whether or not the text response was delayed for whatever reason, whether or not said text was meant as a joke, whether or not said text was received by the correct person, are all factors in whether or not, each text is relevant to any situation.. Whether or not autocorrect decided to kick in..

Texts may appear to confirm evidence presented, but confirm what exactly, that a text was sent?

Interpretation of texts is not evidence and I find that area of texts etc as evidence one should question, texts can be interpreted in many ways, just like DNA can be interpreted in many ways.. (imo)

So the point of informing me of a profiler Real was what exactly??

[[...]]

Just to add...

If a couple/ family are in a room watching TV, whilst looking at their devices, shall we say.. One is reading twitter, one is reading facebook, they are all half listening to the TV, one is on instagram, and someone pipes up out of the blue....

" No way, he didn't do that did he.."

Now what is that remark referring too...??

Suddenly one of the people in the room decides to research this comment made, and searches and searches in vain.. yet these searches are now evidence on this person device that a search about a particular person was made...

The conversation may carry on in the room, others may but in, others may be laughing at the latest video they are watching on their devices.. And make another comment, something on the TV sparks interest and another search is made...

They may not be concentrating and respond to a text received in a manner that has no relation to the question asked, or statement made, and may choose to amend said text, or not bother and let the person who received said text decide or realise, what said text meant...

People search for information all the time on the internet, based on many factors....

It cannot be determined the reason why texts and searches are made, a continuous dialogue may help, but still there could always be questions.

[[...]]

Someone remarked that this was none of my business, and thinking about that remark it is true..

I think I may have come full circle... Comments like mine or anyones elses on a forum are not evidence, evidence that words were written, that is true, but they are not evidence of anything else other than it being one persons opinion based on the information they believe they may know...

They could be viewed as entertainment by some, or used as advice by others, so my comments that are many, are proof of nothing, they appear to have only added to the weight of information already out there..

So maybe a hazzard warning sign should be attached to my posts, that they are posts based on my opinion, and my opinion only, and my interpretation of what information I have viewed or seen..

My posts are evidence of nothing, and as such should been seen in that way...

Edit... And as my posts are evidence of nothing, maybe that is the real reason they should be removed,... Anyone reading them maybe should see them as ???, I do not know... Opinion is just that, opinion....

[[...]]

Therefore my conclusion, is my post no longer need to be here and i no longer need to be a member of this forum, you can remove me from the member list too... thank you