DOODSLAG... The one Dutch word, The one Dutch word on it's own when Translated by Google translator, give us "Manslaughter..."
I was trying to understand how that one word stood out on it's own... And why when it is mentioned in trial, it just states that he searched "DOODSLAG"
http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf At Line 271 of the prosecution chart
Tabak searched the Dutch word
‘doodslag’ (English meaning: ‘manslaughter’)
This came from the Sally Ramage papers..
Now I asked the Dutch in-law another question about the word "Doodslag" and he said it meant Manslaughter...
I also asked if for instance you were to add "XXX" DOODSLAG or DOODSLAG "XXX" / Or even without the XXX
what it would translate as, and his response was, including I believe a text error....
I would neef more (con) text Now I am trying as I am writing to understand whether an error had been made other than the neef error, and had (con)text, just appeared on his phone and he meant to write it that way, or whether or not he meant to write it as a single word "Context"??
But for the moment I'll go back to DOODSLAG.... It may have had emoji's of XXX along side it, It may have been meant to mean something else.... Unless we know the context of this apparent word of apparent guilt, how do we know what was meant??
I'll give an example, which, isn't nice, so I'll pre-warn...
Someone answering a text, may use the term... "What an abortion"
Has nothing to do with someone having an abortion, it's a turn of phrase... We may or may not choose to use such a turn of phrase ourselves, but none the less it is used as a turn of phrase....
So what did the word "DOODSLAG" actually mean?? What context was it in??
Was it accompanied by emoji's that google cannot translate?
`The point again being, in which context did Dr Vincent Tabak look for the word DOODSLAG on his computer??
The word itself may appear incriminating... But it's only incriminating , if we assume the context and do not understand what the real context may have been..