Part One...
Looking back at Sally Ramage papers, I was trying to understand why the text messages stop between Dr Vincent Tabak and Tanja Morson, seeing as the 1300 page document was supposed to be all text messages, emails etc.... Yet they stop after the 17th December 2010... I would have imagined that if Dr Vincent Tabak was trying to make himself look like nothing had changed in his day to day life... then the text messages would have continued up until his arrest... I would have expected text messages from his family in regard to the Police Interview that took place in Holland, just making sure everything was ok with Dr Vincent Tabak...
But then I came across Entry 11.... And put into place the basics of everything is not what it seems.... why does Entry 11 not have a PM or AM after it??
Defence Counsel: Turn to entry 11.
‘Entry 11- seen past the flat at 9.05 where Tanya had already left for work in a lift-share’.
Text message from Tabak: ‘Love you’.
Text answer from Tanja: Love you too. Pretty snow.
Entry 11 doesn't have to be chronological.... we are assuming it is..... But I don't think it is..... The rest of the information could well be true, but not together... Clegg has made statements from information given to him...
Tanja would have left for work, not just how Clegg allows us to believe..(imo)
If Dr Vincent Tabak was seen at 9:05 .... what or who was he seen by??? They didn't bring the CCTV footage of Canygne Road to trial..... So how can they establish that he was seen.... And if that was the case
I think 9:05 is "pm"....... I believe this is the time that CJ saw someone leaving the Flat.... (imo)
Nothing is simple in this case ... They way in which the information is given, we fill in the pieces ourselves....
We decide it is in the morning because of what follows.....
Defence Counsel: What time do you leave for work?
Tabak: 9.00 am.
That is subtle.... That is what makes us believe that the two statements are connected... But I do not believe that they are....
To further establish in our minds that these two events are connected.. the following happens...
Defence Counsel: Do you always access weather reports on the Internet?
Tabak: I always access the Internet for weather reports even whilst in Los Angeles. I had
my computers set up for that.
That has taken the Juries mind away for a second, they are NOT concentrating..... Clegg then follows with...
Defence Counsel: Let us look at your movements on Friday 17 December:
Time line 11- left for work
Timeline 12- Cycled to Bristol T Stn
Timeline 13- Train to bath
Timeline 16- Arrive Bath 9.41
Timeline 17- Accessed Internet for weather- at work
Timeline 18- Accessed weather report.
Timeline 19- Accessed weather report.
Timeline 20- Telephone call to Tanja.
Timeline 21- Another telephone call to Tanja.
So the jury would have noted he left for work at 9:00 ... When Clegg reiterates the sequence of events he doesn't state the actual time that Dr Vincent Tabak left for work on that day..... It's missing..... Dr Vincent Tabak only stated that he normally left for work at 9:00am not that he left for work at 9:00am on Friday 17th December 2010.... And the first time Clegg mentions Entry 11... He states it says he was "seen past the flat", not that he was leaving for work...
seen past the flat has to be a visual identification (imo)... but no-one comes forward to verify this .... No CCTV footage putting Dr Vincent Tabak past the Flat....
I had always assumed that being seen past the flat had to be the Private CCTV, but that wasn't shown at trial.... So the only way to be seen other than that is identification by someone....
Is this time of 9:05 when CJ told the Police he saw people past the Flat??... 9:05 could very well be 9:05pm... which I am of the belief is extremely possible... We know CJ arrives homes a little after 9:00pm on Friday 17th December 2010.. So has part of CJ's witness statement been brought to trial unbeknown to anyone ??? That is something to contemplate... Because I really would like to see how they confirmed that Dr Vincent Tabak was apparently seen
past the flat without any person appearing at trial or CCTV showing Dr Vincent Tabak
past the flatI do believe that the time of 9:05 is 9:05 pm and not 9:05am.... Because I cannot see Clegg having a legal document with the incorrect time.... Therefore it makes me wonder why the document didn't say AM ?? Or Clegg didn't say AM in Court...
Question.... does 9:05 refer to CJ's second witness statement of seeing someone leaving the flat?? would someone like to clarify this!
And If my belief is correct.....if this is the case... is 9:05 from CJ's second witness statement?? It coincidentally fits in with CJ's timeline for the evening... Have the defence revealed something that has been starring us in the face all this time ??? Did part of CJ's second witness statement get used at trial???
Edit.. Is Entry 11 and Timeline 11 two different events ?? Why say "Entry" and not Timeline??
http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf