Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 599766 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2070 on: October 13, 2018, 10:17:00 AM »
Another question.....


If they had Greg Reardon on the stand as a witness, why didn't they have Mr and Mrs Yeates on the stand,... they witnessed the same as Greg... They arrived at the flat being void of their daughter...

I say this because her father found her earring I think underneath the clothes on the floor.. (wish I could find the article... or maybe I've heard him say it on video...)

So, why was just Greg a witness?????????

If your daughter had been murdered would you want to take the stand? What state do you think her parents were in?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2071 on: October 13, 2018, 10:22:38 AM »
I was thinking about the sentencing of Dr Vincent Tabak and how quickly the Judge passed sentence, there was NO medical reports made as mitigating circumstances.. No leniency for a plea of guilty.. I don't remember any victim impact statements..

How did the Judge come to his decision based on what??? Surely Dr Vincent Tabaks behaviour whilst in custody was without fault..

Why didn't the judge defer sentencing whilst all the reports came in????
Where were the background reports???

https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/verdicts-and-sentencing

How do you know there were no medical reports?

,Mr Justice Field said Tabak, who was flanked by six security guards in the dock, was guilty of an evil and wicked act and is a "very dangerous" individual

Yeates's parents were not in court to hear the verdict but her boyfriend Greg Reardon stared at Tabak, visibly shaken and close to tears as he was led from the dock. In a statement from her parents read out by police outside court, they said: "It is a regret that capital punishment is not an option."
During his trial the prosecution claimed that Tabak, 33, was motivated by sex when he attacked Yeates at her home on 17 December last year.

It suggested he may have spied on the landscape architect and claimed that an important feature of the case was that when her body was found on Christmas morning, her top had been pulled above her bra and part of one breast was exposed. His DNA was found on Yeates's chest.

The jury did not hear during the trial that when police delved into Tabak's computers after his arrest they discovered an interest in hardcore pornography, some of which featured strangulation and bondage.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/28/vincent-tabak-guilty-joanna-yeates-murder
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 10:28:28 AM by Stephanie »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline justsaying

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2072 on: October 13, 2018, 10:34:44 AM »
In all fairness, it looks like the QC did the best he could with the bad job he was given.

“This is the Defence Counsel, Mr William |Clegg, QC’s opening speech:

 “If Jo Yeates had stayed for just one more drink she would be alive today. If Vincent Tabak had
gone to Asda as he had planned that same time, he would not in the dock today. …  She turned on the oven to bake.  She phoned several male friends and told how she was bored.  She texted Samuel Ashcroft:  “Where are you this fine eve?”  His reply was “Home- sorry”. She then texted Peter: “Where are you?” Peter replied “On my way to a wedding. Where are you?”  She replied: “At home- on my todd”! She texted a third male friend. She has said she was bored and she was looking for company.  It was the Christmas period and many people were at parties. In the next flat was Vincent Tabak.  They never really knew each other, save for a nod. Vincent Tabak was also alone- and bored.  He decided to go to Asda – not for anything special but to fill in time .  He left his flat; was walking towards his car and went past her kitchen window. The kitchen blind was broken and so stayed up all the time, as Greg Reardon had confirmed. She beckoned to him to come in.
Joanna invited Vincent in, as all the evidence indicated.

She had opened the door and invited him in.  He took off his coat.  He hung it on her coat rack. 
She offered him a drink and he declined as he was driving.  She said her boyfriend was away and she was alone and he said that his girlfriend was away and he was alone. Vincent Tabak misread her friendliness toward him and made a move towards her as if he was about to kiss him on her lips. 
He put one hand in the middle of her back as if he was about to kiss her, and she screamed fiercely. 
He put his hand over her mouth and said sorry and when he moved his hand away she screamed
again. He put his hand to her mouth and throat and she went limp. She was dead. He had never touched her before other than to shake hands as he went into her flat. That one minute was all it took and she was dead. Nothing was timed.  He thinks that maybe he was in the flat for 10 minutes before she screamed.  The incident when he put her hand on his throat was far less than a minute.
Defence expert Dr Carey will give evidence on Friday 21 December 2010 on this matter.
Prosecution pathologist expert witness, Dr Delaney, said on 18 October that it may well have been
10 seconds.  Those arriving at the party at Number 53 said they heard screams.  It is for the jury to decide whether a scream from inside Flat 1 could be heard from outside 53 Canynge Road. The jury will have to decide whether anybody could have heard 

 But one thing is that three witnesses heard screams spread out over some ten minutes. This cannot
be.  The couple arriving outside number 53, a short time after they were filmed on CCTV at number 83. But the weather conditions were icy. How long did it take them to get there?
Warren Sweet said he did not arrive at Number 53’s party until 8.50pm on Friday 17 December
2010. When he arrived at No. 53, Warren Sweet said he heard a scream. That cannot be the same scream that the couple heard. The reaction of all four people who heard screams was initially  put down to students out celebrating as term had finished that day. You may think that the whole of those screams is totally unconnected.  You just couldn’t hear anybody from that distance….
This does mean that one really hasn’t got a real clue as to when Tabak went into Joanna’s flat except
that it was between the time he went to Asda and the time he texted his girlfriend, say, between 9.00
pm and 11.00 pm. Were you to conclude that the couple heard Joanna’s screams and not the scream that Mr Sweet heard; if the Laymans and Sweet ‘s evidence were to be dismissed, it would tie in with the scientific evidence.  One thing is certain. Joanna Yeates was killed between 21.00 and 21.30 pm on Friday 17 December 2010. It was not something he planned. It was, in the words of Dr Delaney, expert prosecution pathologist witness, that death had occurred in less than half a minute; less than 20 seconds, less than 10 seconds even.
 
A very important piece of evidence is that what Tabak wrote in his statement is nearly the same and
corroborated the undisputed pathologist expert witnesses. But his conduct afterwards was frankly disgusting.  He took her body and disposed of it.  He caused anguish to her family.  His defence will not be heard to excuse this behaviour.  He was obviously concerned with the incident, trying to track everything.  It was only a matter of time before the police came to arrest him.  Again he told lie after lie and you will hear no excuse from me about that. It shows a very calculating person trying to wriggle out of her death but it does not help in thinking of what happened at the flat….
He went to his flat and left Joanna’s flat door on the latch. He returned.  He turned off the oven that she had turned on. He took the Tesco pizza that was in the kitchen.  He carried the body from her flat to his flat.  He then put her body in the bag that he used to cover his bike.  He then went to get his car, placed the body in the boot of his car, went to Asda, a trip he formerly planned, and drove aimlessly around whilst deciding what to do.  He tried to put the body over the wall. It was too heavy and so he left it by the roadside.  When he got back home, he put the pizza, the cycle cover and the sock into a corporate dustbin. 
 
And then, despite the awful secret that he was carrying, he tried to carry on as before: going to
parties, living with his girlfriend, etc, instead of going to the police.  There will be no excuse from me for that. He will be called to give evidence on Thursday 20 October 2011. He is not being tried for his behaviour after Joanna died. He is not being tried for dumping the body. What he is being tried for is whether he killed Joanna Yeates, intending to kill or cause really serious harm to her, or whether, he panicked and did it without thinking of the consequences. Most of what the prosecution has stated does not go this fact: it goes to what happened afterwards.”
  (sic)
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 10:37:30 AM by justsaying »

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2073 on: October 13, 2018, 10:37:18 AM »
He sounds like a sadistic psychopath


“Vincent Tabak was a cunning, dishonest and manipulative man who knew exactly what he was doing when he killed Joanna Yeates. Today he has been convicted by a jury in Bristol of her murder last year, despite claiming he meant her no harm.

“He was cunning and dishonest towards his girlfriend with whom he maintained a “normal” relationship - even going so far as to text her shortly after Joanna was dead to say he was bored.

“He manipulated the police by virtue of his own in-depth research on the Internet to keep one step ahead of the investigation before his arrest, looking up extradition and medical details of decomposition.

“He made very selective admissions surrounding the circumstances of Joanna’s death which sought to cast her in an unfavourable light and he kept this up even when he was giving evidence to the jury. Tabak thought his cleverness and deceit would prevent him being convicted of a brutal murder. He was wrong.

“Joanna went missing on 17 December 2010 after meeting friends for drinks. For several days the police mounted a missing person enquiry but with the discovery of her body on Christmas Day it became a murder investigation. The police team undertook a painstaking enquiry into this murder and Vincent Tabak became the focus of their attention following the finding of his DNA on Joanna’s body

“Late in December 2010 the police asked for assistance and guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service. That assistance has come from the South West Complex Casework Unit based here in Bristol. I reviewed the evidence, advised that Vincent Tabak should be charged with Joanna’s murder and began preparing the case for trial.

“In May 2011, Tabak admitted the manslaughter of Joanna, but that was only part of the story. The Crown’s case is and always has been that it was a deliberate act on his part and that is why we refused to accept his plea to manslaughter and he has faced trial for murder over the past four weeks.

“Joanna’s family has been here in Bristol during the trial and have listened to much of the evidence. Our thoughts are with them today as Tabak begins a life sentence for killing their daughter.” http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2011/10/conviction-and-sentencing-of-vincent-tabak-for-the-murder-of-joanna-yeates.html
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2074 on: October 13, 2018, 10:40:33 AM »
You cannot see CJ being discredited but you see "rudeness, verbal abuse" etc etc? What has CJ got to do with Tabak anyway, hasn't he been eliminated from police enquiries? You may have missed Nine's point, but I certainly did not.

What has CJ got to do with Tabak? Well, he had been his landlord for over a year so probably knew him. And, no, I am not suggesting he was anything other than innocent!! Nor is anyone else. From what I have read, CJ took an interest in his tenants, and I would certainly have thought he would have heard if someone was screaming in the flats, or outside, or would have noticed someone behaving suspiciously, particularly if it was VT, whom he knew.

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2075 on: October 13, 2018, 10:44:12 AM »
What has CJ got to do with Tabak? Well, he had been his landlord for over a year so probably knew him. And, no, I am not suggesting he was anything other than innocent!! Nor is anyone else. From what I have read, CJ took an interest in his tenants, and I would certainly have thought he would have heard if someone was screaming in the flats, or outside, or would have noticed someone behaving suspiciously, particularly if it was VT, whom he knew.

Those people who came into contact with Vincent Tabak, including CJ, would have been groomed by him. This is what con men like Tabak do.

CJ was a victim in more than one way.
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline justsaying

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2076 on: October 13, 2018, 10:44:53 AM »
What has CJ got to do with Tabak? Well, he had been his landlord for over a year so probably knew him. And, no, I am not suggesting he was anything other than innocent!! Nor is anyone else. From what I have read, CJ took an interest in his tenants, and I would certainly have thought he would have heard if someone was screaming in the flats, or outside, or would have noticed someone behaving suspiciously, particularly if it was VT, whom he knew.

I think you need to go back and read this thread, there have certainly been enough hints at him being guilty... What CJ did regarding the way he was treated by the police and the press has absolutely nothing to do with Tabak. Nor is it any of Nine's business. Nine's post had nothing to do with what CJ may or may not have heard, it was clearly discrediting his actions! I am just wondering how any of you would react had you all been treated in the same way as he was!

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2077 on: October 13, 2018, 12:04:34 PM »
I have had to remove several posts because they are off topic, argumentative and verbally abusive.

Please could we have civilised discussion on this thread. Thanks.

jixy

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2078 on: October 13, 2018, 12:17:11 PM »
I have read through today's posts, and I cannot see that anyone is" pointing the finger "at CJ. to be honest. However, posts regarding media interviews should be in the appropriate part of the thread : we have one dealing with media matters.


Please could we keep the discussion civil, and refrain from rudeness/verbal abuse/personal remarks about other posters, etc etc. otherwise I will be deleting the offending posts.  Thanks!

I agree to that part where you ask for it to be kept civil but on the rest I have to disagree mrswah. The finger was clearly pointed and CJ got more of an attack that Nine ever directed towards the wonderful Tabak

jixy

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2079 on: October 13, 2018, 12:18:08 PM »
If your daughter had been murdered would you want to take the stand? What state do you think her parents were in?

Only the feelings of Tabak seem to count on this thread it seems

jixy

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2080 on: October 13, 2018, 12:22:39 PM »
What has CJ got to do with Tabak? Well, he had been his landlord for over a year so probably knew him. And, no, I am not suggesting he was anything other than innocent!! Nor is anyone else. From what I have read, CJ took an interest in his tenants, and I would certainly have thought he would have heard if someone was screaming in the flats, or outside, or would have noticed someone behaving suspiciously, particularly if it was VT, whom he knew.

How the posts regarding CJ appeared, they didnt lean towards him only being a landlord. He has nothing to do with the murder but lots of attention and bad comments are still being directed his way.

How he chooses to deal with this experience he has been through, is down to him and him alone. Nine or anyone else on this forum cannot second guess who he could would or should feel. That is for CJ to decide.

As no one has been through the experience, How the heck can we presume to think how he would behave or judge him regardless.

His life was turned upside down in the worse way!

Offline justsaying

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2081 on: October 13, 2018, 12:35:30 PM »
How the posts regarding CJ appeared, they didnt lean towards him only being a landlord. He has nothing to do with the murder but lots of attention and bad comments are still being directed his way.

This is exactly how people end up being wrongly convicted/accused in the first place. The man has clearly been put through enough.

jixy

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2082 on: October 13, 2018, 12:40:39 PM »
This is exactly how people end up being wrongly convicted/accused in the first place. The man has clearly been put through enough.

Well said. Look at cases like Sam Hallam and how hearing the name Sam played it part in him being wrongly convicted.

I guess talking about CJ even now just deflects from the guilty Tabak or answering any further questions inc simple ones like how did the interest in the case start

It is very strange to say the least to just pick up a random case where no claim to MOJ is being made.

Every pointer towards his guilt including the stuff Tabak said himself is just brushed away

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2083 on: October 13, 2018, 12:56:04 PM »
I agree to that part where you ask for it to be kept civil but on the rest I have to disagree mrswah. The finger was clearly pointed and CJ got more of an attack that Nine ever directed towards the wonderful Tabak

IN REALITY :

Vincent Tabak is locked up where he belongs!

CJ appears to have overcome an awful lot and has moved on with his life.

Nine has doubts and has presented her opinions on this forum
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #2084 on: October 13, 2018, 12:58:38 PM »
I think you need to go back and read this thread, there have certainly been enough hints at him being guilty... What CJ did regarding the way he was treated by the police and the press has absolutely nothing to do with Tabak. Nor is it any of Nine's business. Nine's post had nothing to do with what CJ may or may not have heard, it was clearly discrediting his actions! I am just wondering how any of you would react had you all been treated in the same way as he was!

IN REALITY how will Nines post affect CJ? Please explain.
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation