Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 599620 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

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 #3030 on: November 23, 2018, 10:04:34 AM »
I think you are looking too hard, Nine !

Whether or not VT killed Joanna, is one thing, and , IMO, worthy of discussion.  However, all the people connected to the case exist, no question about that, and Joanna certainly existed, and was killed. I think they all lived where we were told they lived, too.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3031 on: November 23, 2018, 03:57:53 PM »
I think you are looking too hard, Nine !

Whether or not VT killed Joanna, is one thing, and , IMO, worthy of discussion.  However, all the people connected to the case exist, no question about that, and Joanna certainly existed, and was killed. I think they all lived where we were told they lived, too.

You're correct mrswah, I need to stay on track.... 

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3032 on: November 24, 2018, 08:46:42 AM »
If I have caused  offence I apologise, I have found the frustrations of this case has stopped me sometimes thinking rationally.. I have tried to work out what and why, nothing adds up...(imo) But I should go back....

I started with not understanding how Dr Vincent Tabak came to be charged with the Murder of Joanna Yeates and subsequently imprisoned for her Murder.... I having followed the case from when Joanna Yeates went Missing to CJ's arrest through to the trial of Dr Vincent Tabak and could not understand, without checking everyone whom may have been in contact with Joanna Yeates and what Joanna Yeates movements had been for a period of time, why the Police appeared to settle on that house..


What possible reason could there have been for them not to look seriously at anyone else, who may have known Joanna Yeates?  Investigations take a long time, but within 34 days we have had 2 arrests and one person charged, neither of whom would have known Joanna Yeates very well.... Dr Vincent Tabak according to trial, did not know Joanna Yeates, and CJ, as far as I am aware, only meet Joanna Yeates and Greg when they came to look at the flats as tenants..

34 days.... that is no time at all in which to wrap this case up.... They were given tips left right and centre... there were appeals, many many people must have given them information, that should have been followed up... But for some strange reason, they did not stray from that building... As for Dr Vincent Tabak, he was away the majority of the time....

Did they ignore information from the public? Did they look at Joanna Yeates work colleagues, friends, family etc.. They ordinarily start with those closest to the victim , eliminate them then work outwards.. If that is the case, how did the come to the conclusion that CJ was responsible in 5 days of finding her body? And then have Dr Vincent Tabak in their sights?

A phone call was made from Holland, apparently, but Ann Reddrop, had him in her sight in late December 2010...how??  What possibly could have given Ann Reddrop cause to even think that Dr Vincent Tabak was guilty of killing Joanna Yeates? Because of a phone call?? No.... it had to be before..(imo)

We must remember that the Police were looking for information, and I think they were looking for anything anyone could remember about that weekend, CJ himself gave a second statement.. He was arrested... Dr Vincent Tabak has been rung by DC Karen Thomas whilst he is away in Cambridge.... Why....

What information was DC Karen Thomas wanting to illicit from Dr Vincent Tabak, whilst he is in Cambridge? They have bounced between CJ and Dr Vincent Tabak without probable cause as far as I can see... Completely ignoring the fact that there are many other people whom could have been in contact with Joanna Yeates, people who were aware that Greg was away for the weekend...

Why not harass Peter Stanley? I am not saying Peter Stanley has anything to do with this, I am pointing out that Peter Stanley, helped start Greg's car and would be aware that Greg was away... Peter Stanley whom also assisted Police on the 31st December 2010 I believe, and had item taken from his house by DC Jon Hook...

But nothing comes of Peter Stanley.... Or maybe they wanted something to come from that, especially as we have CJ in custody at that time...

We have no idea whether or not Peter Stanley had even met Joanna Yeates, we are aware he met Greg, obviously at least at the time he started his car...

So why are the Police entering Peter Stanleys house on the 31st December 2010??? The very same day that they are apparently interviewing Dr Vincent Tabak in Holland??

This interview we are told takes place because of a phone call, a phone call about a car that changes position.. a phone call that takes place whilst CJ is in custody....  But we still have Ann Reddrops statement after trial, where she says to camera that they had been looking at Dr Vincent Tabak since late December 2010... why?

Why would they be searching Peter Stanley's house and him attending the Police station voluntarily on that date, when Ann Reddrop, has Dr Vincent Tabak in her sights?

It is something I haven't really contemplated, but Peter Stanley and Dr Vincent Tabak... what is the connection??

Why would they be taking forensic bags out of Peter Stanleys house and Interviewing him when CJ is in custody and Dr Vincent Tabak is being interviewed in Holland on the same day.... It could even be at the same time... I do not know what time  Dr Vincent Tabak was interviewed..

So 3 men, whom are connected to each other how?? neighbours and landlord...

Peter Stanley doesn't get mentioned at trial, he is referred to as a neighbour who helped start the car if I remember correctly.. But why are the Police at his home? What is the connection other than starting Greg's car??  Why did Jon Hook take forensic bags from Peter Stanleys home??

Joanna Yeates murder: police switch attention to second house
10:28PM GMT 31 Dec 2010

Quote
]Officers carrying forensics bags entered a £1.5 million detached house next door to the flat where the murdered landscape architect lived with her boyfriend, Greg Reardon.

They spent more than an hour speaking to the owner of the property, Peter Stanley, and his tenant, Laurence Penney, 41, and later left carrying a small number of items in a brown forensic bag.

Mr Penney, a design consultant, told The Daily Telegraph that he had been asked to account for his movements around the time of Miss Yeates’s disappearance. He said the questioning had been “routine” because he had only just returned home after a Christmas break in Europe.

Detectives took away for examination a maroon BMW car belonging to Mr Stanley, a 56-year-old mechanical engineer.

He drove the vehicle to a police station accompanied by a detective and was driven back about an hour later in a marked police car.

So we have Peter Stanley and Laurence Penney both being questioned by The Police and nothing of Laurence Penney is said any further... unless you were on the forum at the time and he was discussed.... But according to the article he is away at what must be the relevant times....

But why the forensic bags?

The Police need probable cause again to search a house and take away items that they believe to be linked to the Murder of Joanna Yeates... so why were they there?? Seriously, what possible items could be in Peter Stanleys house??

They never linked Dr Vincent Tabak to Peter Stanley, the man whom stood trial for the murder of Joanna Yeates... Did that little piece of information slip past the defences eyes?

I do not understand why The Defence didn't question Peter Stanley and ask why and what the Police were looking for in his home...

That brings us to 20 days....
20 days when they have done and dusted this case.... And apparently it was because of the Holland Interview... I don't believe it personally.... I am still stuck with what made them check Peter Stanleys home...

Did they believe Peter Stanley helped CJ?? were they wanting to arrest Peter Stanley?? Did they take a DNA sample from Peter Stanley?? is that why he went voluntarily to the Police station?? Did he go to the Police station to eliminate himself from the inquiry??

CJ was eliminated by his DNA, as far as I remember, and if they were talking killers, maybe they believed that CJ had help... And as Peter Stanley helped start Gregs car, I can see why they would want to eliminate him...

CJ is released on bail on the 1st January 2011 and we now have 19 days until they arrest Dr Vincent Tabak... We remember that at The Leveson DCI Phil Jones tells us about a trainer that was found under a kickboard behind a sink in that house with blood spots upon it... and that was the reason that they kept CJ on bail until march 2011...

They obviously still were pursuing CJ until they released him from bail.... according to the statement that DCI Phil Jones makes at the Leveson...
So how comes they arrested Dr Vincent Tabak? Were they convinced CJ had something to do with Joanna Yeates demise? Did they decide it had to be CJ because of his second witness statement and the fact he had the keys to the property?

Was Dr Vincent Tabak unfortunate because he had put himself in the middle of the investigation , by making the phone call from Holland??

They have absolutely no idea at this point , when Joanna Yeates was killed and when she went Missing... There is nothing pointing to the date and time... So why Dr Vincent Tabak?? He ends up with a small window of opportunity on the Friday 17th December 2010, to even commit this crime and nothing to support his arrest...

What happened to Peter Stanley?? What happened to the evidence they took from his home?? And why they took evidence from the home of someone who had no connection to the crime?

What possible evidence could be in Peter Stanleys home.. The jump leads are all I can think of....  The only thing that connects Peter Stanley to Greg and CJ and that house...

I can summise why this may be important... who touched the jump leads etc... But it doesn't connect Dr Vincent Tabak to Joanna Yeates or Peter Stanley... And it is only important if we have still got CJ in the mix....

A 19 day countdown, where Police must still have a huge number of people to Interview, yet they don't... Dr Vincent Tabak has moved out of the property due to all of the Police activity and what evidence have the Police got?

None... DNA... which as stated could be explained away..... It could have been planted as Dr Vincent Tabak suggested.... he is not at the property.... We have no idea whom had access to the properties over that period... we saw random builders going in and out, but who else gained access to Joanna Yeates property and Dr Vincent Tabak's property?

We have the Crime watch program being filmed, and 300 calls or lines of inquiry on the 17th/18th January 2011.. the Yeates next do another appeal... Straight away we have the sobbing girl ring because of The Yeates appeal and Dr Vincent Tabak is then arrested....

On what possible grounds did they arrest him on?

They haven't checked those lines of inquiries that came in after the Yeates appeal, they couldn't have had time. But out of nowhere, they arrest a man who didn't know Joanna Yeates , had been away working in America, when she moved in and had been at home a matter of days, before he apparently decided to kill her...

Doesn't make any sense... They haven't interviewed or checked out Joanna Yeates 200 Facebook friends by this time either..

Had they put all their eggs in one basket pursuing CJ and believed someone had to help him? Is this the reason that Dr Vincent Tabak was arrested?

To this day I cannot comprehend, how in such a short space of time without checking alibi's and friends etc of Joanna Yeates they arrested Dr Vincent Tabak... Especially as they had been busy checking Peter Stanley, whom as we know has no connection to Dr Vincent Tabak... he can't have or else we would have had a statement from him at trial...

The computer evidence I am not convinced of....  two of the searches I have all ready pointed out where done when Dr Vincent Tabak wasn't even at home... he went to collect Tanja... And the computer evidence wasn't scrutinized at trial...

I don't know or understand why Dr Vincent Tabak pled guilty to Manslaughter... I do not know why he stated nothing contrary to that at trial... But his story on the stand is just that.... It sort of fits with the newspaper reports of the time, but it doesn't convince me that it is true...

Will we ever know the truth about the murder of Joanna Yeates or will we forever be made to try and swallow a story told on the stand by a man whom couldn't answer over 80 questions put to him... A man who stood trial without all the evidence in this case being used, that should have connected him to Joanna Yeates and that Flat!!


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8234570/Joanna-Yeates-murder-neighbour-interviewed-by-police-over-boyfriends-flat-battery-incident.html

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3033 on: November 25, 2018, 09:43:04 AM »
MTW... Just noticed this event he is doing....  Firstly he spell 'Yeates" incorrectly, but that is neither here nor there, or is it... i had seen Yeates spelt yates before and wondered which was the correct spelling....

 I want to know  what he did to cover this case?? There's a couple of clips to camera that I have posted before, but  other than that I cannot find anything he has done with regards this case...


Was he the criminologist the Police used?  He has tweeted some points on the case at the time, but unless he has deleted some tweets there really isn't a lot that he has stated on the case via twitter.. As I said, when it came to mentioning Greg Reardon , there is only one tweet about him...

Quote
Mark Williams-Thomas

Verified account
 
@mwilliamsthomas

RT @robcatherall: - expecting a statement on behalf of jo yeates' boyfriend greg reardon after 3 - we'll bring it in live #SkyNews1:41 PM - 1 Jan 2011


I would have imagined there to be many many more tweets in regard to Greg.... Where's the tweet about Greg being a witness and not a suspect?? Or the loving relationship Greg had with Joanna Yeates,

Why is he doing a talk about the case?  Google MTW and Joanna Yeates and there are a couple of references to him...

I always hope that there is someone out there who can shed new light on the case, and take interest when anyone writes a book or says something publicly, in the vain hope that something I may have missed comes to light.

But I cannot see how MWT is going to be of use, if he had nothing to do with the case...


Quote
Mark Williams-Thomas

Verified account
 
@mwilliamsthomas


26 November: Come and hear me talk about some of my investigations  - including  exposing Jimmy Savile, interviewing Oscar Pistorius, interviewing killer Stuart Hazel and investigating the disappearance of Madeline McCann and the Alps murders.

8:26 AM - 26 Oct 2018



Quote
This Funzing Experience:
BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL!
WAS: £15
NOW: £12
What is like to be called into some of the most infamous cases in the world? How was Jimmy Savile finally exposed? Was Oscar Pistorius in-fact innocent? Join us for a gripping talk from one of the most sought after criminologists & investigative reporters, Mark Williams-Thomas, and get under the skin of some of the most high-profile cases the world has ever seen.

Multi award winning investigative reporter and Criminologist Mark Williams-Thomas has far-reaching experience of working at the centre of very high-profile investigations.

Mark’s ability to get exclusive access and interviews with key people is unprecedented, beating the world media to secure the only interview with Oscar Pistorius and finally exposing Jimmy Savile; which has since become the biggest media story of the decade.

Over the past 10 years Mark has covered nearly all the major criminal investigations in the media - from the abduction of Madeleine McCann, the faked abductions of Shannon Mathews to the murders of Tia Sharp and Joanna Yates to the family slayed in their car in the French Alps.

Mark’s determination to succeed is both empowering and captivating – failure is never an option. He is not scared to ask the difficult questions and put his body on the line to get to the truth. He is a master of detail and careful planning, with a unique able to think quickly on his feet. He is at his best when under pressure.

This talk will have you captivated and inspired – giving you the inside stories of the many cases Mark has covered and answering your biggest questions.

Venue: International Students House, Marylebone

Doors: 7pm / Talk starts: 7.30pm.

Earlybird Tickets: £12 (SOLD OUT) / Standard Tickets: £15

*Please see venue website for admission (age restrictions) or accessibility information. Our talks may be filmed for promotional purposes.

**************************************************************************************

Funzing Talks is a new concept which aims to re-invent your after work drinks. We've pulled together an impressive array of leading entrepreneurs, intellectuals, bright thinkers and incredible individuals to inspire your evenings.

Held in a hand picked range of bars across London, a Funzing Talks event makes the perfect after work activity.

Delve into a totally new subject and challenge your perspectives over a beer with like-minded Londoners. Funzing has always encouraged you to do something different with your free time, so we say do just that - you never know where it may lead you!

Experience includes:
One-off opportunity to hear fascinating insights from one of the UK's most high-profile investigators
Fascinating lecture
High profile speaker
Trendy London venue
Unique after-work event

I am now going back over his tweets...

Quote
Mark Williams-Thomas

Verified account
 
@mwilliamsthomas

@BrianCathcart: I've interviewed Chris Jefferies, the Bristol ex-teacher bulk-libelled in the Jo Yeates case. Quite a story. FT Sat mag

6:12 PM - 7 Oct 2011

I read that wrong... I thought MWT meant he had interviewed CJ....  But then I wondered if he did? It made me question the docu-drama's and wonder if MWT had a hand in making them??

 Did MTW make the docu-drama's? or have involvement making the docu-dramas?? Or was he the Police Advisor??

MTW tweets about CJ... the date of the tweet is the 7th October 2011..... The FT article is the 8th October 2011

It reminded me of the interview of CJ on youtube, when across the screen flashes ...
"Murder at Christmas" Crime and Investigation Network.... But it was as if the title in the corner hadn't been finished... it was a temp title... I have posted about this before.... This interview was published on the 28th October 2011 on youtube, the day of sentencing for Dr Vincent Tabak... And the released date for TV is RealCrimeUK
Published on Nov 24, 2011


It has always stumped me how a production could have happened so quickly after the trial.... I thought these TV programs take time to produce, that was why when I had seen the 28th Oct 2011 interview with CJ, I couldn't understand why it said "Crime and Investigation"... " Murder at Christmas"

Quote
Joanna Yeates Landlord Christopher Jefferies's Living Hell after Being Wrongly Accused Of Murder
12,760 views

Bren Ryan
Published on Oct 28, 2011

This is weird... I have got to get this right.... It's important.....  Because all of the Docu-dramas appear to have been made at the same time to me... They did not change.... The Count Down to Murder docu-dramas, which I have pointed out many times is wrong... i thought it had to be made before, but how could it?/

This is really confusing....

I do not remember ever seeing MWT at Bristol Crown Court when the trial is going on,I say that I mean from the images we have of this trial.... I do not see him doing any piece to camera.....  But he says in his funzing blurb, that he's involved in the case.... Did he have involvement??

So how was he involved?? Or is he just saying that??

My heads spinning... I'm trying to remember what was stated in the video's... And why I keep finding what I believe to be new information that differs from trial.... 'The Washing Pile"... for instance...


Going back to the Leveson.....

Quote
Mr Christopher Jefferies
Yes, obviously I have no other experience of bringing defamation proceedings.


Mr Jay
No, I'm sure you haven't. I be sincerely hope you have no future experience of it either. Thank you.

You tell us in your witness statement that there was one interview you gave and that was to the Financial Times, Mr Brian Cathcart.


Mr Christopher Jefferies
Indeed, Professor Brian Cathcart.


Mr Jay
Pardon me, you're absolutely right. His article is in our bundle CJ1 at page 27.


Mr Christopher Jefferies
Yes.


Mr Jay
It was published in the Financial Times on 8 October 2011. This followed an interview with you; is that right, Mr Jefferies?

Then Mr Jay asks:
Quote
Mr Jay
Is that to date the only interview you've given, Mr Jefferies?


Mr Christopher Jefferies
No. I did give an interview for ITN News. One of the reasons that I gave that was that the interviewer happened to be somebody whom at one stage I taught.


Mr Jay
Thank you. In terms of the legal process, the contempt proceedings have been determined. There's ongoing litigation against the police.

May I deal with the issue of the Press Complaints Commission?

This date of this Leveson inquiry is 28th November 2011.... CJ clearly states he only did an interview for ITV news...  When I look this is an ITV interview I find before November 2011..... This interview is posted on the 28th October 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsZnfi5oM5o


But as I have stated in this post... the "Murder at Christmas" interview is posted on the 28th October 2011, making the statement that CJ gave to the Leveson incorrect.... (imo) As looking at both of the youtube videos CJ is wearing different clothing and appears to be at a different address in the 'Murder at Christmas" interview...

When was that interview done?

Mr Christopher Jefferies
No. I did give an interview for ITN News. One of the reasons that I gave that was that the interviewer happened to be somebody whom at one stage I taught.


Quote
ITV News
Published on Oct 28, 2011
Before Vincent Tabak became prime suspect, Jo's neighbour Christopher Jefferies was arrested by police.

Although innocent he was vilified by the press and portrayed as creepy and lewd.

Speaking exclusively to ITV News Mr Jefferies described it as the "most difficult time of my life".

"A lot of [police] time and attention was taken up with me...It's absolutely clear that the focus should have been elsewhere," he said.

On the way treated by the media, Mr Jefferies said "reading [reports about me] in such a concentrated and pointed form for the first time was very upsetting indeed."

"There was an entirely foreign personality that was being foisted on me."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsZnfi5oM5o

Who did he teach??


This is why the case confuses me, why the docu-dramas confuse me... Why doesn't Greg appear in the Docu-dramas??

The date and time stamps of those interviews on those docu-dramas needs verifying... I cannot see how CJ is interviewed about a case before the case has completed... And the ITV interview therefore cannot be exclusive.... If that is indeed the ITV interview that CJ is referring too....
Quote
Mark Williams-Thomas

Verified account
 
@mwilliamsthomas

What's Happened to the Landlord? & Why didn't police arrest Mr. Tabak earlier? Sky Crime Correspondent blog #joyeates http://bit.ly/gE8ijh

9:20 PM - 23 Jan 2011

This tweet got me when I first saw it...... Why would the Police arrest Dr Vincent Tabak earlier?? Why would he say such a thing... (Of course the link doesn't work)

There was nothing to indicate at any time before that Dr Vincent Tabak had any contact with Joanna Yeates, other than living next door.... His behaviour had not been reported... No-one knew of his whereabouts until his arrest and everything else was at trial....

Why is MTW is asking why  Dr Vincent Tabak wasn't arrested sooner?? Why would he even know that he was a suspect?  Just because Dr Vincent Tabak was charged, doesn't mean the case is done and dusted by then....

This is very disconcerting.... And people wonder why I question everything..... and why I make crazy statements....

Who is Dr Vincent Tabak?? Is he an Innocent victim in this crazy case?? Is he made up?? Or is he a scapegoat for this murder....

I cannot fathom how the TV interview and the other interview that is published on the 28th October 2011 is of the same time, if it is supposed to be interviews after a trial....

Did MWT have any involvement with the docu-drama's?? When were they actually filmed.??  Is that the reason Dr Vincent Tabak is always referred to as him/he in the docu- dramas, until we get the Count Down to Murder program, where they made before trial... ????

Which in itself it weird, as all of the info is incorrect basically in that program.....

I go around in circles trying to be rational about this, but I then find weird information, that basically shouldn't have happened before a trial has completed....

It appears I am still chasing a ghost....


I keep re-reading my post before I post t on the forum.... I have even gone and bought breakfast before i post it.... And i am getting more and more annoyed as I walk to get breakfast, when I go over in my mind this post....

I have spent a lot of time on this, thinking i was helping a man whom is in prison.... But i end up going back to is he even in prison??

I am not posting anymore.... let someone sort out this cack... I have had enough, It is not what it appeared in the beginning, when i joined the facebook forum and on here.... I am gullible.... I am an idiot.... I am stupid... I do not know why I post.... There is no need for me to do it, anymore....

Complete B******S....  rubbish, crap.... maybe somewhere in all this someone has committed a crime.... i don't know... i am might annoyed with myself, wasting my time on what i thought was trying to help someone in prison, who didn't have a voice.....

But I do not know if that is even true anymore!!!  And enough is enough....  I have sent my family bonkers over this case... And myself....  Yesterday i felt willing to start again... But sod that for a game of soldiers....

What on earth is this case really about!!!!! Who is this case really about!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs
https://uk.funzing.com/funz/bf-savile-pistorius-mh370-meet-the-investigator-19716
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/1055722250953986048
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/21199405377921026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFgGbNtF0wA
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/122358677175939073

https://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-28-november-2011/mr-christopher-jefferies

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/29287364438261760

Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3034 on: November 25, 2018, 11:33:44 AM »
MTW... Just noticed this event he is doing....  Firstly he spell 'Yeates" incorrectly, but that is neither here nor there, or is it... i had seen Yeates spelt yates before and wondered which was the correct spelling....

 I want to know  what he did to cover this case?? There's a couple of clips to camera that I have posted before, but  other than that I cannot find anything he has done with regards this case...


Was he the criminologist the Police used?  He has tweeted some points on the case at the time, but unless he has deleted some tweets there really isn't a lot that he has stated on the case via twitter.. As I said, when it came to mentioning Greg Reardon , there is only one tweet about him...


I would have imagined there to be many many more tweets in regard to Greg.... Where's the tweet about Greg being a witness and not a suspect?? Or the loving relationship Greg had with Joanna Yeates,

Why is he doing a talk about the case?  Google MTW and Joanna Yeates and there are a couple of references to him...

I always hope that there is someone out there who can shed new light on the case, and take interest when anyone writes a book or says something publicly, in the vain hope that something I may have missed comes to light.

But I cannot see how MWT is going to be of use, if he had nothing to do with the case...




I am now going back over his tweets...

I read that wrong... I thought MWT meant he had interviewed CJ....  But then I wondered if he did? It made me question the docu-drama's and wonder if MWT had a hand in making them??

 Did MTW make the docu-drama's? or have involvement making the docu-dramas?? Or was he the Police Advisor??

MTW tweets about CJ... the date of the tweet is the 7th October 2011..... The FT article is the 8th October 2011

It reminded me of the interview of CJ on youtube, when across the screen flashes ...
"Murder at Christmas" Crime and Investigation Network.... But it was as if the title in the corner hadn't been finished... it was a temp title... I have posted about this before.... This interview was published on the 28th October 2011 on youtube, the day of sentencing for Dr Vincent Tabak... And the released date for TV is RealCrimeUK
Published on Nov 24, 2011


It has always stumped me how a production could have happened so quickly after the trial.... I thought these TV programs take time to produce, that was why when I had seen the 28th Oct 2011 interview with CJ, I couldn't understand why it said "Crime and Investigation"... " Murder at Christmas"

This is weird... I have got to get this right.... It's important.....  Because all of the Docu-dramas appear to have been made at the same time to me... They did not change.... The Count Down to Murder docu-dramas, which I have pointed out many times is wrong... i thought it had to be made before, but how could it?/

This is really confusing....

I do not remember ever seeing MWT at Bristol Crown Court when the trial is going on,I say that I mean from the images we have of this trial.... I do not see him doing any piece to camera.....  But he says in his funzing blurb, that he's involved in the case.... Did he have involvement??

So how was he involved?? Or is he just saying that??

My heads spinning... I'm trying to remember what was stated in the video's... And why I keep finding what I believe to be new information that differs from trial.... 'The Washing Pile"... for instance...


Going back to the Leveson.....

Then Mr Jay asks:
This date of this Leveson inquiry is 28th November 2011.... CJ clearly states he only did an interview for ITV news...  When I look this is an ITV interview I find before November 2011..... This interview is posted on the 28th October 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsZnfi5oM5o


But as I have stated in this post... the "Murder at Christmas" interview is posted on the 28th October 2011, making the statement that CJ gave to the Leveson incorrect.... (imo) As looking at both of the youtube videos CJ is wearing different clothing and appears to be at a different address in the 'Murder at Christmas" interview...

When was that interview done?

Mr Christopher Jefferies
No. I did give an interview for ITN News. One of the reasons that I gave that was that the interviewer happened to be somebody whom at one stage I taught.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsZnfi5oM5o

Who did he teach??


This is why the case confuses me, why the docu-dramas confuse me... Why doesn't Greg appear in the Docu-dramas??

The date and time stamps of those interviews on those docu-dramas needs verifying... I cannot see how CJ is interviewed about a case before the case has completed... And the ITV interview therefore cannot be exclusive.... If that is indeed the ITV interview that CJ is referring too....
This tweet got me when I first saw it...... Why would the Police arrest Dr Vincent Tabak earlier?? Why would he say such a thing... (Of course the link doesn't work)

There was nothing to indicate at any time before that Dr Vincent Tabak had any contact with Joanna Yeates, other than living next door.... His behaviour had not been reported... No-one knew of his whereabouts until his arrest and everything else was at trial....

Why is MTW is asking why  Dr Vincent Tabak wasn't arrested sooner?? Why would he even know that he was a suspect?  Just because Dr Vincent Tabak was charged, doesn't mean the case is done and dusted by then....

This is very disconcerting.... And people wonder why I question everything..... and why I make crazy statements....

Who is Dr Vincent Tabak?? Is he an Innocent victim in this crazy case?? Is he made up?? Or is he a scapegoat for this murder....

I cannot fathom how the TV interview and the other interview that is published on the 28th October 2011 is of the same time, if it is supposed to be interviews after a trial....

Did MWT have any involvement with the docu-drama's?? When were they actually filmed.??  Is that the reason Dr Vincent Tabak is always referred to as him/he in the docu- dramas, until we get the Count Down to Murder program, where they made before trial... ????

Which in itself it weird, as all of the info is incorrect basically in that program.....

I go around in circles trying to be rational about this, but I then find weird information, that basically shouldn't have happened before a trial has completed....

It appears I am still chasing a ghost....


I keep re-reading my post before I post t on the forum.... I have even gone and bought breakfast before i post it.... And i am getting more and more annoyed as I walk to get breakfast, when I go over in my mind this post....

I have spent a lot of time on this, thinking i was helping a man whom is in prison.... But i end up going back to is he even in prison??

I am not posting anymore.... let someone sort out this cack... I have had enough, It is not what it appeared in the beginning, when i joined the facebook forum and on here.... I am gullible.... I am an idiot.... I am stupid... I do not know why I post.... There is no need for me to do it, anymore....

Complete B******S....  rubbish, crap.... maybe somewhere in all this someone has committed a crime.... i don't know... i am might annoyed with myself, wasting my time on what i thought was trying to help someone in prison, who didn't have a voice.....

But I do not know if that is even true anymore!!!  And enough is enough....  I have sent my family bonkers over this case... And myself....  Yesterday i felt willing to start again... But sod that for a game of soldiers....

What on earth is this case really about!!!!! Who is this case really about!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs
https://uk.funzing.com/funz/bf-savile-pistorius-mh370-meet-the-investigator-19716
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/1055722250953986048
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/21199405377921026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFgGbNtF0wA
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/122358677175939073

https://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-28-november-2011/mr-christopher-jefferies

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/29287364438261760

I have a similar quandary about you - do you really think these things are is this a wind up?

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 #3035 on: November 25, 2018, 01:59:54 PM »
Vincent Tabak is a real person, and he is in prison serving a life sentence for the murder of Joanna Yeates !!  I have no doubt about that. Whether or not he did murder her is another matter, but I have no doubt he exists and is serving a sentence.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3036 on: November 26, 2018, 10:07:46 AM »
Vincent Tabak is a real person, and he is in prison serving a life sentence for the murder of Joanna Yeates !!  I have no doubt about that. Whether or not he did murder her is another matter, but I have no doubt he exists and is serving a sentence.

Again thank you mrswah...  I have wondered many times why no-one speaks of this case.. And I try and put two and two together and make 5..

From the start of this case, everyone believed that the boyfriend did it... He was the obvious suspect, as it is the normal course of events in most violent crimes in the home... What information was leaked to the media at the time and discussed on forums lead everyone to believe he must be the suspect..

The finding of the rucksack on the dining table at 11:00pm, the phoning of his mother first... The time it took to ring the police because he believed something had happened to his girlfriend.. These were some of the reason that people had concentrated on Greg and questioned what happened in the flat... Not only that, there was talk of Joanna Yeates being talked of in the past tense and at this point she is a Missing person....

We have a young woman missing and The police are behaving as if there it is a Murder Investigation, the attention drawn to this case is huge....

We move forward, we have CJ arrested out of nowhere... we have media interest and stories of what type of person he is.. And I presume many thought the police must have the correct man, because they know what they are doing...

But on the forums, I think it wasn't as clear cut... many still believed it had to be Greg... They wanted to know how The Police had verified his story that he was in Sheffield, and as his family in Sheffield were not saying anything, I believe it only added to the speculation...  Not just that, they questioned why Joanna Yeates had not gone to Sheffield with this boyfriend.... They had moved in together, they were besotted with each other, they were happy...

There appeared not to be a good reason for Joanna Yeates not to go to Sheffield... I think this gave to rumour that their relationship was not as solid as one might believe,... And talk of Joanna Yeates having another boyfriend started...

But in the event of CJ's arrest, it took the focus away, and i think some thought the Police had their man.... But within no time at all, CJ is released on bail.... A shadow still hangs over him as being on bail, isn't being cleared in some peoples eyes...

On forums posters had looked at the relationships of people on their Facebook pages that they could access, they were trying to see what others had to say...

Then from out of nowhere, Dr Vincent Tabak is arrested, and everyone is mightily surprised, they are wanting to know what is what... They go to his Facebook page to discover that his apparent friends are leaving his page like rats leaving a sinking ship....

Now I cannot remember if there had been 2 Facebook pages for Dr Vincent Tabak, but it had been commented on that it cannot be Dr Vincent Tabak's Facebook page , because it hadn't long been set up...  So the information that was there for people to view was questioned...

Anyone can set up a Facebook page, anyone could add imaginary friends, there was nothing that emphatically proved that this was indeed Dr Vincent Tabak's Facebook page....

And the more I think about it, the more I believe that this Facebook page of Dr Vincent Tabak's may hold the key...

I have used the internet to try and shed light on this case... How images have been changed and how video's contradict each other....  I have tried too hard to find meaning in what people may have posted of reports in the media and it has clouded my judgement sometimes...

I have felt alone without having anyone really to bounce information off, in a constructive way... (no disrespect intended)...  And I have feverishly looked at anything that may explain why this case is wrong....

I am not an investigator, or a researcher... I am just  someone who has tried their best to fathom what this is all about.... And has been sent on a goose chase by some of the information....

But I suppose if i hadn't put the effort in to this i wouldn't have uncovered the discrepencies in the video's statements of people whom i would have expected to know the facts of what happened, and their role in this case...

I have taken stall in the number that was posted on a website, that in all honesty I do not know if that was really Dr Vincent Tabak's number at The Old Bailey... I spend time making sure i link the information and screenshot the information that I find.... So as to support what I have stated...

But there could be more going on about that number and The Old Bailey and honestly, someone could for whatever reason of their own printed this number for another purpose....  I keep talking about the origin of the information and I do not know the origin of that information, the closest I have come to is a certain Investigator whom tweeted on the 4th May 2011 that Dr Vincent Tabak was going to be at the Old Bailey, when everyone else was expecting him to be at Bristol Crown Court... 

This person got their information from where?? How did they know before anyone else that this was the case?? The had to be close to the Investigation to see that was what was happening...  I don't know if the Yeates had actually been informed of this before also, or they had been scouring the internet and had come across that information themselves....

Most of the time and certainly in the beginning of me posting was i believed so much information had been removed from the Internet.... And was suspicious of the intentions for this... I wanted to put back what i felt had been removed, and have as much information in one place, so if anyone really wanted to take a proper look at this case... The information was there for all to see....

I tried to understand why the defence didn't defend their client.... I didn't and don't know law, so it made that difficult.... I have been up against the fact i do not know law and have tried to support any arguments that I have put forward...

How did we have 3 suspects in this case, 3 suspects in 34 days.... 3 suspects whom needed checking and the information needed verifying as to what these peoples movements had been over the relevant time... And us not knowing what the relevant time actually was....

Not only did we have 3 suspects but we had volumes of information being given by the public about what they had seen or what they may have known.... Family friends and acquaintances of Joanna Yeates who all needed to be asked various questions in case they knew something of importance... It had been stated that Joanna Yeates may have been abducted, which brings everyone who knows Joanna Yeates into this inquiry... They may have vital information, which could lead to Joanna Yeates abductors... This doesn't appear to have been done....

That house was all that the Police concentrated on and for what reason I do not know....

3 suspects in a matter of a 34 days... It was like pass the hot potato.... Or more like someone was pointing the finger.... Out of the 3 of them Dr Vincent Tabak in the eyes of the public seemed the less likely person to have committed this crime...  The boyfriend obviously if procedure is followed, is the obvious one, followed by CJ as they decided that he could gain access to the property and also knew that Greg was away....

But is that enough to arrest someone?? Should information be verified??  Shouldn't other lines of inquiry still be ongoing...??

With the circumstances of what was made available in the media, it seemed in all likely hood that Joanna Yeates knew her killer... she had either invited them in to her home or she had meet them somewhere...  The fact that items were found in her home did not prove that she had reached her home.... Even though The Police told the media that they believed that this was the case....

Forums were rife with suggestions that they believed that the Police ignored, and knew of CCTV being available which would show Joanna Yeates last known movements...

Many were amazed when Dr Vincent Tabak had been arrested, and even more so when he was charged... They checked his Facebook page, me also.. And could see his friends disappearing which only added to the idea that he must have some involvement and the Police must have information to tie him to Joanna Yeates death as his friends appeared to have abandoned him....

But calming down and really thinking about this, that Facebook page of Dr Vincent Tabak's could have been fake... and all of the friends he apparently had could also have been fake... Once he's arrested and named people were drawn to check out his page... I cannot remember the date of his page being made, but I do not think it was that old...

You have everyone following this case through social media and anything that The Media printed online keeping up to date with what had been released.... I always felt that Dr Vincent Tabak was made a scapegoat... I could be wrong, there may have been an even more elaborate plan... I have no idea...

For Dr Vincent Tabak to have killed Joanna Yeates he needed access to her Flat, and I do not believe that a young woman who is scared and worried about being left on her own would open the door to a complete stranger, whether or not they are a neighbour... The facts at trial, are only what had been presented in the media, and nothing different came to trial... Anyone can make a scenario out of information given, as I have proved with my many wild and wonderful theories... And that is the point....

The trial should have put to bed any questions many people had, it should have had something more than what we were already aware of... Something other than a man saying he did it, without concrete evidence to support this...

If someone was trying make Dr Vincent Tabak a scapegoat, they had to be involved somewhere along the line.... and Dr Vincent Tabak's Facebook page may be the clue to this....

Social media has been key in this case....(imo) It was used against Dr Vincent Tabak and his texts were also used, as if we are to swallow the idea that he needed to text Tanja to create an alibi...
Asda's CCTV would prove that, and as he is a man that knows about buildings and the flow of people through building, he would also have been aware of CCTV being used in these buildings... He would therefore only need to be caught on CCTV, to show what he was doing at any one time...

But we are told it is the texts that he is using to create his alibi, which is nonsense to me....

So what happened to Dr Vincent Tabak's Facebook , why was that not used at trial?? why were we not privy to the posts that Dr Vincent Tabak must have sent at that time and right up until his arrest...  Did his friends not talk to him on Facebook??

Now I really do not know whether or not he did have an original Facebook page.... I remember when I was on the Facebook Forum there was talk about his page and then someone pointed out, If memory serves me correctly that it couldn't be his page as the dates were to recent....

But I am trying to go back 7 years nearly 8 years and what I possibly viewed and what I read on the forum....  I could go and look at the posts.. mrswah has made available the information from that time... But I am at this moment in time writing from memory and maybe after I will use what was stated on the forum....

If someone was trying to lay the blame on someone else for this Murder, then creating Facebook pages and making suggestions that Joanna Yeates and Dr Vincent Tabak should know each other from functions to do with their work, it creates an idea in the minds of some that maybe they knew each other more intimately seeing as there was talk of Joanna Yeates maybe having a relationship outside the one with Greg... Fueling the fire as to what was really going on in Joanna Yeates life....

Who ever killed Joanna Yeates I believe had contacts who helped them.... And a lazy Police force who were not really looking at the facts, but taking someones word as to what was what and being pointed into a direction they were only too happy to go....

I maybe need to put more store in the Facebook page of Dr Vincent Tabak... And maybe this is where the truth lies... If it can be shown who set up his Facebook page, then maybe we get a little closer as to whom was trying to make Dr Vincent Tabak a scapegoat, taking the finger of suspicion away from the real culprit....

Facebook is the key... I believe that it must be.... And all of the names that are on the Facebook pages ie, groups or Facebook forums, should also show us that this is a reason for it....

The Facebook Missing group, was set up for more than one reason I believe, it is and had collected so much information, It will and does show that names from the Facebook Forum and The Missing group were similar....

I know I noticed that part of my name was used on the Facebook Missing group, and was surprised to see it there... I have talked about how the two groups had similar names and couldn't understand why this had happened...

But maybe the point of it was that someone was keeping an eye open, someone was trying to show us about all of the Fake Facebook names that were all over the groups at the time...

It is more simple, mrswah is correct.... I just got carried away with the idea, that there was a lot more to it than I thought... And couldn't understand why nothing made sense....

Isn't there a saying of give someone enough rope and they'll hang themselves...

I think that this is what this may partly be about... There has been someone plying the internet with false information, people making false names and trying to associate themselves with the case....

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3037 on: November 26, 2018, 10:08:17 AM »
Continued......

In the sense that someone like me being unsuspecting has not until now really thought about this in that way... Because The Media didn't comment on this case I thought there must be a gagging order.... Well maybe they have just been waiting for the right time.... I do not know....

Dr Vincent Tabak could be in prison for a crime he didn't commit, I have always believed that based on what was lacking in this case and trial.... It is always easy to convict on a confession... But is it true....

What ever one believes about Dr Vincent Tabak, one should question this case, and why the Police ignored so many lines of inquiry and why everyone appeared to be happy that a man is in prison for a crime he could not have committed in the way that has been stated....

I suppose someone must have decided that no one would check or cross reference the information that is around the internet.. But I have... maybe not always coming to the correct conclusion, but you have to remember, I have no idea of law... I have never pretended that I have....  I have no education to speak of... But I have life skills and a strong belief that the judicial system need to be fair... And not fill our prisons with Innocent people just to get a conviction.....Allowing a person free to maybe kill again.....

My lack of experience and education , shows through my posts, but I wasn't trying to show whether I am clever or not... I have said  many times it is not about me... I do not want fame or fortune and quite frankly have spent all this time writing for zero anything... I haven't asked for anything... I just want fair....

Why would I want of make money of the back of the death of a poor murdered girl?? What purpose would that serve?? It wouldn't reflect my beliefs.... It wouldn't reflect that my intentions are about what I have always stated.... And my only concern is that I like fair, and started writing about this case on this forum for that reason...

So no... I will not write a book... (or have a ghost writer) I will not say who I am... I do not need to.... I just want and always have wanted what is fair... Plain and simple....

Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction had never sat well with me.... Maybe it has with others, but myself no.... And the idea that at the end of trial we have suddenly an explosion of information about what his character was is even more suspicious to me... It plants clearly in the publics mind that he must have done it.... He's a monster and to boot we will show you just what a monster he is and inform the public that Child Pornographic images where found on his computer....

It closes down discussion, it make him an untouchable an undesirable in anyones eyes, who would want to associate themselves publicly with this type of man??
No-one...
It should have secured  Dr Vincent Tabak's fate forever... It should have sealed his image in the minds of most as the monster who killed Joanna Yeates....

But the question has to be ... why would someone feel the need to monster a person after conviction, when none of this apparent evidence had been brought to trial... Where we have no foundation for these allegations other than talk in the papers.... Well talk is cheap as they say... Or costly... If it means that someone has lost their freedom because of it....

I am truly sorry for my out bursts... I have been consumed with this case , knowing something isn't right, but just not being able to put must finger on it... And the reasons that people did not really comment have frustrated me no end, but there has to be a greater reason for that.....

What is evident in society now and in the distant past , if someone labels you a paedophile, there is virtually no coming back from that, even if you are Innocent... The idea that this type of crime is associated with someone makes everyone stand well clear for fear of being labelled themselves.... It is the cherry on the cake in someones eyes... A slam dunk... To secure the gullible public into believing what ever they are told about a person... They will run for the hills.....

Everyone naturally would be fearful, to associate with such people or even put themselves out there as being some type of supporter of this person or that.... And I believe that is why telling us that Dr Vincent Tabak is such a person, it cemented in those peoples minds that he must have killed Joanna Yeates....

For me ... no... If he had indeed been involved in the images to do with children, then arrest and charge him for these images... I am no supporter of people who commit such acts... But I am a supporter of people being convicted for a crime  that they did commit and not have them in prison for a crime they didn't...  And any false allegations that are made in relation to this type of crime need to be addressed....

Proper supporting evidence is needed for arresting and charging people... Guilty pleas for what ever reason people may be doing this is not good enough... The guilty pleas has to be supported and Allegations of such a nature about children, need even more careful scrutiny... Peoples lives have been ruined because of allegations that are unfounded...

So I am at the beginning again... I have highlighted many things in this case in my strange way....

And just to clarify....I am connected to nobody.... I know nobody connected to this case... I am simply a woman ,who has never been happy with Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction.... It's as simple as that......

And I hope you can understand why I have been so frustrated.... Making outrageous statement sometimes.... No-one should be in prison for a crime they haven't committed... no-one....

And if my time I have spent on here has in some way assisted in questioning the conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak, then I hopefully have succeeded in a small way... And my contribution I hope will have someone look at this case again....

Last thought... Did someone plant the info about Greg across the internet to point the finger at him? It is a possibility..(imo)


Nine.....


Offline Angelo222

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3038 on: November 26, 2018, 10:24:12 AM »
The press and media can only print so much about a suspect during a trial for fear of influencing the jury and that is why after conviction you find all this stuff coming out.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline justsaying

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3039 on: November 26, 2018, 10:25:22 AM »
Nine - Even without the child porn he is still an evil monster. He was convicted on more than confession!

It is a good job you well never write a book on this case because you would be sued for all your speculation, misinformation and conspiracy theories - it would definitely be filed under fiction for sure.

Offline Caroline

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3040 on: November 26, 2018, 11:09:34 AM »
Nine - Even without the child porn he is still an evil monster. He was convicted on more than confession!

It is a good job you well never write a book on this case because you would be sued for all your speculation, misinformation and conspiracy theories - it would definitely be filed under fiction for sure.

Possibly in the comedy section!

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3041 on: November 26, 2018, 11:31:56 AM »
Nine - Even without the child porn he is still an evil monster. He was convicted on more than confession!

It is a good job you well never write a book on this case because you would be sued for all your speculation, misinformation and conspiracy theories - it would definitely be filed under fiction for sure.


Possibly in the comedy section!

Fair enough guys....

Nine

Offline Myster

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3042 on: November 26, 2018, 04:17:07 PM »

Whether or not VT killed Joanna, is one thing, and , IMO, worthy of discussion.  However, all the people connected to the case exist, no question about that, and Joanna certainly existed, and was killed. I think they all lived where we were told they lived, too.
Well spotted!  8((()*/
It's one of them cases, in'it... one of them f*ckin' cases.

Offline Myster

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3043 on: November 26, 2018, 04:20:17 PM »
Possibly in the comedy section!
Hows about  -  "The Nine Lives of Doctor Vincent Van Tobacco"?

Myster.
It's one of them cases, in'it... one of them f*ckin' cases.

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #3044 on: November 26, 2018, 05:17:50 PM »
MTW... Just noticed this event he is doing....  Firstly he spell 'Yeates" incorrectly, but that is neither here nor there, or is it... i had seen Yeates spelt yates before and wondered which was the correct spelling....

 I want to know  what he did to cover this case?? There's a couple of clips to camera that I have posted before, but  other than that I cannot find anything he has done with regards this case...


Was he the criminologist the Police used?  He has tweeted some points on the case at the time, but unless he has deleted some tweets there really isn't a lot that he has stated on the case via twitter.. As I said, when it came to mentioning Greg Reardon , there is only one tweet about him...


I would have imagined there to be many many more tweets in regard to Greg.... Where's the tweet about Greg being a witness and not a suspect?? Or the loving relationship Greg had with Joanna Yeates,

Why is he doing a talk about the case?  Google MTW and Joanna Yeates and there are a couple of references to him...

I always hope that there is someone out there who can shed new light on the case, and take interest when anyone writes a book or says something publicly, in the vain hope that something I may have missed comes to light.

But I cannot see how MWT is going to be of use, if he had nothing to do with the case...




I am now going back over his tweets...

I read that wrong... I thought MWT meant he had interviewed CJ....  But then I wondered if he did? It made me question the docu-drama's and wonder if MWT had a hand in making them??

 Did MTW make the docu-drama's? or have involvement making the docu-dramas?? Or was he the Police Advisor??

MTW tweets about CJ... the date of the tweet is the 7th October 2011..... The FT article is the 8th October 2011

It reminded me of the interview of CJ on youtube, when across the screen flashes ...
"Murder at Christmas" Crime and Investigation Network.... But it was as if the title in the corner hadn't been finished... it was a temp title... I have posted about this before.... This interview was published on the 28th October 2011 on youtube, the day of sentencing for Dr Vincent Tabak... And the released date for TV is RealCrimeUK
Published on Nov 24, 2011


It has always stumped me how a production could have happened so quickly after the trial.... I thought these TV programs take time to produce, that was why when I had seen the 28th Oct 2011 interview with CJ, I couldn't understand why it said "Crime and Investigation"... " Murder at Christmas"

This is weird... I have got to get this right.... It's important.....  Because all of the Docu-dramas appear to have been made at the same time to me... They did not change.... The Count Down to Murder docu-dramas, which I have pointed out many times is wrong... i thought it had to be made before, but how could it?/

This is really confusing....

I do not remember ever seeing MWT at Bristol Crown Court when the trial is going on,I say that I mean from the images we have of this trial.... I do not see him doing any piece to camera.....  But he says in his funzing blurb, that he's involved in the case.... Did he have involvement??

So how was he involved?? Or is he just saying that??

My heads spinning... I'm trying to remember what was stated in the video's... And why I keep finding what I believe to be new information that differs from trial.... 'The Washing Pile"... for instance...


Going back to the Leveson.....

Then Mr Jay asks:
This date of this Leveson inquiry is 28th November 2011.... CJ clearly states he only did an interview for ITV news...  When I look this is an ITV interview I find before November 2011..... This interview is posted on the 28th October 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsZnfi5oM5o


But as I have stated in this post... the "Murder at Christmas" interview is posted on the 28th October 2011, making the statement that CJ gave to the Leveson incorrect.... (imo) As looking at both of the youtube videos CJ is wearing different clothing and appears to be at a different address in the 'Murder at Christmas" interview...

When was that interview done?

Mr Christopher Jefferies
No. I did give an interview for ITN News. One of the reasons that I gave that was that the interviewer happened to be somebody whom at one stage I taught.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsZnfi5oM5o

Who did he teach??


This is why the case confuses me, why the docu-dramas confuse me... Why doesn't Greg appear in the Docu-dramas??

The date and time stamps of those interviews on those docu-dramas needs verifying... I cannot see how CJ is interviewed about a case before the case has completed... And the ITV interview therefore cannot be exclusive.... If that is indeed the ITV interview that CJ is referring too....
This tweet got me when I first saw it...... Why would the Police arrest Dr Vincent Tabak earlier?? Why would he say such a thing... (Of course the link doesn't work)

There was nothing to indicate at any time before that Dr Vincent Tabak had any contact with Joanna Yeates, other than living next door.... His behaviour had not been reported... No-one knew of his whereabouts until his arrest and everything else was at trial....

Why is MTW is asking why  Dr Vincent Tabak wasn't arrested sooner?? Why would he even know that he was a suspect?  Just because Dr Vincent Tabak was charged, doesn't mean the case is done and dusted by then....

This is very disconcerting.... And people wonder why I question everything..... and why I make crazy statements....

Who is Dr Vincent Tabak?? Is he an Innocent victim in this crazy case?? Is he made up?? Or is he a scapegoat for this murder....

I cannot fathom how the TV interview and the other interview that is published on the 28th October 2011 is of the same time, if it is supposed to be interviews after a trial....

Did MWT have any involvement with the docu-drama's?? When were they actually filmed.??  Is that the reason Dr Vincent Tabak is always referred to as him/he in the docu- dramas, until we get the Count Down to Murder program, where they made before trial... ????

Which in itself it weird, as all of the info is incorrect basically in that program.....

I go around in circles trying to be rational about this, but I then find weird information, that basically shouldn't have happened before a trial has completed....

It appears I am still chasing a ghost....


I keep re-reading my post before I post t on the forum.... I have even gone and bought breakfast before i post it.... And i am getting more and more annoyed as I walk to get breakfast, when I go over in my mind this post....

I have spent a lot of time on this, thinking i was helping a man whom is in prison.... But i end up going back to is he even in prison??

I am not posting anymore.... let someone sort out this cack... I have had enough, It is not what it appeared in the beginning, when i joined the facebook forum and on here.... I am gullible.... I am an idiot.... I am stupid... I do not know why I post.... There is no need for me to do it, anymore....

Complete B******S....  rubbish, crap.... maybe somewhere in all this someone has committed a crime.... i don't know... i am might annoyed with myself, wasting my time on what i thought was trying to help someone in prison, who didn't have a voice.....

But I do not know if that is even true anymore!!!  And enough is enough....  I have sent my family bonkers over this case... And myself....  Yesterday i felt willing to start again... But sod that for a game of soldiers....

What on earth is this case really about!!!!! Who is this case really about!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs
https://uk.funzing.com/funz/bf-savile-pistorius-mh370-meet-the-investigator-19716
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/1055722250953986048
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/21199405377921026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFgGbNtF0wA
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/122358677175939073

https://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-28-november-2011/mr-christopher-jefferies

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/29287364438261760

Why are you taking notice of MWT?


Mark Williams-Thomas
Twitter › mwilliamsthomas
Mr King @KingOfHits have spent my whole career investigating,exposing & helping authorities bring to justice offenders like u. I will continue doing what I do, even if u, & minority of others with agendas attack/abuse me. Just remember ‘You are a convicted child sex offender.’

https://mobile.twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/1065915937977712640?p=v



Jonathan Kng
http://www.kingofhits.co.uk/component/option,com_kunena/Itemid,65/func,view/catid,2/id,183092/


UK-Campaigner-Against-Injustice.
@Anti__injustice
Criminal injustice Campaigner, false Allegations. Worked Hard against all the odds to Work with David Rose Of The Mail On Sunday to Expose Mark Williams-Thomas.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Anti__injustice
« Last Edit: November 26, 2018, 06:27:26 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation