I find this very disrespectful indeed yet you are allowed to post this over and over again!
I am referring to the case against Dr Vincent Tabak...
I am sure there are plenty of things that go on behind closed doors, so I am not to know for a fact what is accurate. What the media choose to publish or not is entirely up to them...
I do not understand how virtually an entire case was published in one form or another in the media and social media before a trial took place.. And the story on the stand mirroring the information that was available before trial..
That I believe is a reason to question this case, because something new should realistically have come to trial, other than a man saying he did it and how... Based on the media reports of the time..
80 questions could be argued he didn't wish to answer those, or could be argued he didn't know the answer because it hadn't been reported in the media.
We will agree to disagree about this case...
And confessions on the stand should be supported by evidence, not how evidence may be interpreted...
I have interpreted many things in this case.. So concrete facts, real supporting evidence , new evidence, should have supported the story on the stand told by Dr Vincent Tabak (imo).
As the interpretation of a text , I have shown may have a different interpretation...
Missing you loads, I'm Bored, VXXXCould be interpreted as a person who is giving 3 answers to what has been asked,
* Missing You ( maybe he's away)
* I'm Bored
* VXXX ( could mean Hotel 'V' Amsterdam, as I have posted about)
Therefore, searches, texts, and a tale on the stand do not equal guilt, neither does a partial DNA sample that had no date upon it and could have been from transfer.. A blood spot also having the ability to be transferred..
That is why I keep stating that live witness's were important in this case, and witness's whom lived in the building and with Dr Vincent Tabak appearing at trial, to add some context, at the very least.. To say about his mood , behaviour or anything that happened that weekend..
That is why I ask why CJ or Tanja didn't appear as witness's seeing as CJ spoke to Dr Vincent Tabak on 2 occasions that weekend of the 17th December 2010 to 19th December 2010,.. Tanja Morson too, could have added clarity to what Dr Vincent Tabak stated, as his live in partner, she must have known him better than most..
So we can settle on the fact we disagree..