I have posted this but... I wanted to start a new topic as posts get lost in threads... And I seriously wanted to question whether Dr Vincent Tabak's trial had already taken place in July 2011...
Christopher Jefferies witness statement to the Leveson.. I have normally used Christopher Jefferies second witness statement, and went looking for his first.. Can what it says be true or have they made an error...
Christopher Jefferies first witness statement was made in November 2011
Mr Jay
We, of course, know about the horrific murder of Joanna Yeates which led to the conviction for murder of Vincent Tabak in July this year. Joanna Yeates disappeared, so we have our bearings, on 17 December of last year; is that right?
"July"?
Did they have a trial in July that we didn't know about??
Was the trial in October even more of a show trial than we know it was??
Was that the reason that the media could tweet so fast what had taken place??
CJ States in the Leveson"
I was startled to hear the editor of the Scotsman, one of the papers sued by me for libel and himself a member of the PCC, describe his paper's coverage of my arrest as a mistake.
So I went to the Scotsman to see if I could see there apology..
Yesterday The Scotsman and other newspapers apologised in court for having wrongly suggested that Mr Jefferies was involved in the killing of Joanna Yeates. We had also wrongly suggested that he had acted in an inappropriate, oversexualised manner with his pupils in the past and that he invaded he privacy of his tenants in his capacity as a landlord of two flats. We accepted in court that these allegations were untrue and that Mr Jefferies had no involvement in Ms Yeates' killing. In recognition of the distress caused, we have agreed to pay substantial damages to Mr Jefferies plus his legal costs.
The timing of CJ's suing of the media is important.. Mr Jay had stated that the trial was in "July" and Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted of "Murder"...
That statement must be true.... I will say, how on earth would CJ, be able to sue the papers if there hadn't already been a conviction in 'July" ?? Until there is a conviction there is no evidence to catergorically state that CJ is an Innocent man!! (No offence meant CJ..)
Mr Jay
We know there was a statement in open court on 29 July of this year.
Mr Christopher Jefferies
Mm-hm.
Mr Jay
The newspapers admitted liability, gave the standard apologies on these occasions --
Now I cannot find the pdf of CJ's first witness statement and luckily the statement is available through the link at the bottom... But is the reason that CJ's statement is sealed for 84 years, because they actually held Dr Vincent Tabak's trial in "July 2011"?
It would make sense that a trial had already taken place...
The Scotsman could not state on the 1st August 2011 that CJ was an entirely Innocent man... As the trial we were told was to take place in October 2011..
The Police had believed there to be an accomplice, and until someone else was convicted of this crime, CJ could always potentially have been implicated...
In August 2011, Dr Vincent Tabak still hadn't said anything.... He didn't sign his enhanced statement until September 2011, nothing as far as I am aware stated how he had entered Flat 1.... It is not until the apparent trial in October 2011, that Dr Vincent Tabak gives his version of events... And of course he apparently was invited in....
So... CJ still could have been seen as a suspect by the Police right up until October 2011 as he was the landlord with the keys to Joanna Yeates Flat and they had no idea how entry had occurred...!
The Police did not apologise until 2012 to CJ and cleared him at that time Officially...
I'm aware CJ could confidently feel he could take the papers to court, but he would need something concrete to establish that the hole fiasco in the newspapers was outrageous and he had proof that he was indeed an Innocent man...
After the apparent trial of Dr Vincent Tabak's it did not stop the media from totally vilifying him, with talk of Porn.. prostitutes and his interest in child porn...
So the media's attitude hadn't changed.
CJ wouldn't and couldn't take the media to court at the end of July 2011, without having Dr Vincent Tabak convicted..(imo) The papers would not bow down and just pay him any cost and then state that he was wholly Innocent... They would fight their corner and state that until a trial and conviction, he still could be a suspect..
Is this the reason that No-one wants to talk about Dr Vincent Tabak's trial and conviction?? Because they had already had a trial and convicted him??
Did the "Manslaughter Plea" stand?? Was Dr Vincent Tabak convicted of "Manslaughter" in July 2011 and The October 2011 trial was just for show??
CJ.. has to be confident that he can win his case hands down!! And The apologies to CJ start in court on the 29th July 2011...
Article dated 29th July 2011
"Christopher Jefferies is the latest victim of the regular witch hunts and character assassination conducted by the worst elements of the British tabloid media.
Many of the stories published in these newspapers are designed to 'monster' the individual, in flagrant disregard for his reputation, privacy and rights to a fair trial.
These newspapers have now apologised to him and paid substantial damages."
I missed a trick... Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction had to be settled before CJ took the papers to court, he wouldn't have won and no apology would have been made.. He has to have everything in the bag to be able to stand up in court and say, that there is proof I did not have anything to do with the Murder of Joanna Yeates...!!
I am not surprised that No-one will talk of this case, I am not surprised that the media do not say anything... They probably all got a gaging order in July 2011.. It has been staring us in the face all this time.. CJ.... CJ who has tried time and time again to show us that the case against Dr Vincent Tabak is false...
Not only does he sue the paper, he appears at the Leveson and then the documentary.. But we the public are not listening ...we the public are waiting on a selacious trial.. And we got one... With bells on it...
Now I understand why there were 20 written witness statement that were read out.. Why would you go to a trial if you have already been... That is why Tanja Morson was away on holiday... She didn't need to be there.... It wasn't real...(imo)... Every person whom you expected to take the stand didn't...
* No DCI Phil Jones...
* No CJ...
* No Tanja Morson
* No Peter Stanley
* No Good Character witness's
* No work Colleagues
* No tenant or resident of 44, Canyne Road
* No Firemen
Nobody who should have been at the October trial was not there!! And that I believe is because the trial took place in July... But the papers cannot tell us, this is what happened.. But CJ does in his 'First Witness Statement at The Leveson"... No wonder that trial made no sense at all....
Talked about behind closed doors... Well I am not surprised in the least!!!!!
"Oh what a tangled web we weave.." They got that right!I would just like to add, and I am not being rude to CJ... But.... Why would the media apologies, pay him money and then a documentary is made about "The Lost Honour of CJ"???
At the end of the day.. CJ is simply a retired teacher, who owns a couple of properties, basically a nobody... Yet he manages to wield so much attention his way... Attention that he did not want apparently... I believe all the CJ reports from the Leveson and the documentary .. where to get us to sit up and take notice....
Well CJ... "I Have".... !!!
Read more at:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/apology-christopher-jefferies-1-1777461http://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-28-november-2011/mr-christopher-jefferieshttps://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2011/jul/29/joanna-yeates-national-newspapers[attachment deleted by admin]