What Did CJ witness??? He's says it was dark... He says he heard hushed tones and that there could have been anything up to 3 people at the gate but he couldn't know for sure as the hedge was also there and he couldn't be accurate....
Well thats roughly how it goes... Colin Port states that CJ had told neighbours and wanted The NeighbourHood Watch to be aware of this sighting/hearing..... So what is important enough that CJ wants to inform the Neighbour Hood watch.....???
Not only that it is reported in the media that CJ had told the neighbours of his sighting before he told the Police..
Which makes that either the weekend of the 17th-19th December 2010 or before DS Mark Saunders appeal to the public on the 22nd December 2010.... ( even the 16th December becomes relevant!!) As CJ made his supplement statement to the Police on the evening of the 21st when he had alerted them to what he had recalled... and they came to his house on the 22nd December 2010... coincidentialy the same day DS Mark Saunders makes his appeal.. But it isn't until The Leveson that we have evidence from CJ that he was in contact with the Police and which date they had received this information..... But it had been reported in the media... We probalby took not much notice of it at the time....
"I think he first told neighbours that he thought he had seen Miss Yeates leaving with two people before he spoke to the police, but when we spoke to him he seemed rather vague about the details," he said.
I don't think it is anything to do with Joanna Yeates.... Maybe that is why he isn't a witness.... We have 3 people who could and should make an appearance at trial... CJ... Tanja Morson.. Peter Stanley..... But what about any other residents at Canygne Road??
Thinking about who appears at trial we have,... Greg... Rebecca Scott.. and we also have the Lehmans and Harry Walker..... None of the afore mention either lived on Canygne Road or were their at the time.....
The Private CCTV footage... has someone on it.... But not Joanna Yeates..... The mentioning of that footage is for someone else I believe.....
Thinking about what CJ has said in Interviews etc about this case.. It is little to nothing.... The Yeates do not object when a mini series is made about him.... And everything surrounding this case is odd..
For starters.... If this was about a genuine Missing person Inquiry.. the Police would not be taking statements and fingers prints plus DNA of the tenants of that building as CJ has stated... A simple knock on the door and a couple of questions would do the trick....
But the Police are there asap... The Police are getting statements and samples from all of the tenants.... which we were not aware of at the time....
Why is this important.... Because I believe they were looking for someone else... and not one of the tenants... they needed their finger prints and DNA to eliminate them.... from whatever it was they were looking into....
Lets face it... what is the point of searching tons of rubbish for a Pizza and packaging?? they must have found plenty of Pizza's in their search... But there isn't any evidence of them.... did they have a barcode scanner whilst they were searching?? i don't think so... I believe that was to put us off the scent.... Even if they found said Pizza what would it prove?? She didn't eat it?? They wouldn't waste tons of money searching rubbish for a Pizza (imo)..
So that means that they must have been looking for something else.... (imo)... And what better way than to search a whole community.. (that being Clifton) than a story about a Missing Person and a Pizza..... It gave the Police access to everyone's rubbish in the entire area without needing a warrant or causing suspicion amongst the residents......
That house... 44, Canygne Road.... Again i believe there was something about that house that they needed access to without arousing suspicion.... They are searching apparently Dr Vincent Tabak's draws looking apparently for a body.... he makes a crack about it.... maybe he said to much to to many people about the comings and goings at that address....
It's possible that they needed him to keep quiet..... And not alert anyone to the strange behaviour of the Police at 44, Canygne Road.... maybe he didn't want to play ball.... I don't know....
Leveson... he does state that he don't want to talk about anything that may hinder any ongoing Investigations... And this is why I come back to CJ's second witness statement.... He reveals nothing other than apparently what he may have heard or may have seen... depending on what you take as accurate.... But this is not revealed at trial and is not revealed at the Leveson either.... So what CJ may have witnessed hasn't prejudiced any ongoing Investigation.... But If the Murder of Joanna Yeates took place... then his account would have been seen as important to trial.... (imo)
The media obviously cannot report anything to do with a live Investigation, especially if arrest have been made.... But we are assuming that it is Dr Vincent Tabak's arrest that prevents the media from talking about what they know..... When that may not be the case.....
How many times do they Police use covert tactics?? where they spin an untrue story to gain a a confidence and illicit confessions from people?? Colin Stagg springs to mind.... All around the country it has been reported in the media that an undercover Police Officer has taken a role in someones life and is ostensibly lived as two seperate people.... Now how are we to know if this isn't the case with what had taken place at 44, Canygne Road??
The Police had 7 days in which to decide how the would proceed with CJ's second witness statement... 7 days to act on what reasons CJ had told him he had been arrested for.... which as we know was poppy cock...
(1): he was The land lord and had the keys
(2): he made a subsequent statement
(3): Didn't have a witness alibi
“At the time of my arrest, there were three grounds
given for suspicion. One, I had the keys. Two, I didn’t
have a witness alibi for the relevant times. Three, I had
volunteered an additional witness statement about
something I remembered subsequent to giving the
first statement to the police.
And did Mr Hardyman have a witness alibi that he was in bed with a cold??? Did any other residents have a witness alibi for what they state is the relevant times.....
If you want to discredit someone... get them in the tabloids and vilify them... make the nation hate them then whatever comes out of their mouths after that will no longer have any credence......
The relevant times... the 17th December 2010... both are significant for the Police.... But is it to do with Joanna Yeates? I do not believe it can be.... It makes no sense... we go to trial about a murder that the evidence doesn't support and the newly appointed SIO of The Joanna Yeates Murder Investigation never takes the stand... In fact no Policeman of any standing takes the witness box in this Murder trial.... Not forgetting that an appointed SIO Officer for any Investigation is there until said Investigation is completed.... So why the change of SIO's??
We have Civilian Andrew Mott... who's apparent change of his Official title happens frequently.... WE have PC martin Faithful... a plod from the Failand area.... and a couple of people whom apparently have arrested Dr Vincent Tabak.... But no-one who could catergorically state what happened from A to B in this investigation.....
We are always left lacking... CJ I believe is not allowed to reveal what he witnessed... Because it has nothing to do with any Murder or Missing person..... then when he has appear in documentaries goes along with the idea that he received a Phone call from Greg Reardon... Of which the timings of these phone calls do not add up... You would have thought that the fact that CJ had been rung by Greg Reardon would appear somewhere other than a documentary after the event.....
You would have thought that that piece of information was relevant to the trial... proving for Greg at least what attempts he made to locate his girlfriend... Any barrister worth their salt would question the boyfriend/husband of the victim as to their movement to shift suspicion from their client who hasn't said a word....(imo)...
But we don't get that.... we get a defendant who is happy to say he is guilty of manslaughter without any statement to support this claim... And a trial that takes place where the defendant then tells a tale which somewhat fits the medias information around that time revealing for the first time what has taken place......
Now I may be a bit of a numpty... but that cannot be correct.... You need evidence first and foremost.... And no evidence is there to support anything that Dr Vincent Tabak claims at trial...
So why did the trial take place?? Was it to take the heat off something else?? You see why I question whether Joanna Yeates existed... whether the trial was a Moot trial.... Because no Forensic evidence put Dr Vincent tabak in Joanna Yeates flat and no Forensic evidence put Joanna Yeates in Dr Vincent Tabaks Flat either.... which you would have thought that a fight for life had taken place there would be more evidence of this...
Back to CJ and him stating it was "DARK".... That tells us the outside light on the edge of the building next to Joanna yeates Flat could not have been switched on.... And we have The Lehmans telling us that there was a light on, but I believe that it was for the main house entrance,....
Which means that the Light from the main entrance would have put into shadow anyone on the path by the gate.... In turn means that Joanna yeates could not have possibly seen Dr Vincent Tabak through her kitchen window as it was "DARK"...!!!
Maybe CJ corrected himself when he said he saw people... As it could be outlines... But he definetaly witnessed people in that vicinity... Therefore his testimony is import to the trial of Dr Vincent Tabak....
We have Clegg trying to get this trial over by burying his client... he is not his apparently usual robust self... He never challenges anything that the prosecution put forward rather he aids them in the conviction of his own client.... And it is Cleggs performance that first concerned me when Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted of the Murder of Joanna Yeates.... A man that is known as The Master Defender... behaving in a manor unbecoming to such a title...
And to bury Dr Vincent Tabak further as to no -one coming near him with a barge pole ... we throw in Porn and child porn for good measure.... That should keep this case buried forever.....
Whre were the Tabaks at trial??? Marcel , Cora and Eileen i think the other sister is called?? They appear in the media on one day only.... They do not take the stand to tell us of how their brother is of impeccable character and how he was as a young man growing up with them....
We just assume that they are there for support... but are they?? Or are they too part of an agreement with the court?? Everyone goes through the front of that building.... But daily we see The Yeates... but daily we do not see The Tabaks.... And seeing as the media are set up there from the crack of dawn we should be seeing them enter the court on a daily basis....
The same with DCI Phil Jones... he attends court on many Occasions.... The Old Bailey... The Trial ..but he is never a witness,..
He turns up at the trial on the 20th October 2011 with a heavy briefcase in tow... So why is he there if he isn't taking the stand.... The briefcase isn't for show...(imo)... It must contain some information..... And we are back at a trial that makes no sense ..(imo)...
A man who for NO reason whatsoever decides to plead guilty to Manslaughter.... A case that is described for all intense and purposes as "Complex"... when in all seriousness, it should be a simple Murder Case... A DCI whom arrives at trial with a heavy briefcase not telling us anything.... So it must be for show... The trial cannot be real (imo)... Or was DCI Phil Jones at the trial of Dr Vincent Tabak for another reason??
Leveson would not allow CJ to be a Core participant of the first part of the Inquiry if he was a witness in another Investigation or trial.... And with what CJ states... he is such a witness.... But a witness to what???
Not the Joanna Yeates case... But something else.... that is why we do not know the content of CJ's second or first witness statement... Or any tenants of that building or street.... Even Peter Stanley.. whom should at the very least provided a statement that he helped start the car of Joanna yeates... The car that was being driven to Sheffield by her boyfriend,... The car that we see no photographs of that has miraculously disappeared....
So what were Avon and Somerset Police Investigating.... what was it that the 17th December 2011 is so important... The day that "THEY TELL US JOANNA YEATES WENT MISSING.........."
I have found that tactics are used to put the media off the scent.... Did CJ inadvertently cock that up?? By disclosing to his neighbours that he had witnessed something and wanting his neighbours to alert The Neighbourhood watch.... Which in turn could have compromised an Investigation that the Police had been working on for ages???
Again... one last thing I will add... "The trainers that DCI Phil Jones speaks of at the Leveson.. this pathetic excuse he uses as to why CJ was kept on bail....
Nowwe all know that Joanna Yeates apparently was last seen wearing boots... So the trainers should not come into it.... But what we do not know is how old these trainers are,... whether or not they are womens trainers or mens trainers.... Whether or not they are relevant to the Joanna Yeates case or another case...
If the Police had Intel on that flat and wanted to search said Flat .. then by placing CJ under arrest gives then the opportunity to search this flat without causing suspicion.... Because we are told that said landlord is a strange bird.... So no-one will mind....
If these trainers with blood upon them had anything to do with CJ... do we not think that a man of CJ's standing would have got rid of the evidence of these trainers instead of hiding them under the sink behind the kick-board.... CJ is not a stupid man... just like Dr Vincent Tabak... a man who could have dumped said hard-drives.... So the probability that anything found in a kitchen that CJ had lived in doesn't mean that it was related to Joanna Yeates or CJ for that matter!!
So back to square one..... Is CJ's witness statement relevant firstly to The Joanna Yeates Investigation... Or are they relevant to another inquiry altogether!
Edit... I apoligise for rambling on... but there is so much to this that a simple question doesn''t suffice....
https://news.sky.com/story/joanna-yeates-landlord-held-over-murder-10490254