The Defence Will State Their Case

[Nicholas]

CJ.... Gives Dr Vincent Tabak Good Character Reference

CJ on Video Describing Dr Vincent Tabak: 7:16


I thought I would post this seeing as no-one gave Dr Vincent Tabak a Good Character Reference...

CJ, Dr Vincent Tabak's Landlord, whom i would say knew him reasonably well.... He certainly knew him better than Geoff Hardyman, who's defence statement was only any use to "Bernard" The cat, but I am more than positive, "Bernard didn't take the stand....

I have been trying to show where I believe the defence failed their client, Where there is evidence clearly available, from a live witness that is a household name now....  A live witness, who cannot only put himself on Canygne Road on the night in question, but has told us of how he conversed with Dr Vincent Tabak that evening....

A live witness who describes an encounter with Dr Vincent tabak, as he was leaving for the gym that evening, A live witness, who could clarify If Dr Vincent Tabak was one of the 2/3 people at the gate..

A Live witness, who can tell us what attire Dr Vincent Tabak could have been wearing that evening, A live witness that, saw the dusting of snow on the ground....

Now CJ, considering his vilification in the press, must be a brave man....  knowing how bad publicity, can scare away potential witness's has kindly done his bit for Dr Vincent Tabak, not only through adversity, has this man courageously put us straight on some of the events for that evening, he provides us with a 'good Character" reference to boot....

CJ, description of Dr Vincent Tabak, gels with that of DCI Phil Jones, whom described Dr Vincent Tabak as a very Placid Individual to deal with....

CJ, whom has not been bullied or persuaded by the vilification of Dr Vincent Tabak after the trial, feels strong enough about his former tenant, that he has shared with us, his honest opinion, of Dr Vincent Tabak's Character..

Something might I add, that was never allowed, or appeared , to be allowed in court....  CJ... Has put his head above water, and kindly furnished us with many details, and I am sure, if CJ was interviewed, there would be many more details he could tell us if asked....

Dr Vincent Tabak is not only Placid, but very civilised, according to two witness's who's credentials, we can not fail to be impressed by... Firstly DCI Phil Jones, the SOI, of the Investigation into the Murder of Joanna Yeates, again a man whom had every reason to describe Dr Vincent Tabak in an unsavoury light, yet chose, to divulge his thoughts about Dr Vincent Tabak, by describing Dr Vincent Tabak as Placid....

And CJ..... who could forget CJ.... The Landlord who's life has been turned upside down by the events that lead to Joanna Yeates Murder... A Christian and upstanding man, whom has had the public and media behind him, supporting him in every way, since his release from custody, and we have been privy to his torment, we have been allowed to get a glimps of he 3 day ordeal, where he shares with us his treatment at the hands of the media, and his utter shock at being incarcerated, for a crime he did not commit....

Would words like ... Placid.... formal politeness, always extremely polite,  civilised person, heard by the jury whilst said trial was taking place, have changed the jury decision?? Would the jury have viewed Dr Vincent Tabak in a different light, if these two witness's were called to give their opinion of Dr Vincent Tabak??

2 men... not mice... whom have standing in the community, who's opinion surely would have resonated with the jury... 2 men whom, hand on heart could have given us a clearer indication as to Dr Vincent Tabak's character....

Yet they did not take the stand... They maybe had no control over that... But they have been telling us for quite awhile, we just hadn't taken any notice....

If there was no medical reason , for Dr Vincent Tabak's apparent behaviour, And no evidence at trial to support Dr Vincent Tabak, being a crazy person, who deliberately strangled Joanna Yeates, no evidence presented proved it was a deliberate act, yet for a stange reason they found him guilty....

Does anyone believe if CJ and DCI Phil Jones had taken the stand that the outcome would have been very different??

Does anyone believe that if these witness were available Dr Vincent Tabak would not have told said tale on the stand..... I wonder, if the evidence of CJ and Dr Vincent Tabak's little conversation on Canygne Road that evening, could cast doubt to the story on the stand, that Dr Vincent Tabak provided us with, coupled with CJ, glowing Character Reference, would the jury in fact have doubted whether it was even possible for Dr Vincent Tabak to commit said Crime??

If we haven't really established the day, then how can the story on the stand be true, and the only reason I believe we haven't established a day, Is because CJ again has provided us with important information....

We were lead to believe that Dr Vincent Tabak had lied about CJ, we were lead to believe when the trip to Holland by DC Karen Thomas took place on the 31st December 2010, that the reason for said trip, was to establish what Dr Vincent Tabak had witnessed in relation to his landlords car changing position, that Landlord being CJ....

But... unfortunately the Police believed that Dr Vincent Tabak was lying, that Dr Vincent Tabak, was trying to deflect from himself, by trying to incriminate his Landlord....

But DC Karen Thomas is mistaken, that cannot be further from the truth....  CJ Dr Vincent Tabak's Landlord backs up, Dr Vincent Tabak's claim... He tells us in his own words that Dr Vincent Tabak's recollection is true and accurate..

He tell us that:
Vincent Tabak helped me move the car that morning, erm, becawse, there was snow on the drive, and I need some help, in the car being pushed up.. erm, the slight incline, from the parking area onto the main part of the drive,, so that I could get the car out

He further tells us that:
This was that one evening, which
might have been Friday 17 December 2010, as  I was coming back from the gym at
about 9pm, I had parked my car on the road and was just walking through the gates of
the main driveway,

Clearly here CJ is telling the world that Dr Vincent Tabak was not mistaken, when he stated to the Police that CJ's car had changed position that evening as CJ has indicated by kindly informing us that his car was in it's car parking space on the Saturday morning of the 18th December 2010.... Now if DC Karen Thomas had interviewed CJ, surely CJ told her of her error...

Again The Jury do not get to hear this piece of Information, further adding to CJ Good Character reference of Dr Vincent Tabak....

So when it has been put on the law pages website which I have posted the information before, and that information tells us that Dr Vincent Tabak tried to implicate his Landlord, someone needs to correct them... I would have said it needs taking down but it appears it already has been....

So what have we understood from a quick arrest and trial... Were evidence was collected, were lines of Inquiry clearly failed to happen.... Who do we blame...??

Was it lack of disclosure?? Was it lack of funds on the polices side.... I am no-one, I keep saying, I do not have access, to the information many people have and had at the time, but if in my weird way... I can find a live witness for The Defence, what does that say about The investigation... Should that worry us??

I don't know... But we can only thank CJ, for his honest and true evaluation of Dr Vincent Tabak, we can only thank CJ for letting the world know that Dr Vincent Tabak did NOT try to implicate him in any way.... We can only thank CJ.. for his unfortunate arrest...

Because without that, no-one would know who he is... without Netflix, we cannot see the torment he faced, and with his fight against the media, he would not be a known person to this day... And no-one therefore would hang on to his ever word.... Looking at every syllable, that leaves his lips....

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg496437#msg496437

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.2325

I think t would be helpful if you watched this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13908358  and read more on the Dowler family and all they suffered. Is this really what you wanted for Tabaks victims? Just to satisfy your mind?

[Nicholas]

Some of it is off the top of my head as, you can clearly see from the way I write.... Notes are many.....  some I don't go back too....

How many conflicting statements have been made in this case and by other posters.....

It depends on the order of the notes... Do I use the notes to find the information, or do I use the notes so i have a record of the time something was said, that i can refer, back too quickly once i have started my post.....

I am not on oath.... I shouldn't have to explain this too you...

I don't think you're on oath and you don't need to explain yourself

I do however think you've made a mistake regarding this case but I do understand how that may have happened

[jixy]

The only time thought seems to have been given to the victim or her family is when it has been pointed out to Nine

That is mainly why this whole thread is so difficult to comprehend.

Everyone can come under fire, even Jo for doing something so bad that someone was angry enough to kill her!

I personally dont think your point will ever get through because all concerns have only ever been for TABAK and a false miscarriage of justice!

[Nicholas]

The only time thought seems to have been given to the victim or her family is when it has been pointed out to Nine

That is mainly why this whole thread is so difficult to comprehend.

Everyone can come under fire, even Jo for doing something so bad that someone was angry enough to kill her!

I personally dont think your point will ever get through because all concerns have only ever been for TABAK and a false miscarriage of justice!

I concede in that I think it would be helpful to Nine if she were to look at other cases as she will no doubt find anomalies in many of them, similar to what she has in this case.

I haven't read this entire thread, only parts of it, but it clear there's been numerpus conspiracy theories.

[Nicholas]

No but maybe I am starting to recognise I have been played...

I'd been interested to hear who you think has played you?

I noticed there were several other posters initially who would post on this case. Wonder why they no longer join in with you?

[jixy]

I agree that she should look at other cases to find a balance. I think justsaying when they joined the forum suggested that too

Nine doesnt seem to want to compare or look at any of side to innocence. Maybe if she did then all the issues she doesnt understand or gets confused by could become clear

[Nicholas]

How can I answer for the Tabak family.... I can hazzard a guess but cannot answer for them... I do not know them either...

And yet you think you know Tabak and that he's innocent? It makes no sense!?

[Nicholas]

My heads on over-drive to day... And seeing as some of you have experience of the law maybe you could answer this


Dr Vincent Tabak was supposed to be interested in violent porn... I not going one way or the other on this for the minute, it's not the point of my query.....

So the only title or name we were made aware of was "Sex and Submission"..  An adult series available to view on British Tv's at any time....

Dr Vincent Tabak was taken to court again in march 2015 I believe for the charges relating to images on his computer....  Day and date of these images haven't been established....

Now don't get knickers twisted here I am trying to look at this head on.....

What is the date of the images and when were they apparently made or downloaded?? Any of them??

And does the fact Dr Vincent Tabak is Dutch have any baring on this..... What I mean is would it make a difference if the images were made or downloaded whilst he was in Holland or lived in Holland... Meaning the children in said images possibly originated in Holland?? As for the violent porn I can't say....

Does that then mean that the crime of the images should have been the Dutch Authorities jurisdiction??

Can the British Police charge a Dutch National with crimes that could have been committed in Holland?? Is having the information on his computer enough for the British Police to take action, or do they need to identify these poor children to make sure, that they are safe, and if as I say they too are possibly Dutch nationals, then shouldn't that be a Dutch issue, not British??

Is this the reason that there were no protective measure put in place for these children?? British Jurisdiction didn't have the Authority to do it,... It's another question to ponder...

So if the porn, and images of children where downloaded or made on the computer that Dr Vincent Tabak used, if we cannot establish where and what date these images were made, how do we know for a fact , that no-one else at anytime had access to said computer??

All these images should be dated... details in this case are scarce... Dates and times scarcer... I know he plead guilty... He apprantly plead guilty to manslaughter and I am trying to work out why he would do that...

But simply put... Can a Dutch National be charged with something he did in Holland by British Police??

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/28/joanna-yeates-law-on-gender-hatred

[John]

Without doubt, Nine has put a huge effort into writing about the Joanna Yeates murder case and had Tabak not confessed or DNA from him been found on the victim, this case might very well have turned out completely differently. However, Vincent Tabak did admit to killing Joanna in what appears to have been quite simply a moment of madness. 

I don't believe for a moment that this murder was premeditated otherwise he would have gone to much more trouble to hide his victim's remains.  As it was, he panicked and drove around looking for somewhere to dump her. He tried to lift the body over a wall and had he succeeded it would have fallen into a quarry and might not have been discovered for some time if at all leaving few forensic clues to find.

I agree with Nine that the body could not have lain where it was found for any significant length of time. This was a public road and the verge was very narrow, even covered as it was in leaves any walker would have found it suspicious.

[mrswah]

Without doubt, Nine has put a huge effort into writing about the Joanna Yeates murder case and had Tabak not confessed or DNA from him been found on the victim, this case might very well have turned out completely differently. However, Vincent Tabak did admit to killing Joanna in what appears to have been quite simply a moment of madness. 

I don't believe for a moment that this murder was premeditated otherwise he would have gone to much more trouble to hide his victim's remains.  As it was, he panicked and drove around looking for somewhere to dump her. He tried to lift the body over a wall and had he succeeded it would have fallen into a quarry and might not have been discovered for some time if at all leaving few forensic clues to find.

I agree with Nine that the body could not have lain where it was found for any significant length of time. This was a public road and the verge was very narrow, even covered as it was in leaves any walker would have found it suspicious.

Not a dog walking area either. It is far too dangerous. However, across the road , there is a car park leading to woods, and I believe this is where people would walk their dogs.

[jixy]

Without doubt, Nine has put a huge effort into writing about the Joanna Yeates murder case and had Tabak not confessed or DNA from him been found on the victim, this case might very well have turned out completely differently. However, Vincent Tabak did admit to killing Joanna in what appears to have been quite simply a moment of madness. 

I don't believe for a moment that this murder was premeditated otherwise he would have gone to much more trouble to hide his victim's remains.  As it was, he panicked and drove around looking for somewhere to dump her. He tried to lift the body over a wall and had he succeeded it would have fallen into a quarry and might not have been discovered for some time if at all leaving few forensic clues to find.

I agree with Nine that the body could not have lain where it was found for any significant length of time. This was a public road and the verge was very narrow, even covered as it was in leaves any walker would have found it suspicious.

DNA a confession and a search of the area where the body was found. Maybe Tabak wasnt as honest as he could have been about certain points in the case

That definitely doesnt indicate he is innocent.

The body WAS found in the location, however long it had been there undiscovered. Maybe once again Tabak had a reason to bend the truth. We know he lied and lied so how can anyone know the exact truth in this case

No one has taken away from Nine the time and effort put into this case but a lot of it has been dismissing the real evidence including words from Tabaks own mouth, backed up with quite bizarre conspiracy theories!

[Nicholas]

Without doubt, Nine has put a huge effort into writing about the Joanna Yeates murder case and had Tabak not confessed or DNA from him been found on the victim, this case might very well have turned out completely differently. However, Vincent Tabak did admit to killing Joanna in what appears to have been quite simply a moment of madness. 

I don't believe for a moment that this murder was premeditated otherwise he would have gone to much more trouble to hide his victim's remains.  As it was, he panicked and drove around looking for somewhere to dump her. He tried to lift the body over a wall and had he succeeded it would have fallen into a quarry and might not have been discovered for some time if at all leaving few forensic clues to find.

I agree with Nine that the body could not have lain where it was found for any significant length of time. This was a public road and the verge was very narrow, even covered as it was in leaves any walker would have found it suspicious.

What's your conclusion then John?

And what are your thoughts on the following?

"... and a small group of independent thinkers who include Noel O'Gara in Ireland, GW in Bristol, Debra Ann C in the West Midlands and F in Hackney. Our aim is to make this clever young engineers cruel fate and the authorities disgusting cover up better known to the outside world.
http://vincent-tabak-is-innocent.blogspot.com

I presume this is the same Noel O'Gara? https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/ogara-fined-for-illegally-auditing-companies-26514306.html

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/994988.ripper-victims-son-calls-for-new-inquiry/

[[...]]

Without doubt, Nine has put a huge effort into writing about the Joanna Yeates murder case and had Tabak not confessed or DNA from him been found on the victim, this case might very well have turned out completely differently. However, Vincent Tabak did admit to killing Joanna in what appears to have been quite simply a moment of madness. 

I don't believe for a moment that this murder was premeditated otherwise he would have gone to much more trouble to hide his victim's remains.  As it was, he panicked and drove around looking for somewhere to dump her. He tried to lift the body over a wall and had he succeeded it would have fallen into a quarry and might not have been discovered for some time if at all leaving few forensic clues to find.

I agree with Nine that the body could not have lain where it was found for any significant length of time. This was a public road and the verge was very narrow, even covered as it was in leaves any walker would have found it suspicious.

Not a dog walking area either. It is far too dangerous. However, across the road , there is a car park leading to woods, and I believe this is where people would walk their dogs.

So how did the Birches manage to find her on a grass verge??  They were walking their dogs,  You are right mrswah, it is busy, and that is why I cannot understand how  Joanna Yeates was found on a grass verge on Longwood Lane close to the quarry entrance...

She had to be somewhere more inaccessible , thats why they used the fire truck, If they were trying to just shield the area, they could have used tarpaulin, as they did at the back of the Flats... But A fire truck with a winch suggests that they need to reach her from a difficult position...

The area that she was discovered changed before trial, she was on a golf course at one point... There were images detailing where she was found,

Police hunting for the missing Bristol architect Joanna Yeates sealed off part of a golf course after a young woman's body was found by a couple walking their dogs on this morning. The discovery was made in the Failand area, about four miles outside the city centre.

Media of course may get details wrong, but that wrong? 

If Joanna yeates was actually found on the grass verge as was sated at trial, she simply couldn't have lain there for over 8 days. So was she at another location before? making Longwood Lane the 3 scene of Crime....

If Joanna yeates was moved closer to the time of discovery, which really seems more than likely if we are to believe that Longwood Lane is actually the discovery sight, then Dr Vincent Tabak couldn't have moved her...

He was in Cambridge from the 23rd December 2010 , I believe and then went to Holland from Cambridge to see his family arriving back in Bristol on the 2nd January 2011..

How would Dr Vincent Tabak be able to move her again?? He wouldn't.....

There are 3 forensic tents on Longwood Lane at this time.... None of which were used to cover Joanna Yeates body....They used 7 fire appliances over 4 days, the parents were allowed to walk around the Scene of Crime on the 27th December 2010, there is no way that when the scene obviously hadn't finished being processed that any member of the public would be allowed to walk around or not even if they are family members...

All indicating that where Joanna Yeates had been discovered could not be on that Lane on a grass verge....

Her body had to be deposited over something... We have had a trial, where we are told, whether or nor we believe what Dr Vincent Tabak has stated on the stand, that Joanna Yeates was found on a grass verge on Longwood lane....
The Prosecution have gone with a grass verge on Longwood lane, The defence have gone with a grass verge on Longwood Lane, everything else suggests otherwise...

This is problematic for many reasons...  If the real deposition site is else where, what does that say about the evidence that was presented at trial, The DNA, The Blood evidence that are supposed to conclusively prove that Dr Vincent Tabak was the killer of Joanna Yeates...

The obvious piece of evidence that thens puts the rest of the evidence into question is the evidence I believe Tanya Nickson gave,

Forensic scientist Tanya Nickson, who examined bloodstains found on a wall next to where Miss Yeates had been found on Christmas morning on Longwood Lane, in Failand, said the pattern indicated smearing rather than splattering.

She said this suggested that someone had been attempting to put the body over the wall into the quarry below.

Ms Nickson told the jury: "The presence of the blood on the top of the wall may indicate that an attempt was made to deposit the body over the top of the wall."

Tanya Nickson has told the jury of the location of the blood, and suggested that Dr Vincent Tabak was trying to lift Joanna Yeates over the wall so as to hide her body from sight.....

The more likely scenario is that, Joanna Yeates body was discovered elsewhere, and we have Tanya Nickson, telling us something that was NOT possible, bringing into question her evidence ... not only that bringing all of the blood and DNA evidence into question, therefore telling us that what Dr Vincent Tabak stated on the stand was a tale, that someone.. for whatever reason had him believing was true....

It can't have been true.... 7 Fire appliances working on that scene over 4 days suggests that (A) she was in a different location and (B) that they were needed to retrieve something else... They not only used regular fire trucks but, had used a safety boat also... A boat suggesting that Joanna Yeates was more likely in water,than on dry land...

At trial the Fire Service did not attend, anyone following such a case over the Christmas period could not fail to notice the fire service arriving at the scene, all lined up on Longwood Lane, a fire service, who's services were needed over 4 day, the 29th December 2010 being the last day that they were used...

So why were they not at trial?? why didn't The Defence or Prosecution call anyone from the Fire Service to testify to what they were doing at the scene on Christmas day??

It has been a long time being questioned the location of Joanna Yeates body in that area... Testimony from Andrew Mott and PC Martin faithful telling us that they had to stop a body from thawing.... Well where were they when they had been trying to stop this from happening??

We are now left with, a location that doesn't match the defendants testimony, blood evidence that cannot have been where it was claimed, discounting all of the forensic evidence as being collected correctly, each piece of this evidence putting into question Dr Vincent Tabak's testimony on the stand... Showing us we cannot trust what was stated on the stand by him.... As him lying about his Landlord wasn't accurate either, we have CJ's statements to prove that....

Where Dr Vincent Tabak got the information he told on the stand, I cannot say, but virtually all of it was in the media before trial...

Somebody isn't telling the truth.... I know Dr Vincent Tabak didn't tell the truth on the stand, but who else??

If the evidence of trying to implicate CJ, wasn't heard at trial, how was it used when it came to his sentence??  Dr Vincent Tabak, must have remembered helping CJ on that Saturday 18th December 2010 morning, to help push his car up the drive....

Yet Dr Vincent Tabak has apparently no recollection of this when he is at trial... He believes for some obscure reason that he tried to implicate his Landlord, when we know that simply isn't true...

Dr Vincent Tabak appears to have a false memory of events... clearly indicated by him agreeing that he tried to implicate CJ... What other false memories does Dr Vincent Tabak have to the whole episode??

The evidence suggest that they are all false memories (imo) So therefore why must we believe that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates??

As for the Birches.... little to nothing is known of these people, they did not attend court, their statement was just read out.... Are they the figment of someone imagination?? Where did their statement come from?? The same with Andrew Mott and PC Martin Faithful, who both describe seeing Joanna Yeates that day... What of their evidence at trial, did they omit to tell us the real location of Joanna Yeates body??

Did Tanya Nickson also omit where abouts and on which wall she found her evidence??


https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/25/joanna-yeates-a-body-found

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8061.msg394112#msg394112

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/family-of-joanna-yeates-visit-spot-where-her-body-was-news-footage/693154970

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8834133/Vincent-Tabak-confessed-Joanna-Yeates-killing-in-emotional-meeting-with-prison-chaplain.html

[Nicholas]

So how did the Birches manage to find her on a grass verge??  They were walking their dogs,  You are right mrswah, it is busy, and that is why I cannot understand how  Joanna Yeates was found on a grass verge on Longwood Lane close to the quarry entrance...

She had to be somewhere more inaccessible , thats why they used the fire truck, If they were trying to just shield the area, they could have used tarpaulin, as they did at the back of the Flats... But A fire truck with a winch suggests that they need to reach her from a difficult position...

The area that she was discovered changed before trial, she was on a golf course at one point... There were images detailing where she was found,

Media of course may get details wrong, but that wrong? 

If Joanna yeates was actually found on the grass verge as was sated at trial, she simply couldn't have lain there for over 8 days. So was she at another location before? making Longwood Lane the 3 scene of Crime....

If Joanna yeates was moved closer to the time of discovery, which really seems more than likely if we are to believe that Longwood Lane is actually the discovery sight, then Dr Vincent Tabak couldn't have moved her...

He was in Cambridge from the 23rd December 2010 , I believe and then went to Holland from Cambridge to see his family arriving back in Bristol on the 2nd January 2011..

How would Dr Vincent Tabak be able to move her again?? He wouldn't.....

There are 3 forensic tents on Longwood Lane at this time.... None of which were used to cover Joanna Yeates body....They used 7 fire appliances over 4 days, the parents were allowed to walk around the Scene of Crime on the 27th December 2010, there is no way that when the scene obviously hadn't finished being processed that any member of the public would be allowed to walk around or not even if they are family members...

All indicating that where Joanna Yeates had been discovered could not be on that Lane on a grass verge....

Her body had to be deposited over something... We have had a trial, where we are told, whether or nor we believe what Dr Vincent Tabak has stated on the stand, that Joanna Yeates was found on a grass verge on Longwood lane....
The Prosecution have gone with a grass verge on Longwood lane, The defence have gone with a grass verge on Longwood Lane, everything else suggests otherwise...

This is problematic for many reasons...  If the real deposition site is else where, what does that say about the evidence that was presented at trial, The DNA, The Blood evidence that are supposed to conclusively prove that Dr Vincent Tabak was the killer of Joanna Yeates...

The obvious piece of evidence that thens puts the rest of the evidence into question is the evidence I believe Tanya Nickson gave,


Tanya Nickson has told the jury of the location of the blood, and suggested that Dr Vincent Tabak was trying to lift Joanna Yeates over the wall so as to hide her body from sight.....

The more likely scenario is that, Joanna Yeates body was discovered elsewhere, and we have Tanya Nickson, telling us something that was NOT possible, bringing into question her evidence ... not only that bringing all of the blood and DNA evidence into question, therefore telling us that what Dr Vincent Tabak stated on the stand was a tale, that someone.. for whatever reason had him believing was true....

It can't have been true.... 7 Fire appliances working on that scene over 4 days suggests that (A) she was in a different location and (B) that they were needed to retrieve something else... They not only used regular fire trucks but, had used a safety boat also... A boat suggesting that Joanna Yeates was more likely in water,than on dry land...

At trial the Fire Service did not attend, anyone following such a case over the Christmas period could not fail to notice the fire service arriving at the scene, all lined up on Longwood Lane, a fire service, who's services were needed over 4 day, the 29th December 2010 being the last day that they were used...

So why were they not at trial?? why didn't The Defence or Prosecution call anyone from the Fire Service to testify to what they were doing at the scene on Christmas day??

It has been a long time being questioned the location of Joanna Yeates body in that area... Testimony from Andrew Mott and PC Martin faithful telling us that they had to stop a body from thawing.... Well where were they when they had been trying to stop this from happening??

We are now left with, a location that doesn't match the defendants testimony, blood evidence that cannot have been where it was claimed, discounting all of the forensic evidence as being collected correctly, each piece of this evidence putting into question Dr Vincent Tabak's testimony on the stand... Showing us we cannot trust what was stated on the stand by him.... As him lying about his Landlord wasn't accurate either, we have CJ's statements to prove that....

Where Dr Vincent Tabak got the information he told on the stand, I cannot say, but virtually all of it was in the media before trial...

Somebody isn't telling the truth.... I know Dr Vincent Tabak didn't tell the truth on the stand, but who else??

If the evidence of trying to implicate CJ, wasn't heard at trial, how was it used when it came to his sentence??  Dr Vincent Tabak, must have remembered helping CJ on that Saturday 18th December 2010 morning, to help push his car up the drive....

Yet Dr Vincent Tabak has apparently no recollection of this when he is at trial... He believes for some obscure reason that he tried to implicate his Landlord, when we know that simply isn't true...

Dr Vincent Tabak appears to have a false memory of events... clearly indicated by him agreeing that he tried to implicate CJ... What other false memories does Dr Vincent Tabak have to the whole episode??

The evidence suggest that they are all false memories (imo) So therefore why must we believe that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates??

As for the Birches.... little to nothing is known of these people, they did not attend court, their statement was just read out.... Are they the figment of someone imagination?? Where did their statement come from?? The same with Andrew Mott and PC Martin Faithful, who both describe seeing Joanna Yeates that day... What of their evidence at trial, did they omit to tell us the real location of Joanna Yeates body??

Did Tanya Nickson also omit where abouts and on which wall she found her evidence??


https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/25/joanna-yeates-a-body-found

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8061.msg394112#msg394112

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/family-of-joanna-yeates-visit-spot-where-her-body-was-news-footage/693154970

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8834133/Vincent-Tabak-confessed-Joanna-Yeates-killing-in-emotional-meeting-with-prison-chaplain.html

Who "played you" Nine?

No but maybe I am starting to recognise I have been played...

[[...]]

Who "played you" Nine?

That is the big question.... appears the public themselves have been played....