Author Topic: Similarities in this Case  (Read 1042 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline [...]

Similarities in this Case
« on: April 18, 2017, 10:32:21 AM »
I wanted to start this topic to look at the similarities between the arrest of CJ and the arrest of Dr Vincent Tabak...

Not only that but look at why? and what the Police believed about the case... Had the Police been Tunnel Visioned in this case..??

Had the Police investigated to the fullest other options as to the demise of Joanna Yeates?
They were stuck with that building... Infact they never left that building!!

Was the PIZZA the reason that they took a certain line of inquiry that they didn't venture from???

Was The Pizza the reason that No other viable suspects were swobbed???

Lets look at the building.... The Police already had the knowledge that a previous owner of Flat 1 was a paedophile and had worked at Clifton College and the only other person whom had worked at Clifton College and had access to Flat 1 was CJ...

I believe  someone had hit upon the idea of paedophiles and just didn't let it go.....

The Pizza featured HIGHLY in this case... we all didn't really know what the significance of this item was.. but maybe it was just that... The biggest CLUE they thought they had...

Pizza.. Beer.. Porn... all used to entice young people by paedophiles....
Who really is going to take a Pizza and a Pizza only from the scene of Crime??

I want to look more closely at the reports about this Pizza and why they didn't use information that they had in relation to it....

CJ was an easy target (IMO) for the Police... he was eccentic, he lived in the building and he had ties to Flat 1 in many different ways...

But I believe that the Police under estimated CJ and thought that because they had:

(1): Opportunity

(2): Ability to gain access

(3): A connection to a paedophile, by the mere fact he'd purchased this flat and had worked at the same college...
They went down that road...

There major problem with CJ and also Dr Vincent Tabak was that little old adage Motive???...

They could put certain pieces together, but they never had a Motive with either of their suspects....
Did a stretched an massively under pressure police force who wanted a result fail to look at other possible suspects..

Personally I believe they did... I believe they had a bee in their bonnet and didn't let it go!!!

24

Offline John

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2017, 11:20:52 AM »
I wanted to start this topic to look at the similarities between the arrest of CJ and the arrest of Dr Vincent Tabak...

Not only that but look at why? and what the Police believed about the case... Had the Police been Tunnel Visioned in this case..??

Had the Police investigated to the fullest other options as to the demise of Joanna Yeates?
They were stuck with that building... Infact they never left that building!!

Was the PIZZA the reason that they took a certain line of inquiry that they didn't venture from???

Was The Pizza the reason that No other viable suspects were swobbed???

Lets look at the building.... The Police already had the knowledge that a previous owner of Flat 1 was a paedophile and had worked at Clifton College and the only other person whom had worked at Clifton College and had access to Flat 1 was CJ...

I believe  someone had hit upon the idea of paedophiles and just didn't let it go.....

The Pizza featured HIGHLY in this case... we all didn't really know what the significance of this item was.. but maybe it was just that... The biggest CLUE they thought they had...

Pizza.. Beer.. Porn... all used to entice young people by paedophiles....
Who really is going to take a Pizza and a Pizza only from the scene of Crime??

I want to look more closely at the reports about this Pizza and why they didn't use information that they had in relation to it....

CJ was an easy target (IMO) for the Police... he was eccentic, he lived in the building and he had ties to Flat 1 in many different ways...

But I believe that the Police under estimated CJ and thought that because they had:

(1): Opportunity

(2): Ability to gain access

(3): A connection to a paedophile, by the mere fact he'd purchased this flat and had worked at the same college...
They went down that road...

There major problem with CJ and also Dr Vincent Tabak was that little old adage Motive???...

They could put certain pieces together, but they never had a Motive with either of their suspects....
Did a stretched an massively under pressure police force who wanted a result fail to look at other possible suspects..

Personally I believe they did... I believe they had a bee in their bonnet and didn't let it go!!!

Clearly both are men and were successful professionals in their own right in their chosen careers, neither would have ordinarily come to police attention in a murder case had they not been associated to some extent with the victim.

I recall thinking at the time that the retired teacher who was arrested first, was the perfect patsy for police who were facing ever increasing pressure to solve the murder.  I remember Sky News intercepting him outside his home and treating him very shoddily.

Vincent Tabak on the other hand never had to face the press and media to the extent that CJ did, that at least spared him some notoriety.  Tabak's career is over as a result of his own actions whereas CJ has found a new lucrative career to take him out of his early retirement as a teacher.  Strange old world!
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 12:17:20 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • Total likes: 459
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2017, 12:21:48 PM »
I agree that CJ was the "perfect patsy". He was eccentric, he was Joanna's landlord (and therefore, they could have found his DNA and his fingerprints in her flat, had they wanted to), he had no alibi,he had a car,  he was also old enough to be questioned about Glenis Carruthers--------and I bet the Avon and Somerset Police would love to solve that one, after all this time.

I believe the friend who got CJ a lawyer is a former student, who trained as a barrister, but who doesn't practise as one.

Offline John

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2017, 12:44:16 PM »
I agree that CJ was the "perfect patsy". He was eccentric, he was Joanna's landlord (and therefore, they could have found his DNA and his fingerprints in her flat, had they wanted to), he had no alibi,he had a car,  he was also old enough to be questioned about Glenis Carruthers--------and I bet the Avon and Somerset Police would love to solve that one, after all this time.

I believe the friend who got CJ a lawyer is a former student, who trained as a barrister, but who doesn't practise as one.

It was CJ's property which the murdered girl and her boyfriend had rented so there was every reason to believe that his (landlord's) DNA would have been found therein.  By contact, that DNA could have been transferred quite innocently to the victim so it just doesn't bear thinking about had CSI found that DNA on the victim or her clothing. Without an alibi we could have been looking at yet another miscarriage of justice.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline [...]

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2017, 01:07:12 PM »
It was CJ's property which the murdered girl and her boyfriend had rented so there was every reason to believe that his (landlord's) DNA would have been found therein.  By contact, that DNA could have been transferred quite innocently to the victim so it just doesn't bear thinking about had CSI found that DNA on the victim or her clothing. Without an alibi we could have been looking at yet another miscarriage of justice.

Agreed by contact...

And just as plausible Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA could also be contact... Didn't they all share the same entrance to collect the post?????


Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • Total likes: 459
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2017, 01:10:18 PM »
It was CJ's property which the murdered girl and her boyfriend had rented so there was every reason to believe that his (landlord's) DNA would have been found therein.  By contact, that DNA could have been transferred quite innocently to the victim so it just doesn't bear thinking about had CSI found that DNA on the victim or her clothing. Without an alibi we could have been looking at yet another miscarriage of justice.

I agree.

I don't understand why the police needed to arrest CJ at all, to be honest. Of course, they had the right to question him further, and to insist that he went along to the police station to answer those questions, but was it really necessary to make a dramatic dawn arrest------after all, they had no evidence that he had done anything!

Offline [...]

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2017, 01:32:09 PM »
I'm reposting from the early thread:

Here is what lead to CJ's Arrest:

This is a video interview from CJ when he appears on Judge Rinders Crime storys: Joanna Yeates:

At: 9:30 on the video CJ says:

Quote
The time that I had given my original statement... erm.. to detectives..They stressed, that they were very interested if that at some point in the future.... er....
Anybody remembered anything, that they hadn't... erm... remembered at the time, they should certainly straight away..... get intouch with the police


Then at 22:25 CJ says....
Quote
But erm.... Give what I knew.... erm..I got back intouch with the police to say... You know i'm pretty certain, that on that particular evening... this is what I was aware of

Cj is refering to hearing people on the path near the little gate:

Now at 22:30 The Police Officer says:

Quote
Christopher was quite well known... erm.... In the area, He's a retired
School Master from Clifton College...And actually he became quite an integral part of the initial investigation.... He was a witness and erm.......
He described erm.... seeing some people walking down the driveway of the address... On that Friday evening around about the relevant time... We knew Joanna had returned home....

Now what on earth the Officer is calling CJ a witness for, is beyond me.
We Know they saw him as a suspect...

Quote
seeing some people walking down the driveway of the address

Now I.m sure It's the little path CJ's refering too... because it is what CJ hears and doesn't see clearly...

In the honour of CJ.. you see CJ standing in the drive and he looks around and stops as if he has noticed something near the little gate...

Now.....

If CJ... had seen people in the driveway as described by the Police Officer... then surely CJ would have seen them close up and would have given the Police a description of the individuals, and the Police would then put out a description to the media...As these people would be..... PERSONS OF INTEREST!!!

So again.... (IMO) I believe what the policeman says is an untrue......

Quote
he became quite an integral part of the initial investigation.


yes suspect..(IMO)

CJ says at 24:00 mins:
Quote
Ironically, it was that phone call, which lead the Police to think I was making something up.... In order to deflect suspicion away from myself

So the Police put 2 and 2 together and came up with arresting CJ because of his supplementary statement and the fact that he had the keys to all the flats as the Landlord....


Quote
In order to deflect suspicion away from myself

Now where have I heard that before???? I will elaborate later......

Cj... I'm sure they soon realised would not have the physical strength to lift Joanna Yeates on his own without causing any drag marks..

So... when they released him on bail... believing that CJ, had to be part of the murder of Joanna Yeates, they need to get another suspect in their vision.. to be an accomplice with CJ in the crime...

Remember.. they didn't release CJ from Police Bail until March 2011...
And again in CJ's own words:

Quote
And therefore the police continued to entertain the suspicion that possibly there had been some sort of collusion... Between myself and Vincent Tabak

Now looking at this post in a different way and a different angel to course of this investigation.. we have DCI Phil Jones quote again....

Quote
Christopher was quite well known... erm.... In the area, He's a retired
School Master from Clifton College...And actually he became quite an integral part of the initial investigation.... He was a witness and erm.......

So was the Initial Investigation looking into the possibility it could have something to do with paedophiles in this Initial Investigation that DCI Phil Jones his referencing???

Why would CJ be an INTEGRAL part of the initial investigation???

Is that why CJ was a witness??? Did he witness the teacher whom he bought Flat1 from...entertaining/teaching young pupils from Clifton College at Flat 1 ... It's a possibility (IMO)....

Offline [...]

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2017, 01:53:09 PM »
Here's what led to Dr Vincent Tabaks arrest:   Taken from an earlier post:...

We know from CJ that they all had already given statements.... So any extra information was a supplementary statement, to aid the Police with their investigation:
Crime Watch Joanna Yeates Part 2:
At 2:05 The Presenter says:
Quote
An Officer recieved a call from Vincent Tabakin the Netherlands claiming to have new information

Remember the Police had invited the residents to get in touch if they remembered anything:
At 2:09 The Police Woman says:
Quote
He could remember that Chris Jefferies car had been parked on the driveway in  Canygne Road.... In a particular position the evening before Jo went missing... and the next Morning the car was facing in the Opposite direction....
The Presenter on the Program says at 2:20 mins
Quote
What Tabak  had to say was now crucial new evidence for police who are now questioning Jeffereies

Presenter at 2:30 mins
Quote
On New Years Eve they sent a team out to meet him at a hotel in Amsterdam... But his version of events seemed confused

Well... Version of Events... ??? (what are they talking about?)
All he's really supposed to be telling them is that he saw CJ's Car move position....
The Policewoman says at 2:45 mins
Quote
There were details of Vincent's Account.... That...... were concerning me....

Why would the details that Dr Vincent Tabak was telling her about CJ's Car moving position be of a concern????
She's supposed to be talking to him as a witness remember:
The Police woman then says at 2:48:

Quote
He was Vague in some area's... He was over interested in other area's, Particulary around our Forensic examination...
There was things in his account that just didn't seem right.... to me.
And then his reluctance to give his DNA at the end of the process.......  Again started to Ring Alarm Bells

She then says:
Quote
He was over Interested in others particularly around our Forensics

Now..... Dr Vincent Tabak is sat with Police officers thinking that they are there for a nice chat as to what he saw regards CJ....
He could quite simply being interested what was happening with the case as there had been alot of media coverage
 they had just arrested his neighbour and all this had been happening in the building that he lived in....
For all we know... he might have tried to find out how serious the information that they had gathered against CJ was...
 Him and Tanja would then be homeless...

So we cannot summise why Dr Vincent Tabak asked what ever question to the Police...

Quote
Then his reluctance to give his DNA at the end of the process.....
End of what process......????? Dr Vincent Tabak , If you remember was a WITNESS?????
They had him at that hotel for 6 hours... He's only supposed to be telling them CJ's car moved.....
But they act and behave like Dr Vincent Tabak is a SUSPECT and not a WITNESS!!!

Quote
What Tabak  had to say was now crucial new evidence for police who are now questioning Jeffereies
Why would Dr Vincent Tabak, be being asked to give his DNA... they only popped over supposidly to get a witness statement from him...
Why did they have a DNA kit in tow??????

Well.... like I said... he rang to give a supplementary statement....... He wasn't trying to frame CJ....
 They had to let CJ go... there only remaining SUSPECT was Dr Vincent Tabak....
Quote
All the people who lived in 44, Canygne Road... were interviewed, statements were taken... So... my statement was taken along with everyone else...
DNA samples were taken, finger prints, were taken.... It was all entirely Voluntary..But obviously nobody had anything to hide....
So nobody was in the least bit concerned.. erm.... about co-operating in that way...

CJ had said they had all given DNA samples already.... So They didn't need to got to Holland to get a second DNA sample from Dr Vincent Tabak.....

Looking at that I now wonder if anyone else from that building rang the Police a similar response would have taken place..(Just a thought)..(IMO)
And The CPS had already stated that they Planned Dr Vincent Tabak's Arrest, they were reviewing the Evidence etc in late December 2010


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0

Offline Leonora

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2017, 12:11:52 PM »
...
If CJ... had seen people in the driveway as described by the Police Officer... then surely CJ would have seen them close up and would have given the Police a description of the individuals, and the Police would then put out a description to the media...As these people would be..... PERSONS OF INTEREST!!!

So again.... (IMO) I believe what the policeman says is an untrue......
You yourself also speculate why CJ was not called as a witness in the trial. Of course the persons he saw were of interest to the police! There is no doubt in MY mind that his 2nd witness statement to the police describing what and whom he saw would not only have demolished the prosecution's case against Vincent Tabak, but also revealed the real reason why he was arrested. The general public believes that his 2nd witness statement was "very very very very vague", because, as you well know, it has never seen the light of day, even after the general public have been so nice and sympathetic towards the landlord on account of his ordeal.

I know I cannot convince you of anything directly but the facts of the Schiphol interview that you yourself have done so much to expose DO prove what was in that statement. Vincent Tabak, Tanja and Ilse gave up a whole day of their precious vacation to make the long round trip to Schiphol. DC Karen Thomas spent taxpayers' money and a whole day in Holland together with another officer who was probably her senior. It was a crucial interview, yet the court was told nothing at all about what was talked about for 5 hours 45 minutes. The landlord was in custody back in Bristol, so this interview CAN ONLY have been about Christopher Jefferies - what and whom Christopher Jefferies saw - what he told Vincent and Tanja and his neighbours what he saw. It HAD to be deadly serious.  I challenge you to produce a mitigating excuse for these people.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 12:42:10 PM by John »

Offline Leonora

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2017, 04:31:46 PM »
I agree.

I don't understand why the police needed to arrest CJ at all, to be honest. Of course, they had the right to question him further, and to insist that he went along to the police station to answer those questions, but was it really necessary to make a dramatic dawn arrest------after all, they had no evidence that he had done anything!
So what was their hidden agenda for making this dramatic dawn arrest mrswah? Was it:

(1) To show the public that they weren't just sitting on their backsides twiddling their thumbs?

(2) To entrap Vincent Tabak (whom Ann Reddrop had already planned to arrest) into telephoning from Holland?

(3) To distract the journalists from the inquest opened and adjourned very quietly the day before?

(4) To stop journalists from asking irritating questions about why the very attractive, effervescent Joanna hadn't gone to Sheffield that weekend?

(5) To teach Christopher Jefferies such a lesson that he would never, ever, tell a journalist, film producer, or anyone else, what and whom he saw that weekend and described in his 2nd witness statement?

Offline AerialHunter

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2017, 06:06:14 PM »
Leonora,

You have hit one nail directly on the head. Why did senior police officers not want their name associated with this investigation? That has become one of the mainstay points in our inquiry in to our own primary suspect, no senior police have come anywhere near us, they've only ever used expendables in any form of direct contact with us.

The next interesting point is that earlier today, following our own inquiry parameters that certain individuals were set up for the police to secure a conviction, we have uncovered a new thread possibly leading directly back to Tabak. Although thinner than a spiders silk at present we are following up on the information, accepting as we do that our imaginations can run wild. Tabak may have been chosen quite deliberately to be lined up for a fall as he was in the exact environs we would have expected a victim to be, it was only when we went and looked that we found him. We are neither shocked or surprised at this, we only had to look at where we had a suspiciously blank space. Further inquiries to follow.



There is none so noble or in receipt of his fellows unbridled adulation as that police officer who willingly deceives to protect one of his own kind and, by virtue of birthright, extends that privilege to his family.

Offline Leonora

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2017, 08:56:21 PM »
...
Tabak may have been chosen quite deliberately to be lined up for a fall as he was in the exact environs we would have expected a victim to be, it was only when we went and looked that we found him...
Almost any scenario is more plausible than the absurd alternatives with which the hapless jury were confronted, but your mysterious thread would carry no weight if it were proposed by anyone but yourself.

For quite a long time, of course, this was The Joanna Yeates Case. Gradually, however, it became about The Lost Honour of Christopher Jefferies - which I would find pretty galling if I were her poor parents. (In the same way, the long-suffering Kercher family rarely let us forget that it was The Meredith Case, not the Amanda Knox Case.) Be that as it may, attractive, young, educated women are not nearly so rare or exotic as a People Movement Analyst, especially if he has been doing his analysis for Binladen Corporation, or any place where large moving crowds might subsequently become the target for a terrorist attack. Was this case really about Vincent Tabak?
« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 12:45:12 PM by John »

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • Total likes: 459
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2017, 11:11:13 PM »
I have often wondered why the murder of Joanna was considered to be "a complex case"----complex cases were what Ann Reddrop was involved with. The Little Teds Nursery case (which made Ms Reddrop "lawyer of the week")was a complex case indeed, but the murder of one attractive, vivacious young woman by the young chap next door (which is what  Ann Reddrop and almost everyone else assumes happened) hardly makes for a complex case, however foul it was.

Or, was it much more complex than that????

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • Total likes: 459
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2017, 11:15:25 PM »
"The Lost Honour of Christopher Jefferies" did an excellent job of "deflecting attention away" from anything connected with this case apart from CJ's wrongful arrest and the appalling conduct of our media!

Offline [...]

Re: Similarities in this Case
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2017, 08:20:47 AM »
"The Lost Honour of Christopher Jefferies" did an excellent job of "deflecting attention away" from anything connected with this case apart from CJ's wrongful arrest and the appalling conduct of our media!

Yes mrswah..... when ever you mention the case everyone says ...."Oh Yes, The one with The Landlord".  No mention of Dr Vincent Tabak... and No mention of Joanna Yeates !!