Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[[...]]

I just wondered what chemical they would need to need breathing equipment??

Anyone know???

[[...]]

The crime scene bothers me.....

[mrswah]

I don't know what a crime scene should look like, to be honest. I have never seen one, and I suspect they are all very different.

Nathan Matthews was known to have a hoarding problem, so his home would have been much untidier than Jo and Greg's.

Very interesting account in the Mail:  I have read the book written by Becky's father, which is also very interesting. I was comparing this case with that of Joanna Yeates, as both took place in Bristol.

There was much better evidence in the Becky Watts case (and just in case anyone is wondering, yes, I do believe Matthews and Hoare are guilty)!

I knew that police interviews of suspects were recorded, but I haven't seen one in the media before. I am surprised: thought they would have to be confidential.

[[...]]

Apparently Not Mrswah.....

Remember the lady who wanted to see Dr Vincent Tabak's statements and they eventually said she couldn't after weeks of wrangling... Because apparently the information could be used on an appeal!!!

So why release a taped statement of this girl?????

Always things DO NOT ADD UP... when it come to Dr Vincent Tabak...






Even if he was a hoarder... why didn't they remove his things???

They removed all of the kitchen appliances from Joanna Yeates flat!!!!

Not even a kettle!!!!!

One thing i've noticed in the corner... Is a box that looks like its for a drill or something????? WHY!!!

[[...]]

Was gonna put on bottom of other post... but made a new one instead!!

[[...]]

http://miscar

[[...]]

Post Removed by myself...

[[...]]

What shoes did she own... probably more than what were on the shelf....

[[...]]

Splitting hairs 1

[jixy]

Dutch engineer Vincent Tabak, 37, had claimed he would not get a fair trial because of his notoriety and tried to get the case thrown out of court.

But a judge rejected his claim and three hours later Tabak admitted four charges of possessing 145 indecent photographs of children

So as I have already posted he challenged these charges but he didn't challenge manslaughter? you always post about alleged porn, not quite sure how that works when he admitted the above?

[[...]]

Exclusion of Bad Character evidence
The court cannot exclude evidence of bad character of its own motion after the prosecution has served notice that it intends to adduce evidence of bad character.

The defence can apply to have the evidence excluded under section 101(3) where it is admissible under subsection (d) and subsection (g) (where the evidence is relevant to an issue in the case between the prosecution and the defendant or has become admissible because of the defendant's attack on another person).

In these two circumstances the court must not admit such evidence if it appears that its admission would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that it ought not to admit it. In applying the test the court is directed to take account, in particular, of the amount of time that has elapsed since the previous events and the current charge. This is a stricter test than under section 78 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) which states that the court may refuse to admit the evidence, whereas section 101(3) states that the court must not admit the evidence if it would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings.

The court has no power to exclude evidence of bad character which is admissible at the behest of a co-defendant once it has passed the test in section 101(1)(e). In particular there is no power under section 101(3) or under section 78 PACE 1984 (R v Musone [2007] EWCA Crim 1237).

The power of the court to exclude evidence under section 78 PACE 1984 is preserved by section 112(3)(c) Criminal Justice Act 2003 which provides that:

"Nothing in this Chapter affects the exclusion of evidence on the grounds other than the fact that it is evidence of a person's bad character."

In practice section 78 PACE 1984 will have a very limited application:

It c

[[...]]

Dutch engineer Vincent Tabak,

[jixy]

Excuse me? I actually feel quite sick right now. we don't know what the images were? are you serious? 145 indecent pictures of children My god... im glad we don't know exactly what they were Even one picture is one too many

And how exactly do you know Tabak didn't say and think that? You keep stressing to us what an intelligent man he is so why wouldn't he hold those views?

145? I think I could be sick and anyone who doesn't feel the same has quite a big problem! CHILDREN! MEANT TO BE LOVED CARED FOR AND LOOKED AFTER NOT ABUSED FOR DISGUSTING FULFILLMENT OF PERVERTS!

[PaultheRed]

Yet again Nine you are manipulating things to fit your opinions and warped mind that he is innocent , yet again failing to see he admitted the crime so making so many of your points invalid and not necessary but how you can possibly say that the 145 sick and deprived images he had of children are insignificant is absolutely disgusting and I can only presume you yourself get off on such images yourself or that you have no moral concept of what is right or wrong .

You keep pointing out what VT said , thought or intended to do unless you are him how do you know his thoughts , morals, intentions or acts you are not him so can't possibly know his thoughts and you weren't there so don't know how things happened you are making things up to fit your train of thoughts which if you believe those 145 images are innocent makes you as warped as VT and every other child sex offender in this country ....

[[...]]

Excuse