Every word that was made in The Police Press Conferences were carefully chosen. Every word that was imparted was crafted. Every word That DCI Phil Jones spoke had been meticulously constructed. This would ensure that if they were talking directly to the person whom had either killed Joanna Yeates or had knowledge of Joanna Yeates death, these words would hopefully prick their conscience ..
The avoidance of direct questions relating to what Joanna Yeates was wearing on the day she was found... Always telling us she was fully clothed.. No boots.... When asked about shoes DCI Phil Jones diverted the question...
There had to be something significant with what Joanna Yeates was wearing for them to play cat and mouse games with the press... If she had the clothes on that she had been wearing on the night they say she disappeared and had worn to The Ram public house, then realistically, there shouldn't have been any problem with the Police describing her dressed condition on her discovery... Minus
Her coat or not... Minus Boots.. Minus shoes...
They gave away lots of information in dribs and drabs... some information that really we shouldn't have found out about until the trial..(imo)
Things like Greg being away that weekend, That CJ helped start the car, that her coat, was left at the Flat,that there had been no forced entry, that there was 'No" sexual assault, yet they couldn't rule out a 'Sexual Motivation".. that she had been to various shops on route home and what purchases she had made... There was virtually nothing left out... Nothing new that you would have thought would smash this case when it did eventually come to trial... Because we were all too aware of the circumstances surrounding this Investigation...
Bu the Police do hold things back.. The Police have a way in which they know who that perpetrator is... Something that only the killer and the Police would know, something that would identify them from anyone else, that may make claims that they had committed this horrendous act...
But nothing new came to trial... In fact
Nothing came to trial to support what some would say is Dr Vincent Tabak's confession... Nothing that had been withheld by the Police for this trial of great importance..
So I keep looking ..re-reading and possibly discovering the hidden truth...
From Channel 4 News at The Police Press conference DCI Phil Jones said:
At a press conference earlier, DCI Phil Jones said: “When Jo was found on Christmas day morning she was fully clothed. She wasn’t wearing her jacket. She wasn’t wearing her boots and she was only wearing one sock.
An innocuous statement and no untruth... But It's what surrounds this innocuous statement that is really important.. It is what they are NOT saying that is really important...
She wasn't wearing "her" Jacket... that got me thinking... was she wearing someone elses Jacket?? Because
"Fully Clothed" in my book means just that.. she had all the garments on you would expect on finding her in the winter months...
She wasn't wearing her Boots?? Later on in the Investigation we are told that she wasn't wearing shoes... But was she wearing
trainers?? The images of the trainers in the hallway are there for a purpose, these very same trainers that moved position in a Flat that was a time capsule.... Just like the trainers that were found under the sink in 44, Canygne Road...
Did Joanna Yeates have trainers on???Joanna Yeates very well might have been missing a sock... But did she have tights on?? Women often wear tights under their clothing as an extra layer of protection against the cold.. I don't ever remember them saying that she had a bare foot... I think we presume.. because of the information we have been given....
Maybe it is more to do with what hadn't been said, And really that should be the case... Because there should always be something withheld from the public something that connects the Killer to The Crime and The Crime scene...
But there is Nothing
new that connected Dr Vincent Tabak to this Crime... Nothing we didn't already know... And in my opinion..... There should have been!
'The Sexual Motivation Angle need further Investigation (imo)... They managed to wangle a tall story from Dr Vincent Tabak at trial... But.. The 'Sexual Motivation" was spoken of well before we hear any cock and bull story coming from Dr Vincent Tabak mouth at his trial for the Murder of Joanna Yeates..
There had to be something that the Police were already aware of to suggest that this had been a 'Sexually Motivated Attack"... Wasn't that one of the reasons that ITN News were banned... mark Williams Thomas queried that the Police had said that There was No Sexual Assault, yet they couldn't rule out a Sexual Motive... That describes motive... And the Police must have had a reason to believe that this was the motive.. They had to have some kind of evidence that would support this motive...
She was Fully Clothed... Her Jeans were not interfered with... I know they say that her T- Shirt/Top was over her head.. But any Detective might have come to the conclusion that the reason for this was that the killer knew Joanna Yeates and couldn't bare to look at her , or she stare back at them...
So why the "Sexual Motive" ?? What possible reason could the Police have to believe that there was a "Sexual Element to this case, as Mark William Thomas said in his Interview with ITV...
The Police didn't know about the apparent porn on Dr Vincent Tabak's laptop at this time... They didn't know that Joanna had nearly been kissed by Dr Vincent Tabak.. yet we happily go along with the Polices idea that it was a 'Sexually Motivated attack....
Is it possible that the marks on Joanna Yeates neck were not
allcaused from someone strangling her...
Did the bruising that were clear to see look like a
"love bite"??? Is this why they all believed that it was 'Sexually Motivated"... They were leading Dr Vincent Tabak down the garden path....(imo).. Maybe they were afraid to mention this mark on her neck.. Hoping that the jury by looking at the photographs would come to that conclusion on their own... After The Prosecution made it clear that Dr Vincent Tabak's purpose was indeed a sexual one.... Did the Jury put two and two together and come up with five ???
That is why I believe the fact that Dr Vincent Tabak tried to Kiss Joanna Yeates is important... Because a
Love Bite is just a few steps on from a Kiss.....
A jury listening to The Prosecution pushing the Sexual Urges they say that motivated Dr Vincent Tabak... The judge on summing up, so sure in his own mind that 'This was a Sexually ' motivated assault... And then to put the final nail in Dr Vincent Tabak's coffin, The Porn is played out to the public as the guilty verdict is read out...
I couldn't I understand there insistence that it was "Sexually Motivated"... Or there was a 'Sexual Element " to this case without any signs of a "Sexual Assault".. But if i believe that a
Love Bite was possibly on the neck of Joanna Yeates amongst the bruises.. Then YES... I can see how they would not rule out 'A Sexual Motive"... Even though it could have been possible that Joanna Yeates had Scratched herself in such a way to cause the marks ....
You can understand why The Yeates believed it was 'Sexually Motivated" if they were aware of such marks on her neck... Or any other part of her body.. And why they were horrified at the information we were given about what was purported to be on Dr Vincent Tabak's laptop....
So everyone was in on certain information about the death of Joanna Yeates, apart from Dr Vincent Tabak..(imo).. Because I never forget Ann Reddrop's insistence that this was indeed "MURDER" and "MANSLUGHTER" was never an option.. But the evidence in court didn't really prove "Murder" It didn't really prove anything... Apart from the fact a man stood up and said how things played out....And we all know that that didn't make sense...!!!
I think it's what we were not told that is important.. and what we were lead to believe is true... If Joanna Yeates did have a
Love Bite on her neck, or another part of her body.. then Dr Vincent Tabak could not have killed her (imo).. He surely would remember such an action...
I have just had another thought... is this why they talk of saliva and DNA?? Because if someone gave Joanna Yeates a "
Love Bite" Then it would be quite possible that their DNA was indeed left behind !!!!!
https://www.channel4.com/news/police-search-for-joanna-yeates-missing-socks
