Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 272152 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1719
  • Total likes: 652
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1500 on: June 22, 2018, 06:40:17 PM »
I think probably because Vincent Tabak admitted killing Joanna. The trial then became not about IF he did it but whether it was manslaughter or murder. What information could Chris Jeffries bring to these proceedings that would have helped a jury understand why Tabak did what he admitted to? Also, it's my understanding that Tabak implicated Jeffries during the investigation, presumably to divert attention away from his own guilt, but didn't continue to implicate him after he finally confessed. Did he implicate Jeffries when he gave his own evidence on the stand?

No, he didn't.

I'm not at all sure he ever implicated CJ at all: CJ never said whether or not he had moved his car that night. For all we know, he had done, to make it easier for him to exit his driveway in the morning, as snow was forecast.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1501 on: June 22, 2018, 07:04:49 PM »
I think probably because Vincent Tabak admitted killing Joanna. The trial then became not about IF he did it but whether it was manslaughter or murder. What information could Chris Jeffries bring to these proceedings that would have helped a jury understand why Tabak did what he admitted to? Also, it's my understanding that Tabak implicated Jeffries during the investigation, presumably to divert attention away from his own guilt, but didn't continue to implicate him after he finally confessed. Did he implicate Jeffries when he gave his own evidence on the stand?

From the BBC...

Quote
Admission to jurors
Vincent Tabak - the man who would later emerge as Miss Yeates's killer - also saw it as an opportunity.

I shouldn't have said that about Chris Jefferies
Vincent Tabak
The 33-year-old Dutch engineer gave police false information he hoped would pile more suspicion on Mr Jefferies.

He later admitted trying to wrongly incriminate the retired English teacher, who lived in the flat above Miss Yeates and her boyfriend Greg Reardon in Canynge Road in Clifton.

Tabak, who was Miss Yeates's next-door neighbour as well as Mr Jefferies' tenant, was arrested in January and later pleaded guilty to Miss Yeates's manslaughter but denied murder.

At his trial at Bristol Crown Court, he admitted telling police Mr Jefferies' car had moved on the night of 17 December.

"I shouldn't have said that about Chris Jefferies," he told jurors.

As I keep saying , why wasn't CJ at trial.... It is well known he "WITNESSED" people at the gate at what would be the relevant time in accordance with the evidence that was presented at trial....!!

Did CJ hear any screams... he lived above Joanna Yeates... The timings which they kind of accept from Dr Vincent Tabak, was Joanna yeates arrived home around 8:50pm he went round was invited in, chatted for 10 minutes, then tried to kiss her and she screamed... Then screamed again.... A violent assault is taking place, CJ must have heard something if the Lehmans apparently hear something.... CJ is on site and lives above.... He would have heard a commotion.. (imo) If the prosecution are happy that the Lehmans from their distance could... CJ puts himself at Canygne Road around 9:00pm. So he most certainly should of.... If we accept that Joanna Yeates did in fact reach her home at 44, Canygne Road

In fact how long were the Lehmans outside?? Did they see CJ arrive?? we don't know... So without CJ's statement we are not positive who was seen at the gate... We do not know who may have left Canygne Road at what is a relevant time in terms of a violent assault taking place.... Could CJ confirm whether or not the light were on outside Joanna Yeates Flat that evening or did they not work properly?? It the light are not on outside Joanna Yeates Flat then Joanna Yeates could not have seen Dr Vincent Tabak through the kitchen window, therefore she would not invite him in....

There was NO forced entry.. so you would then have to know for a fact that the light were on outside the house... I don't even think that was covered at trial.... But CJ could confirm this also.... So could the Lehmans if they walked past her Flat... They may have noticed the light from the main entrance... but did they notice the light outside Joanna Yeates Flat.... did they see if it was turned on or NOT!!

Having witness's being able to corroberate the events of that evening I would have imagined would strengthen the prosecutions claims... But they are more than one witness short at that trial.... CJ being one and Tanja Morson being another....

Once you bring CJ to trial , you then have to bring Peter Stanley, because they could then tell us exactly what happened on that evening from apparently helping start Greg's car and cross examination should take place.... (imo)

But NO CJ... No Tanja Morson and No Peter Stanley..... In fact I cannot find anything that references Peter Stanleys statement he made to the Police being presented at trial....






https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-15430885

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1502 on: June 23, 2018, 08:34:47 PM »

This is from The Leveson, found it whilst looking at Colin Port... Exhibt CP5.pdf  ..Media stratergy etc...

Quote
Homepage
  ,Homepage banner and spotlight images
¯ 1440 inbound messages went to the investigation team via the form on the website
   Newsroom
¯ Newsroom story with regular updates
¯ Updates automatically pushed out via twitter with #joyeates "hashtags"
¯ Updates automatically appeared on dedicated section (see below)
,  Story e-mailed out to subscribers (currently 15,000+ subscriber base) and media contacts
¯ Briefings filmed / uploaded to YouTube and embedded as well as images
   Dedicated section
¯ Set up special website address- www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo
¯ Interactive Google map showing key locations
¯ Video play list showing most recent video release first
¯ Image gallery of Jo
¯ Facebook and Twitter sharing tools
¯ Secure on-line contact form sending messages direct to the incident room
¯ Twitter widget showing discussion around the case and our updates
¯ IP address logging for investigative purposes
   Local pages
¯ Localised community safety article in the Clifton area
¯ Downloadable advice leaflet (the same as distributed physically in the area


So this must have been the stratergy for The Joanna Yeates Investigation...

The IP logging for Investigation purposes.....  I didn't think they logged anything... But apparently they did... So much for anonymity....

* Do not know the date for this stratergy??

* What did the google maps show?? .. Is this the map the Dr Vincent Tabak had viewed??

* 15,000+  subscriber base... now how did they filter through all of them to see if they had a suspect!!

* Why just a localised community safety article just in Clifton??

* Twitter widget... kept an eye on any tweets

* Briefings filmed then uploaded to youtube.... So were these briefings live??

* What story did these 15,00 + subscribers base  receive??

* Is it unusual to set up special web address? www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo Who has access to this special
   web address now??

* How many people are in their subscriber base ??


Further down on the document....

Quote
Prepare for the ’ten day turn’: media likely to ask questions about your experience as
an SlO & potential for bringing in another / more senior SIO or outside force to help
Don’t under-estimate the additional personal pressure of being ’the face of the
investigation’

Here's a theory.... So as not to put DS Mark Saunders I believe who was the original head of this Investigation... We then get Introduced to DCI Phil Jones.... Looks like they were ready for the 10 day turn!!

I still want to know when this media strategy was put in place and the website dedicated to Joanna Yeates at Avon and Somerset.

At the moment the earliest i can find the use of the web address is 24th December 2010 which is the Tesco's Pizza CCTV

Going back to them logging IP addresses..... Why wasn't this evidence of the hits from Dr Vincent Tabak at trial??  Why didn't the use their own logs as evidence.... In fact .. there's an idea... get the logs from this an see if Dr Vincent Tabak's IP address was logged! And who else may be a suspect!


Do the Police ordinarily email 15,000+ subscribers for a Missing Person??
Next question, was CJ or Dr Vincent Tabak one of their subscribers??

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122162825/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/?witness=chief-constable-colin-port

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1503 on: June 23, 2018, 08:54:53 PM »
No, he didn't.

I'm not at all sure he ever implicated CJ at all: CJ never said whether or not he had moved his car that night. For all we know, he had done, to make it easier for him to exit his driveway in the morning, as snow was forecast.

I believe you are correct mrswah, well the papers and trial say different... But the reality might be a far easier explanation....

Quote
SWNS.com

 
@SWNS
Follow Follow @SWNS
More
#joyeates Tabak felt tired and "under the weather" the next day but was woken to move his car by Chris Jefferies.

11:28 AM - 11 Oct 2011

Now... CJ should have been at trial!!!  He woke Dr Vincent Tabak, that was probably why Dr Vincent Tabak had noticed that CJ's car had moved.... So that has to be off the drive and CJ states at the Leveson that he left it on the road!!


Maybe this is the reason we have the talk of the car moving position mrswah.... Makes sense.... But it now has me questioning what CJ said in his statement to the Police when he was arrested!!!

We get the tale that Dr Vincent Tabak rang from Holland because of CJ's car changing position... Now if CJ has told them that he woke up Dr Vincent Tabak to get him to help him move the car, then the Polices info could quiet as easily come from CJ.... We only know about the 2 witness statement.... but what about when he was in Police custody!!

They make up some cock and Bull story about Dr Vincent Tabak ringing to give them an excuse to go to Holland and hey presto.... a new suspect is in their sights....

The telephone recording of Dr Vincent Tabak ringing the Police from Holland was never produced at trial... So I can conclude that it is just as possible they got that information from CJ, as he explained what he did that weekend to the Police whilst in custody.... !!

If CJ originally said his car was parked on the road as he told us in The Leveson Inquiry... then it would take a brain surgeon to work out that if Dr Vincent Tabak had helped him move his car, it had to be parked on the drive... which is what is depicted in The Lost Honour of CJ.....  Therefore the Police had the information beforehand about the car changing position.... (imo)

If anything says that CJ should have been at trial... that tweet does... ..(imo)

https://twitter.com/SWNS/status/123706634030690304

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1504 on: June 23, 2018, 09:53:04 PM »
Back to the leveson for a mo.... Exhibit CP5.pdf

Quote
Leaks or investigative.iournalism?
- Media speculation on lines of investigation can get out of hand
- Interference & amateur sleuthing mean SIO must be prepared to reconsider detail / timing of
investigative strategy to retain integrity of investigation :
Need to be aware of potential for ’jigsaw identification’ of crucial investigative strands
through mass media enquiries about lines of investigation; work closely with
Communications lead on diversionary tactics for putting them off the scent


So what tactics were used to put the media off the scent??


* The arrest of CJ?? (lets not forget it was a planned arrest)

* The arrest and charge of Dr Vincent Tabak??

* The Sobbing girl ??

* The Pizza ?

* The Missing Sock ??

* The boyfriend being a witness and not a suspect??

* The Incident van parked outside 44 Canygne Road from 22nd December 2010??

* 7 Fire Trucks

* The Grass Verge

* 43 insignificant Injuries

* The Myriad of High Ranking Police Officers on Longwood Lane ??

* The several different locations that Joanna Yeates may have been??

* The revealing of NO FORCED ENTRY ??

* Telling us No Sexual Assault

* Telling us what was left behind at her flat?? keys etc..

* The removing of Joanna Yeates front door??

* The filming of Peter Stanley??

* The filming of the family crossing crime scene tape??

* Allowing people to place flowers at Longwood Lane ??

* Allowing the media to film the back of 44,Canygne Road in early December 2010

* Naming people who had nothing to do with the investigation??

* The erection of scaffolding at the back of 44, Canygne Road

* The Ikea men

* The texts ?/

* The date of Joanna Yeates "Missing " being the 17th December 2010??

* The mentioning of cold cases ??

* Allowing the media to park outside 44, Canygne Road 24/7

* The man handing in a "Missing Sock"..

* The reporting she had been found on Christmas Day??

* The other location across from Longwood lane on the junction??

* The layout of the flats??

* The for rent images

* The Halloween pictures

* Telling us she was on her own all weekend?/

* Dr Vincent Tabak being registered on the electrol roll at that address?? (when was he actually added to the roll..
   and don't tell me that the date tells us... I want to know when electronically and dated by that computer that he
   was added )

* Them telling us she's covered in snow when found , but we get shown hardly any snow on Christmas day??

* The media being allowed into Flat 1 when the trial is taking place... To a staged Flat that we all know it is..

Now I could carry on... But......  The point now is What were they actually Investigating???

The tactics that are used to throw us off the scent have been never ending.... Did she actually live in that Flat we have been allowed to see?? There was far too much immediate coverage for a Missing Persons Inquiry, and this pdf tells us that it was something quite different... Did they do the same for Becky Watts?? ....

There is something about this case that they do not want us to know... more reason to question Dr Vincent Tabak's guilt....

They have always stuck with the 17th December 2010, when there is NO evidence to prove that.... But If I use this from the Leveson and my theory that they changed the SIO because of the 10 day turn, then the appointment of DCI Phil Jones on the 27th December 2010, fits nicely.... (imo) So was this strategy set up as early as the 17th December 2010? Is that why we have everyone proving that Joanna Yeates was alive on the 17th December 2010?? Is that why Dr Vincent Tabak is charged between  the 16th December 2010 to the 19th December 2010??

Had something happened to Joanna Yeates before the 17th December 2010??

They say they use tactics to throw them of the scent... So is Rebeccay Scotts Interview another tactic to throw the media of the scent??


It time for them to tell us the truth...  And what was it about Joanna Yeates that this level of tactics and media handling was needed before she was even found dead!! At this time she is simply.....

 "A Missing Person"!!

Edit.... What was really taking place on the 29th December 2010.... This was the day that the media had a myriad of options to report.... Everything happened on that day.... I remember posting about it...

* The day of the door removal..
* CJ being Interviewed...
* Release of CCTV footage in bargain Booze
* New images of Joanna yeates were released
* The Intercom Panel being remove




http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122162825/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/?witness=chief-constable-colin-port

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1505 on: June 23, 2018, 10:25:44 PM »
Quote
,Story e-mailed out to subscribers (currently 15,000+ subscriber base) and media contacts

This is bugging me...... Who are these 15,000+ subscribers that they "emailed"????... and what are they subscribed too??

Your conducting an Inquiry not a Raffle!!

What story??



http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122162825/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/?witness=chief-constable-colin-port

Exhibit CP5


Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1506 on: June 24, 2018, 09:06:55 PM »
I have been sent on a wild goose chase... and my imagination has often got the better of me.... But in the being it was someone who said the answer is staring us in the face and it's far more simple than that.... And even if i don't know the whole answer just yet... I am finding the answer should be far more similar than I have made it.....


Part1....  Attached images show where info is also from......

Ages and ages ago.. I remembered someone asking me how all of the facebook accounts etc could be interfered with.... How someone had the clout to remove what ever had been written about around the time Joanna Yeates went Missing and when the court case started....  I think I now found found a theory about that too....

Leveson..... CP2 Here are some quotes......

Quote
Criteria for these special cases is as follows:
¯ There is proven evidence that the target community will not engage with the police via
   their main social media account and only a locally branded account will work
¯ eServices remain the guardians of the account with engagement being done in
   collaboration with the team and the local officers who have been granted access
¯ Guidance be given to the officers on appropriate use
¯ Breach of guidance will result in immediate closure of the service
¯ Clear guidance is given to the organisation when questioned that this is a temporary
   solution and has an operational purpose

And...

Quote
INTELLIGENCE AND OPERATIONAL USE
Districts and units have been provided wlth open source accounts on,Facebook and Twitter
created by eServices to facilitate open source intelligence gathering and witness contact as
well as for operational commander use during public order incidents.

I think I have found my answer..... JOANNA YEATES, MISSING SINCE 17/12/10 group which has had me confused on many occasions i believe it to be one of these "Operational Accounts" for Intelligence gathering.... (imo) There has been many a post that has thrown me on that least of all Jess Siggers Post.... Where she is aware that Joanna yeates is Missing and is ready to search for her before she has actually gone Missing......

Quote
Jessica Siggers
27 December 2010
Travelling back to my home in Clifton today which will never feel the same again. Jo, I never knew you but our paths may have crossed many times. You, your family & Greg have not left my thoughts since last weekend when we received a message from BDP. I wanted to go out and search there & then. No-one should be taken the way you were. It's a cruel world but for what it's worth, you will get justice. RIP beautiful girl. X

And this one that David yeates apparently posted...

Quote
David Yeates
24 December 2010
The comment below is from me, not Greg. I was mistakenly logged into his facebook Id. Applogies

The comment he is referring too...

Quote
Greg Beardon
24 December 2010
Teresa & I had to go to Bristol today and we were totally moved by the number of posters placed in the windows of shops and pubs around Clifton, near Jo's flat. Unfortunately we were not able to meet up with you at Cabots Circus. We cannot find the words to express our appreciation of the effort you have given in an attempt to bring my little girl back. The sight of her face in each of the posters brought home the unreal situation we find ourselves in.

Back to thois part of the quote from the pdf...

Quote
Clear guidance has been given and is displayed on the account "profiles that these do not
represent the constabulary as channels for public contact, instead directing people to the main
 corporate accounts.

Makes this quote from Greg Reardon make more sense.....

Quote
Greg Beardon to JOANNA YEATES, MISSING SINCE 17/12/10
24 December 2010 at 14:04 ·
All, please direct all press to the avon and somerset police.


So my conclusion is that these are accounts set up for Operational purposes......   And when I posted about the 15,000+ email subscribers,  I now wonder if the email was in relation to the facebook discussion group....  by the 24th December they had 9,000 members....

Quote
Louise Webber
24 December 2010
Over 9000 members and rising!!!!


And the group is called JOANNA YEATES, MISSING SINCE 17/12/10

So my contention now is that if this group was set up by the Police and as they have stated in the media pdf which is from the Leveson, they do set up accounts for "Operation Use"....  And my conclusion to that is, The date of Joanna Yeates disappearance is down to the page and not any proof of what she last ate..... (imo)

I could never understand why I found articles that had Information before if had been released... BDP for instance releasing that Joanna Yeates was found dead by the 24th December 2010... They shouldn't have had that info.... but if they were on some list and were privvy to that information then, it would make more sense....

So the hype was set up by The Police, by the looks of it (imo).... The accounts I would now question....  I'm even questioning The helpfindjo webpage....  Because it is still there... If the family had set it up as we have been told then I don't believe that, seeing as the Police have admitted trying to put everyone off the scent...!!



https://www.facebook.com/groups/169097479794933/

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122162825/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/?witness=chief-constable-colin-port      CP2

This is a redacted version :https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/media/23528/2101-Social%20Media%20Protocol.pdf

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1507 on: June 24, 2018, 09:07:36 PM »
That is why the cock-up happens I believe and what I mean about cock-up is the release of the image of Joanna Yeates in waitrose from the "Missing Posters, before the Police had actually released the CCTV...  The poster that has the Polices web address on the bottom with terms and conditions... (attached)... I believe it is because, the police had the images and the Police made the helpfindjo web page..... (imo) again an account that directs us to the Police.....

Quote
HEartfelt condolences go out to all of Jo’s friends and family. Please respect their privacy at this difficult time.

All enquiries/information/help with the investigation should be directed to the Avon and Somerset Police force – http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/.

Now there was a comment on that site that had me scratching my head... i knew there was a reason it had switched a light on  and maybe this post tells us why..... Scott is talking to the admin on the helpfindjo webpage

Quote
Scott Fulton
Hi,

We have now set up an easier link to the latest on the appeal at: http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo if you could update your homepage that would be appreciated.

We are also keeping updates via our Facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/avonandsomersetpolice

We’ll be adding a full feature to our site tomorrow.

Thanks,

Scott
eServices Manager
http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk

December 23, 2010 at 1:46 pm   

Full Feature??? It's a simple Missing Persons Inquiry!!!!


Scott Fulton whom is listed in the "Establishing their Roles Topic" is the E- Services manager for Avon and Somerset Police... Now yesterday I posted about Media strategies.... And how a dedicated web page on Avon and Somersets website had been part of their media strategy for this "Operation"...

Reminder:
Quote
Homepage
  ,Homepage banner and spotlight images
¯ 1440 inbound messages went to the investigation team via the form on the website
   Newsroom
¯ Newsroom story with regular updates
¯ Updates automatically pushed out via twitter with #joyeates "hashtags"
¯ Updates automatically appeared on dedicated section (see below)
,  Story e-mailed out to subscribers (currently 15,000+ subscriber base) and media contacts
¯ Briefings filmed / uploaded to YouTube and embedded as well as images
   Dedicated section
¯ Set up special website address- www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo
¯ Interactive Google map showing key locations
¯ Video play list showing most recent video release first
¯ Image gallery of Jo
¯ Facebook and Twitter sharing tools
¯ Secure on-line contact form sending messages direct to the incident room
¯ Twitter widget showing discussion around the case and our updates
¯ IP address logging for investigative purposes
   Local pages
¯ Localised community safety article in the Clifton area
¯ Downloadable advice leaflet (the same as distributed physically in the area

Going back to how this information was first sent.... I believe it has to be via their subscribers.... On the same page as the comments from Scott Fulton, the first comment is this...

Quote
Robert Ricker
So sorry to hear about this. I’m in Dallas, TX, but I’ve shared this link on my Facebook with many of my British friends to share with their families across the pond.

Best of everything in your search.
Robert

December 22, 2010 at 9:58 pm   

This is the earliest we know that Joanna Yeates is Missing.....  DS Mark Saunders is interviewed for TV and makes an appeal... It is a small story in the British media.... So how on earth would a guy from Dallas, be finding the Helpfindjo webpage in the first place???? I believe it's possible emails were sent to direct people to this page.... (imo)

Again I will go back to yesterday.... And the media strategy... (Exhibit CP5) talked of posters flyers etc...

Quote
Support, Support, Support- we’re on your side and our role is to help you
Buffer and interface between you, your investigation team and the media
Advisors on all aspects of communications and media handling:
Broadcast and print media: 24 hour line into the community & potential
witnesses
Online and social media -investigation, communication, community intelligence
& reassurance
- Printed materials- letters, newsletters, posters, flyers
- Face to face- street briefings, public meetings, community reassurance
Strategic guidance and tactical options throughout
Practical management and housekeeping of all communications activities from Day 1
to the end of the trial and sentencing
But most importantly...
¯ Trust Us and Tell Us, in real time. We need to work as one.

Now it reminded me when I posted about the talk of flyers: from a post
Quote
Katie Goldsmith
24 December 2010
While out posting flyers this week we went to Tesco in Clifton village where the CCTV footage was. They weren't massively keen to put up posters there as they weren't allowed to put them in windows. They only had one behind the counter on the wall. Does anyone know if this has now changed? If not I will write to the manager. As this seemed uneccesarily uncooperative as it is there that people will remember her most.

From the helpfindjo webpage
Quote
Joanna went missing on Friday December 17. After leaving the Ram public house on Park Street following drinks with work friends Jo called Rebecca. Rebecca added: “When I found our Jo had gone missing I hoped she was still alive but deep down I couldn’t help but think she’d been abducted and some harm had come to her. The next few days both Emma and I spent handing out posters and flyers, we needed to do something to help; I couldn’t sleep so kept in regular contact with Jo’s family, Greg and Emma.

Then we have Rebecca Scott who also talks of flyers...... From the transcript of her video interview


Quote
(Pause) It's been hard ter think about anything else since erm.. (pause) Per particularly those first few weeks... I ..I be lucky if I sort of slept (pause) at all really.... Erm.... Erm I think we were all desperate to do everything we could to get her back and erm... Myself and Emma had gone up to Bristol to erm er hand out posters and flyers erm....... (licks lips) And lots of her work colleagues were doing the same, so we all sort of got in contact, best coordinate, the sort of pulled resources and our time.

Flyer??? I don't believe that any flyers were handed out.... they may have been, but I am now starting to believe that this cannot all be coincidence......... Seeing as handing out poster/flyer etc is part of the media strategy for Avon and Somerset Police!!


* Was this a real case??

* What was this case about??

* What is Operation Briad ??

All of this was out in place extremely quickly for a Missing Person.... and I do not believe she ever was... That's if she exists....  Or that it was really a murder case... I still don't know.... But I believe I know a little more.....

It well have could been a Media exercise by the Police, that went too far for all I know.... And if this didn't really happen then The Attorney General could say that CJ was wholly Innocent and nothing to do with Dr Vincent Tabak and the Manslaughter Plea.....

I remember thinking how quick the helpfindjo webpage was updated when anything was released about the Inquiry.. Now I believe it has to be The Police who updated it....

So is everything that was put on the internet via social media etc a Police Media Strategy??? Because i am being to believe that it is....  And the responders to these site could very well be one of the 15,000 + subscribers that The Police emailed....


Edit...
Quote
Scott Fulton
Hi,

We have now set up an easier link to the latest on the appeal at: http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo if you could update your homepage that would be appreciated.

Why is Scott Fulton telling an apparent relative of Joanna Yeates to update there homepage??? 
Answer... Because they have to be connected to the police....(imo) and i do not think it's a relative of Joanna yeates... If it was a relative they would ring them or the would update the homepage of their own accord!!!


http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122162825/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/evidence/?witness=chief-constable-colin-port
https://helpfindjo.wordpress.com/page/1/
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg470437#msg470437
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8056.msg456179#msg456179
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8168.msg406612#msg406612

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1508 on: June 24, 2018, 09:24:21 PM »
I know my posts are long sorry.... But just to add..... And lets not forget

Quote
Leaks or investigative.iournalism?
- Media speculation on lines of investigation can get out of hand
- Interference & amateur sleuthing mean SIO must be prepared to reconsider detail / timing of
investigative strategy to retain integrity of investigation :
Need to be aware of potential for ’jigsaw identification’ of crucial investigative strands
through mass media enquiries about lines of investigation; work closely with
Communications lead on diversionary tactics for putting them off the scent

So What Scent did they try so hard to put us off!!!



http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg470451#msg470451

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1509 on: June 24, 2018, 09:31:20 PM »
Here's another thing to ponder....

If The Police went to all this trouble to advertise promote and execute this media strategy.... How would Dr Vincent Tabak know... A man who was supposed to have been following every aspect of this case....

Someone was following every aspect of this case... And I don't believe it was Dr Vincent Tabak... Or the man they tell us is Dr Vincent Tabak.... (imo)

So who was all of this media exercise aimed at?? They had Gold Command involved at a very early stage, so it was never about a "Missing Person" (imo)!!


Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1510 on: June 24, 2018, 10:33:46 PM »
There is something else to consider in all of this....

The Police never left Canygne Road, they never questioned Joanna Yeates 200 plus facebook friends...  They never Interviewed the scores of people that Joanna Yeates may have been in contact with in the weeks leading up to her death...

This random attack takes place and they focus on the neighbour whom didn't know whom she was....

The talk of taking DNA samples,,, that never happened...

The information about that was received via facebook... Where the manager of the Hope and Anchor is the one who reveals that Joanna Yeates went there at lunch time....  ( was he also one of the contacts??)

A completely staged Flat..

Forensic Officers looking like they're on  training exercise as AH.. pointed out....

I could never understand why they never moved from that address... And I'm wondering if it was a training exercise....  Did something happen to Joanna Yeates.. Is she real??

The case is never spoken of... And that probably because the communications department stopped telling us this story.....  Nothing new comes out..... it has all stopped....

So is that why we don't know anything more??  Who ever had their hand on the pulse of the department can no longer spin the story.... It's not what I thought and there's a gagging order.... More like someone can no longer put anyone off the scent!!!

So who are The Yeates??? Who was Joanna Yeates.... Was it a massive publicity stunt??  I don't know... But there are to many coincidences with this... And the answers lie within what is out there... and why we no longer hear anything....

I think the answers lie with Avon and Somerset Police.... The Leveson and CJ....  and what is said at the Inquiry....


Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1511 on: June 25, 2018, 09:57:55 AM »
From The Leveson Core Participant hearing 6th September 2011

Quote
Leveson Inquiry transcript www.levesoninquiry.org.uk
 1 Tuesday, 6 September 2011
 2 (10.30 am)
 3 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Good morning.
 4 I don't consider this to be a court, but we will see
 5 how we get on. There is no prohibition on the use of
 6 live text-based communications, and at least at present
 7 I am satisfied that its use does not pose a danger to
 8 the interference or the proper conduct of this Inquiry.
 9 Unless any difficulty arises, I am happy to make it
 10 clear that the use of unobtrusive, hand-held, virtually
 11 silent equipment for the purposes of simultaneous
 12 reporting of proceedings to the outside world, as they
 13 unfold, is entirely acceptable.


Is this why the media tweeted the trial?? 

I still don't understand why CJ was part of The Leveson?  If he could basically have been called as a witness...

I asked if Dr Vincent Tabak had been convicted in July because of this which was said by Mr Jay...

Quote

    Mr Jay
We, of course, know about the horrific murder of Joanna Yeates which led to the conviction for murder of Vincent Tabak in July this year. Joanna Yeates disappeared, so we have our bearings, on 17 December of last year; is that right?

By August people are being asked this....

Quote
I invited anyone who
19  wished to be identified as a core participant within
20  Rule 5 of the Inquiry Rules 2006 to notify the secretary
21  to the Inquiry prior to 31 August,

We then get this :
Quote
My Lord, I am here on
 21 behalf of two different groups of individuals. The
 22 first is a group of high profile individuals whose
 23 experiences of media reporting have been a matter which
 24 the courts have already dealt with.
 25 They are the McCanns, Gerry and Kate;
 
 1 Christopher Jefferies, the man who was wrongly vilified
 2 by the press over the murder of Joanna Yeates; and
 3 Max Mosley,

So CJ as been identified as early as the 6th September 2011 as a Core Participant..  Nearly a whole month before the trial is to take place.....

At this point in time why would they say that CJ is a High Profile Individual??? I said before he's a nobody... But obviously someone has a different take on that....  We have the tabloids in for a few days stating things about him and we have him winning a libel action.... he is still no-one... We do not have "The Lost Honour of CJ" made by this time which would make him well known by the country...  So he is a random person off the street, who happened to teach at a college....  So what makes him High profile by the 6th September 2011 ???

This whole case is weird.... Was Dr Vincent Tabak found guilty of Murder in July?? I have asked this before... Or is the case against him none existent??

Is Dr Vincent Tabak connected to the Police??  It goes around my head I don't understand why CJ has been accepted as a core participant when in all honesty he should have been a witness at a murder trial.....

Leveson must have known that.... He wouldn't have accepted him when a trial was due to take place.... So what happened?? Who made it possible for CJ to be a core participant??

Ordinarily trials etc should have been completed and to even suggest CJ as a core participant seems crazy (imo)

But then we go back to the trial... where everything gets thrown out of the window... A trial that makes no sense to me... Where the evidence doesn't support the story, where we do not know what stories the police released to the media were true or false to put the media off the scent....  An Investigation that was not as simple as was made out on the TV... Where witness's do NOT appear at trial... ie CJ.. Tanja Morson and Kingdom.

Everything we heard at trial had already played out in the media.... Now if these stories that were fed to the press are false, then how can what was said at trial be accurate too?? The only information the press had was what was given to them, they all told us in detail throughout the Missing Person Inquiry to The Murder Inquiry what had happened.. We knew everything, which we shouldn't have... I am now starting to wonder if the "Manslaughter Plea" actually happened...  The media told us and the Police apparently send the media off the scent... Therefore i conclude that Dr Vincent Tabak did not Plead guilt to Manslaughter.... But something else possibly happened at The Old Bailey under that unique number U20110387....

So back to the tweeting of the trial.... The media must be aware of what is going on... (imo) Did they play the Police at their own game?? By the time the trial took place had they seen what was the content of The Leveson report?? Did they know they had been played???

If they knew the content of the Leveson and in particular Exhibit CP5/and CP2 and the strategies used by the Police... Did they take Leveson at his word and tweet the whole trial?? The trial in itself is part of the evidence of the Leveson you could say... Seeing as a core participant who should have been a witness was allowed to take part and named before the completion of said trial...

Is this why we have the media tweeting the trial, when their is no ruling that I am aware of that states the media can tweet live a Criminal Trial... No recording devices are supposed to be in a criminal court or any court as far as I am aware...

Was the case made up of false Information.... Nothing particularly new came to trial.... We had Darragh Bellew thrown in for good measure, but he had just started working for the same firm as Joanna Yeates and there must have been other people whom Joanna Yeates was with that evening who would be a better witness....

We have Greg Reardon telling us a version which includes information that The Yeates tell us in documentaries... David for instance lets us know he found an earring... So when were these documentaries made?  We have Rebecca Scott telling us about her phone Call, which we know everything about seeing as it was told by the media time and time again.. The Police releasing the video of Rebecca Scott telling us her version of events on the 12th January 2011 ( I have transcribed that Interview) and arriving at court looking like she had been dragged through a bush backwards.....

The Lehmans who heard screams and others, which these screams had been reported in the papers, I wrote about another forum member called "Kingdom"  who lived directly behind Joanna Yeates bedroom window I believe .... Mid Morning on the Saturday 18th December 2010 he heard someone say something like..."Help me".... And it was reported in the papers about Kingdom, But they had reported it as happening on the Friday 17th December 2010 and on The other forum Kingdom Corrects the day it happened , that being the Saturday...

Quote

kingdom
BC Member
kingdom's Avatar

Posts
278
Likes
100
OCT
26
2011
Default Re: Did Harry Walker change his story about the screams he heard?
 - they newspaper seems to be incorporating several people's experiences in that article.

I only found out about Harry Walker's witness statement 10 days ago and have only read the details for the first time on this thread. What i experienced was during the day time - this is what i explained to the police on the 21st of December and to an Evening Post journalist a few days later.

(I'm the person in one of three flats - not Harry Walker - whose bedrooms back onto both CJ's drive - and with one having an oblique view of Tabak's door -- HW is in the same development but in the main house).

What i heard - on what i NOW believe to be saturday mid morning - probably between 10am - and 12.30 pm - was what sounded like a female voice shout out - 'Why won't someone help me!' very loudly. I only clearly caught the last two words 'help me!' - looked outside and there was no one about and assumed it was someone actually calling to someone else on Canynge Road and that i'd misheard - what i thought i'd heard).

It definitely wasn't on the friday night - i was in on the friday night and can't recall hearing anything undue - although i do recall hearing raised voices one evening of that week - which could have been an argument or could equally have revelers). I have a TV in the bedroom so it feasible that any scream might have been blocked out by the sound of that - (i seem to recall there was a turbulent episode of Eastenders on that evening).

I spoke to the DC last week who i had spoken to back in January and she said that as i hadn't been called as a witness they had probably concluded that what i heard was not relevant to the case. (Which i took to mean that the police have concrete forensic evidence that Jo was murdered on the friday night and that what i heard could not have been her on the saturday morning).

Personally i disagree. I'm not a fantasist or prone to a wild imagination and it would be a spectacular coincidence if the shout had not been Jo as at the time i thought the timbre of the voice sounded very odd.

I have contacted the police about this issue on at least 4 occasions specifying that i had heard this during the brightest part of that day - i was still in my dressing gown when i checked outside (my central heating had been on the blink). The issue is that i know it was A morning - but i can't say definitively WHICH morning it was.


Again the media were aware of Kingdoms statement..

Daily Mail 22nd January 2011
Quote
Meanwhile, more evidence of a disturbance on December 17 emerged. A resident living in the building directly behind 44 Canynge Road has told police he heard a woman screaming ‘Help me’ on the night Miss Yeates went missing. He heard the cries from his bedroom, which looks on to the ground-floor flats which are now screened with tarpaulin while forensic experts continue to examine them.

Someone had to tell them that Kingdom had made a statement to the Police.... Everything is in the media.... Well before trial..... Would Kingdoms statement been used if CJ had been the person charged?? Is that some of the evidence they had against CJ at the time?? He obviously counter acted that...(imo)

Did Harry Walker ever use the words "Help me " at trial??  NO!! So there is obviously another witness whom has witnessed screams who wasn't called to give evidence...

A trial made up completely of media reports as far as I can see... A trial that had no substance.... The media who were told too much to put them off the scent..... So what was this trial really about?? Did they convict someone of a crime they didn't commit??  What were the Police really Investigating??  Who were the Police really Investigating??  Where they looking at Dr Vincent Tabak in relation to something else?? I don't know...

But you cannot put a man on the stand for a crime he couldn't have committed... With a trial that was made up of reports the media had already told.... With CCTV footage Missing Time Stamps... The media must have had access to the CCTV Footage before trial (imo) thats why The Time Stamps are Missing, and that is why we see the same CCTV footage after trial with the Date only and No time stamps.... I believe it is possible the media had been given them in advance....

One thing I'll come back to.... The Nero cafe CCTV.... were is that footage?? It's Colin Port who tells us this, the media never reported it.... Which supports what I am saying... The trial is made up of information that The Media received and they didn't receive the information about the ~Nero cafe!! or The trainers that DCI Phil Jones speaks of...... They are not mentioned at trial...

But we see images of people holding coffee cups from Nero Cafe... Nigel Lickley is photographed holding such a cup... we have images of trainers on the bookstand in the hallway...

Were the media told of this information?? But didn't say because they had applied it to CJ who's never charged?? Also the media were not allowed  to report on a suspect at the time and CJ was on bail until March 2011....  So it is possible that around that time the media were aware of this information, but couldn't report on it.....

Bring me back to what in this case was Information to throw everyone of the scent and what was real info?? Because you can't have a trial based on media reports were the media are allowed to tweet said trial... (imo)

One last thing... Was Tanja Morson Dr Vincent Tabak's girlfriend??  She is named as early as 22nd January 2011 in the media... But that doesn't have to be her real name.... Seeing as the police were trying to put people off the scent... Was it the Police who supplied the images of Tanja Morson visiting Dr Vincent Tabak in prison??

Why when a trial is due to take place and the Attorney General had warned the media about identifying suspects/witness's etc of a trial... do the media tell us about Tanja Morson??  I would say it's because Miss Morson isn't Dr Vincent Tabak's girlfriend..... She like so many other things in this case it is there to put us off the scent....(imo)

So that makes the texts and emails between Dr Vincent Tabak and Tanja Morson untrue.... (imo) So who or what puts Dr Vincent Tabak anywhere?? apart from a story told on the stand that is the defendant with no supporting evidence to confirm his claim.... If the trial witness's are made up from newspaper reports and they are NOT real witness's... then CJ wasn't a real witness either, even if he did see people at the gate...(imo) Because I  conclude that Leveson wouldn't have allowed for CJ to be a Core Participant at an Inquiry before a trial had taken place....

What are we left with..... A right fudge up!!!





http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122201634/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/leveson-inquiry-transcript-060911.pdf

https://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-28-november-2011/mr-christopher-jefferies

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122151746/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/hearing/2011-09-06am/

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8056.msg456179#msg456179

https://www.bowlandcentral.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98647&p=1588039&highlight=Kingdom+screams#post1588039

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349356/Joanna-Yeates-murder-suspect-Vincent-Tabak-split-girlfriend.html#ixzz1bqGibX00

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1512 on: June 26, 2018, 08:01:45 PM »
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....

Quote
"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

Quote
“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

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1513 on: June 27, 2018, 08:49:56 AM »
A quote from Amanda Hirst at The Leveson Inquiry....

Quote

Ms Amanda Hirst
Yes. The public have a right to know within bounds, within boundaries, and I think throughout that investigation and throughout other investigations, we provide the media with as much as we can, always led, of course, by the SIO.

I think there's another point to make here as well, which is a really crucial one. Certainly in the Joanna Yeates case, we know that Vincent Tabak was actually following the progress of the investigation via the media, and also on our own website and through other social media, and that was something that the investigation team picked up and was also discussed openly in court. So it was very, very important for us to preserve the integrity of that investigation and ensure that anything that was inappropriate or shouldn't get out into the public domain was contained.

This is from the documents at The Leveson attributed to Colin Port but have Amanda Hirst name upon them....
Quote
Homepage
  ,Homepage banner and spotlight images
¯ 1440 inbound messages went to the investigation team via the form on the website
   Newsroom
¯ Newsroom story with regular updates
¯ Updates automatically pushed out via twitter with #joyeates "hashtags"
¯ Updates automatically appeared on dedicated section (see below)
,  Story e-mailed out to subscribers (currently 15,000+ subscriber base) and media contacts
¯ Briefings filmed / uploaded to YouTube and embedded as well as images
   Dedicated section
¯ Set up special website address- www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo
¯ Interactive Google map showing key locations
¯ Video play list showing most recent video release first
¯ Image gallery of Jo
¯ Facebook and Twitter sharing tools
¯ Secure on-line contact form sending messages direct to the incident room
¯ Twitter widget showing discussion around the case and our updates
¯ IP address logging for investigative purposes
   Local pages
¯ Localised community safety article in the Clifton area
¯ Downloadable advice leaflet (the same as distributed physically in the area

Looking at what Amanda Hirst states to The Leveson, is Dr Vincent Tabak's Interest in the case, he according to Amanda Hirst was following the Investigation through, social media, through The Media and through The Avon and Somerset Polices website...

Now I am not wholly convinced of this...... Going back to The Sally Ramage papers..... Nowhere in these searches does Dr Vincent Tabak click on the dedicated Joanna Yeates web page that The Police had made especially for this Investigation.... www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/jo

We know that by the 23rd December 2010 this page had been established, we know Google maps had been added to this page, we know that all forms of social media had incorporated the hashtag #joyeates

No other forms of social media are mentioned at trial in regards to Dr Vincent Tabak....  He is a man supposed to be following ever aspect of this Investigation... he apparently knew every movement and was keeping ahead of the Investigation. According to Ann Reddrop:

Quote
Vincent Tabak was a cunning, dishonest and manipulative man who knew exactly what he was (deali) doing when he killed Joanna Yeates... Today he has been convicted by a jury of her murder last year, despite claiming he meant her know harm.. he was cunning and dishonest towards his girlfriend, with whom he had maintained a normal relationship.. Even going as far as to text her shortly after jo was dead to say he was bored..

He manipulated the Police by virtue of his Indepth research on the internet.. to keep one step ahead of the Investigation, before his arrest, looking up extradition and medical details of decomposition.. he made very selective admissions surrounding the circumstances of Jo's death which sought to cast herin an Unfavourable light... And he kept this up even when he gave Evidence to the Jury...

Tabak thought his cleverness and deceit would prevent him from being convicted of a brutal murder............. He was wrong!

Jo went missing on Friday 17th December last year after meeting with friends for a drink.. For several days the Police mounted a "Missing Person Inquiry", but with the discovery of her body on Christmas Morning, this became a "Murder Investigation...

Late in December the Police ask for assistance and guidance from The Crown Prosecution Service.. That assistance has come from "The South West Case Work Unit" based here in Bristol... I reviewed the Evidence and Advised that Vincet Tabak should be charged with this murder and began preparing this case for trial... In May this year Tabak admitted Jo's Manslaughter....but that was only part of it..

The Crowns Case is... and always has been that it was a deliberate action on his part.. And "That|is why we refused to accept his plea for Manslaughter"... and he faced trial for "Murder"o over the past 4 weeks....

Jo's family have been here in Bristol, during the trial and have listened to much of the evidence... Our thoughts are with them and with her partner Greg today as Tabak begin's a life sentence for "Murdering" Jo...

Indepth research?? No mention of following any of this case on Twitter or Facebook nor the dedictated helpfindjo webpage. We only have a couple of mentions that he went to Avon and Somerset Polices website...

Dr Vincent Tabak makes an unusual search before anyone is aware that Joanna yeates is Missing

Quote
On his computer at work, Tabak searched for news on
‘Melanie Hall’
‘Avon and Somerset police home page’
‘News’
‘Murder of Melanie Hall’
At Line 224 of prosecution chart
Tabak searched the words
‘Missing persons’.

Why would Dr Vincent Tabak search for Melanie Hall?? He has no connection to that case in any shape or form... The search i have said many times cannot be Dr Vincent Tabak's. (imo) This search is before the 21st December 2010. So who's searches are they..

Quote
At Line 267 of the prosecution chart
at 15.00 pm on 21 December 2010, Tabak searched the words
‘Extradition of Dutchman’
‘Jo Yeates’

There is no suspicion on Dr Vincent Tabak at this time and If extradiction was on his mind he should have stayed in Holland when he went over the festive period..

We are getting an idea of what these searches are about... here's a couple more to prove a point..

Quote
On 23 Dec 2010 at 4.00 pm
Tabak searched the Dutch Wikipedia for the words
‘extradition’
‘Yeates’
‘missing persons’
‘% of grey cars in UK’
‘Renault Megan cars in UK’
At Line 340 of the prosecution chart
Tabak Googled on 26 Dec 2010
‘Yeates’
At 3.00 pm he search the Telegraph Newspaper online
At 3:43 pm he searched online global newspapers
At 3.45 pm he searched the words
‘Suspension bridge police footage’

So between the 23rd December 2010 and the 26th December 2010 Dr Vincent Tabak doesn't look once at the dedicated web page the Police set up on their site.. The webpage that has all the information upon it, including maps, galleries, links etc to keep completely on top of this Investigation....

And here is where my point lies.... Either Dr Vincent Tabak is connected to the Police in some way and was aware of The media Strategy that was put in place, which is revealed in the Leveson report or the searches are that of a person who was aware of the media strategy and How IP address were logged and what the media strategy for this case was....

To be able to avoid looking directly at the dedicated webpage on Avon and Somersets Police website whilst also Missing every opportunity to check Twitter and facebook, tells me that Dr Vincent Tabak cannot be the person who made the searches....

Ann really:
 
Quote
He manipulated the Police by virtue of his Indepth research on the internet.. to keep one step ahead of the Investigation, before his arrest

So how would Dr Vincent Tabak be aware of the strategies adopted by Avon and Somerset Police??

How would Dr Vincent Tabak know to avoid any social media or the dedicated webpage created by the Police.. not only that... But the helpfindJo website that apparently had been set up by her family!!

That at the very least should have been visited by Dr Vincent Tabak with up to the minute headlines and news, video's etc.... But not once to hear at trial that Dr Vincent Tabak visited any of these most important webpages, not once is social media mentioned in his searches...


Amanda Hirst
Quote
I think there's another point to make here as well, which is a really crucial one. Certainly in the Joanna Yeates case, we know that Vincent Tabak was actually following the progress of the investigation via the media, and also on our own website and through other social media, and that was something that the investigation team picked up

She clearly states that it is their own website and social media that Dr Vincent Tabak was following the progress of the Investigation, when clearly the searches tell us otherwise.... So who is Amanda Hirst really talking about?? who's name should be there instead of Dr Vincent Tabak?? And who would have the knowledge to avoid Avon and Somersets dedicated website also the wordpress website and ALL Social Media??

Now to keep one step of this Investigation, you again would need to know the strategies that were out in place.... You would need to know, what was a Red Herring in the media and what was fact... The media strategy did tell us that it was there to throw the media off the scent..

Again... the last search of Dr Vincent Tabak's apparent searches is this..

Quote
At Line 566 of the prosecution chart
At 6.00 pm on 19 Jan 2011, Tabak searched the webpage of Avon & Somerset police.

When was this dedicated webpage removed??  It doesn't state its the dedicated webpage... Just The webpage of Avon and Somerset Police..

I'll go back to what I said yesterday... Was that Avon and Somerset Police looking into something else at 44, Canygne Road?? Nothing in this trial substanciates anything...

There is a clear avoidance of the dedicated webpages and social media, which suggests that the searches could not have been that of Dr Vincent Tabak.. And if they were why would he avoid these dedicated webpages and social media...  Amanda Hirst has stated that Dr Vincent Tabak looked at Social media, so where is the proof of that!!

To keep one step ahead of this Investigation you had to know the Polices media strategy (IMO)!!
So how would Dr Vincent Tabak know that!


http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg470678#msg470678

https://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-27-march-2012/ms-amanda-hirst

http://www.criminal-lawyer.org.uk/39-CLN-JAN-2012.pdf

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8424.msg421095#msg421095

https://helpfindjo.wordpress.com/

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #1514 on: June 28, 2018, 03:31:47 AM »
Starring us in the face..... I've been chasing photoshopped images around the net for an age....  And I have come to a radical conclusion...

Every so often phrases from articles I have read pop in my head, or tweets that I realise have a relevance, but they appear to be from some random person not really connected to the case... But I've have to think again about that, especially as I realise that, to throw people off the scent, is really paramount in this case...

So the tweets I keep going back to.....

Quote
Liz Church

@dailyturnout
Follow Follow @dailyturnout
More
Vincent Tabak named on the BBC is not the right age group for arrested man #JoYeates #JoannaYeates #Yeates
2:46 PM - 20 Jan 2011

Quote
Josie Ensor

Verified account
 
@Josiensor
Follow Follow @Josiensor
More
Although, according to 192 search of 2010 electoral role, Vincent Tabak is the 40-44 age band? http://bit.ly/ehNfCK #joyeates

3:01 PM - 20 Jan 2011

Quote
Emily Gosden

Verified account
 
@emilygosden
Follow Follow @emilygosden
More
@Josiensor Vincent Tabak's CV (http://bit.ly/gahKHc) date of birth has him aged 32. Curious as to how 192.com source the age guide...

3:07 PM - 20 Jan 2011

On the very day Dr Vincent Tabak is arrested and no-one is supposed to know his name 3 random people make a reference to Dr Vincent Tabak's age...  I've looked at those tweets i don't know how many times, and dismissed them... But i do not think I should....

From start to finish we have had images of Dr Vincent Tabak looking like an ordinary young man to an almost grotesque  caricature of what he is supposed to look like.... I say time and time again that the Flat is staged and the photos have been photoshopped and It is obvious that they have...

No-one has officially identified Dr Vincent Tabak... not one person, we have random images we are lead to believe are Dr Vincent Tabak, but I don't believe that they are..... People have said many things on this forum, even though to most it may not appear that way... But taking what has been said and what the media have stated and the understanding of what strategies were used by Avon and Somerset Police.. I have drawn up a small list..


* In Plain Sight

* One of four

* Why won't Dr Vincent Tabak's family speak

* Throw off scent

* Who verified Dr Vincent Tabak identity

* Some type of deal

* Immunity

* Screamed from the rooftops

* No protesting Innocence

* Not able to locate him with the prison services

* Placid Dutchman

The other day I mentioned that The Tabak's were not at court every day.... You only see them on one day.. we see The Yeates coming and going... But Not The Tabak's , which quite frankly is disturbing really... Their brother is facing a Murder Charge, the media are all parked out side the Court and we see the same photo's of The Tabak's used and reused.....

This evening it suddenly dawned on me..... everything is not what it seems... There has been plenty of smoke and mirrors to this case...

The location of Kelcey Halls opposite Bristol Crown Court, on the 21st January we see The Tabak's crossing the road from The Law firms office... (image  attached) and then we see apparently on a break in the trial on the 21st January 2011.. The Tabak's leave The Court with Kelcey Hall (image attached)

Here a question posed.... How do you get Dr Vincent Tabak in and out of a court without anyone seeing him??

Answer: Right under everyones noses... they are just not looking!!

You see i think I know what the contempt issue may be... And not the cock and bull we have been told.... But identifying defendants etc in the papers.... And I believe they didn't identify Dr Vincent Tabak on the day of the arrest... But lead us to believe that they had Many papers mentioned Dr Vincent Tabak name on the 20th January 2011.... On the 20th January 2011 Channel 4 gives us this:

Quote
20 Jan 2011
Joanna Yeates murder: police search neighbour’s flat
Following the arrest of a 32-year-old in connection with the murder of Joanna Yeates, police search a flat belonging to Dutch national Vincent Tabak. Channel 4 News looks at his background.

Now the media are well aware they are NOT allowed to name a suspect who hasn't been charged and I do not believe they did!!

The Police fed the media the stories as far as I can tell and on the 22nd January 2011 we get this story...

Quote
They have the wrong man, says brother of Vincent Tabak
VINCENT Tabak’s brother, Marcel, protested his brother’s innocence.
By ANIL DAWAR AND JOHN CHAPMAN
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sat, Jan 22, 2011



Marcel Tabak... The brother whom said his brother was a scapegoat... The brother ,whom we see outside Bristol Crown Court on the 21st October 2011... The Brother who we do not see daily at these court proceedings... The brother who has not screamed from the roof tops, the brother who has stayed silent for all these years...

Whilst I like a numpty have been chasing a Placid Dutchman whom I believe was in prison for 20 years all around the Internet.... As we know they cannot and should not have released Dr Vincent Tabak's name whilst he was under arrest ... But it was everywhere... And the more I think abut it the more I don't think they did.... I have said so many times things don't add up.... Everything seems to be the opposite of what it should be...  The case makes no sense... And i still do not know what the case is about.... mrswah has said she is unsure whether Dr Vincent Tabak is Innocent,... But i suppose it depends in which context you put that....

We have a story at trial that doesn't make sense... we have the arrest of a landlord that has been through a change in his life due to said arrest.... And I questioned before... who was Joanna Yeates and maybe i should have questioned... who is Dr Vincent Tabak??


I believe this man is Dr Vincent Tabak ( If Dr Vincent Tabak is his real name...) and not the images that we have been shown all over the media of a monstered image that everyone wants to believe is the sort of person who they imagine would be capable of such an act....... (I believe those images are photoshopped)



Now I've come to that conclusion I don't know what to think!

Except for one thing.... Is the man I have identified the owner of this unique trial number U20110387 ???

Something tells me that he is!!

Maybe I should start calling him Dr Tabak or Mr Tabak, because I am not sure of his name....



https://twitter.com/dailyturnout/status/28091537820745728
https://twitter.com/Josiensor/status/28104792735744000
https://twitter.com/emilygosden/status/28106420947779586
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/224632/They-have-the-wrong-man-says-brother-of-Vincent-Tabak
https://www.channel4.com/news/joanna-yeates-murder-police-search-neighbours-flat