Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 227506 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #60 on: April 16, 2017, 08:35:58 PM »
I think you are taking the above quote too literally.  Certainly the police were asked for assistance in late December 2010 but the review and decision to arrest Tabak came later.
You cannot escape the startling implications of Ann Reddrop's statement about her own role, John. Her first public appearance in the case was at Vincent Tabak's hearing before the magistrate's bench, three days after he had been charged. Without her statement outside Bristol Crown Court after the trial, we would have taken it for granted that the CPS did not get involved until the police had a strong enough case to put before the CPS. The police would have claimed that they had this after they had arrested their suspect and examined his car and his black coat for the forensic evidence that they would claim had been found.

Yet here is Ann Reddrop stating categorically - not "alleging" - that the police had approached her for advice approximately four weeks earlier - namely, about the time when Christopher Jefferies was being doorstepped and arrested. If, like most people, you believe that the arrest of the landlord was an act of bumbling desparation on the police's part, then you may interpret her statement to mean that the crestfallen detectives had begged the wise Ann Reddrop to advise them how to avoid any further débâcles. If, on the other hand, you concede that there is much more than meets the eye in Christopher Jefferies's involuntary role in the case, then she is telling us that she, Ann Reddrop, is the mastermind who pulled the unseen strings.

Offline John

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #61 on: April 16, 2017, 09:09:10 PM »
You cannot escape the startling implications of Ann Reddrop's statement about her own role, John. Her first public appearance in the case was at Vincent Tabak's hearing before the magistrate's bench, three days after he had been charged. Without her statement outside Bristol Crown Court after the trial, we would have taken it for granted that the CPS did not get involved until the police had a strong enough case to put before the CPS. The police would have claimed that they had this after they had arrested their suspect and examined his car and his black coat for the forensic evidence that they would claim had been found.

Yet here is Ann Reddrop stating categorically - not "alleging" - that the police had approached her for advice approximately four weeks earlier - namely, about the time when Christopher Jefferies was being doorstepped and arrested. If, like most people, you believe that the arrest of the landlord was an act of bumbling desparation on the police's part, then you may interpret her statement to mean that the crestfallen detectives had begged the wise Ann Reddrop to advise them how to avoid any further débâcles. If, on the other hand, you concede that there is much more than meets the eye in Christopher Jefferies's involuntary role in the case, then she is telling us that she, Ann Reddrop, is the mastermind who pulled the unseen strings.

I recall the Chris Jeffries debacle extremely well and remember thinking at the time that he was the subject of a media witch hunt because of the way he looked and acted.  In the end they had to apologise to him although I still believe the BBC and Sky News got off light.

Jefferies won damages from eight newspapers over stories about him after his arrest. The publishers of the Mirror and the Sun were fined for contempt of court over their coverage.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/16/joanna-yeates-police-apologise-christopher-jefferies
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 02:13:43 AM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #62 on: April 17, 2017, 12:25:08 AM »
It is a defendant's decision whether to plead guilty to manslaughter or murder, not his counsel.

On the advise of their Council.... Dr Vincent Tabak had followed the advice of his council up until this point by saying No comment on the advise of his council to virtually every police interview that had taken place ...... instead opting to provide the police with written statements explaining his movement for that fateful weekend!!!!...

Which begs the question why he suddenly thought... I understand English Law and I will not follow the advise of my council and will Plead guilty to manslaughter instead!!!
I won't opt for a trial.. but I'll put my hands up and make the prosecutions case so much easier for them...

I'm not as green as I am cabbage looking and I am sure that you are not!!! Why would you????

On commenting directly to your post John... a defendant follows his councils advice... especially as a foreign national having NO understanding of the law of the land which you are in!!!!


Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #63 on: April 17, 2017, 12:50:19 AM »
I think you are taking the above quote too literally.  Certainly the police were asked for assistance in late December 2010 but the review and decision to arrest Tabak came later.

You cannot ask for assistance on a possible suspect when there was NO evidence to link said suspect in any shape or from to the murder of Joanna Yeates...

I will repeat... You CANNOT go to Holland to interview Dr Vincent Tabak for 6 hours as a witness... on the 31st December 2010... when you have already made a decision that he is a suspect and NOT CAUTION HIM!!!

The minute they suspected he was a suspect.. which The Police lady said in interviews, that he brought questions to their investigation... Things just didn't add up... He was too interested in Forensics..... they should have cautioned him..(IMO) and the law of the land in the UK...

But they hid under the guise of Danish law... and used danish law in which to interigate him... which as I have posted many times... allows for a suspect to be questioned for 6 Hours or you either charge or realse... but they couldn't do that as they had no power in Holland..

Yet The CPS clearly states that the police came in late December 2010 to ask for advice..in relation to Dr Vincent Tabak being a suspect..

Which in turn,... means they went to Holland with the sole purpose of interviewing Dr Vincent Tabak as a suspect...

Which the Poliice lady told an Untruth about at the trial... and in videoed interviews on the crime watch program that was screened in November 2011 after they had convicted Dr Vincent Tabak!!!

I would love to see what they were going to screen on I think was the 24th January 2011 as a Crimewatch appeal!!!

Offline John

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #64 on: April 17, 2017, 02:13:32 AM »
You cannot ask for assistance on a possible suspect when there was NO evidence to link said suspect in any shape or from to the murder of Joanna Yeates...

I will repeat... You CANNOT go to Holland to interview Dr Vincent Tabak for 6 hours as a witness... on the 31st December 2010... when you have already made a decision that he is a suspect and NOT CAUTION HIM!!!

The minute they suspected he was a suspect.. which The Police lady said in interviews, that he brought questions to their investigation... Things just didn't add up... He was too interested in Forensics..... they should have cautioned him..(IMO) and the law of the land in the UK...

But they hid under the guise of Danish law... and used danish law in which to interigate him... which as I have posted many times... allows for a suspect to be questioned for 6 Hours or you either charge or realse... but they couldn't do that as they had no power in Holland..

Yet The CPS clearly states that the police came in late December 2010 to ask for advice..in relation to Dr Vincent Tabak being a suspect..

Which in turn,... means they went to Holland with the sole purpose of interviewing Dr Vincent Tabak as a suspect...

Which the Poliice lady told an Untruth about at the trial... and in videoed interviews on the crime watch program that was screened in November 2011 after they had convicted Dr Vincent Tabak!!!

I would love to see what they were going to screen on I think was the 24th January 2011 as a Crimewatch appeal!!!

Vincent Tabak volunteered to be interviewed as a witness in Holland so it is irrelevant whether the police viewed him as one or as a suspect.  In the UK the correct procedure when interviewing a witness who during the course of the interview becomes a suspect is to caution the person before proceeding. However, in the case of VT, the interviewing officers became suspicious of him but they had insufficient forensic evidence to take it any further.  As they were outside their jurisdiction the best they could have hoped for was Tabak's cooperation.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 02:17:51 AM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #65 on: April 17, 2017, 02:16:03 AM »
On the advise of their Council.... Dr Vincent Tabak had followed the advice of his council up until this point by saying No comment on the advise of his council to virtually every police interview that had taken place ...... instead opting to provide the police with written statements explaining his movement for that fateful weekend!!!!...

Which begs the question why he suddenly thought... I understand English Law and I will not follow the advise of my council and will Plead guilty to manslaughter instead!!!
I won't opt for a trial.. but I'll put my hands up and make the prosecutions case so much easier for them...

I'm not as green as I am cabbage looking and I am sure that you are not!!! Why would you????

On commenting directly to your post John... a defendant follows his councils advice... especially as a foreign national having NO understanding of the law of the land which you are in!!!!

Actually, a defendant can make his or her own mind up after taking advice from counsel.  Only Tabak knew the truth of what had occurred and ultimately only he could make the decision as to what to plead to.  He decided to put his hands up to manslaughter in the hope of getting a reduced sentence for his crime.  It failed and now he will spend at least another 14 years in prison before being eligible for parole.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2017, 05:02:21 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #66 on: April 17, 2017, 06:56:25 AM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg397725#msg397725

Continuing from my other post......

Another thing I don't understand.... When The Prosecution and Defence appeared at the Old Bailey.. (IMO) The Defence must have argued behind closed doors about the Charge that the prosecution where going for....Murder Charge and Nothing less.... So why advise his Client to pled guilty to Manslaughter, handing A Conviction on the Prosecutions plate....

The ball would be in the Prosecutions court to prove murder!!!!

When did  the Defence negotiate a charge with the prosecution?? If nothing was negotiate.. then Why The Manslaughter Plea???? you would only negotiate with the prosecution if it was beneficial...
So how was A Manslaughter plea beneficial to Dr Vincent tabak????

It was only beneficial to The Prosecution (IMO)...

And allow a Jury to make the decision.... They were arguing whether it was Murder or NOT anyway... Wouldn't it be more prevalent for the Defence to leave it with the Jury knowing that the Prosecution were pursuing The Murder Charge..

And with the jury almost certain to have known about the plea, then that information would only prejudice them into finding him guilty... But without the plea, they may have come to a Manslaughter conclusion!!!!
When did  the Defence negotiate a charge with the prosecution?? If nothing was negotiated.. then Why The Manslaughter Plea???? you would only negotiate with the prosecution if it was beneficial...
So how was A Manslaughter plea beneficial to Dr Vincent tabak????

Why indeed! How indeed! No matter how this is twisted and turned, it does not make any sense at all. Could the secret agreement that you are inferring, between the defence and the Crown, possibly have been legal, let alone transparent?

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #67 on: April 17, 2017, 04:33:20 PM »
From the outset, we cannot determine what pressure Dr Vincent Tabak was under whilst incarcerated, and what lead to him making the plea at The Old Bailey..

Prison by definition is not a holiday home... It's there as a punishment, and I am sure that remand prisoners do not get special treatment..

Prisons themselves use dirty tricks.. everyone who is of the opinion that people don't confess to something they haven't done are very much mistaken...

You then (IMO) have to be of the mindset that the prison enviroment is just peachy and all prisoners are treated fairly... you have to believe that every prison officer is honest to the eight degree and took on the role as master of the key, because he/she wants to protect the inmate and help them repent and re shape them into upstanding citizen's...

When in reality there some officers displaying some of the same traits as the people who are incarcerated... They will remove any bit of hope that the prisoner may have .. A small bit of light in their tunnel to take away the numbness of isolation, and wait for the next time that light may appear..

Depriving prisoner of their basic rights and using whatever reason seems legit to explain this or not bothering to explain... because unless you look for the horrors that prison life brings, you would never understand how it affects the mind psychologically... Just dangle the carrot and at the last possible moment remove it... And you remove the hope that goes with it...


Just today I found a tweet that shows the cruelty that is bestowed upon prisoners... Isn't incarceration enough without cruel punishments that psychologically damages people who are in prison who's mental health may not be sound to start with...

Loosing one's liberty was supposed to be punishment in itself and reforms were supposed to help prisoners adjust to the outside world on their release... But prisons themselves appear to teach hatred (IMO) by displaying cruelties to prisoners who have very little to hold on too....

Quote
called HMP Whitemoor & officer tells me prisoners locked in cells from 5pm to 9am over 4 days of Easter so can't call families

With liberties like the above being removed and hopes dashed, to me shows just how easy it would be to wear a person down to such a point they just want it all to go away, without really understanding the consequences of their actions...

You have to be of a strong mind to start with, if you are put in this enviroment and if you are not, then any pressure could make you say anything...

Dr Vincent Tabak had lost his father and Tanja had helped him through his PHD... she was his rock... he wasn't allowed to see her or any family for around 25 days .. and if he was fragile in that respect, it would be easy to add pressure one drip at a time....

It's a disgrace that there was never a psychological evaluation of Dr Vincent Tabak presented in court, which with him being placed on Suicide watch should in itself have raised huge questions...


And I'll say again a confession is only as good as the evidence to back it up.... And the evidence was poor.. The partial DNA sample which if the want us to believe Dr Vincent Tabak used the small gate could quite easily be transfer..

Who's to say Bernard the cat never jumped into the boot of Tanja Morsons car... transferring a spot of blood... Or samples were contaminated by LCG who had a poor track record on such things...there are always explantion when the evidence isn't strong.. And A good defence team could cast doubt...

Instead of passing the Prosecution another nail to be rammed into their clients coffin (IMO)...



Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #68 on: April 17, 2017, 05:29:24 PM »
What financial help would Dr Vincent Tabak be able to gain, to prove the case against him was flawed???

I am not sure but I don't think he's entitled to legal aid, so how would he and his family fight his conviction???

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #69 on: April 18, 2017, 09:28:25 AM »
Quote
The 65-year-old was detained last Thursday on suspicion of the murder and held until Saturday night, when he was released.


Didn't they arrest Dr Vincent Tabak on the THURSDAY also.... must be a little Police trick to add pressure and make it difficult for contact with family... legal council etc.. Which by charging him gave them extra days in which to interrogate him before he appeared at the magistrates court... what day was Dr Vincent Tabak supplied with a Duty Solicitor???

The difference with the two arrests was that CJ had his OWN lawyer on hand to come to his rescue and have him released on the Saturday, where as Dr Vincent Tabak didn't...

If Dr Vincent Tabak was the Calculating ,Manipulative, decitful person the CPS had stated, then why wasn't this clever man prepared??

Why hadn't he engaged the services of a Solicitor in anticipation of his arrest??

Why did he have a duty solicitor in the police station instead of his own Solicitor..??.. everyone was watching the news... if he had indeed engaged such services , his own council would have popped up at the station, just Like CJ's did.. and had him released in the same fashion....

So, he wasn't Calculated was he!!... and the polices tactic seem to be exactly the same... maybe the arrest of CJ needs more attention and what information was released at the time about him...

Remember the media made statements that CJ had a paedophile as a friend whom he had purchased the flat from...(using as example)

This tells me that the paedophile angle had always been an avenue that they were investigating(or using)(IMO)... So why did we all of a sudden have Dr Vincent Tabak suddenly have an interest in Child Porn!!!

The story seems to have been set in the begining (IMO) the similarities between CJ and Dr Vincent Tabak's arrest needs closer inspection, all is obviously not what it appears to be!!!!!

Remember when I did the searches and used CJ... I 'm believing I was on the right track with that post..

(And no.. I didn't say it was CJ and I'm not saying that now)......


One thing to remember is the Police had an angle because of the PIZZA... Why would they make such a Big deal about a missing Pizza????

I'll tell you for why... Pizza and Beer are two of the things that are used to entice young children by paedophiles.. That and watching PORN...

Sound familiar does it???? The very subject that was mentioned after Dr Vincent Tabak's trial......
So maybe that was why they thought Multiple Killers... they could have been looking for a paedophile ring!!!!!




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8240260/Joanna-Yeates-murder-architect-told-friends-she-would-be-alone.html

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #70 on: April 18, 2017, 10:06:13 AM »
Didn't they arrest Dr Vincent Tabak on the THURSDAY also.... must be a little Police trick to add pressure and make it difficult for contact with family... legal council etc.. Which by charging him gave them extra days in which to interrogate him before he appeared at the magistrates court... what day was Dr Vincent Tabak supplied with a Duty Solicitor???

The difference with the two arrests was that CJ had his OWN lawyer on hand to come to his rescue and have him released on the Saturday, where as Dr Vincent Tabak didn't...
I agree with you that the choice of Thursday for the both of the two arrests was a police trick. We know that Vincent Tabak's arrest was planned well in advance, but this shows that the arrest of Christopher Jefferies was no spur-of-the-moment move as most people believe. It shows that neither Colin Port nor Ann Reddrop grabbed the phone the moment they saw the angry landlord on TV with the words, "That is our man!"

However, Christopher Jefferies did not have his lawyer ready on hand. According to both himself and "The Lost Honour..." he exercised his right to telephone a former pupil, whom he must have known well, and it was the pupil who got hold of Stokoe Partnership, London. They too had probably seen Mr Jefferies on TV. As far as we know, it was Paul Okebu whom they sent to represent the landlord, and presumably it took him a little time to get to Bristol. Meanwhile, of course, his client would be going through the usual indignities that the police reserve for suspected murderers, including an intimate medical examination and dressing up in unsuitable clothes.

« Last Edit: May 01, 2017, 05:07:12 PM by John »

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #71 on: April 18, 2017, 10:20:11 AM »
If Dr Vincent Tabak was the Calculating ,Manipulative, decitful person the CPS had stated, then why wasn't this clever man prepared??
I do get hot under the collar about Ann Reddrop's characterisation of Vincent Tabak, as it so obviously conflicted with the facts of the case. As you say, a killer who "kept one step ahead of the police" would have made sure he had his own lawyer available, such as Sarah Maddock, a good friend of Tanja's. He had five weeks in which to get the boot of the car steam-cleaned, either in Cambridge or Holland so as not to arouse suspicion. He had five weeks to "accidentally" drop the supposedly incriminating laptop and get it repaired with a new hard disc. He could have left his black coat in a paper bag outside a charity shop and then told Tanja that he had inadvertantly left it on a train.

All of his actions, in fact, suggest a person with nothing on his conscience except perhaps not having tried hard enough to win the Binladen contract in Mecca.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #72 on: April 18, 2017, 10:38:00 AM »

However, Christopher Jefferies did not have his lawyer ready on hand. According to both himself and "The Lost Honour..." he exercised his right to telephone a former pupil, whom he must have known well, and it was the pupil who got hold of Stokoe Partnership, London.

Leonora... I wasn't suggesting that CJ had a Lawyer prepared... I meant that with his arrest in the media anyone whom had connections to CJ could spring into action and help him, friends Colleagues etc.. They would have been outraged by his arrest and made sure he was released on Bail A.S.A.P

So... who did Dr Vincent Tabak manage to call???  It would be Tanja (IMO) she was his rock... And what could she do in relation to this??

So how many people were really just Dr Vincent Tabak's friends??? Or were they friends of a couple??? Tanja being the person they mainly knew!

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #73 on: April 18, 2017, 02:44:41 PM »
I'm still looking at this Pizza and Paedophile Angle....

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8060.msg398194#msg398194

The Police used the media to say various statements that I presume were aimed at certain suspects they were investigation...

Quote
Former pupils and neighbours (many of whom, on closer inspection, barely knew him) lined up to say that he is ‘eccentric’. Apparently, he was nicknamed Wizard because of his hair.

I believe they used CJ's arrest to let someone Know they were looking at them...

So I wondered if there had been A Police Operation named "WIZARD"..

Then I found this:...

Quote
OPERATION WIZARD
An investigation into a family counterfeiting DVD's and CD's on a massive scale.

So in context to the "Wizard" Comment... was that a reference to making Child porn DVD's ???

What double meaning is hidden in the media reports that were made at the time...?????




http://www.titanrocu.org.uk/36/section.aspx/22

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1343782/Joanna-Yeates-murder-Odd-truth-Christopher-Jefferies-great-teachers.html#ixzz4ebkRTSot