Author Topic: The Defence Will State Their Case  (Read 160309 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #135 on: May 19, 2017, 11:18:10 AM »
Part one.......  i know I write long posts .. So I have split it into three....


I was Just looking at The News clips and I found one with Paul Vermij (Tabak family spokesman) , it got me thinking....

Video's are brilliant... they often put things into perspective, were the written word is often missed....

Quote
Vincent arrived with his girlfriend,er...on the 28th of December and they spend a few days together.. ermmm.... Celebrating Christmas and and New Years Eve and they left back for the UK on January the 2nd

Watching Paul it really got me visualising this little break to Holland to see his family... They had only arrived on the 28th December, I hadn't really thought about it properly...

Lets get this into some kind of order:

20th December early hours in The Morning... Dr Vincent Tabak and Tanja are woken up to be asked by the Police if they have seen their neighbour...

I do remember Joanna Mother saying that Tanja seemed concerned...  Because she had also been round before the Police ...

22nd December 2010 according to the trial transcript.. Dr Vincent Tabak's House was visited by The Police... Some say it was the 23rd December... At this point they carried out what is discribed as a routine search of the flat...

Then on the 31st December the Police interview him in Holland at Schiphol airport for six hours.


Well that's the quick version.... But putting yourself In Dr Vincent Tabaks position, just turns the whole thing around..

He is first awoken by Joanna Yeates family and then the Police on the 20th December 2010 in the early hours.... Most people don't take into account that Joanna Yeates Family had already been around and knocked on the door of flat 2....
So it is already registering that something quite serious is happening...

We all think this is Sunday... but the missing persons call didn't happen until the Monday... So he is not long back from America.. Tired and has been knocked up out of bed twice in the early hours of Monday morning ... he then has to get ready for a full days work....

I'm not surprised this event was in the for front of his mind.... Now we know that Joanna place of work had informed everyone ..How I don't know?.. could the same info have been sent to Buro Happold....  That isn't as far fetched as it sounds....  I have posted about an "World Architect News" online publication that featured "The Murder of Joanna Yeates....  Anyway..... Everyone is talking about this event... and when he returns home.. There is Police activity around the building..

This must be sinking In.. Dr Vincent Tabak and his girlfriend Tanja have moved to a respectable part of the city.. an affluent part of the city.. where you would imagine, it was safe... And this News and Police activity would be a little un-nerving for anyone, let alone a Dutch national In a foreign land....

After the initial flurry of Police.. The activity doesn't stop...  not only do the pair need to continue with their working lives but there home lives are now blighted by the media interest....

http://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/video/vincent-tabak-makes-first-court-appearance-netherlands-news-footage/655331800

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #136 on: May 19, 2017, 11:19:33 AM »
Part Two......

On the 23rd December the Police come around again to Dr Vincent Tabak's flat... And this time conducted a search of the premises.....

To me... this action is the important action..... This is an abuse of power in my opinion..... They have a Dutch National with no real idea of English law... A neighbour missing and he wouldn't put up any resistance to this...
Ordinarily... when there is A Missing Person... The police "Do Not" search the surrounding properties... they don't just assume that one of the neighbour in the local community has a body hidden in the house...

They would just make house to house Inquiries... and that would be it....  On this day after the Polices Intrusion into their home Dr Vincent Tabak and Tanja travel to her Parents home in Cambridge.... The pair are probably hoping for some peace...

But No..... DC Karen Thomas who I believe is "The Murder Investigation" Team Member from the Twin Track Investigation... doesn't let it lie...   She phones Dr Vincent Tabak on the 24th December 2010 to ask him more questions...... This I believe is NOT normal Police Procedure..(IMO)...  The poor Man is trying to get away from the attention that is surrounding his building and has gone away for a few days for Christmas.... "Why" Is DC Karen Thomas ringing him???

We must bare in mind.. That DC Karen Thomas stated that it was his behaviour in Holland that prompted her suspicions... So again..."Why" did DC Karen Thomas ring Dr Vincent Tabak whilst he was away in Cambridge ?? There really is NO rhyme or reason for this....

He has been spoken to twice and had a search of his home by the time she decides to ring him on the 24th December 2010... So why is she harrassing him when he's at Tanja's parents home....

With these constant questions ,searches and people whom they are staying with asking questions... I am Not surprised that this was always on Dr Vincent Tabak's mind... he could get away from it.....

They then travel to Holland and are there on the 28th December 2010... Of Course Dr Vincent Tabak is going to tell his family what has been Happening In England right next door to where he lives... We need to remember that Dr Vincent Tabak has lead a very quite life... pootling about, he is quite unremarkable in the sense that he never draws attention to himself... But now.... He his girlfriend and the building are at the centre of one of Englands Biggest Media Profiled Cases....

So it's not surprising he knows a lot about it.... Now I'm coming to why I started to write this ... And it is of course the "Infamous Interview in Holland"....

Ok... I know the Official version is that Dr Vincent Tabak tried to implicate CJ.... which i do not believe for one moment..... But I really want to understand how any why.. they persuaded Dr Vincent Tabak to come to that Interview In the first place.....

As we would assume Dr Vincent Tabak knows Dutch Law... And I am of the belief that they "Police Team who went to Holland, not only used Dutch Law when they Interviewed him.... But I believe that when he spoke on the phone, he was made aware of the situation.... And it is extremely feasible that they explained about this Interview over the phone....

DC Karen Thomas has implied that Dr Vincent Tabak's sister was like a mother hen fussing over him.... And whilst we have the image of a Placid Dutchman in our minds we can sort of see where she is coming from.... I always thought she was there looking out for him.... But there has to be more than that....

Dr Vincent Tabak's sister has accompanied him because not only does Dr Vincent Tabak know that this is an Official Police Interview, So does his sister... and she is probably making sure that they stay within the boundaries of Dutch Law....(IMO)

I had to really think about this...... If Dr Vincent Tabak is trying to get away from all of "The Media Attention" and is on his well earned break for The Christmas period.... WHY ON EARTH WOULD HE AGREE TO GIVE A WITNESS STATEMENT... In Holland when he is relaxing and wanting to spend time with his family....???

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #137 on: May 19, 2017, 11:21:18 AM »
Part Three.....

He's only been in Holland a few days... And DC Karen Thomas who up until this point has NOT left Dr Vincent Tabak alone... Is Flying out on her mission to Interview him as a "Witness"..... Now in anyone's book that information that Dr Vincent Tabak may or may not have had ,could wait for the couples return to England...

But DC Karen Thomas again, won't let it lie.... she flys to Holland and Interviews Dr Vincent Tabak for 6 hours...
I know I've explained before that in Dutch Law..  You can Interview a suspect for 6 hours.. then you either charge or release them...

Now it was never DC Karen Thomas's intention to charge Dr Vincent Tabak with anything whilst he was in Holland... But she used 'The Full Application of Dutch Law" to intimidate Dr Vincent Tabak (IMO)....

Her note book must have been close to bursting by the time this Interview was complete... she had gone totally prepared to undermine and un nerve Dr Vincent Tabak... (IMO)... Her intension was already fixed .. her knowledge that "DutchLaw' allows a 6 hour Interview must have been fixed in her mind... Or did she just conveniently stop at around 6 hours.... I don't believe THAT for one second....

She had to be prepared, there are no two ways about it.... She wouldn't want to contravene "Dutch Law"... especially as Dr Vincent Tabak's sister was present.... So would have checked what the Dutch Procedure would be on Interviewing a suspect ....... I can Confidently say Suspect...... because no matter how DC Karen Thomas wants to dress this appauling treatment of Dr Vincent Tabak up... She had to Know That "Dutch Law" allows for 6 hours...(IMO)

The answer to this stares us in the Face.... If she had gone to Holland with the "Sole" Intension of Interviewing Dr Vincent Tabak as "A Witness"... then the Interview could and should have carried on for longer.... They could have popped to the bar to make them all feel more comfortable.... But it wasn't like that.... This was a Serious Interview...  And Dr Vincent Tabak was defineatly a "SUSPECT" (IMO)... And his sister was their purely to protect his interests....

This action alone I believe is Illegal (IMO)... we then come to the excuse of why they take Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA swab.....
This reason is across between two answers that Dc Karen Thomas  and DCI Phil Jones do NOT exactly agree upon... When we see DC Karen Thomas talk about when she comes to the end of the "Process".... as she like to call it.. Because of Dr Vincent Tabak's apprant over interest in "Forensics" and his story NOT being quite right... This is why DC Karen Thomas says she asked for a DNA sample.....

Now when we look at DCI Phil Jones reason for why they took Dr Vincent Tabk's DNA.... he at first talk about Dr Vincent Tabak's ....again apparent over interest of "Forensics... But then adds that they took his DNA Following the policy we had taken with all our witness's....

Now I believe that statement made on video by DCI Phil Jones is wrong.... And by both of them giving different reason's for obtaining Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA... How can we be completeley sure that he did indeed give this sample Voluntarily???  Ann Redrrop herself on video states that Dr Vincent Tabak was reluctant to give this DNA sample.... What reason did DC Karen Thomas give Dr Vincent Tabak for obtaining his DNA???

He has to be under the impression that the Interview is legit... It's done within the boundaries of "Dutch Law"... But chuck a bit of English Law into the mix and anything could have been said to Dr Vincent Tabak to get him to give what "they" describe as a "Voluntary" sample... (IMO)

We do not now what is contained within the notes of a 6 hour Interview that DC Karen Thomas and her Colleague took.... So we do not know the type of questions and what questions she and her Colleague asked Dr Vincent Tabak.... And without there content being revealed in court, we only have their "word" that Dr Vincent tabak was over Interested in "Forensic's " and that his story had changed!.. Personally I do NOT believe them (IMO).. I believe they have proven that they as "The Law' cannot keep their simple story straight.. which can be seen in various video's ... So why should i believe.... Again in DC Karen Thomas words.. "Their Version of Events"!! (IMO)..

I don't... I don't believe a word of it.... The used the law to hound Dr Vincent Tabak... And they also used the fact that he was a Forgien National to confuse him into cooperating with the English Police Force ,..(IMO)..

So why didn't the Defence look into the legal status of this Interview?? Did "The Base Metal Service', not stretch to finding out just a few basics of "Dutch Law"??  Or were the Defence to concerned "That Their Base Metal Service" Had not much room for manuover ..(IMO)...

Which ever way you look at it.... Dr Vincent Tabak DID NOT have FAIR treatment from the outset...... (IMO) From being questioned not only by "The Missing Persons" enquiry team to being question agin by "The Murder Enquiry" team.. in this Twin Track Investigation.... Is it any wonder that Dr Vincent Tabak had trouble sleeping?? As he had no concept of English Law and would NOT be aware of what a "Twin Track Investigation" was.....(IMO)

Or maybe that was how they got around harassing him.... They could have told him that was how Investigations were conducted,... And every time someone called or search his home... it was from either "The Missing Person" team or "The Murder " team...(IMO) Maybe that's why Dr Vincent Tabak was being so helpful... because he was dealing with TWO Investigations at the same time....

And in my opinion.... it was them that Manipulated The Dutchman and not the other way around...... (IMO)!!


Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Total likes: 462
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #138 on: May 19, 2017, 12:47:57 PM »
It is highly likely that VT didn't know what a "twin track investigation " was, since I am British, and I didn't know either!

It is also highly likely that he didn't know the ins and outs of English law----why should he have done?

I would imagine that he was told that it was "normal procedure" to give a DNA sample, so he did. I wonder if Tanja was asked to give one too---does anyone know?   And, perhaps it really is "normal procedure"---I have no idea!  The whole business of going all the way to Holland to interview him, when he was returning home a couple of days later, is a bit over the top, however!  Very over the top, in fact. And, goodness knows why the police kept phoning him while he was in Cambridge.

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #139 on: May 19, 2017, 10:37:03 PM »
This Case is about..... Smoke.... Mirrors..... And Leverage..... In my humble Opinion.... And there are some of you out there who know EXACTLY what I mean.....

My Mammoth 17 hour stint yesterday... and 15 hour stint today... Finally put things into perspective.... For some aspect of this case at least....( Not Forgetting 8 months of Typing for as many hours a day....) lol   ?{)(**
 &%+((£


And now  I believe I can Prove that... The Placid Dutchman Is Innocent.... which I have always believed ....

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #140 on: May 27, 2017, 01:51:31 PM »
Maybe I have been unfair with The Defence in the light of what I believe I have uncovered..

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8051.msg408563#msg408563\

Maybe it was the Defences best effort with Little Time to tackle this case fully and with The reluctance of the prosecution to hand over 1300 pages of Document... That The only way "CLEGG" could actually help Dr Vincent Tabak... Was to discredit his own client..

Making as many moves as he could so someone would say that procedure hadn't been followed in this case... And then an appeal would be forth coming....

He also needs the trial to take it's course because ....he needs them all to perjure themselves so he can actually back up the fact that Ann Redrrop actually misused her powers and the like of DC Karen Thomas happily told the world about Dr Vincent Tabak's weird behaviour in Holland!!! (IMO)..

And the only person not covered in flies is DCI Phil Jones..... who never took the witness stand in court ,... But Happily stood next to Ann Redrrop as she Publicly claimed she had been Investigating Dr Vincent Tabak since ... late December 2010.. And he watched her commit Judicial Suicide in front of A Nation (IMO).... Maybe someone needs to look at DCI Phil Jones Motives for pursuing Dr Vincent Tabak whilst never taking the fall for it going wrong in court... (IMO)

What could DCI Phil Jones possible have to hide... ??? I wonder if he does a spot of putting?? Or would that be too rude to ask?? (IMO)..

Yes... it's true... Clegg doesn't loose cases like this.....as leonora pointed out...  Maybe this case isn't lost after all....  8)--))

Maybe they Defence are still pulling strings behind the scenes as we all write on here ..... I really hope so...  And whilst your at it... check out the timings and do a demonstration on how hard it is to carry a body around please ....  8)--))

Offline AerialHunter

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #141 on: May 27, 2017, 05:52:31 PM »
It struck me as odd that a QC with the experience of Clegg could be such a prat. Maybe there is rather more to what you are suggesting here.
There is none so noble or in receipt of his fellows unbridled adulation as that police officer who willingly deceives to protect one of his own kind and, by virtue of birthright, extends that privilege to his family.

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #142 on: May 28, 2017, 09:36:53 AM »
Maybe I have been unfair with The Defence in the light of what I believe I have uncovered..

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8051.msg408563#msg408563\

Maybe it was the Defences best effort with Little Time to tackle this case fully and with The reluctance of the prosecution to hand over 1300 pages of Document... That The only way "CLEGG" could actually help Dr Vincent Tabak... Was to discredit his own client..

Making as many moves as he could so someone would say that procedure hadn't been followed in this case... And then an appeal would be forth coming....

He also needs the trial to take it's course because ....he needs them all to perjure themselves so he can actually back up the fact that Ann Redrrop actually misused her powers and the like of DC Karen Thomas happily told the world about Dr Vincent Tabak's weird behaviour in Holland!!! (IMO)..

And the only person not covered in flies is DCI Phil Jones..... who never took the witness stand in court ,... But Happily stood next to Ann Redrrop as she Publicly claimed she had been Investigating Dr Vincent Tabak since ... late December 2010.. And he watched her commit Judicial Suicide in front of A Nation (IMO).... Maybe someone needs to look at DCI Phil Jones Motives for pursuing Dr Vincent Tabak whilst never taking the fall for it going wrong in court... (IMO)

What could DCI Phil Jones possible have to hide... ??? I wonder if he does a spot of putting?? Or would that be too rude to ask?? (IMO)..

Yes... it's true... Clegg doesn't loose cases like this.....as leonora pointed out...  Maybe this case isn't lost after all....  8)--))

Maybe they Defence are still pulling strings behind the scenes as we all write on here ..... I really hope so...  And whilst your at it... check out the timings and do a demonstration on how hard it is to carry a body around please ....  8)--))
I like this very much. Just one small gripe - I don't believe ANY of the witnesses actually perjured herself/himself - except VT himself of course. It was all too carefully planned for that.

By "perjury", I mean telling porkies. Of course, a witness also swears to tell "the whole truth", and NONE of them did that! Not even the Home Office Pathologist, who failed to mention why he could not get near the body for 6 hours - until it had been recovered from wherever it was by the fire & rescue service. I assume that does not count as perjury.

Rebecca Scott told the court, "I knew when Joanna bought a kitten that Greg was the real deal". Her phrasing allows for the unspoken possibility that the couple could have started to drift apart subsequently. There was much speculation about this at the time of Joanna's disappearance and death. This is no reflection on the character of either of the two young people.

Barristers are immune to prosecution for telling untruths in court, but normally you expect them to pounce on each other, and you expect the judge to pounce on either of them. This did not happen in this unusual trial.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2017, 10:22:54 PM by John »

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Total likes: 462
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #143 on: May 28, 2017, 10:24:44 AM »
Just to clarify-----perjury is lying in court,  but declining to tell the court everything you know, and deliberately leaving bits out,  does not count as perjury.   Is this what you are saying, Leonora? Just asking out of my own ignorance !!!

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #144 on: May 28, 2017, 10:45:53 AM »
Just to clarify-----perjury is lying in court,  but declining to tell the court everything you know, and deliberately leaving bits out,  does not count as perjury.   Is this what you are saying, Leonora? Just asking out of my own ignorance !!!

Do you know exactly what DC Karen Thomas said in court??...

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #145 on: May 28, 2017, 11:27:30 AM »
Do you know exactly what DC Karen Thomas said in court??...
Detective Constable Karen Thomas from Avon & Somerset Constabulary, a member of the police's major crime investigation team, testified on the sixth day of the trial, 17th October 2011.

DC Karen Thomas telephoned Vincent Tabak on Christmas Eve 2010 while he and his girlfriend were staying with her parents at Sawston near Cambridge. The DC questioned him about his movements on the night of Joanna Yeates’s disappearance. He told her he had been in his flat all evening, before driving in the early hours of the morning to pick up his girlfriend after she left her employer’s works party. He added that he had not known Joanna Yeates personally. During a subsequent interview, the DC’s suspicions were to be aroused by the fact that he would change his story to include an evening trip to Asda in Bedminster.

Detective Constable Karen Thomas testified that she and a colleague had travelled to the Netherlands on New year’s Eve 2010 to question Vincent Tabak, after he and his girlfriend had seen on TV that their landlord had been detained for questioning. The contact was initiated by Vincent Tabak’s girlfriend, who telephoned to Avon & Somerset Constabulary about the curious case of the landlord’s car in the night. They had noticed that the landlord had moved his car during the night when Joanna disappeared, so that it was facing the opposite direction the following morning. The Detective Constable told the court that it was this telephoned attempt to incriminate his landlord that had first aroused the police’s suspicions of Vincent Tabak.

She told the court that both Tanja Morson and Vincent Tabak’s sister Eileen “fussed” over the defendant and expressed concern that he might be tired, “more than you would expect in the case of a grown man. I would describe the sister as a bit of a mother hen”, she added.

The Detective Constable told the Court how overly-interested Vincent Tabak had been in hearing more about why the police had removed Joanna Yeates’s front door, in full view of the TV cameras. She told him, “Removing the front door of a murder victim’s apartment is standard procedure”.

The Detective Constable told the court that she took Vincent Tabak’s fingerprints and a swab of his saliva during the interview.

During the 6 hour interview at Schipol Airport, Vincent Tabak gave the Detective Constable an account of his movements during the evening of the murder that occupied 18 pages of her notebook.

Vincent Tabak told her that he had been to the Asda supermarket in Bedminster. Her suspicions were aroused by the fact that Bedminster is on the opposite side of the River Avon to 44 Canynge Road, but on the same side of the river as Longwood Lane. Vincent Tabak told the Detective Constable that he had purchased beer, crisps and rock salt in Asda, but she did not ask him for the receipt.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 11:34:16 AM by Leonora »

Offline Leonora

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #146 on: May 28, 2017, 11:47:06 AM »
Just to clarify-----perjury is lying in court,  but declining to tell the court everything you know, and deliberately leaving bits out,  does not count as perjury.   Is this what you are saying, Leonora? Just asking out of my own ignorance !!!
We can all agree that telling a barefaced lie in court while under oath is perjury. However, it is not perjury if the lie is immaterial to the case, and it may not be perjury if the witness honestly believed it to be true.

Deliberately leaving bits out that are material to the case violates the oath, but as most of the Prosecution's witnesses did this without being prosecuted, it presumably doesn't count as "perjury". In a REAL trial, Counsel for the Defence would have begun his cross-examination of Peter Brotherton by asking him, "Would you tell the court your occupation?" He would also have cross-examined Lyndsey Farmery and begun with the same question.

I am sorry that my account of DC Karen Thomas's testimony is composed almost entirely of indirect speech. I can remember more detailed reports in the press but they seem to have been removed from the internet. However, I remain convinced that she avoided telling any lies. Her sin was the sin of omission. In a REAL trial, the judge himself would certainly have asked her, "Having spent all that money to fly to Holland, what did you and the defendant talk about for the rest of the six hours?"

Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #147 on: May 28, 2017, 01:13:32 PM »
Detective Constable Karen Thomas from Avon & Somerset Constabulary, a member of the police's major crime investigation team, testified on the sixth day of the trial, 17th October 2011.

DC Karen Thomas telephoned Vincent Tabak on Christmas Eve 2010 while he and his girlfriend were staying with her parents at Sawston near Cambridge. The DC questioned him about his movements on the night of Joanna Yeates’s disappearance. He told her he had been in his flat all evening, before driving in the early hours of the morning to pick up his girlfriend after she left her employer’s works party. He added that he had not known Joanna Yeates personally. During a subsequent interview, the DC’s suspicions were to be aroused by the fact that he would change his story to include an evening trip to Asda in Bedminster.

Detective Constable Karen Thomas testified that she and a colleague had travelled to the Netherlands on New year’s Eve 2010 to question Vincent Tabak, after he and his girlfriend had seen on TV that their landlord had been detained for questioning. The contact was initiated by Vincent Tabak’s girlfriend, who telephoned to Avon & Somerset Constabulary about the curious case of the landlord’s car in the night. They had noticed that the landlord had moved his car during the night when Joanna disappeared, so that it was facing the opposite direction the following morning. The Detective Constable told the court that it was this telephoned attempt to incriminate his landlord that had first aroused the police’s suspicions of Vincent Tabak.

She told the court that both Tanja Morson and Vincent Tabak’s sister Eileen “fussed” over the defendant and expressed concern that he might be tired, “more than you would expect in the case of a grown man. I would describe the sister as a bit of a mother hen”, she added.

The Detective Constable told the Court how overly-interested Vincent Tabak had been in hearing more about why the police had removed Joanna Yeates’s front door, in full view of the TV cameras. She told him, “Removing the front door of a murder victim’s apartment is standard procedure”.

The Detective Constable told the court that she took Vincent Tabak’s fingerprints and a swab of his saliva during the interview.

During the 6 hour interview at Schipol Airport, Vincent Tabak gave the Detective Constable an account of his movements during the evening of the murder that occupied 18 pages of her notebook.

Vincent Tabak told her that he had been to the Asda supermarket in Bedminster. Her suspicions were aroused by the fact that Bedminster is on the opposite side of the River Avon to 44 Canynge Road, but on the same side of the river as Longwood Lane. Vincent Tabak told the Detective Constable that he had purchased beer, crisps and rock salt in Asda, but she did not ask him for the receipt.

Well if her admission in court is that it was the telephone call that aroused her suspicions ... Again i will ask.... why was Dr Vincent Tabak Not Cautioned.. when they arrived in Holland to take his statement???Cautioned... as a matter of procedure... Does that therefore mean any material gathered at said Interview would be Inadmissible in court?? Has all the evidence from Dr vincent Tabak been obtained "Illegally"???

If Dr Vincent Tabak was NOT Cautioned... And bothe DC Karen Thomas And DCI Phil Jones have both given differing reason as to why Their suspicions were raised... also differing reasons as to why his DNA was obtained.... The the addition of "Finger Prints" also being obtained in "Holland"... would only be taken if someone was being charged with a crime ...(IMO)..... Yet they would probably say that this was for Elimination purposes...(IMO)... Yet why go armed with DNA swabs and The ability to take Dr Vincent Tabak's finger prints ... if you only went to Holland to ask a question about a car moving position as the story goes???

And when we come to Dr vincent tabak's sister...DC Karen Thomas then goes on to imply that his sister is a "Mother Hen"... Which is a really bad stereotypical description of any female who maybe trying to question the procedure of said "Interview"...(IMO).. And also would therefore discredit any future concerns that his family may have in relation to this trial...... (IMO)..



Offline [...]

Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #148 on: May 28, 2017, 01:52:23 PM »
I'd just like to add this description of what :Mutual legal assistance requests... entail... and maybe highlight, how it was used to obtain an "Illegal" statement of Dr Vincent Tabak and evidence samples......(IMO)..


Quote
Mutual legal assistance (MLA) is a method of cooperation between states for obtaining assistance in the investigation or prosecution of criminal offences. MLA is generally used for obtaining material that cannot be obtained on a police cooperation basis, particularly enquiries that require coercive means. Requests are made by a formal international Letter of Request (LOR). In civil law jurisdictions these are also referred to as ‘Commission Rogatoire’. This assistance is usually requested by courts or prosecutors and is also referred to as ‘judicial cooperation’.

I like to scrutinize as much of this as possible:

Quote
(MLA) is a method of cooperation between states for obtaining assistance in the investigation or prosecution of criminal offences.
Dutch Authorisation to gain access by legal means to Dr Vincent tabak... (IMO)...

Quote
MLA is generally used for obtaining material that cannot be obtained on a police cooperation basis, particularly enquiries that require coercive means.

This One does exactly what it says on the Tin....(IMO)

* COERCIVE... Using force to persuade people to do things that they are unwilling to do:

So was Dr Vincent Tabak "Reluctant" to give his DNA as Ann Redropp had claimed on one TV Documentary about Dr Vincent Tabak and The Joanna Yeates Case??

What else was Dr Vincent Tabak reluctant to do?? Maybe have a 6 hour Interview with DC Karen Thomas and Partner whilst he was trying to enjoy his time in Holland with his own family.....

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mutual-legal-assistance-mla-requests


Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Total likes: 462
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Defence Will State Their Case
« Reply #149 on: May 28, 2017, 02:03:00 PM »
Has it never been proved that VT bought crisps, beer and rock salt in ASDA then?  Surely, if he was under suspicion of having killed someone and having the body of that person in the boot of his car, I would have thought the police would have been very interested in proving exactly what he bought at ASDA.