Author Topic: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?  (Read 13977 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline [...]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #90 on: June 07, 2018, 08:12:59 AM »
I can relate to that, a trial can be overwhelming.  I know this from bitter experience, having supported a family member who was stitched up by the police (thankfully the jury saw sense). For something like shoplifting or criminal damage maybe, but not killing someone.  I cannot get my head round that. I believe that Tabak is guilty of the murder of Joanna.

Hi Gerladine, welcome to the forum... everyone has a difference of opinion, and as you can see from this thread mine differs from yours... I hope you spend some time to read what has been written, and maybe come to a different conclusion... One thing is for sure, nothing in this case adds up...

Offline Angelo222

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #91 on: June 07, 2018, 08:40:43 AM »
Hi Gerladine, welcome to the forum... everyone has a difference of opinion, and as you can see from this thread mine differs from yours... I hope you spend some time to read what has been written, and maybe come to a different conclusion... One thing is for sure, nothing in this case adds up...

I disagree Nine.  The events which occurred hold no mystery for me.  Tabak has admitted his guilt but he thought that by doing so he would get away with a manslaughter charge and be out of prison in a few years. Joanna wasn't accidentally killed, Tabak strangled the life out of her.  Granted it was not premeditated but he panicked, the rest is history.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2018, 08:43:22 AM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #92 on: August 03, 2018, 12:40:49 AM »
Tabak is innocent.
3 days after Joanna was reported missing Greg Reardon references Joanna in the past tense claiming, 'She was my future'.
Joannas body had not yet been discovered. She was still missing.

When someone is missing in unknown circumstances and a very close person very soon starts to reference their loved one in the past tense it indicates that they have guilty knowledge that the missing person is dead.

If you look online you will find Joannas parents taking part in documentaries and press interviews. You will not find any videos of Greg Reardon.

Not only do I firmly believe Tabak is innocent I am very sure there is much more to this as to why the real killer is not in prison.

Offline [...]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #93 on: August 03, 2018, 02:53:29 AM »
Tabak is innocent.
3 days after Joanna was reported missing Greg Reardon references Joanna in the past tense claiming, 'She was my future'.
Joannas body had not yet been discovered. She was still missing.

When someone is missing in unknown circumstances and a very close person very soon starts to reference their loved one in the past tense it indicates that they have guilty knowledge that the missing person is dead.

If you look online you will find Joannas parents taking part in documentaries and press interviews. You will not find any videos of Greg Reardon.

Not only do I firmly believe Tabak is innocent I am very sure there is much more to this as to why the real killer is not in prison.

Hi.. welcome to the forum... not many believe in Dr Vincent Tabak's Innocence... It has been said before about Joanna being talked of in the past tense on more than one occasion..

I believe the Police already knew that she was dead also... Their approach early on suggests this... The Forensics examinations of the Flat before Joanna yeates body had even been discovered, suggests that they knew a crime had been committed...

This link here:
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/police-forensics-officers-working-at-the-flat-that-yeates-news-footage/659296240

Is a small clip made on the 24th December 2010.. The Forensic Officers are working on the bay windows of the Flat we have lead to believe is Dr Vincent Tabak's, this is long before he is even a suspect .. But I believe that the flat has to be Joanna Yeates flat, and we have been mislead as to which Flat Dr Vincent Tabak lived in...

Why would they be doing forensic examinations on neighbours windows or in fact on Joanna yeates windows ,if they believed she was a Missing person??

As for why the real killer isn't in prison, I have no idea.... I have just always believed that Dr Vincent Tabak is Innocent...

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1719
  • Total likes: 652
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #94 on: August 03, 2018, 09:17:38 PM »
Tabak is innocent.
3 days after Joanna was reported missing Greg Reardon references Joanna in the past tense claiming, 'She was my future'.
Joannas body had not yet been discovered. She was still missing.

When someone is missing in unknown circumstances and a very close person very soon starts to reference their loved one in the past tense it indicates that they have guilty knowledge that the missing person is dead.

If you look online you will find Joannas parents taking part in documentaries and press interviews. You will not find any videos of Greg Reardon.

Not only do I firmly believe Tabak is innocent I am very sure there is much more to this as to why the real killer is not in prison.

Welcome to the forum!

In the early days of Joanna going missing, there was an interview in which her parents and boyfriend took part, but this mysteriously disappeared from the internet!!

Talking about a missing person in the past tense, does not, IMO, necessarily indicate guilt:  if someone is missing, it is natural enough to suspect they might be dead (again, in my opinion).

However, I have never felt happy about Vincent Tabak's conviction. Do take your time to read through the thread!

Offline John

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #95 on: August 04, 2018, 01:54:55 PM »
Posters are reminded of the forum rules and in particular should keep comments, RELATIVE, AMIABLE and CONSTRUCTIVE.  You could call it the RAC of the forum world.

Please do not engage in sniping, goading or name calling as such conduct will attract penalties.

Have a great weekend everyone!!
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposť of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #96 on: August 04, 2018, 09:17:35 PM »
Thankyou for the welcome all.

I hadnt seen any discussion on the statement analysis front on this thread so I thought I would add it.. But I do grant that Greg Reardons past reference statement could be interpreted another way depending on what he was told by the police in the first few days. It is the opinion of professional statement analysts that a close loved one referring to a missing person very soon in the past tense without a clear indication of a death having occurred (which there wasnt)indicates guilty knowledge.  I would love to hear a transcript of the 999 call. But among other things, the dissapearance of Gregs interviews online compound my suspicion that he had guilty knowledge and a whole host of people are aware of it.

The statement analysts and the body language analysts professionals as well as regular sleuths would have been all over it.

Something that really interests me in our modern era is how internet and mobile information is portrayed as part of evidence. I would be interested to have it reported factually  whether Tabak looked up Murder vs Manslaughter before or after Joanna was reported missing.

Because if Tabak was planning to kill and get away with manslaughter, I think he would be clever enough not to leave evidence of him searching it before or after murdering someone.

If he searched it after she was reported missing then it could easily have a very innocent explanation.. Your next door neighbor goes missing and everyone you talk to plus the newspapers and the nation is speculating about what could have happened. Many people at the time speculated that she could have been killed accidentally in a domestic arguement, manslaughter. So it piqued his interest and he looked up the concept on the internet. Information is only valuable within the context.

As for the search for Longwood lane. Did Tabak search that before she was reported found there or after? If it was after, then its totally irrelevant as that information was already in the public domain. But if it was before she was found I would consider the following...

Imagine you had access to someone's search history. You've got a body hidden somewhere and someone else has to go away for it. Theres a man who isnt from the area who is searching for nice places to go walks having been given directions and he's looked up a few places online. Alongside other things you could just move the body to one of those locations and voila you've got your Fall Guy.  A Fall guy (I cant remember the word for a person who gets set up for someone elses crime) Who is now put on the back foot to explain why hes looked up the exact area theyve found a dead body in.

( I think they went to great lengths to convice the public that the body had been there for a long time and was frozen to the ground when it had infact been moved to that location to be found.)

Even easier you could remotely access your decoy's computer and just do the searches yourself but this method would give away a psychological advantage to your target who would have a clear conviction that his computer had been remotely accessed which would show in statenent analysis and lie detector tests..

Given the absolute circus of everything surrounding this case, pulling out all the stops to make a show of determination to leave  'no stone unturned'  have a hoard of officers search through a mountain of rubbish for a missing pizza it is definately within reason that powers would have been used to covertly surveil the internet usage of the neighbours.

Im very sceptical of there ever having been a missing pizza.

I was wondering if any good internet researchers could find a webpage Im looking for where alongside information about the Home office Pathologist Dr Russell Delaney, is featured a very short written slideshow presentation for students on how to carry out a post mortem examination.

If you find the right site Im looking for, as you scroll down the slides you should come to one slide in big bold letters which reads:

DO ONE
DO ONE
DO ONE
BEFORE EVISCERATION!

It is a play on the learning principle in medicine of "See one, do one, teach one" and is describing 3 things you should do before the removal of the organs.

It had some really interesting information on it , and it was formally on the first page of google for a short time. If any research whizzes can locate it there is some interesting information in it I'd like to revisit.

Offline [...]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #97 on: August 05, 2018, 03:12:44 PM »
If I have found the correct website, it appears to have been removed.....

http://bdiap.org/Trainees2011/Delaney.pdf

talking of Dr Russell Delaney, he doesn't appear in The Law pages, as expert medical witness they have either LGC Forensics or Dr Carey...

So what is the story of Dr Russell Delaney?? Does he no longer practice??


Offline [...]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #98 on: August 05, 2018, 09:43:37 PM »
From this clip we see Dr Russell Delaney at court for the trial of Dr Vincent Tabak...

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/vincent-tabak-trial-doctor-russell-delaney-along-outside-news-footage/656256976

Now here's where I do not understand his connection to Avon and Somerset Police and why he would want to be part of another documentary called "The Murder  Detectives"

We can see him on E02 of the program at 3:21.. The man i have been lead to be Dr Russell Delaney says:

Quote
2 is upper abdomen, edge of the um.. spinal column. 3 and 4 they both go in,one goes in to about 14 centimeter...I'm not sure which.

Why don't you know which!!

Now we have been lead to believe that the man who's images I have attached and the links I have posted, is  Dr Russell Delaney....

Well... I am not sure now... because if the man in both video's is Dr Russell Delaney, why for one is he appearing in a documentary for Avon and Somerset Police, Not only that he appears to be viewing images of the dead man and describing from said images what the cause and injuries appear to be......

Looking at this Cold.... not knowing whom I am supposed to be looking at... i would have thought that the man in "The Murder Detectives" was just another Police Officer.... He doesn't appear to have the knowledge of what i would have expected from a man who has carried and does carry out post mortems... Surely he would know which knife wound went into which rib and between which rib.... He must do.... But as a police officer looking at some images he would not be able to distinguish between which stab wound was which...

But as a home office forensic pathologist, he would and should be able to differentiate between the two...(imo) i know i am generalising here... But..... What happened to the organs that the knife penetrated... What happened to any description of the angle

He wouldn't be blindly looking at images on a computer but have in front of him his diagnosis (imo)... diagrams, notes etc.. which clearly demonstrate which stab wound caused the death of this young man and at which depth they had entered this young mans body.... not state he doesn't know... He should for all intense and purposes (imo) be unintelligible to us mere mortals, with his grasp of medical knowledge..

Sorry , I'm expecting Dr G.. here.... I'm expecting to be floored by medical information I have to google, to grasp and understand what is going on... or have I been watching too many programs??

I have decided that it must be Dr Russell Delaney based on the images and video's I have seen before this program aired... But is it?

The fact that he is sat in the documentary also is problematic for me, as I would have expected someone of Dr Delaney's reputation, not to be actively involved in a documentary for TV... And also not being credited for being in this TV production.... (He is a home Office Forensic Pathologist!)

So is the man we have been lead to believe is Dr Russell Delaney... just a Policeman from Avon and Somerset Constabulary?? Or an extra for LGC Forensics??

If so , who is Dr Russell Delaney? And did he perform the post mortem on Joanna Yeates??  As the Law Pages does not credit Dr Russell Delaney as being involved at all with any examination of Joanna Yeates... It just had LGC Forensics as the prosecutions expert witness.... Dr Delaney is not even mentioned as an independent witness...


So is it me getting things wrong....  Or is the guy on the Murder Detectives just another Policeman... or is it really Dr Russell Delaney, whom they didn't credit for his input??

I cannot find anything about Dr Delaney and this Murder investigation of Nicholas Robinson... But i can see a man on this program that I have always known to be Dr Russell Delaney since the Joanna Yeates murder Investigation...


Now i keep checking back as to how many stabs wounds this young man recieved, because i try to be as accurate as i can be with the information i write....

So From the man they tell us is Dr Delaney.... "2 is upper abdomen, edge of the um.. spinal column. 3 and 4 they both go in,one goes in to about 14 centimeter...I'm not sure which.

Yet...
Quote
The murder was in revenge for his role in a failed bid to buy a firearm. Nicholas suffered three stab wounds to his chest and managed to run out of the house and into Lower Gay Street, where he was able to call the emergency services. Despite being treated at the scene by paramedics, he couldnít be saved.

So why is the man who they say is Dr Delaney talking of 4 stab wounds?? I am just questioning, because nothing that comes from Avon and somerset Police ever makes sense to me...


Dr Delaney does appear in the first episode of this documentary,... at 3:39 of the video.. togged up looking like he's about to perform an autopsy... But again he is not creditered...

But another observation of this documentary is the car that has driven over the blood and crime scene, that shouldn't be parked there (imo).. at 3:27 of the video...

I just find the documentary strange... probably because i am looking at the key players whom appear... and many of them where there at the Joanna Yeates murder.... And yes .. I'm sure you would say they should be because it's Avon and Somerset Police..... But therefore when did DS Mark Saunders becomes DCI Andy Saunders of the MCTI ?

Too many similar sounding names for me. to cope with... or is that just coincidence??

Anyway back to Dr Delaney... did he?? would he?? appear in a documentary for A&S Poilce, when he is supposed to be an independent home Office Forensic pathologist?? I don't know... But it needs questioning... Especially as he was also involved with The Joanna Yeates Investigation...
I personally would feel a lot happier, if this Pathologist was truly independent...

And what I mean by this... Is that he is interviewed independently of any investigation taking place and explains his role as a home office pathologist.. and how he works independently of the Police and what his findings happen to be are unbiased...

Which they should be (imo).... yes i question everything... And believe you me i think we should... I want to believe in these experts opinions and what they have to say based on their medical knowledge, that should confound me... I should't be left questioning whether a man I see in a video whom I recognise is a fully qualified home office forensic pathologist whom i have been told is Dr Russell Delaney... Having me second guess if he is really the same man... And not that he is another actor appearing in a docudrama...

And the lack of accreditation for his role has me wondering and questioning who the man in the video and images is the real Dr Russell Delaney? And if it is... I must add for me.. I am mighty disappointing in what a small snippet has revealed about his role in a Murder Investigation.... !

But apparently no-one else is looking to see what goes on in these Investigations.... maybe we should! maybe like me everyone should be informed as to who is who... then you wouldn't get the like of me asking basic questions...  i must add.. that on first glances he looks the apparent part... But what I really want to know... IS......
Is he the correct part... Is that Dr Russell Delaney Home Office Forensic pathologist in that video??

And if so... why is he appearing in a docudrama with A&S police??


https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3gavcp
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3gi7mn
https://www.heart.co.uk/bristol/news/local/man-sentence-murder-of-teenager-robinson-stab/


[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline Baz

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #99 on: August 06, 2018, 05:02:25 PM »
Hello and welcome.

Having said that I'm about to disagree with you:

Imagine you had access to someone's search history. You've got a body hidden somewhere and someone else has to go away for it. Theres a man who isnt from the area who is searching for nice places to go walks having been given directions and he's looked up a few places online. Alongside other things you could just move the body to one of those locations and voila you've got your Fall Guy.  A Fall guy (I cant remember the word for a person who gets set up for someone elses crime) Who is now put on the back foot to explain why hes looked up the exact area theyve found a dead body in.

You make that sound simple but it isn't. They (and 'they' is how I will refer to whatever shadowy organisation you think orchestrated this supposed cover up) found that the guy living next door just happened to have not only "looked up a few places" but also had no alibi and whose movements could be used to suggest he had the opportunity. Also they managed to find a guy who would not only apparently never say "Actually I was just googling nice places to walk" but would actually confess to the crime on numerous occasions.

Quote
Because if Tabak was planning to kill and get away with manslaughter, I think he would be clever enough not to leave evidence of him searching it before or after murdering someone.

If he searched it after she was reported missing then it could easily have a very innocent explanation.. Your next door neighbor goes missing and everyone you talk to plus the newspapers and the nation is speculating about what could have happened. Many people at the time speculated that she could have been killed accidentally in a domestic arguement, manslaughter. So it piqued his interest and he looked up the concept on the internet. Information is only valuable within the context.

Isn't it more likely that he googled the difference between murder and manslaughter after the crime because he had just killed someone and wanted to understand that under the circumstances in which he had taken a life whether he would be charged with murder or manslaughter. Especially when you consider his other searches: extradition, local bin collection, definition of sexual assault and body decomposition. Perhaps it was because all the neighbours were talking about the possible murder and he wanted to innocently understand how her body was decomposing, even going as far as to watch a video of a body decomposing.

Now of course you'll say (as Nine probably would as well) that those searches were planted by those that planted the body where he had just been planning to take a nice walk. You'll also presumably say that his DNA being found on her body was planted. And that his confession in prison was under duress or he was drugged and that he continued to confess in court due to threats or because he wanted to be extradited (for a crime he hadn't commited?!?) But at no point has anyone offered anything like proof that these things are true. Or why he isn't appealing his conviction.

There's that saying that if you hear hoofbeats expect horses not zebras. All the evidence we do have points to Tabak but you and Nine seem to be still expecting zebras.

Offline [...]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #100 on: August 06, 2018, 05:34:53 PM »
"If expecting Horses not Zebra's" is often the simplest of answers, then why did Ann Reddrop think Zebra's and not Horses when she got involved with this case??


Offline Baz

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #101 on: August 06, 2018, 05:57:45 PM »
"If expecting Horses not Zebra's" is often the simplest of answers, then why did Ann Reddrop think Zebra's and not Horses when she got involved with this case??

As all the evidence pointed to Tabak (the horse) and this is who she said should be charged, Iím
not sure I see your point?

Admittedly I donít know all the players and their involvements in this story as well as you do.

Offline Baz

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #102 on: August 07, 2018, 03:50:09 PM »
"If expecting Horses not Zebra's" is often the simplest of answers, then why did Ann Reddrop think Zebra's and not Horses when she got involved with this case??

Are you going to elucidate on this? Because I am still none the wiser.

Offline [...]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #103 on: August 07, 2018, 05:31:54 PM »
Are you going to elucidate on this? Because I am still none the wiser.

Ann Reddrop was the Head of The Complex Case Unit, and the complex case unit deal in multiples as in crime/ murder /fraud etc....

Ann Reddrop's involvement in this case elludes to it being a far more complex case than we have been lead to believe.... A simple Murder , not to put too fine a point on it, is what it apparently turned out to be...

Yet Ann Reddrop pursued this case to the bitter end even telling us at the end of trial what a cunning man Dr Vincent Tabak was.... She had been looking at him since late December 2010...

Now... We know Dr Vincent Tabak hadn't any prior convictions... not even  a parking ticket... yet the full force of the CPS, with the backing of Ann Reddropp is keen to put Dr Vincent Tabak away.... They didn't have any evidence as to what he may or may not have done, yet he was on remand from January 2011...

He wasn't a serial killer or anything of that nature which would have had Ann Reddrops attention... even though as I have pointed out there has been many times various unsolved murders have been mentioned in context to this crime.... ( Glenis Caruthers.. Melanie Hall)...  We have even had those who are part of these cold cases make a visual appearance.... DCI Bevan and DC Joe Goff)..

Yet there is no evidence or no possibility that Dr Vincent Tabak could have been part of these murders...

Dr Vincent Tabak a quiet studious young man finding himself in the middle of this drama....

So to answer your question Baz.... Ann Reddropp must have heard Zebra's and not Horses for her to get herself involved in this case in the first place, because realistically she shouldn't...  Dr Vincent Tabak didn't come under the 21 criteria of the complex case unit.... So why did Ann pursue this case until the bitter end??


In late December 2010 Ann Reddropp had no reason to pursue Dr Vincent Tabak.... The Police went over to Holland on the 31st December 2010 to interview him.... Ann says it was his DNA that she built a case against him... But she says that before the Police go to her in late December 2010.... Where had they got the sample from??

Ann Reddropp outside Bristol Crown Court..

Quote
And Vincent Tabak became the focus of their attention following the finding on his DNA on Jo's body.. Late in December the Police asked for assistance and guidance from the Crown Prosecution service, that assistance has come from The South West Complex case Unit based here in Bristol... I reviewed the evidence, advised that Vincent Tabak should be charged with Jo's murder and began preparing the case for trial...

Now they went to Holland because it had been mentioned that CJ's car had moved position.... He at this point was in custody.... Why didn't they wait till Dr Vincent Tabak came home??

As British Police they will not be able to arrest him without cause and the relevant documentation signed and agreed.. But they only wanted to question him.... The had no Dutch Police present at the time... Or they should have been mentioned at trial.... But if Ann suspects Dr Vincent Tabak of murdering Joanna yeates, surely he should have been cautioned...

But no...... they wouldn't have had enough evidence for the Dutch Authorities to be happy with an arrest or anything else (imo)... But they do question him for 6 hours which as I keep saying is the length of time that Dutch law allows for a suspect to be charged or released.....

Coincidence.... So... protocol appears not be have been followed... Dr Vincent Tabak has been questioned for 6 hours... And hey Ho... we have DC Karen Thomas telling us on the Crime Watch program (video attached)that it was Dr Vincent Tabak's over interest in forensics that got her alarm bells ringing..... Well that has to be an untrue, if Ann is saying it was late December 2010 that the Police had come to the CPS....


The only person the Police at that time had gone to the CPS about would have been CJ... and as we know he was in custody when they went to talk to Dr Vincent Tabak....

Ann Reddrop on the Murder at Christmas  part 2 at 12:57 of video...

Quote
At that meeting one thing the Police did ask for was a voluntary DNA sample from Vincent Tabak, he was somewhat reluctant to do so..erm.. sufficiently reluctant for the officer who took the sample to phone the incident room in bristol and report that reluctance. Being something that concerned her, it wasn't quite right...

So Ann tells us the Police came to the CPS in late December 2010, also before that they have had his DNA (low copy) no strong evidence...

So yes Dr Vincent Tabak has to be the Zebra.... As Ann had apparently realised it had to be Dr Vincent Tabak and a team of Investigators went to Holland to interview him, at the same time as he had began to be investigated.. She must have had a crystal ball.... Because how could Dr Vincent tabak be the subject of the Polices Investigations in late December 2010... We have a day of the 31st December 2010 and the interview according to DC Karen thomas was what sparked their concern... Ann too tells us this on video...

So the British Police have to act on Dr Vincent Tabak's apparent phone call... fly over to Holland meet Dr vincent tabak, interview him for 6 hours... take a DNA sample at the end of the process as DC Karen Thomas tells us.... Fly back to the UK... Get the DNA sample tested... get the results of the DNA sample, then go to Ann Reddrop again and ask her for her assistance..... All in a few hours..... Is she having a giggle??

She was defineatly hearing a Zebra if she within a few hours had Dr Vincent Tabak as her suspect... with no other corroberating evidence on a low copy of DNA.... The appeal by the Yeates hadn't happened yet and the sobbing girl hadn't rung... So what evidence did she have to believe that Dr Vincent Tabak was her man??


She should have been looking for a horse instead of getting The Police to cross the channel to chase a foreign national who could have been spoken too on his return back to the UK!!

So baz... Dr Vincent Tabak is the Zebra.... And Ann obviously likes to chase them, because I cannot see what cause she or the Police had in investigating Dr Vincent tabak, when there was still plenty of people to interview and as we know Dr Vincent tabak had never meet Joanna Yeates or didnt know Joanna Yeates... No forced entry no reason to suspect a placid Dutchman... (imo).. But blindly they go looking for a Zebra because they heard 3 horses were at the gate.... !!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_vHIC9hJo  (Ann Reddropp outside Bristol Crown Court)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRDtLjPfdw0  ( DC Karen Thomas)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs (Ann Reddropp features greatly.. part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SgoYy3G750 (Ann Reddropp part 2 murder at christmas)


Edit...  Why is Ann Reddropp featuring in a Docudrama anyway???? Why does she feel the need to tell us the story, bit strange if you ask me..!





[attachment deleted by admin]

Re: Why do some think Vincent Tabak innocent?
« Reply #104 on: August 09, 2018, 06:02:57 PM »
Hello and welcome.

Having said that I'm about to disagree with you:

You make that sound simple but it isn't. They (and 'they' is how I will refer to whatever shadowy organisation you think orchestrated this supposed cover up) found that the guy living next door just happened to have not only "looked up a few places" but also had no alibi and whose movements could be used to suggest he had the opportunity. Also they managed to find a guy who would not only apparently never say "Actually I was just googling nice places to walk" but would actually confess to the crime on numerous occasions.

Isn't it more likely that he googled the difference between murder and manslaughter after the crime because he had just killed someone and wanted to understand that under the circumstances in which he had taken a life whether he would be charged with murder or manslaughter. Especially when you consider his other searches: extradition, local bin collection, definition of sexual assault and body decomposition. Perhaps it was because all the neighbours were talking about the possible murder and he wanted to innocently understand how her body was decomposing, even going as far as to watch a video of a body decomposing.

Now of course you'll say (as Nine probably would as well) that those searches were planted by those that planted the body where he had just been planning to take a nice walk. You'll also presumably say that his DNA being found on her body was planted. And that his confession in prison was under duress or he was drugged and that he continued to confess in court due to threats or because he wanted to be extradited (for a crime he hadn't commited?!?) But at no point has anyone offered anything like proof that these things are true. Or why he isn't appealing his conviction.

There's that saying that if you hear hoofbeats expect horses not zebras. All the evidence we do have points to Tabak but you and Nine seem to be still expecting zebras.

(To begin, when I say 'they' I mean an extended group of people tasked with covering up the true nature of this crime. which is not wholly all that outlandish or crazy safari story stuff really,)
 Do you understand now what I mean about the value of search history?

You are talking about, and 'when he looked up ' x y z as if its a statement of fact that Tabak himself did it. When I have explained that anyone with a little technical knowledge and motive can remotely access someones computer and make it look as though those searches had been carried out by their target.. And you're saying "of course" I'll say this and that it's..not as simple as I say.

But take for instance, if I want to, all I need is a Linux system and a software development kit for generating SS7 packets (which is readily available online) and once I have someones mobile number I can read all their text messages, i can listen in to their calls, delete messages and logs and I can also geolocate them. Gaining access to a laptop and carrying out additional google searches on it is very easy. I think it would be interesting to see what searches were found on the work computer vs the home laptop. Not that i believe we would ever be given the truth about that.

It is not only possible but given the number of things that dont add up about this case it is probable.

Please understand the wider point of what someone can lead people to believe based on access and control of someones personal computer and access to personal information about them, which can be used to steer a tailored narrative.

I think Tabak made some of the searches relating to the case, which had innocent explanations, but I dont think he made the more incriminating searches.

I do think a big kerfuffle was made to try and convice people that the body was frozen to the ground in longwood lane

Is it all that common where a lone male murderer has opted to use his car to dispose of a body that he leaves the body beside a road where it will be easily seen?

We are told that Tabak bought rock salt in Tescos because he dropped her body in the snow outside the flat so he dissolved the snow imprint evidence.

But how heavy was Joanna that tabak supposedly struggled to lift her the distance to his car? He's a big guy 6ft 4 and fit enough to run a half marathon. fool me once...

Alongside this we are supposed to believe 6ft 4 tabak couldnt lift her over the 4ft wall in Longwood Lane? fool me twice?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/cops-hunting-a-white-van-man-1694868

The woman who spotted the van said,

ďI canít understand how she was lying there in that verge for so long without being spotted."

As she is a regular dog walker of the area I think its very important what she is saying .Its a lane frequented everyday by DOG WALKERS.

I believe it is possible that at that point in time somebody was scoping out the area they had been tasked with leaving the body and perhaps even that the body was in the area in a concealed location and the person was tasked with moving it for it to be 'found'.

I think somebody went by with a van tipped the body to the side of the road. Based on what the dog walkers have said they must havehaphazardly mad a bucket with them dumped snow on top of it.

Because, if her body had been lying there totally undisturbed since it snowed, her jeans pocket would not have been showing through the snow. It would have been covered uniformly. The temperature was too low leading up to the day of discovery for the snow to have melted.

One could argue that a a dog could have moved the snow with an unaware owner, but if a dog had found a body it would have made a bigger mess of the snow around it to reveal the body than just the jeans pocket. A dog would have dug out all around the body and any owner would have noticed. A wild animal would have have really disturbed the scene more than just a back pocket. Unless of course the body wasnt covered in snow at all.

 And what happened to the landlord saying Joanna left the house of her own accord with two people?
 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12089150

I do think this is truthful. I think some people she was in contact with lured Joanna out of her house in a planned attack. I think its people joanna was is contact with that her family and friends didnt know about but possibly her boyfriend did know about.

And after giving this statement then the landlord becomes a suspect? Suspect on what grounds? Once he's released they forget about his witness statement. why?
 I think he was arrested because of what he saw was going to tear holes in a carefully preplanned narrative. And the plan from the start was to have Tabak arrested, after a period of time where a collection of supposedly incriminating internet searches would have been implanted into his regular search history about the case until an excuse could be made to go for him.. I believe its possible he was being watched before joanna went missing.  its possoble Joanna was being watched aswell.

We are told "partygoers" heading to a nearby house heard two screams. Who exactly were the party goers? And whose house were they heading to? And why if the screams from the flat were so loud as to be heard from the street didn't the bookish Jefferies hear them?  Perhaps its more likely they came from further down the street where a group of people had left the flat on foot
 
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/28/joanna-yeates-case-vincent-tabak

The last sentence in this paragraph from this article I believe is quite important.

"Avon and Somerset police may now have some questions to answer. Why did they not look into Yeates's next-door neighbour more closely until he contacted them with supposed information about Christopher Jefferies? Did they preserve the scene of the crime properly in the early days? Why did it still take three weeks for them to arrest Tabak after he gave his DNA sample?"

 "A sample of Tabak's DNA was found on her chest, however scientists could not establish what it came from."

How convenient....

3weeks is a VERY long time after a positive DNA match on a high priority murder case. What was going on with tabaks dna sample in the background which took an unprecedented long time to get a confirmation of a match and hence an arrest?

Note : When Tabak called the police to report Chris Jeffries car having changed direction...If tabak went out around 10 to go to asdas, then his story of him seeing Chris Jefferies car having been parked the opposite direction than it previously was, would have added credence to the story of Chris Jefferies having saw Joanna leaving the flat with two men on that evening as he went out in his car to run an errand.

As for Russell Delaney, his name appears on many articles on the Joanna Yeates case and I just find certain things which appear and dissapear from the internet at certain times to be rather curious.