Other High Profile Cases and Persons of Interest > The murder of landscape architect Joanna Yeates in Bristol in December 2010.

Did Dr Vincent Tabak's Conviction happen in May/July 2011?

(1/7) > >>

[...]:
I have posted this but... I wanted to start a new topic as posts get lost in threads... And I seriously wanted to question whether Dr Vincent Tabak's trial had already taken place in July 2011...

Christopher Jefferies witness statement to the Leveson..  I have normally used Christopher Jefferies second witness statement, and went looking for his first.. Can what it says be true or have they made an error...

Christopher Jefferies first witness statement was made in November 2011


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

"July"?
Did they have a trial in July that we didn't know about??
Was the trial in October even more of a show trial than we know it was??
Was that the reason that the media could tweet so fast what had taken place??

CJ States in the Leveson"

--- Quote ---I was startled to hear the editor of the Scotsman, one of the papers sued by me for libel and himself a member of the PCC, describe his paper's coverage of my arrest as a mistake.
--- End quote ---

So I went to the Scotsman to see if I could see there apology..


--- Quote ---Yesterday The Scotsman and other newspapers apologised in court for having wrongly suggested that Mr Jefferies was involved in the killing of Joanna Yeates. We had also wrongly suggested that he had acted in an inappropriate, oversexualised manner with his pupils in the past and that he invaded he privacy of his tenants in his capacity as a landlord of two flats. We accepted in court that these allegations were untrue and that Mr Jefferies had no involvement in Ms Yeates' killing. In recognition of the distress caused, we have agreed to pay substantial damages to Mr Jefferies plus his legal costs.
--- End quote ---

The timing of CJ's suing of the media is important.. Mr Jay had stated that the trial was in "July" and Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted of "Murder"...

That statement must be true.... I will say, how on earth would CJ, be able to sue the papers if there hadn't already been a conviction in 'July" ?? Until there is a conviction there is no evidence to catergorically state that CJ is an Innocent man!! (No offence meant CJ..)

--- Quote ---Mr Jay
We know there was a statement in open court on 29 July of this year.

Mr Christopher Jefferies
Mm-hm.

Mr Jay
The newspapers admitted liability, gave the standard apologies on these occasions --
--- End quote ---

Now I cannot find the pdf of CJ's first witness statement and luckily the statement is available through the link at the bottom... But is the reason that CJ's statement is sealed for 84 years, because they actually held Dr Vincent Tabak's trial in "July 2011"?

It would make sense that a trial had already taken place...

The Scotsman could not state on the 1st August 2011 that CJ was an entirely Innocent man... As the trial we were told was to take place in October 2011..

The Police had believed there to be an accomplice, and until someone else was convicted of this crime, CJ could always potentially have been implicated...

In August 2011, Dr Vincent Tabak still hadn't said anything....  He didn't sign his enhanced statement until September 2011, nothing as far as I am aware stated how he had entered Flat 1.... It is not until the apparent trial in October 2011, that Dr Vincent Tabak gives his version of events...  And of course he apparently was invited in....

So... CJ still could have been seen as a suspect by the Police right up until October 2011 as he was the landlord with the keys to Joanna Yeates Flat and they had no idea how entry had occurred...!

The Police did not apologise until 2012 to CJ and cleared him at that time Officially...

I'm aware CJ could confidently feel he could take the papers to court, but he would need something concrete to establish that the hole fiasco in the newspapers was outrageous and he had proof that he was indeed an Innocent man...

After the apparent trial of Dr Vincent Tabak's it did not stop the media from totally vilifying him, with talk of Porn.. prostitutes and his interest in child porn...

So the media's attitude hadn't changed.

CJ wouldn't and couldn't take the media to court at the end of July 2011, without having Dr Vincent Tabak convicted..(imo) The papers would not bow down and just pay him any cost and then state that he was wholly Innocent... They would fight their corner and state that until a trial and conviction, he still could be a suspect..

Is this the reason that No-one wants to talk about Dr Vincent Tabak's trial and conviction?? Because they had already had a trial and convicted him??

Did the "Manslaughter Plea" stand??  Was Dr Vincent Tabak convicted of "Manslaughter" in July 2011 and The October 2011 trial was just for show??

CJ.. has to be confident that he can win his case hands down!! And The apologies to CJ start in court on the 29th July 2011...

Article dated 29th July 2011


--- Quote ---"Christopher Jefferies is the latest victim of the regular witch hunts and character assassination conducted by the worst elements of the British tabloid media.

Many of the stories published in these newspapers are designed to 'monster' the individual, in flagrant disregard for his reputation, privacy and rights to a fair trial.

These newspapers have now apologised to him and paid substantial damages."


--- End quote ---

I missed a trick... Dr Vincent Tabak's conviction had to be settled before CJ took the papers to court, he wouldn't have won and no apology would have been made.. He has to have everything in the bag to be able to stand up in court and say, that there is proof I did not have anything to do with the Murder of Joanna Yeates...!!


I am not surprised that No-one will talk of this case, I am not surprised that the media do not say anything... They probably all got a gaging order in July 2011.. It has been staring us in the face all this time.. CJ.... CJ who has tried time and time again to show us that the case against Dr Vincent Tabak is false... 
Not only does he sue the paper, he appears at the Leveson and then the documentary.. But we the public are not listening ...we the public are waiting on a selacious trial.. And we got one... With bells on it...

Now I understand why there were 20 written witness statement that were read out.. Why would you go to a trial if you have already been... That is why Tanja Morson was away on holiday... She didn't need to be there.... It wasn't real...(imo)... Every person whom you expected to take the stand didn't... 

* No DCI Phil Jones...
* No CJ...   
* No Tanja Morson
* No Peter Stanley
* No Good Character witness's
* No work Colleagues
* No tenant or resident of 44, Canyne Road
* No Firemen

 Nobody who should have been at the October trial was not there!! And that I believe is because the trial took place in July... But the papers cannot tell us, this is what happened.. But CJ does in his 'First Witness Statement at The Leveson"... No wonder that trial made no sense at all....

Talked about behind closed doors... Well I am not surprised in the least!!!!!

"Oh what a tangled web we weave.."  They got that right!

I would just like to add, and I am not being rude to CJ... But.... Why would the media apologies, pay him money and then a documentary is made about "The Lost Honour of CJ"???

At the end of the day.. CJ is simply a retired teacher, who owns a couple of properties, basically a nobody... Yet he manages to wield so much attention his way... Attention that he did not want apparently... I believe all the CJ reports from the Leveson and the documentary .. where to get us to sit up and take notice....

Well CJ... "I Have".... !!!



Read more at: https://www.scotsman.com/news/apology-christopher-jefferies-1-1777461

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

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2011/jul/29/joanna-yeates-national-newspapers


[attachment deleted by admin]

[...]:
Now I understand why Sally Ramage could say exactly what she wanted in her paper about The trial of Dr Vincent Tabak in October 2011..

She could make as many errors/deliberate mistakes as she wanted, No-one would correct her...  If Dr Vincent Trial didn't really happen in October 2011 and that was a complete 'Show Trial".. That in itself tells us Dr Vincent Tabak is Innocent....

He must be... They are not going to go that far... What has been covered up/hushed up to try and fool the public that the trial took place in October 2011??

It as it has been said to me before Extremely Serious! Using the Judicial system to completely fool the public.. And it sure did....

As I have said... No media outlet could state that CJ was an Innocent man, before someone else had been convicted, and indeed they did say this before the "October" show trial...

So.. now that I have come to this conclusion... will the media speak up??? Can you speak up??

It's time there was an Inquiry into the conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak... Never mind the Leveson... Time the British public and the world knew what has gone on... Something seriously needs to be done !!!!!



[...]:
Question:... Did Dr Vincent Tabak appear at The Old Bailey in "July 2011"  with his unique trial Number of: U20110387

Was this the trial that took place we were not party too??

There had to be a reason that Dr Vincent Tabak went to The Old Bailey in 'May 2011' in the first place and was given his unique trial number U20110387

So I put it to everyone, that Dr Vincent Tabak was convicted in July 2011 and  it was under the trial number of U20110387 and at The Old Bailey!!

Mr Clegg.... anything to say??



[...]:
So where do we go from here??

I have written so much trying to pull the Defence apart.... Never mind The Prosecution.... And The conclusions I have made over this time period have been a revelation to me...

I never understood why The Defence would bury their Client... Why images show lack of protocol and Nothing is said or done.. Why NO, cross examination of witness's really took place... Why all of The Hearsay Evidence was apparently allowed.. Why the letter of the law was not followed in court...

Why Judge Field said it was Sexually Motivated, when there was NO Proof of this at trial... Why daily for over a year I have found new anomalies, with evidence and trial statements...

I am convinced, that they convicted Dr Vincent Tabak in July... And maybe not what we think....

Leonora has always talked about a deal... And I believe that to be true... But was the deal struck in May 2011 and the finalities done in July 2011??

This has been quite a journey and I have felt frustrated on many many occasions... And I too must have frustrated others..

But..... There still has to be someone who has been protected, something has been covered-up, and I believe the press had no option but not speak about what deal had been made...

But that didn't stop the show trial taking place...

Now why is that?????



[...]:
By the 6th of July 2011... Is possibly the date at which Dr Vincent tabak conviction had been settled...


--- Quote ---He was subsequently released without charge and was ‘entirely innocent,’ Mr Grieve told three judges, including Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge.

Miss Yeates’s next-door neighbour, Dutchman Vincent Tabak, a 33-year-old engineer, has admitted manslaughter but denied murder and is due to go on trial at Bristol Crown Court in October.
--- End quote ---

Making a statement like that in itself is prejudicial..  This is July 2011 we are talking... Dr Vincent Tabak could have withdrawn his guilty plea to Manslaughter and said it was made under duress.. He could have got evidence to prove that it wasn't him whom had killed Joanna Yeates.. The timeline suggest that is true....


--- Quote ---Mr Grieve said the articles published on December 31 and January 1 would have posed a ‘substantial risk of serious prejudice’ to any trial Mr Jefferies might have faced.
--- End quote ---

By that token the same should apply to Dr Vincent Tabak... Nothing should be published before The apparent trial in October that might prejudice a jury... Nothing stating he had pleaded guilty to Manslaughter for starters!! (imo)

So is Bernard finally out of the bag??




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011462/Sun-Daily-Mirror-contempt-court-Joanna-Yeates-murder-articles.html#ixzz56EqEkaT1


[attachment deleted by admin]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version