Author Topic: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.  (Read 15823 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #60 on: September 22, 2017, 11:13:09 PM »
Joanna Yeates: Murder at Christmas Part 1 11:55 of the video:...

Here's a quote from CJ in this program... Now I am being to wonder if Greg was back earlier than they say he was ..

Quote
I got up on the Monday morning noticed that I had a Missed Call on my phone from Greg at about half past twelve on the Sunday, so that was very, very , unusual.

CJ is not a stupid man ...And I cannot see how he would mistake 12:30am Monday  for 12:30pm Sunday.. His phone would not register the call as 12:30 Sunday if it was AM... it would become Monday..

So when did "Greg" contact CJ....

Was it 12:30am Sunday 19th December 2010 and if so why had Greg rang CJ before he had returned from Sheffield..

If not it has to be 12:30pm Sunday that Greg rang CJ....  Again why did he ring CJ at this time ??

CJ was not called to be  a witness, which I'm sure we all agree he should have been... 

If Greg as rung CJ at either of these times on the Sunday, he must have been concerned for Joanna Yeates welfare... So why did it take so long to inform people ??

I can only go from what is available on video and as Greg has never made an appearance we can refer too.. I can only use what I have .. And question what I see and hear...

So... would CJ mistake the day that Greg rang him???? For an educated man such as CJ.. I don't think it likely... Which leaves us with even more confusion...

Or does this go with that she was missing possibly before 'Friday 17th December 2010... As they charged Dr vincent Tabak from the 16th December 2010.. And that never made sense to me....!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X5I4eOKIBs


Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #61 on: October 10, 2017, 12:41:07 PM »
In The Lost Honour of CJ... There a scene where Greg goes to the main door and rings the buzzer... CJ(man playing him) opens the door and talks of  who's in which Flat...

The Interesting part is when he is about to invite Greg inside... he says:

Quote
Why don't you come .. Actually don't I'll just erm I'll just go and get a coat....

He then closes the door on him...

Now if this was the main shared entrance for Greg ,Joanna Tanja and Dr Vincent Tabak to get there mail, why didn't Greg just walk inside ???? Why wait on the door step... CJ didn't invite him in!!!!

If he wanted to talk to CJ.. he should have been able to walk inside that main Door and Knock on CJ's flat door... The Police do that later on when they go to arrest CJ.... But CJ has Greg hanging on the door step....


So is there another shared entrance ????

 

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #62 on: October 10, 2017, 10:46:22 PM »
Found this on facebook from The Crime and Investigattion Channel

Quote
CI UK
20 December 2013 ·
Joanna Yeates was murdered on Christmas Eve in 2010. Find out more about her story in Joanna Yeates: Murder at Christmas, for free online, for a limited time only!

Murdered Christmas Eve ??


Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #63 on: October 12, 2017, 07:48:44 AM »
Looking at The Lost Honour of CJ...

When the shots are done of the Flat that Dr Vincent Tabak, was supposed to have lived in .. we get footage of the real flat outdoors/indoors etc....

But when the footage of what is supposed to be Joanna Yeates Flat, it looks nothing like it should... The Access Panel is on the wrong side , the door opens the opposite way and when you see CJ stood outside, The path dosen't lead to the little gate. It turns right,,,

If CJ owned that Flat what we know as Joanna Yeates Flat, then why wasn't the scenes shot there ????

Did CJ own other properties???

Images attached ...

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #64 on: October 19, 2017, 11:40:59 AM »
Finding what is written on the Reading Glasses of the woman who plays Mrs Yeates in the Judge Rinder program, I find slightly disturbing..

The word Dead Is on the arm of these glassses.... Why would someone dress the woman playing Mrs Yeates with a pair of Glasses that say "Dead"
I believe that they are supposed to be be a designer pair of glasses from "Red or Dead"

How inappropriate.... Or like many images is it meant to be there ????

Image attached .....

This can be seen at 7:41 of the video


Edit  Just checking the logo for Red or Dead and what appears on the arm of the glasses isn't their logo... The Font is different..

So who would write the word "DEAD: on The Arm of the Glasses of the Woman playing Mrs Yeates in The Judge Rinder Crime Program about Joanna Yeates ???

I have attached an image of another pair of glasses from Red or Dead

I am starting to question....
Who are these programs actually aimed at???

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4htq8y

Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #65 on: October 19, 2017, 03:27:31 PM »
The Judge Rinder program about Joanna Yeates, I hadn't realised when it was made/aired...
22nd June 2016

How comes they made this program then???
The Interview with the parents looks a lot older...

The summary about episode 3 for the first season of this program has nothing to do with Joanna yeates... But that is the episode that Joanna yeates story is featured..
Season 1 Episode 3
Quote
SUMMARY

Barrister Robert Rinder examines the case of 20-year-old hair stylist Hollie Gazzard, who was fatally stabbed by former boyfriend Asher Maslin in her Gloucester salon in the presence of customers. Maslin had proved to be a controlling character, and had a record of violent and criminal activities. He had threatened that if Gazzard left him, there would be `hell to pay', prior to the incident in February 2014.


But on the IMDb website is says:
Quote

Add Image S1, Ep3
22 Jun. 2016 Joanna Yeates
Know what this is about?
Be the first one to add a plot.

I don't believe that all these interviews happened for the program.. maybe Phil Jones did.. But I don't know...

I had just assumed that it was made after the trial..





http://www.radiotimes.com/tv-programme/e/fmmzgx/judge-rinders-crime-stories--series-1-episode-3/

Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #66 on: October 23, 2017, 11:12:45 PM »
......................

Offline [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #67 on: October 30, 2017, 11:59:34 AM »

Edit... The information at trial NEVER proved that Dr Vincent Tabak killed Joanna Yeates..... The Staging of The Crime scene should tell you that....!!!


Offline Baz

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #68 on: October 30, 2017, 05:01:35 PM »
Hi Nine,

I’m a long time lurcker but a first time poster. I’ve been reading this forum for years and years but especially, in the last year, this thread.

Firstly, I have a lot of respect for the tenacity you have shown in your search for information and the amount of time you have obviously spent on this. It’s genuinely incredible to me.

However, I find myself disagreeing with almost all of your posts. It seems to me that you find the slightest piece of information that piques your interest and then through supposition (hence the infinite number of times you have to write “imo”) blow it all out of proportion in the hope that it will lend support to your belief in Mr Tabak’s innocence. Some examples that come to mind are a couple of days ago when you took “he telephoned his mother, her friends, her mother and later” to mean that Greg phoned his mother’s friends, even though he clearly mean’s Jo’s friends, and the time you started try to find meaning in Coldplay’s lyrics with regard to the murder (I didn’t imagine that did I??)

Here’s my take. The reason that the trial doesn’t reveal everything you want it to is because Tabak pled guilty to taking Jo’s life and the trial became about the motivation. The Crown did not need to prove he did it and so a lot of the information they would have required was no longer necessary. And a lot of the ‘holes’ or ‘inconsistencies’ you find are because there isn’t access to information you need so you go to any source you can find and build off of that i.e. the accuracy of a reconstruction on an ITV daytime tv programme.

Something that nothing has ever refuted for me is Tabak’s confession and guilty plea. Now as a True Crime addict I am well aware of the phenomenon of false confessions and have no trouble believing that they do happen. The West Memphis Three was one of my first True Crime addictions and that is a case with a clearly false confession. However, in all the years I have been reading about these sorts of things I have come to understand that false confessions are generally given by those with low IQs and are in most cases immediately retracted. Neither of these things are true of Tabak. Also, even if he did confess under stressful conditions from police, why did he still plead guilty and why is he, apparently, not fighting now?

I do have a question, the photo of Tabak that you claim isn’t him. What makes you say that? It clearly looks like him. Is there something there I have missed? You also mentioned that he is photo shopped into photos with his girlfriend but I have never seen any proof of this!

Anyway, I could keep writing for ages but I won’t.

Just thought I would say, on your anniversary, you have given me hours of entertaining reading, even if I don’t agree with any of it, for which I am grateful. I doubt i will be posting again, but you never know.

Baz

P.s. Have you tried getting in touch with Tabak directly?

Offline AerialHunter

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #69 on: October 30, 2017, 06:27:30 PM »
Baz, you are a genius. I knew I kept overlooking something. Welcome to the forum. Keep it coming.

AH
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 John

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #70 on: October 30, 2017, 06:53:06 PM »
Some interesting points Baz, we are always grateful to readers that get involved occasionally.

Nine has posted a huge amount of material and appears to be entirely convinced that Tabak is innocent but the evidence would appear to tell a different story.  Certainly, Tabak's attempt to plead guilty to the lesser offence of accidental killing or whatever else you want to call it appeared to have been futile.  Personally, I don't believe for a moment that he set out to murder Joanna but once he had assaulted her, something in him took over and he continued to strangle her. That in law is murder.  Had he stopped and left her shocked but alive he would have been charged with assault and probably lost his job.  As it was, and this is only known to him, he persisted and killed her.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2017, 06:59:36 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Leonora

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #71 on: October 31, 2017, 11:58:20 AM »
...The reason that the trial doesn’t reveal everything you want it to is because Tabak pled guilty to taking Jo’s life and the trial became about the motivation. The Crown did not need to prove he did it and so a lot of the information they would have required was no longer necessary. And a lot of the ‘holes’ or ‘inconsistencies’ you find are because there isn’t access to information you need so you go to any source you can find and build off of that i.e. the accuracy of a reconstruction on an ITV daytime tv programme...
If you are prepared to believe in the authenticity of Tabak's guilty plea, then I fear you are prepared to believe anything. This case has nothing in common with any other case you or I have ever come across. If you had read my posts, you would know that the plea was almost certainly faked, probably by the use of an actor (imposter) on the video-link. There is an astonishing amount of evidence to back up this contention.

Even if it really was Tabak who entered the plea, it doesn't alter the fact that he had nothing to do with the killing of Joanna Yeates.

It isn't a question of what some of us "think". It is a question of hard facts - first and foremost the testimony in the witness box of Peter Brotherton - who didn't even tell the jury the most important fact about himself, namely that he was a senior officer from another prison. Not once did this witness actually state that the prisoner had confessed the crime to him. It was all in the minds of the jury, the press and the public. The incriminating sentences were actually said by Counsel for the Defence, cross-examining the witness. It was a clever trick carried out in full public gaze by a conjuror and his assistant.

It PROVES beyond a shadow of doubt that the Defence, the Prosecution and the Judge were in collusion to stage the trial. Judges are trained to stop this kind of trickery, but this judge was silent. So too was the defendant, thereby proving that he was part of the conspiracy.

The judge, the defence QC and the prisoner were also silent during the testimony of the Detective Constable who travelled to Schiphol. This is astonishing, as she quite obviously omitted nearly everything - certainly everything of importance - that was discussed during the 6 hour interview of the defendant.

The third concrete proof of Tabak's innocence never came to court - Christopher Jefferies's 2nd witness statement. This is important because he has been the subject of so much publicity, yet not one single journalist nor documentary film maker has elicited the contents of this vital statement. The secrecy surrounding it PROVES that there is a big cover-up - and the landlord himself is party to it.

EDIT - By the way, all the full media accounts of the testimony of Brotherton in the witness box have been removed from the internet, quite recently, so it isn't all that easy for you to verify how he and Mr Clegg deceived us all. You would need to get a printed copy of one of the newspapers from a central library, preferably in the Bristol area. But you can just as well trust me.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 12:04:21 PM by Leonora »

Offline AerialHunter

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #72 on: October 31, 2017, 01:05:32 PM »
If you take a step back and look at everything from Nine, Leonora, Mrswah and now Baz, and then try and build a model that fits all, there appears to only be one solution.

Working backwards, the police “officers” standing outside the court are utterly despondent, the statements read out were delivered in such a manner as to indicate that something is seriously wrong, nothing is delivered with the normal cocky gusto.

Leonora perceives that the confessions were false and, more to the point, staged and completely out of place.

Nine’s epic research points out that at every turn a kind, thoughtful, extremely intelligent man has suddenly become a cold, thoroughly dismissive killer that could strangle a pretty young woman, dump her body and go shopping for crisps, a situation that is as about as likely as winning the lottery without buying a ticket.

Baz’s observations are unintentionally astute in respect of the model, but highlight the where the cement needs to be put between the blocks.

Put yourself into Tabak’s place, imagine you are so intelligent you are probably six questions ahead and going round the same pointless loop of argument day after day after day, wondering when these morons are going to take a hint and go and do something useful instead of high fiving each other after each pointless day.

Sitting in front of you are the comparative academic equivalent of a pair of Troglodytes, trying to be the story twisting experts the police hold up as an example of genius coppers. Their reputations are on the line with this one and they are not going to give an inch, Yeates uncle was a copper so there is an additional pressure to get Tabak to “crack” under their amazing powers of persuasion. And so they keep going, round and round, round and round, until the victim, who’s been exposed to the same stuff over and over again, starts to remember things as they come up in conversation again, and again, and again.

But the Troglodytes are up against a brain that can see them coming and can see the weakness in this petty system developed to persuade your average simpleton to confess to all, and Tabak walks them into the void. All he’s done is shove the system straight up their own arses by simply confessing to manslaughter. As he will have pointed out the Trogs have got a killer out there and he struck fast, hard and with the ability to avoid detection, and he’s probably going to do it again. But now the Trogs can’t touch him, because the inquiry ends here, it stops, and they are the ones who will have to answer in the long term to the queue of bereft parents wanting to know why they let this continue.

And the Trogs became the victims of their own system.

This might account for the behaviour of Clegg, he’s part of the system too and realised that Tabak had damaged them beyond repair, he needed to be made an example of, hence the Judges complicity by handing out an unusually long sentence. The apology to Yeates parents wasn’t for killing Joanna, it was for preventing the Trogs going after her killer.

They don’t like it up ‘em.

AH
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 [...]

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #73 on: October 31, 2017, 01:28:11 PM »
If you take a step back and look at everything from Nine, Leonora, Mrswah and now Baz, and then try and build a model that fits all, there appears to only be one solution.

Working backwards, the police “officers” standing outside the court are utterly despondent, the statements read out were delivered in such a manner as to indicate that something is seriously wrong, nothing is delivered with the normal cocky gusto.

Leonora perceives that the confessions were false and, more to the point, staged and completely out of place.

Nine’s epic research points out that at every turn a kind, thoughtful, extremely intelligent man has suddenly become a cold, thoroughly dismissive killer that could strangle a pretty young woman, dump her body and go shopping for crisps, a situation that is as about as likely as winning the lottery without buying a ticket.

Baz’s observations are unintentionally astute in respect of the model, but highlight the where the cement needs to be put between the blocks.

Put yourself into Tabak’s place, imagine you are so intelligent you are probably six questions ahead and going round the same pointless loop of argument day after day after day, wondering when these morons are going to take a hint and go and do something useful instead of high fiving each other after each pointless day.

Sitting in front of you are the comparative academic equivalent of a pair of Troglodytes, trying to be the story twisting experts the police hold up as an example of genius coppers. Their reputations are on the line with this one and they are not going to give an inch, Yeates uncle was a copper so there is an additional pressure to get Tabak to “crack” under their amazing powers of persuasion. And so they keep going, round and round, round and round, until the victim, who’s been exposed to the same stuff over and over again, starts to remember things as they come up in conversation again, and again, and again.

But the Troglodytes are up against a brain that can see them coming and can see the weakness in this petty system developed to persuade your average simpleton to confess to all, and Tabak walks them into the void. All he’s done is shove the system straight up their own arses by simply confessing to manslaughter. As he will have pointed out the Trogs have got a killer out there and he struck fast, hard and with the ability to avoid detection, and he’s probably going to do it again. But now the Trogs can’t touch him, because the inquiry ends here, it stops, and they are the ones who will have to answer in the long term to the queue of bereft parents wanting to know why they let this continue.

And the Trogs became the victims of their own system.

This might account for the behaviour of Clegg, he’s part of the system too and realised that Tabak had damaged them beyond repair, he needed to be made an example of, hence the Judges complicity by handing out an unusually long sentence. The apology to Yeates parents wasn’t for killing Joanna, it was for preventing the Trogs going after her killer.

They don’t like it up ‘em.

AH

ah.. know I understand....  The feeling of responsibility and saying sorry.... Honestly sometimes I don't see what is right in front of me .....   

Offline Baz

Re: TV Programmes made after Vincent Tabak's conviction for murder.
« Reply #74 on: October 31, 2017, 04:24:11 PM »
Leonora,

Thanks for the overtly condescending response.

As you argued that it isn’t about what people “think” but about “hard facts” and then cited the Salvation Army Chaplain Peter Brotherton not disclosing his employment by another prison, I figured I’d do some research to test this “hard fact”.

I started with your blog post about it. Here is a quote:

“Issue 5 of the Butler Trust’s magazine “Insight” reported the award of a Commendation for 2012–2013 to a Peter Brotherton, Supervising Officer at Whitemoor Prison, Cambridgeshire. The citation refers to his work with the transport of dangerous prisoners to and from court, and to contact with the CPS. Perhaps he received this Commendation as a reward for tricking Vincent Tabak.”

So, I decided to try and prove you were right in your presumption that the man at Tabak’s trial and the award winning prison officer were one and the same by finding a picture of the prison officer in a picture associated with the prison and compare it to the picture on your blog of the man from the trial.

Well, I managed to track down the Butler Trust “Inspire” magazine regarding the awards and here is a link:

http://www.changinglivestogether.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Inspire-5-Book.pdf

If you scroll to page 17 of the PDF you’ll see a picture of Pete Brotherton and Anthony Richardson of HMP Whitemoor. Neither of these men is the man pictured in your blog and therefore I think we can come to the conclusion that the Chaplain Peter Brotherton is not the same man as the Prison Officer Peter Brotherton, which explains why he didn’t reveal to the jury that he was a prison officer, because he wasn’t one.

Anyway, hope that helps.

Baz