Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[[...]]

Mr Lickley said forensic archaeologist Karl Harrison considered how Miss Yeates was found, especially regarding leaves and snow around and on her body.

Mr Lickley said: "After her death, she was placed on a verge, laying on a layer of leaf matter. Following her deposition leaves were placed around her and tucked in around her sides, compressed against her body.

"A layer of snow fell, sealing the leaf litter. A little time was taken to place the body of Joanna Yeates before she was left at the scene."


Read more at http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/joanna-yeates-fought-killer/story-13538504-detail/story.html#657kCmb7ZmU9bH5T.99

https://www.cranfield.ac.uk/people/dr-karl-harrison-466715

Bit surprised about the Forensic Archaeologist Karl Harrison being called....

Leonora ,does this lend weight to what you believed as to where she may have been...

A forensic archaeologist is typically called when human remains are found scattered on the ground surface and/or remains are suspected to be buried.

So why did they need a Forensic Archaeologist???? 

She was only supposed to be covered up with a LAYER of leaves... they had already removed the snow!!! 

They Didn't need to call Karl !!!

Evidence recovery

Most forensic archaeological investigations take place outdoors, where considerations of scene location and weather must be made. One must make carefully consider logistics  to determine what equipment is necessary and potentially useful. A consideration of logistics also implies planning for broader issues such as how to approach the site and how to delimit the area under investigation.In the case of buried evidence, a forensic archaeologist will excavate. Excavation refers to the process of digging out or uncovering objects in the ground. In a forensic investigation, an archaeologist may be called to excavate a grave. Before the destructive process of excavating a grave begins, all evidence on the ground surface must be documented and collected. Surface evidence can include plants, insects, objects such as clothing or a weapon, and human remains. All evidence should be photographed and mapped, showing the location of each item in relation to other evidence as well as to other important features such as buildings, streams, roads or fences. Once the location of evidence is documented, investigators may collect it. How each piece of evidence is collected and cared for depends on various factors, explained in the section: Inventory of Evidence.

Is this why the 8 Fire Appliances where called????  extremeley weird that they would use a Forensic Archaeologist???? 

http://www.sfu.museum/forensics/eng/pg_media-media_pg/archaeologie-archaeology/

EDIT:

Archaeology and anthropology are the study of historic human remains and the objects, buildings and other artefacts associated with them. Forensic archaeologists and anthropologists can apply the same techniques to crime scenes, to get evidence from human remains, as well as from drugs, guns or stolen goods found at crime scenes, whether recent or decades old.

Forensic Archaeology
A forensic archaeologist’s first involvement may be to help the police locate the site where a body and victim’s personal items, or stolen goods are buried, through geological and geophysical surveying techniques, as well as using imaging and photography.
The forensic archaeologist may also help with the excavation, using similar tools and expertise to those used at an archaeological dig. This has to be done slowly and painstakingly, and the archaeologists will record and preserve anything found at every stage and depth (for example paint flakes, hair, clothing or DNA) as it may be vital evidence. The colour and state of the soil may be useful in the investigation.

FORENSIC ARCHAEOLOGIST .... Buried ITEMSs...  where on earth was she???? she cannot have been on the road by their own admission!!!!

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/forensic-archaeology.html


Human Remains tends to lend to skeletal remains...  Buried must be the reason.....

[John]

When his girlfriend and Brother went to see him why didn't they take the chance to help him and highlight his plight

There is no proof whatsoever he was gagged then or to this day!

If VT feels that he is the victim of a miscarriage of justice there are several organisations in England which he can approach for help but that has not happened.  My own view is that he knew exactly what he was doing when he admitted to manslaughter. Unfortunately for him however the CPS and a jury disagreed and called it murder.

[Leonora]

Bit surprised about the Forensic Archaeologist Karl Harrison being called....

Leonora ,does this lend weight to what you believed as to where she may have been...

So why did they need a Forensic Archaeologist???? 

She was only supposed to be covered up with a LAYER of leaves... they had already removed the snow!!! 

They Didn't need to call Karl !!!

Is this why the 8 Fire Appliances where called????  extremeley weird that they would use a Forensic Archaeologist???? 

http://www.sfu.museum/forensics/eng/pg_media-media_pg/archaeologie-archaeology/

EDIT:

FORENSIC ARCHAEOLOGIST .... Buried ITEMSs...  where on earth was she???? she cannot have been on the road by their own admission!!!!

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/forensic-archaeology.html


Human Remains tends to lend to skeletal remains...  Buried must be the reason.....

We cannot be sure whether Karl Harrison arrived at Longwood Lane before Joanna's body was recovered and moved to the mortuary, or was not summoned until Boxing day. I am not sure whether he read his own statement out in court, or whether it was read out by a Prosecution barrister. He was not cross-examined. However, the jury did hear his evidence, one way or the other.

On the other hand, the jury were NOT told about the FOUR pumping engines, plus a command vehicle (seen towing a fuel bowser), plus a safety boat (not demounted). These were called to the scene on Christmas day, manned by some 23 fire & rescue officers. The HM Pathologist was not able to do more than "glimpse" the body until the fire & rescue appliances had done whatever it was they were called out to do.

You may draw your own conclusions. Were all these people just carrying out some sort of charade to give us something to chat about? In that case, failing to tell the jury about the fire engines was just a bit of harmless fun. Is that really a proper occupation for a police force engaged in a serious investigation?

[[...]]

Quote from :

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/200400/NDNAD_Annual_Report_2009-11.pdf

5 A crime is detected when a suspect has been identified for that crime and there is sufficient evidence to charge the
suspect. In such cases, the Crown Prosecution Service requires that, in addition to the DNA match, there must be
supporting non-DNA evidence available. Convictions are achieved through integrated criminal investigation and evidence
from a number of sources - not through a DNA match alone.
6 For example, a suspect on being presented with DNA match evidence linking him to one offence, may also confess to
further offences.

What evidence did they have when they first arrested Dr Vincent Tabak... other than the DNA they said was his????

And what evidence did they have to charge him?????

Because I cannot see any of this supposed evidence brought to trial!!!!!

For example, a suspect on being presented with DNA match evidence linking him to one offence, may also confess to
further offences

This is why I believe the confession or whatever you want to call it happened.... They had absolutley NOTHING to hold him on... the evidence was NONE existent ,.. and they knew they would lose if they went to court...

What was the SUBSTANTIAL piece of evidence they ARRESTED him on????????

They had nothing!!! Yet the lady from the CPS said they planned his arrest....... my question is....

WITH WHAT!!!!!!

What evidence did they arrest Dr Vincent Tabak on?????????

And lets not go with the sobbing girl who never existed rubbish...... What did they arrest him with??

He was an Ideal citizen... nothing in his background to even suggest criminal behaviour.. not even a parking ticket....

So I will keep asking ...WHAT evidence did they arrest him with?????

[Leonora]

Quote from :
So I will keep asking ...WHAT evidence did they arrest him with?????

Long may you ask this question. The big "why" concerns that "master of defence" who swallowed the prosecution's case so wholeheartedly.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[mrswah]

The police never seemed to look any further than Canynge Road for Joanna's killer. I wonder why.

The fact that her belongings were in the flat is by no means proof that she ever arrived home.

[John]

The police never seemed to look any further than Canynge Road for Joanna's killer. I wonder why.

The fact that her belongings were in the flat is by no means proof that she ever arrived home.

Once someone admits to a crime the police won't use valuable resources following any other line of enquiry unless there a persuasive reason for doing so.  The vast majority of sane people who confess to a crime mean what they say.

[[...]]

Long may you ask this question. The big "why" concerns that "master of defence" who swallowed the prosecution's case so wholeheartedly.

Quoting from your pdf leonora

On the day I meet Clegg, his former client
the Soham police officer Brian Stevens,
appeared in court charged with conspiracy
to pervert the course of justice. Clegg shows
no glint of emotion when he describes acting
for Stevens on previous charges, all dismissed,
relating to child sex allegations and
computer pornography charges. “It was
obvious the prosecution case was flawed
because of their expert evidence,” he states.
The prosecution threw in the towel and
offered no new evidence after it acknowledged
fundamental flaws in its technical
computer evidence. It is likely that Clegg will
be instructed on the current charges facing
Stevens. Perhaps Clegg has a natural distrust
of the efficiency of our investigation system.
He makes it clear that he is not really
surprised about the evidence debacle in
Stevens’ case. “There are lots of cases where
the evidence is flawed,” he says.

So what happened in the Dr Vincent Tabak Trial?????

So where does his future lie? He and his
set’s senior clerk John Grimmer are
seasoned at promoting the chambers. The
set has grown from 22 in 1983 to its current
15 silks and 42 juniors and is rated as
England’s finest serious crime chambers.
Clegg, that master of criminal defence, now
spends a lot of his time advising City clients
on matters such as corporate manslaughter,
health and safety, trading standards, and
money laundering.
But Clegg, it seems, will never be too far
from the action, although professional life for
him has changed. “Individuals come to me for
advice these days,” he says. ■

So if people came to him for advice in 2003... what made him be Dr Vincent Tabak's defence.... ?????

There seems no reason!!!!

[[...]]

Once someone admits to a crime the police won't use valuable resources following any other line of enquiry unless there a persuasive reason for doing so.  The vast majority of sane people who confess to a crime mean what they say.

So why didn't they use there resources before his appearance at the Old Bailey????  It doesn't make sense John..

And what evidence did they arrest him on....  This case is wrong on so many levels...

Yes... unfortunatley people do admit to things that they have not done.. It's been proved the world over... An admission should be only part of the plea... real evidence to support it should also be used ... and I cannot see any real evidence... Especially when it was reported that Dr Vincent Tabak was driving around with Jonna Yeates body in his car... the images they used where of him on Park Street.. on the 18th Decemeber 2010.. when he was picking up Tanja...

The searches I believe are completeley flawed....

The porn I believe was a ruse....

The DNA was partial and cross contamination could easily have happened as the forensic company had had similar errors in the past...

No evidence was presented to show Dr Vincent Tabak's previous good character..

No evidence of him being in her flat...

Her clothes had changed from friday 17th December 2010

The asda Video's didn't have time stamps...

The defence got the 1300  page Document on the 7th Oct 2011..

The statements by various people keep changing.....

The was NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE  presented in Court... 

And the full profile which they never got a match too that wasn't Joanna Yeates or Dr Vincent Tabak's...

Why wasn't there a delay made in this trial... if as Leonora has pointed out he was such a good Lawyer???

And why assasinate his own Clients Character?????

Someone prove to me that he did it.... And not with the dodgy evidence they brought to court or used after he was convicted...

Give me some proper times... Show where he was with his phone... if it was switched off show that too....

Show which bridge he crossed... which traffic cams he went passed ... show me all his text messages and phone calls.. emails etc... show me the ASDA CCTV TimeStamps...

Show me how he managed to carry a dead weight that many times...  Show me his statements...  show me the pics of the crime scene...

show me what was underneath the two Forensic tents??

Show me, the dates of the DNA samples from Joanna Yeates that was put into the National Data base...

Because that one doesn't make sense!!

Show me what evidence the CPS had when they planned to arrest Dr Vincent Tabak...  Show me all of those computers...

Show me the phone call from Holland, let me listen to it...  Show me Joanna Yeates computer and phone... Greg's and Tanja's... let me see all the text and phone calls that were logged... let me see if Joanna Yeates phone could indeed be working on Sunday the 19th 2010 at 9:00pm if it hadn't been charged since friday...

Show me finger prints on the tv... show me finger prints in the flat.... show me a real reason why Dr Vincent Tabak would jepodise the life he had spent over 10 yrs studying for just to go throw it in the bin...

Show me why a man whom obviously loved his girlfriend he was in constant contact with, would suddenly get his head turned by a pretty girl...

Show me how he had harrased females in the past... Show me why Tanja never came to court.... Show me why CJ never came to court...

Show me the CCTV of him leaving his street and at what times...

Do a complete demonstration to show me if it is even possible within the time frame...  Show me all the cars on Longwood Lane that night...  If cars passed him on Longwood Lane they would have had to slow down to get past him...  It isn't very wide.... Get me the people who slowed down to pass him on that night to come court and testify he was there or at least someone was there....
Show me every bit of evidence that is supposed to be against Dr Vincent Tabak.... And then,, if you can prove it maybe I'll change my mind!!!!

[[...]]

Long may you ask this question. The big "why" concerns that "master of defence" who swallowed the prosecution's case so wholeheartedly.

Yes Leonora WHY??????

[Leonora]

The police never seemed to look any further than Canynge Road for Joanna's killer. I wonder why.

The fact that her belongings were in the flat is by no means proof that she ever arrived home.

Cast your mind back, mrswah, to that missing person's call at 00.45 on Monday morning. Imagine you are on duty at Avon & Somerset Crime Centre. What do the rules tell you to do? You should reassure the caller that there has probably been a misunderstanding, so why not get some sleep and wait to see if she turns up at work? In 99 missing-person cases out of a hundred, no crime has been committed.

So what was it that made someone decided to send officers out to 44 Canynge Rd in the middle of the night and even get the neighbours out of the beds to ask if they had heard anything? Obviously, the police KNEW a crime had been committed. The police insisted publicly that no one had heard from Joanna after she phoned her best friend in Swansea - even though they couldn't possibly KNOW that NO ONE had heard from her.

They INSISTED that she had got back to the flat - as indeed she probably had done, at some stage - but the presence of her coat and handbag in the flat didn't actually prove anything at all.

The police appealed for a pizza, instead of appealing for the persons seen on the front path. They did not behave like police who want to find a missing person, nor like police who were keeping an open mind. Once they had a body, they continued not to behave like police who are keen to find the killer, since 99 victims of violence out of a hundred were assailed by someone close to them. If the police were genuinely keen to nail the killer, they would have arrested Joanna's boyfriend, or one of the young men she texted on the way home, or an ex-boyfriend, depending on what they found when they read her diary.

But no, they arrested the landlord, who everyone is now agreed was the wrong man, but who quite clearly would have fulfilled the police's requirement for a random killer connected to 44 Canynge Road, rather than a personal killer who target Joanna because she was who she was. That is your question mrswah. Why did the police focus on the house rather than the victim?

[[...]]

Cast your mind back, mrswah, to that missing person's call at 00.45 on Monday morning. Imagine you are on duty at Avon & Somerset Crime Centre. What do the rules tell you to do? You should reassure the caller that there has probably been a misunderstanding, so why not get some sleep and wait to see if she turns up at work? In 99 missing-person cases out of a hundred, no crime has been committed.

So what was it that made someone decided to send officers out to 44 Canynge Rd in the middle of the night and even get the neighbours out of the beds to ask if they had heard anything? Obviously, the police KNEW a crime had been committed. The police insisted publicly that no one had heard from Joanna after she phoned her best friend in Swansea - even though they couldn't possibly KNOW that NO ONE had heard from her.

They INSISTED that she had got back to the flat - as indeed she probably had done, at some stage - but the presence of her coat and handbag in the flat didn't actually prove anything at all.

The police appealed for a pizza, instead of appealing for the persons seen on the front path. They did not behave like police who want to find a missing person, nor like police who were keeping an open mind. Once they had a body, they continued not to behave like police who are keen to find the killer, since 99 victims of violence out of a hundred were assailed by someone close to them. If the police were genuinely keen to nail the killer, they would have arrested Joanna's boyfriend, or one of the young men she texted on the way home, or an ex-boyfriend, depending on what they found when they read her diary.

But no, they arrested the landlord, who everyone is now agreed was the wrong man, but who quite clearly would have fulfilled the police's requirement for a random killer connected to 44 Canynge Road, rather than a personal killer who target Joanna because she was who she was. That is your question mrswah. Why did the police focus on the house rather than the victim?

Why did the ask Dr Vincent Tabak about the lounge???? To me theres rather alot of furniture in the lounge arranged in the wrong way...   they don't give freedom of movement...  you have to squeeze past...

:: :: Whether he went into the bedroom or lounge.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7613.msg383784#msg383784


So... we always knew why he needed to be in the bedroom.... because of the earring in the duvet and the other one under the pile of clothes....

But what was with the LOUNGE?????   

Again... why did her mother think she had been abducted....???

:: Was she dead when he put her in the boot of the Renault Megane.

Because there should NOT have been any blood in the boot of Dr Vincent Tabak's car... dead people don't bleed... he'd apparently already put her in the bicycle bag/cover!!!!

So what was in the front room?????? There that white outline behind the couch... never knew what that was... about the size of a mobile phone!!!


Edit:....

Cast your mind back, mrswah, to that missing person's call at 00.45 on Monday morning.

  Why did it take so long to ring the police when he'd rung her parents around 12:00 ??

Her phone gets me.... if the police think immediatley there is foul play... why did they allow Greg to use her phone to ring rebecca Scott around 4:00am??

And another thing that gets me..... How did he know the password/ number to get into her phone in the first place??

Did they just look at her phone for texts and calls or did they get a proper read out from the phone company????



And if there's a proper read out... did the defence have a copy????

[mrswah]

Cast your mind back, mrswah, to that missing person's call at 00.45 on Monday morning. Imagine you are on duty at Avon & Somerset Crime Centre. What do the rules tell you to do? You should reassure the caller that there has probably been a misunderstanding, so why not get some sleep and wait to see if she turns up at work? In 99 missing-person cases out of a hundred, no crime has been committed.

So what was it that made someone decided to send officers out to 44 Canynge Rd in the middle of the night and even get the neighbours out of the beds to ask if they had heard anything? Obviously, the police KNEW a crime had been committed. The police insisted publicly that no one had heard from Joanna after she phoned her best friend in Swansea - even though they couldn't possibly KNOW that NO ONE had heard from her.

They INSISTED that she had got back to the flat - as indeed she probably had done, at some stage - but the presence of her coat and handbag in the flat didn't actually prove anything at all.

The police appealed for a pizza, instead of appealing for the persons seen on the front path. They did not behave like police who want to find a missing person, nor like police who were keeping an open mind. Once they had a body, they continued not to behave like police who are keen to find the killer, since 99 victims of violence out of a hundred were assailed by someone close to them. If the police were genuinely keen to nail the killer, they would have arrested Joanna's boyfriend, or one of the young men she texted on the way home, or an ex-boyfriend, depending on what they found when they read her diary.

But no, they arrested the landlord, who everyone is now agreed was the wrong man, but who quite clearly would have fulfilled the police's requirement for a random killer connected to 44 Canynge Road, rather than a personal killer who target Joanna because she was who she was. That is your question mrswah. Why did the police focus on the house rather than the victim?

Yes, indeed, that is my question-----and they were focussing on the house right from the start, long before anyone had "confessed" to anything !   

They so wanted us all to believe Joanna had arrived home that they got Father Henwood into court to testify that he had seen and spoken to Joanna (whom he did not know), rather than read out a statement from him.

[[...]]

I was just looking at one of the early post and photo's... And noticed something...

This is of the door in the hallway....

The catchment for the brass yale lock is a different colour and I noticed a large stain at the front door, never noticed that before...

If as one newspaper suggested.. they never had carpets.. why hasn't that piece of underlay been taken away, there is obviously a stain there?????


Another thing I had noticed was the new looking underlay in the bedroom....

If someone has gone to the trouble of buying new underlay, where is the carpet???

The underlay in the bedroom is "cosi"... the underlay in the rest of the house is old of a fawn colour.. why the new looking underlay???

I can't see why someone would buy new underlay and not carpet? odd!

Yet in October when the Halloween party happened at their house the underlay is old????


I've circled the underlay in the bedroom in October 2010


[attachment deleted by admin]

[Leonora]

If VT feels that he is the victim of a miscarriage of justice there are several organisations in England which he can approach for help but that has not happened.  My own view is that he knew exactly what he was doing when he admitted to manslaughter. Unfortunately for him however the CPS and a jury disagreed and called it murder.

So you think Vincent Tabak knew exactly what he was doing when he signed his enhanced statement and agreed to be cross-examined as his lawyer's only independent defence witness? (His team had "inherited" their pathologist from their predecessors instructed by Crossman & Co of Radstock.)

You are very keen to point out that the police did everything they did because that is standard police procedure. Presumably you would also agree that Vincent Tabak's formidably experienced defence lawyer also knew exactly what he was doing when he avoided every opportunity to discredit the prosecution witnesses, and took every possible opportunity to discredit his own client in the eyes of the jury?

Why do you think Vincent Tabak stuck with the same firm of solicitors and the same barristers' chambers when he subsequently appeared in court on a charge of possessing illegal images of child abuse?

There can be only one rational explanation for the behaviour of Vincent Tabak and his top lawyer - namely, that he had been secretly offered a full amnesty and a new identity, in return for sacrificing his good name and for taking responsibility for the actions of some (to us) unknown killer who (for reasons of National Security or other reasons) the CPS couldn't bring to justice.

To this day Vincent Tabak is probably analyzing people movements in a Buro Happold office in one of the many overseas countries where the murder of Joanna Yeates never made the headlinrs. This is the only possible explanation why no one will talk about him, and why nothing is heard from him.