Vincent Tabak and the Murder of Joanna Yeates

[Leonora]

Statements are merely a pretrial guide, it is testimony that counts.

In this case, witness statements read out in court played a much larger role in the prosecution case. Only one colleague of Joanna's testified in person to her behaviour at the Ram pub, but the court also heard statements from several other colleagues who had been at the pub with her but did not testify in person.

Two or three party goers who had been at 53 Canynge Road and a neighbour at Percival Court testified in person to having heard screams, and, in addition, several statements about the screams they heard or did not hear were read to the court from other party goers who did not testify in person.

Statements were read to the court from several witnesses who did not testify in person and who described the behaviour of Vincent Tabak and his girlfriend at two parties they attended. One of these stated that the defendant had described Joanna's presumed killer as "a crazy detached person" in the course of a dinner party. Counsel for the Prosecution made much of this phrase, so it is curious that Counsel for the Defence never asked his client during his cross-examination whether he had in fact used the phrase.

Important prosecution statements were also read out from expert witness Karl Harrison and the defendant's employer Shrikant Sharma. It is curious that neither of these was called to testify in person.

[Leonora]

I found this a little interesting...

So her film was of the pages?????  Not of the HISTORY!!

That almost makes me laugh.... Please let me see the film that Lyndsey Farmery should the Jury..
I especially want to see how she got to 'DOODSLAG"!!!!!

I would call it a Powerpoint presentation rather than a "film". The only moving pictures shown during Lyndsey Farmey's testimony was an accelerated video of body decomposition at a "body farm". She has a relatively unusual name, but I have not being able to find any evidence in any other context that she has any expert knowledge of computer use analysis.

[[...]]

I would call it a Powerpoint presentation rather than a "film". The only moving pictures shown during Lyndsey Farmey's testimony was an accelerated video of body decomposition at a "body farm". She has a relatively unusual name, but I have not being able to find any evidence in any other context that she has any expert knowledge of computer use analysis.

Do you not think that weird leonora..... why would she show an accelerated video at a body farm???????  That is WRONG on all levels..... She was supposed to be showing his search history, not the videos he may have viewed, that a different territory altogether...

At Lines 311 (a to g) of the prosecution chart (on 23 December 2010)
Tabak searched Wikipedia for the terms
‘decomposition’
‘ how fast does body decompose’
‘ film of body decomposing’
‘what takes place from hour to hour after death’
‘what happens to human body after death’

A few problems here... does wiki have such films??????  what were the times of these supposed searches and viewings??? He was at Tanja Morsons parents house on that day as far as I can remember......

Must be before 4:00pm...
 

At Line 318 of the prosecution chart
 Tabak searched the words
‘penalty for manslaughter’
At Line 321 of the prosecution chart
Tabak Googled the words
‘Jo Yeates’


‘weather’
On 23 Dec 2010 at 4.00 pm
Tabak searched the Dutch Wikipedia for the words
‘extradition’
‘Yeates’
‘missing persons’
‘% of grey cars in UK’
‘Renault Megan cars in UK’

So where was he to look at this and which laptop are they talking about, because apparently they just lumped all these laptops together.... was it his own??? Buro Happold's ???? which laptops are each of these searches from !!!!!!!!

Also if he looks up extradition of a Dutchman before he went to Holland.... why did he not just stay there when he went a week later???????

Why would he search the dutch wiki for cars etc at 4:00pm????..... That must have been in DUTCH!!!!! come on Lyndsey my love.... wheres your translations of the DUTCH TEXT!!!!!!!!!!!

(He wouldn't be writing the english word 'EXTRADITION' in a Dutch wiki)... because he wouldn't get the answer!!!  He should have searched the word 'uitlevering" Dutch for extradition!!!!

At Lines 311 (a to g) of the prosecution chart (on 23 December 2010)
Tabak searched Wikipedia for the terms
‘decomposition’‘decomposition’
‘ how fast does body decompose’
‘ film of body decomposing’
‘what takes place from hour to hour after death’
‘what happens to human body after death’

Wiki doesn't have film of bodies decomposing.... so what did she SHOW!!!!????????  He didn't look at a film from a body farm.... How can she use that as EVIDENCE!!!!!


POWERPOINT PRESENTATION..... What the diddly What!!!

[Leonora]

POWERPOINT PRESENTATION..... What the diddly What!!!

In the 20th century, a succession of still images projected on to a screen was called a "slide show". However, in the 21st century, slide transparencies were replaced by Powerpoint presentations. During the pre-trial hearing before judge Martin Picton on 20th September, Counsel for the Prosecution stated that the trial would include a "digital display". Is that less "diddly tw.." for you?

I don't supposed the witnesses themselves had to fumble for the images they wanted to show the court. According to most of the reporters in court, "Ms Farmery only spoke to confirm the images displayed as the jury was shown dozens of internet pages said to have been viewed by Tabak":

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vincent-tabaks-internet-use-analysed-2372832.html

Each of the journalists reported a selection of the web pages actually displayed. The 1300 page timeline from which Sally Ramage quotes identifies the searches that the Prosecution alleged the defendant made (not the pages he viewed). I do not dispute the grounds for which you are sceptical about these. It is clear from the media reports that it was Counsel for the Prosecution who opened his mouth to expand on the timings of the searches. He was not under oath. Can you find any report that the witness herself confirmed that the timeline was a true record of the searches conducted by the defendant?

[Leonora]

Did Tanja Morson make a statement????????    why wasn't she in court!!!!

While aggressively cross-examining the defendant at the end of his first day in the witness box, Counsel for the Prosecution asked him what he and his girlfriend did after they got back to their flat together early on the morning of 18th December 2010. "Did you have sex?" he asked. It was probably the defendant himself who told the court during this part of his cross-examination that his girlfriend didn't notice anything out of the ordinary about his behaviour.

We have been persuaded that the police were not very bright, e.g. in arresting the hapless landlord and then being forced to release him again. We are supposed to believe that Vincent Tabak was not as clever as he thought he was in believing that he could escape the long arm of Avon & Somerset's Detective Plod. And we are supposed to content ourselves with the conclusion that his girlfriend was blind to his "crazy, detached" personality. However, it is all nonsense.

Why did she not testify? - I don't believe the "treasury analyst" from Dyson is stupid, I don't believe she could not see through this crazy prosecution, so I suspect she fled for the duration of the trial to Chile, where a summons from Avon & Somerset to appear as a witness presumably carries no legal force. On the contrary, I am sure she was furious with the police and the CPS over having had her life so seriously and permanently disrupted. Not being stupid either, I think the CPS, on the other hand, worked out that letting her anywhere near the court would have put a serious spoke in the wheel of their case.

[[...]]

In the 20th century, a succession of still images projected on to a screen was called a "slide show". However, in the 21st century, slide transparencies were replaced by Powerpoint presentations. During the pre-trial hearing before judge Martin Picton on 20th September, Counsel for the Prosecution stated that the trial would include a "digital display". Is that less "diddly tw.." for you?

I don't supposed the witnesses themselves had to fumble for the images they wanted to show the court. According to most of the reporters in court, "Ms Farmery only spoke to confirm the images displayed as the jury was shown dozens of internet pages said to have been viewed by Tabak":

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vincent-tabaks-internet-use-analysed-2372832.html

Each of the journalists reported a selection of the web pages actually displayed. The 1300 page timeline from which Sally Ramage quotes identifies the searches that the Prosecution alleged the defendant made (not the pages he viewed). I do not dispute the grounds for which you are sceptical about these. It is clear from the media reports that it was Counsel for the Prosecution who opened his mouth to expand on the timings of the searches. He was not under oath. Can you find any report that the witness herself confirmed that the timeline was a true record of the searches conducted by the defendant?

On saying that leonora..  should she be able to PROVE he viewed the webpages??? Not just show a selection of webpages that he was supposed to have viewed???

A 10 year old could have done her job!!!!  That's ridiculous... she is supposed to explain how when and where Dr Vincent Tabak viewed this material... So a man who has qualifications in Computer Science didn't delete his search history???

He would know to keep this clean as it tends to slow down your computer function.... So when did she retrieve this data???

I have the problem with which computers each of these images and searches came from.... where was the clarity on that!!!!

My God... they tricked the jury good and proper, she's a novice (IMO)... Why on earth didn't the DEFENCE challenge Anything?????..

Not being rude... Well maybe I am.... But.. what defending did the defence DO????

There's a myriad of reasons for an unfair trial.....

[Leonora]

Why take his DNA again if they had already taken a sample from him in HOLLAND??

Did they take a sample in Holland??

This is from the trial ..

This was part of an elaborate deception to trick the duty solicitor and the barrister she subsequently instructed, Paul Cook QC. The public and the duty solicitor were given to believe that Vincent Tabak's arrest was made on the basis of an anonymous telephone tip-off from a crying girl who had seen the TV appeal from Joanna's parents broadcast on 17th January 2011. The duty solicitor knew nothing about the Shiphol interview, which would be represented just before the abortive bail hearing as a serious attempt to incriminate the hapless landlord. Nor did she knew that the police already had her client's DNA from Schiphol. The swab taken by the duty nurse was a charade, so that the detectives could proudly flourish a match to DNA on the body when they arrived for the second day of interviewing.

[mrswah]

This was part of an elaborate deception to trick the duty solicitor and the barrister she subsequently instructed, Paul Cook QC. The public and the duty solicitor were given to believe that Vincent Tabak's arrest was made on the basis of an anonymous telephone tip-off from a crying girl who had seen the TV appeal from Joanna's parents broadcast on 17th January 2011. The duty solicitor knew nothing about the Shiphol interview, which would be represented just before the abortive bail hearing as a serious attempt to incriminate the hapless landlord. Nor did she knew that the police already had her client's DNA from Schiphol. The swab taken by the duty nurse was a charade, so that the detectives could proudly flourish a match to DNA on the body when they arrived for the second day of interviewing.

Is there evidence that the duty solicitor knew nothing about the Schiphol interview?

[[...]]

I keep trying to find information relating to the dates between 16th December 2010 and 20th January 2011..

I thought i'd look at facebook and people who knew Joanna Yeates and Greg Reardon...

What I find strange is that time is missing from facebook... Take Helen Reardon for instance...  Her facebook timeline misses those years, but shows posts from 2008.... so between 2008 and 2012 there are no posts... why would that be??????


EDIT...... why are there so many peoples facebook accounts missing the vital timelines?????????

[Leonora]

Is there evidence that the duty solicitor knew nothing about the Schiphol interview?

Her client may have told her that it took place, but its significance wouldn't have been apparent to her thanks to the extensive smokescreen, consisting of the barrage of questions put to her client by the detectives plus the huge succession of news reports fed to the media by the police themselves and the forensics company's public relations officer. The fact that Paul Cook QC declared that his client was going to apply for bail, and then the very next day he changed his mind, is evidence of the efficacy of this smokescreen.

[[...]]

Her client may have told her that it took place, but its significance wouldn't have been apparent to her thanks to the extensive smokescreen, consisting of the barrage of questions put to her client by the detectives plus the huge succession of news reports fed to the media by the police themselves and the forensics company's public relations officer. The fact that Paul Cook QC declared that his client was going to apply for bail, and then the very next day he changed his mind, is evidence of the efficacy of this smokescreen.

Has anyone approach Paul Cook about this question of BAIL????

[Leonora]

Has anyone approach Paul Cook about this question of BAIL????

Yes, I did, on 6th January 2012. When he didn't reply to my e-mail, a well-known person with actual experience of criminals and innocent people who had got wrongly imprisoned e-mailed the following:

"Hi Paul Cook - I am writing to you about your former client Vincent Tabak. You did act for him in the beginning of his arraignment before Michael Fitton took the brief. Therefore you are also responsible for this man's stitch up and mistreatment by the police. I have put Mr Fitton on notice below and the same comments could be addressed to you. I hope you both put your heads together and rectify this crime otherwise it will develop into another Stefan Kiszko fiasco and you will be forever tainted with the crime."

He did not reply. It would probably be more effective to find out which pub he or his clerk drinks in, and offer to buy him a drink.

[John]

I keep trying to find information relating to the dates between 16th December 2010 and 20th January 2011..

I thought i'd look at facebook and people who knew Joanna Yeates and Greg Reardon...

What I find strange is that time is missing from facebook... Take Helen Reardon for instance...  Her facebook timeline misses those years, but shows posts from 2008.... so between 2008 and 2012 there are no posts... why would that be??????


EDIT...... why are there so many peoples facebook accounts missing the vital timelines?????????

The material has been expunged.

[John]

Yes, I did, on 6th January 2012. When he didn't reply to my e-mail, a well-known person with actual experience of criminals and innocent people who had got wrongly imprisoned e-mailed the following:

"Hi Paul Cook - I am writing to you about your former client Vincent Tabak. You did act for him in the beginning of his arraignment before Michael Fitton took the brief. Therefore you are also responsible for this man's stitch up and mistreatment by the police. I have put Mr Fitton on notice below and the same comments could be addressed to you. I hope you both put your heads together and rectify this crime otherwise it will develop into another Stefan Kiszko fiasco and you will be forever tainted with the crime."

He did not reply. It would probably be more effective to find out which pub he or his clerk drinks in, and offer to buy him a drink.

If you are expecting a response from a lawyer you will have a long wait.

[[...]]

The material has been expunged.

There's seems to have been far too much expunging in this case..... I remember the Greg Reardon Facebook posts That I found from 16th October 2010 not too long ago... The ones where he is giving away his ski gear from Canygne Road.. They too seem to have been "expunged"...

My My My..... I find this whole case one expunction after another... Dr Vincent Tabak expunged from the face of the earth, no one cares... Everyone involved in this case getting on with their lives, (I'm not including the Yeates family).... People who have told  Untruth after untruth after untruth... Whom we are supposed to respect... We bring our children up to respect the laws of the land, but when the law is not truthful, then what are we supposed to do???

If due process had taken place in this country an Innocent man would not be sat behind bars... For whatever reason people decided it was best to put this case to bed, I hope they accept that they knowingly allowed someone to go free (IMO) who if they have done this once they could do this again...

Expunging.... Things like Timestamps.... Where are the Timestamps on the Video's from Asda????  Why the need not to be clear and honest and upfront... why the need to bring to court late the 1300 pages of evidence that the defence made no attempt to have a delay made (IMO)... why a prominent Lawyer would put his reputation on the line and do virtually nothing for his client but disparage him...(IMO)

I have sat here for days.. months.. frustrated at what has taken place, even my husband has remarked on what they did to the Dutchman....
(IMO) They can't even keep the story straight between them, I have found this from the various video of people talking who's memories are clearly failing them (IMO)... The years pass and backslaps all round, and the pride people must feel for their achievements is beyond words...

This case was a mess from start to finish.. There was no conclusion.. there was a punishment, plain and simple.. Someone has to pay... And many an Innocent person has been paying for years....

Open... Fair... Honest... It's not much to ask for... we expect this from a system that is there to protect us from the evil in the world.. But, it doesn't appear to be what we get (IMO).... We shouldn't even be here if that was the case..We shouldn't have to set up forums and argue for years about the Miscarriages of justice that have taken place... But we are...And we do... Which just shows that are system is not Open Fair and honest... (IMO)

I cannot tell you why I cannot leave this case alone, why Dr Vincent Tabak swims around my head, I'm not the loony some have portrayed me as... I'm a concerned citizen, that is all, and just like the media frenzy that took place in the begining, I too got hooked on what was happening....

Do we come to a point in our lives where we have to account for every movement that we do and every search we have ever made and justify it??? My God... the searches I have made.. someone could have a field day with it.... Ask me what I did 2 weeks ago and I probably can't remember... Does that mean I have done something??

The evidence should be just that... 'Evidence... there should be no hiding, no untruths , it should be laid out for all to see... And if you haven't got the evidence then.. that's that... I've gone through a range of emotions on this thread, from the vein hope that maybe someone was actually taking notice of what had been said and in my imagination where actually going to do something about it.... To feeling sad.. hopeless... dejected a feeling that what I say is futile... The public's minds have been poisoned by a media content with selacious headlines, and they are ready to string him up...

I was reading through a load of twitter tweets the other day, people wanted to hang him, put him in a room with them.. do unspeakable things... And all this was before the jury were asked to retire.. It may have seemed like a fabulous idea to tweet the entire proceedings, But again that only added to the public's contempt for a man they knew nothing about... So by the time the pornography and prostitutes came to the headlines, you had a public who believed they knew and understood what had happened in a court room in England..

Tweets are 49 characters.... It takes 49 characters to tell the public what is happening in a high profiled murder trial... It's almost laughable if it wasn't so serious... Say they hadn't managed the plea... 49 characters would only tell the public the basics, and whats more.. The Judge failed to realise  that the Jury had families who could say anything they wanted to them... the jurors wouldn't have to mention anything, but their families could quite easily have given their opinion on Dr Vincent Tabak's guilt.....And who's to say what sway that had on a Jurors knowledge, they may not read anything... but it didn't stop a public telling them what they had read on twitter!!!

So how many Jurors are in the room now..... the whole country had become jurors... without the evidence to prove to them otherwise... Without knowing the Time Stamps where missing... Without the 1300 page document of timelines.... without realising that Joanna Yeates clothes were different... Without witness's who could state many things about Dr Vincent Tabak.... But they all put 2 and 2 together and made 5...

What can you say in 49 characters??? I always find I never have enough... 49 characters that changed a person life, and a nations opinion... They should have had the cameras in if they were allowing tweets.. Lets us see everything... not just what 49 characters will allow us to say....

Leonora mentioned the amount of statements..
How many statements where read out???????? Far too many IMO... get those people on the stand, don't let them hide behind a piece of paper... Dr Vincent Tabak wasn't allowed to hide behind his statement...Oh No... they wanted him on the witness stand for all to see, for the world to cast judgement, without the true facts of this crime...

People have obviously been trying for years to have questions answered about this case and have been knocked back at every turn.... WHY???

Why if they are ALL so confident that 'The Dutchman' did it, do they not just answer the questions of a few individuals????? Because I cannot believe that the 10 or so people who have grave concerns with the conviction of Dr Vincent Tabak are going to make any waves if the truth has been told....(IMO)

I cannot believe that these 10 individuals will bring the law to it's knees.. Ordinary people who dare to ask questions relating to Dr Vincent Tabak and how on gods earth he had the time to do what they said he did... Get me the video's of the police interviews.. the phone call from holland.... 1300 pages... lets see what is hidden in these things.... And stop hiding behind the data protection act.... that one's a blinder, can be applied at will..... (IMO)

I will keep saying that Dr Vincent Tabak is Innocent, because I believe he is...  And unless you show me properly that he isn't.. my mind is not changing...



Edit:... I have a challenge.... everyone try to reply or post with 49 characters.... lets just see how much information you can get out there on any case!!!!!




I think one of the major problems with this case is 'The Trip to Holland'..... Everyone should ask themselves that question... WHY?????????