“Things are seldom what they seem. History and literature hold many examples of deception imposed on credulous people by the production of artificial facts posing as circumstantial evidence.”
– The Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred Bucknill, The Nature of Evidence, 1953
“Things are seldom what they seem” wrote the Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred Bucknill in his 1953 book The Nature of Evidence. “History and literature hold many examples of deception imposed on credulous people by the production of artificial facts posing as circumstantial evidence. We need not go further than the Old Testament for good examples of that kind of deception. Thus Jacob deceived his father Isaac when he was old and his eyes were dim, by wearing his brother’s clothes, putting the skins of the kids upon his hands and upon his neck, and telling his father that he was Esau.”
Nigel Lickley QC
|The judge, Mr Justice|
Field, did not intervene
|Any one of Colin Port’s|
officers could have
played her part
If Lyndsey Farmery really does have computer skills that did not emerge in court, then she may also have been the police officer who allegedly found on the defendant’s computer a collection of legal commercial pornographic videos that could be expected to be found on the computers of lots of other ordinary people. Neither she nor any other witness testified to these under oath, however, as it was Mr Lickley who described them at some length for the sensation-hungry journalists (and he was not under oath), while the jury were not present. There were also alleged to be audit trails of internet adult porn sites that had been opened.
|Images of child abuse|
If these child images really were found on any computers used by the defendant, why did this Prosecution witness not testify to the jury this irrefutable evidence of his bad character?
The serious failure of the IT expert to instigate efforts to identify the children so that steps could be taken to protect them against further exploitation and round up the paedophile ring responsible detracts from her credibility as a witness. The fact that a charge for possession of this material was not included with the murder charge suggests, however, that the IT expert did not look closely enough at these pictures to ascertain that they were in fact innocent legal photos of Vincent Tabak’s seven nieces and nephews.
The IT Expert and Mr Lickley did not mention that the adult pornographic scenes depicting strangulation, blondes tied up in car boots etc. allegedly on Vincent Tabak’s computer were the result of searches he had made after he became aware that his next door neighbour suffered that fate. It could have been nothing more than natural curiosity. Some of the websites containing these lurid videos may even have opened automatically without any intention on Vincent Tabak’s part, as it is not uncommon for the designers of all kinds of websites to earn extra money by triggering the opening of further windows promoting something else entirely.
It was subsequently alleged in Court and in the media, bizarrely, that the viewing of ordinary everyday adult porn videos turned Vincent Tabak into a sexual pervert with a strangulation fetish, so people who think like that should not find it surprising if the IT expert did not also develop similar propensities which she felt an urge to try out in practice.
If Vincent Tabak really had committed the crime, then the police would have shown a clear track record of his times. They would have their computer expert to show that he went offline from 9.30 p.m. to, say, 10.30 p.m. on the evening Joanna died, and then came back online at whatever.