Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that the jo yeats jury should have been told about his strangling during sex fetish?

382 replies

pippala · 28/10/2011 17:54

pleased for Joanna's family that he has been found quilty, their ordeal is hardly over though.
Min 20 years, so he will be 53 when he comes out, with still half his life left.
Now it appears he watch porn that involved strangulation, had sex with prostitutes and like choking them!
I have heard about better orgasms when you can't breath, Isn't that how Mike Hutchence died?
I can not understand why this was withheld from the jury.
I was on jury service and put away a pedo for 33years. at sentancing we were told he had done it before to 3 other girls! I can understand that we were not to know as we were hearing only that case but in Tabaks case he hadn't killed before,as far as we know but his personality was not the one portrayed by the defence.

OP posts:
SauvignonBlanche · 28/10/2011 17:57

No I don't agree, whilst it is distasteful this fetish may be shared by non-murderers.
He was convicted on evidence not supposition.

sabrinathemiddleagedwitch · 28/10/2011 18:00

It would have influenced the jury and given him grounds to appeal. Lots of people do the stragulation thing, lots of people have consensual oddly fetishised sex, lots of people have sex with prostitutes and not all of these people are murders. People have to be convicted on the actual evidence.

grovel · 28/10/2011 18:01

And anyway he was a foreigner. Bound to be convicted.

Whatmeworry · 28/10/2011 18:01

The images were apparently downloaded after the murder.

MrsTwinks · 28/10/2011 18:02

if her boyfriend/someone more likely had shared the same fetish, and it was considered admissable evidence they likely would have missed the actual killer. So no its not unreasonable for it not to be told to the jury

LaPruneDeMaTante · 28/10/2011 18:03

Half his life left at 53?

cyb · 28/10/2011 18:03

Don't understand your comment grovel

531800000008 · 28/10/2011 18:05

well yes of course everyone lives to 106 nowadays innit Prune

OP YABU

Tchootnika · 28/10/2011 18:05

Well it clearly wasn't necessary to tell the jury about that in order to secure a conviction, was it? Seems that real evidence was enough, so why add that sort of detail, OP?

Bennifer · 28/10/2011 18:13

Sabrina has it I think. It may well be that there's a link between his use of porn and the murder but any potential weak link in the chain of reasoning that can be appealed at a later date should be left out. No-one would want him to be released on the basis of inadmissable evidence in a few years time.

DeadFromTheNeckUp · 28/10/2011 18:18

No. Justice has been done.

And may the bastard be strung up by his balls and rot in Hell.

Original poster
pippala · 28/10/2011 18:20

By withholding the fact he indulged in fetishes with prostitutes he was portrayed as a "normal" man, due to get married and start a family. His defence was that he panicked when she screamed so put his hand around her throat.
It was obviously sexually motivated as he carried out his fantasy with her.
When I was on jury service the pedo was also portrayed as a nice old granddad type, salt of the earth, friendly neighbour etc then we found out he raped his three year old neighbour!
I guess more will follow as the police are questioning him again tonight. My betting is over unsolved murder cases!
At 53 he is middle aged so yes he will still have nearly half a life left. my fil just died aged 96!

OP posts:
pigletmania · 28/10/2011 18:24

grovel Hmm he was found guilty because there was evidence for that not because he was from another country, please don't play the race card its distasteful.

pigletmania · 28/10/2011 18:26

I think that they should have included that evidence in this case, this would have formed part of the background to her murder.

blackoutthesun · 28/10/2011 18:27

YABU

the police had said that they want to talk to VT about the content on his computer. so there could be more crimes

grovel · 28/10/2011 18:27

Piglet, I was being facetious.

DuelingFanjo · 28/10/2011 18:28

Yabu.

pigletmania · 28/10/2011 18:29

I know grovel

MinnieBloodBar · 28/10/2011 18:31

YABU to use the word 'pedo'.

BarryKent · 28/10/2011 18:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

sozzledchops · 28/10/2011 18:33

I thought the jury would find him not guilty to murder. So glad they got it right considering this new information. Imagine if you had been on that jury, found him not guilty only to learn of everything else.

MonstrouslyNarkyPuffin · 28/10/2011 18:34
Hmm

They don't tell juries facts that may cause them to be biased in their judgement of the facts of the case.

You haven't figured this out and were on a jury?

SheCutOffTheirTails · 28/10/2011 18:34

YANBU

At the very least the prosecution should have been allowed to challenge the lie that he was in monogamous relationship by bringing in the fact that he used prostitutes.

He was allowed to portray himself as naive and sexually inexperienced, and that was a lie.

With a different defence, I can see that they might have been irrelevant. But not with that one.

Prolesworth · 28/10/2011 18:36

So how is the defence allowed to tell a pack of lies about Tabak's character but the prosecution is not allowed to refute those lies with evidence because it has been ruled inadmissible? This does not seem right to me at all.