Author Topic: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?  (Read 92982 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #226 on: October 18, 2019, 04:09:AM »
I can find nothing in West's trial testimony that said the response was quick.
When asked how long he had taken [to contact the police HQ and the police at Witham while Jeremy was on hold], he said it was about 3 minutes. Shortly after saying that, he said that he had told Jeremy to go to his father's house and wait for police officers there, and that a unit from Witham was attending and wouldn't take long. Pc West was asked a second time about this and replied "Police officers had already been sent when I spoke to him." He was later asked how long his initial conversation with Jeremy had taken, and replied "Well, it is difficult to ascribe times but perhaps a minute at most. It is — a minute is an awfully long time." He was also asked "How long do you really think it was then, a minute or maybe more?" and replied "Mo, I would say that a minute would more than cover the conversation we had initially."

Overall, the above amounts to Pc West saying that his own call-handling was so quick that within about 4 minutes from when Jeremy called him, the police at Witham had been told to go to WHF.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12639
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #227 on: October 18, 2019, 10:12:AM »
When asked how long he had taken [to contact the police HQ and the police at Witham while Jeremy was on hold], he said it was about 3 minutes. Shortly after saying that, he said that he had told Jeremy to go to his father's house and wait for police officers there, and that a unit from Witham was attending and wouldn't take long. Pc West was asked a second time about this and replied "Police officers had already been sent when I spoke to him." He was later asked how long his initial conversation with Jeremy had taken, and replied "Well, it is difficult to ascribe times but perhaps a minute at most. It is — a minute is an awfully long time." He was also asked "How long do you really think it was then, a minute or maybe more?" and replied "Mo, I would say that a minute would more than cover the conversation we had initially."

Overall, the above amounts to Pc West saying that his own call-handling was so quick that within about 4 minutes from when Jeremy called him, the police at Witham had been told to go to WHF.

No PC West stated that EACH of the two calls he made while Jeremy was on hold lasted approximately 3 minutes. 3x2 = 6. So west thinks its approx 6 mins which is not far from my own calculation of 8 mins.

Anyway what is the point you are trying to make here? If its Nevill calling the police this is not going to get you anywhere.

The calls logs and statements all show one telephone call. If you want to prove Nevills calls to the police you must unearth a whole new set of phone logs and witness statements from different phone operators not yet made public.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2019, 10:12:AM by David1819 »

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #228 on: October 18, 2019, 12:41:PM »
No PC West stated that EACH of the two calls he made while Jeremy was on hold lasted approximately 3 minutes. 3x2 = 6. So west thinks its approx 6 mins which is not far from my own calculation of 8 mins.

Anyway what is the point you are trying to make here? If its Nevill calling the police this is not going to get you anywhere.

The calls logs and statements all show one telephone call. If you want to prove Nevills calls to the police you must unearth a whole new set of phone logs and witness statements from different phone operators not yet made public.

Then add the time he spoke with Jeremy.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #229 on: October 18, 2019, 01:26:PM »
I always thought it was 11 minutes in all for some unknown reason ::)

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #230 on: October 18, 2019, 03:03:PM »
I always thought it was 11 minutes in all for some unknown reason ::)

It's not for an unknown reason, 11 minutes is what AE stated Jeremy claimed when interviewed on the morning after the murders. I posted that days ago - but 11 minutes seems reasonable to me, given what happened during the call.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #231 on: October 18, 2019, 07:03:PM »
It's not for an unknown reason, 11 minutes is what AE stated Jeremy claimed when interviewed on the morning after the murders. I posted that days ago - but 11 minutes seems reasonable to me, given what happened during the call.




Oh, so I wasn't dreaming  ;D Is this the " Christ you took long enough " as JB said when the officer returned to the phone after a pregnant pause ?

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #232 on: October 18, 2019, 07:22:PM »



Oh, so I wasn't dreaming  ;D Is this the " Christ you took long enough " as JB said when the officer returned to the phone after a pregnant pause ?

Words to that effect, yes.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Strobe

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #233 on: October 19, 2019, 03:32:AM »

As I understand it, what's been claimed by Bill Robertson is that Jeremy called the police at 03.36 and PC West put Jeremy on hold at about 03.37 when he called Witham police station. Leaving aside the question of whether this happened or not, the theory can't be refuted by an appeal to the testimony of PC West, since the claim is being made that West in his testimony was lying and that he was involved in a police cover up.

If the police wanted to cover up the fact that Nevill called the police at slightly before 03.26 and that it was Nevill who was put on hold by West, when the latter called Bonnett at headquarters, then they would naturally be trying their best to make it seem like Jeremy's call lasted for longer than it did, if they wanted people to believe that Jeremy called at 03.24 and not at 03.36.

One thing which does not seem to have been addressed on this thread is an explanation of the timing of West's call to Witham at 03.37, where he tells the officer receiving the call that he has Bamber on hold. It is perfectly consistent with Jeremy calling at 03.36

PC West did not record the fact that he called Witham twice, once at 03.30 and again at 03.37 in his statements. There were definitely two calls since the first was by radio link and the second by telephone.

« Last Edit: October 19, 2019, 03:35:AM by Strobe »

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 32623
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #234 on: October 19, 2019, 08:19:AM »
As I understand it, what's been claimed by Bill Robertson is that Jeremy called the police at 03.36 and PC West put Jeremy on hold at about 03.37 when he called Witham police station. Leaving aside the question of whether this happened or not, the theory can't be refuted by an appeal to the testimony of PC West, since the claim is being made that West in his testimony was lying and that he was involved in a police cover up.

If the police wanted to cover up the fact that Nevill called the police at slightly before 03.26 and that it was Nevill who was put on hold by West, when the latter called Bonnett at headquarters, then they would naturally be trying their best to make it seem like Jeremy's call lasted for longer than it did, if they wanted people to believe that Jeremy called at 03.24 and not at 03.36.

One thing which does not seem to have been addressed on this thread is an explanation of the timing of West's call to Witham at 03.37, where he tells the officer receiving the call that he has Bamber on hold. It is perfectly consistent with Jeremy calling at 03.36

PC West did not record the fact that he called Witham twice, once at 03.30 and again at 03.37 in his statements. There were definitely two calls since the first was by radio link and the second by telephone.




This firstly, of course, is presupposing Nevill was a stupid as Jeremy. Odd, don't you think that two people from the same family, when faced with someone going berserk with a gun, would waste time looking up and calling, with all those extra digits, a local police station, when there was the 999 facility. Then comes the obvious question WHY? Jeremy, at that time, wasn't a suspect. There was no reason for anything to be covered up.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 38245
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #235 on: October 19, 2019, 10:05:AM »

This firstly, of course, is presupposing Nevill was a stupid as Jeremy. Odd, don't you think that two people from the same family, when faced with someone going berserk with a gun, would waste time looking up and calling, with all those extra digits, a local police station, when there was the 999 facility. Then comes the obvious question WHY? Jeremy, at that time, wasn't a suspect. There was no reason for anything to be covered up.

Chelmsford was over 21 miles away.

Jeremy phoned Chelmsford as it gave him the best chance of being picked up at home by the police. The police car journey went near his home & even overtook Jeremy's car on the way to WHF. 

Being over 21 miles away, also gave Jeremy more time at home to get himself together.  He even had time to phone Julie. To hear a friendly voice.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2019, 10:22:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #236 on: October 19, 2019, 12:00:PM »
As I understand it, what's been claimed by Bill Robertson is that Jeremy called the police at 03.36 and PC West put Jeremy on hold at about 03.37 when he called Witham police station. Leaving aside the question of whether this happened or not, the theory can't be refuted by an appeal to the testimony of PC West, since the claim is being made that West in his testimony was lying and that he was involved in a police cover up.

If the police wanted to cover up the fact that Nevill called the police at slightly before 03.26 and that it was Nevill who was put on hold by West, when the latter called Bonnett at headquarters, then they would naturally be trying their best to make it seem like Jeremy's call lasted for longer than it did, if they wanted people to believe that Jeremy called at 03.24 and not at 03.36.

One thing which does not seem to have been addressed on this thread is an explanation of the timing of West's call to Witham at 03.37, where he tells the officer receiving the call that he has Bamber on hold. It is perfectly consistent with Jeremy calling at 03.36

PC West did not record the fact that he called Witham twice, once at 03.30 and again at 03.37 in his statements. There were definitely two calls since the first was by radio link and the second by telephone.






Strobe I also understand that West's call was being relayed as he was on the phone to Jeremy at the same time. This is where the mix-up all started, though why EP didn't own up to the two calls of " Mr Bambers " I'll never know as initially it began as a genuine mistake and then continued to snowball all owing to the mix-up in the phone-calls coming from 2 Mr Bambers. What followed from then on was abysmal.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #237 on: October 19, 2019, 12:03:PM »
Nevill's call was 999 but Jeremy hadn't been aware of that as he was killing time flicking through the phone book when the phone had remained engaged at the WHF end.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 32623
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #238 on: October 19, 2019, 01:00:PM »



Strobe I also understand that West's call was being relayed as he was on the phone to Jeremy at the same time. This is where the mix-up all started, though why EP didn't own up to the two calls of " Mr Bambers " I'll never know as initially it began as a genuine mistake and then continued to snowball all owing to the mix-up in the phone-calls coming from 2 Mr Bambers. What followed from then on was abysmal.

So you really believe that the pair of them, father and son would be stupid enough, given the severity of the situation, to look up the number of a local police station, wasting precious time with extra digits, when the 999 facility would have done the job much faster?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #239 on: October 19, 2019, 01:11:PM »
So you really believe that the pair of them, father and son would be stupid enough, given the severity of the situation, to look up the number of a local police station, wasting precious time with extra digits, when the 999 facility would have done the job much faster?




For the second time, Nevill rang 999.