Author Topic: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?  (Read 92097 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #375 on: October 23, 2019, 08:04:PM »
my thoughts  on timings in general are this

in those days  - the police were well aware of the importance of timings and  reliable clocks. The period of time we are talking about their Notes and time keeping was vital for evidence . they did not have technology to rely on . So IMO any changes or stating that clocks were wrong is either deceitful or down right sloppy. In court they would be expected to be accurate and detailed with their evidence.

However members of the public would obviously be more lax with their memory or accuracy . The argument that Jeremy would remember in detail all the timings and what was said because of the  horrendous outcome is quite frankly  ridiculous ( IMO so not to cause offence)  Firstly when he took the call if he is innocent he did not know what the outcome would be and then he would ( as reported ) be in total shock . And his first thoughts would not have been I am shortly going to have to make a full and detailed statement .  And if he made both calls to prove his innocence he would have pushed to mention the other call . As far as I am aware he mentioned about his fathers phone being engaged when he tried to call back  that was all ?


Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #376 on: October 23, 2019, 08:10:PM »
And I've always maintained that when JB tried to phone his dad back and found the line engaged that Nevill would have been phoning the police at that very time. When a phone is engaged it means that someone you're trying to call is talking to someone else. Elementary isn't it ?

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #377 on: October 23, 2019, 08:15:PM »
And I've always maintained that when JB tried to phone his dad back and found the line engaged that Nevill would have been phoning the police at that very time. When a phone is engaged it means that someone you're trying to call is talking to someone else. Elementary isn't it ?

In that case, Nevill would have had to have been calling the police at just after 03:10 and no one is arguing that.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 37666
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #378 on: October 23, 2019, 08:23:PM »
All the Sheila scenarios submitted exclude Nevill calling the police.

It's hard enough just trying to find a suitable time for Nevill calling Jeremy. With some strange scenarios given.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2019, 08:25:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 37666
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #379 on: October 23, 2019, 08:25:PM »
If Nevill was only able to speak to Jeremy for 4 seconds & say 11 words, it is surprising that around 30 minutes later he was able to spend several minutes speaking to the police.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 37666
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #380 on: October 23, 2019, 08:27:PM »
If Sheila had 'the gun' and was 'going crazy' at around 3.10am when Nevill called Jeremy, what went on at WHF over the next 30 minutes?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2019, 08:28:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #381 on: October 23, 2019, 08:30:PM »
my thoughts  on timings in general are this

in those days  - the police were well aware of the importance of timings and  reliable clocks. The period of time we are talking about their Notes and time keeping was vital for evidence . they did not have technology to rely on . So IMO any changes or stating that clocks were wrong is either deceitful or down right sloppy. In court they would be expected to be accurate and detailed with their evidence.

However members of the public would obviously be more lax with their memory or accuracy . The argument that Jeremy would remember in detail all the timings and what was said because of the  horrendous outcome is quite frankly  ridiculous ( IMO so not to cause offence)  Firstly when he took the call if he is innocent he did not know what the outcome would be and then he would ( as reported ) be in total shock . And his first thoughts would not have been I am shortly going to have to make a full and detailed statement .  And if he made both calls to prove his innocence he would have pushed to mention the other call . As far as I am aware he mentioned about his fathers phone being engaged when he tried to call back  that was all ?

At the point when Jeremy phones, West didn't know what the outcome would be either and at around 03:30, he was probably bored and low on concentration or as you say - 'sloppy'. He was criticised for being just that after given evidence. One thing he would remember, is taking two calls, one from Nevill and one from Jeremy.

My dad had a massive heart attack in front of me I had to call the emergency services - I was in total shock but the time of the call was 21:25 - it's etched on my brain. It took 12 minutes for the paramedics to arrive from me hanging up the phone (seemed like a lifetime), he was pronounced dead at 21:40. The undertaker arrived at 10:10. Like I said, the times are etched and Bamber supposedly didn't even know there was much wrong when he made his call. He recalled the times perfectly the following day without any problem. After he had time to think, he realised that calling Julie first, was a problem.

Years later he made a complaint against West, claiming her perjured himself by changing the time on the log from 03:26 (the time Jeremy clung to at trial) to 03:36. Now he argues the opposite. He required the time to be 03:26 at trial so he could argue he called Julie after the police - he needs the time to be 03:36 now, so he can argue that Nevill called. So when did he called Julie?
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #382 on: October 23, 2019, 08:36:PM »
Nevill rang the police and Sheila rang the ambulance.

Ainsley suppressed all this information and had Taff Jones murdered.

Because Robert Boutflour promised him a job at the caravan site.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #383 on: October 23, 2019, 08:38:PM »
There's a difference when you're physically there with a person who's died than if you get a phone-call at stupid o'clock from 3 or so miles away.
I nursed my husband until his death at night and was asked by the on-call GP what the time of death was and I was struggling even then.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17937
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #384 on: October 23, 2019, 08:48:PM »
Nevill rang the police and Sheila rang the ambulance.

Ainsley suppressed all this information and had Taff Jones murdered.

Because Robert Boutflour promised him a job at the caravan site.
Did Robert Boutflour have contact with Ainsley? Boutflour wrote to him which resulted in a meeting with ACC Peter Simpson. Then Ainsley appointed James Kenneally to conduct a review, which kept the original conclusion Taff Jones had jumped to. It was only when Julie came forward and Stan Jones became involved that things changed.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16117
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #385 on: October 23, 2019, 08:50:PM »
It's very difficult to prove whether Nevill rang the police but Sheila didn't ring an ambulance.

Ainsley suppressed a lot of information and was able to retire early with a police pension, to carry out his role at the caravan site, but didn't have Taff Jones murdered.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #386 on: October 23, 2019, 08:56:PM »
Nevill rang the police and Sheila rang the ambulance.

Ainsley suppressed all this information and had Taff Jones murdered.

Because Robert Boutflour promised him a job at the caravan site.


 :o :o :o :o

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16117
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #387 on: October 23, 2019, 08:58:PM »
Obviously because he had learned he put the wrong time on the log. He stated in his court testimony that he was informed he wrote the wrong time.

He expressed it was a matter of dispute as to whose time was wrong and whose time was right and was very stubborn about this.  Why does Myall mention a similar time for a call to Witham, with the informant on hold?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2019, 08:59:PM by Roch »

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #388 on: October 23, 2019, 08:59:PM »
Nevill rang the police and Sheila rang the ambulance.

Ainsley suppressed all this information and had Taff Jones murdered.

Because Robert Boutflour promised him a job at the caravan site.


 Not sure I would even begin to comment on that except I often wondered about the lack of statements from ambulance staff as I would think they would have running information about what was going on

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #389 on: October 23, 2019, 09:05:PM »

It's very difficult to prove whether Nevill rang the police but Sheila didn't ring an ambulance.

Ainsley suppressed a lot of information and was able to retire early with a police pension, to carry out his role at the caravan site, but didn't have Taff Jones murdered.


I was being sarcastic.

The CT claim Sheila rang an ambulance. Why don’t you believe that then?

The only thing Ainsley and Co suppressed (as far as I know). Is the evidence of no forced entry via the bathroom window. The bible and Fletchers silencer experiments.