Author Topic: Proof Conclusive - 'DS Jones reason for returning to scene to collect Silencer  (Read 364 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
The following information will lead to the quashing of convictions/release from custody of Jeremy Bamber - Essex police seized Anthony Pargeters silencer from the scene, on the first morning of the police investigation (7th August 1985). it was Seized by 'DS Jones after he returned to the farmhouse as a result of information received from Jeremy Bamber, regarding the fact that there existed 'A SILENCER'and a telescopic sight belonging to 'THE GUN' (as evidenced by the witness, 'Ann Eaton, who went to 9 Head Street at 9.10am that same morning, and overheard that discussion). Two hours later (11.10am) 'DS JONES' left 9 Head street, Goldhanger, and returned to the scene to look for and collect 'that silencer' and telescopic sight, belonging to 'THE GUN' used in the shootings.

A Uniformed PC who had been instructed to keep a log of anyone who arrived or left the farmhouse building after 10.00am, recorded in his handwritten (timed events) log, records for the fact that 'DS JONES' did return to the scene at that time..

Years later, as a result of the 'COLP' Enquiry into claims made by 'Jeremy BAMBER' that Essex police and his relatives had fabricated the 'SILENCER', blood, and paint/scratchmark  evidence, to get him convicted, 'DS Jones' was asked by COLP investigators, why he had returned to the scene at 11.10am, on that first morning of the police investigation, and 'DS Jones' claimed that he had no recollection of having done so.




THEY KEEP BLOCKING THIS INFORMATION FROM BEING POSTED...


Please Click on link (below), and type 'Open File', to view unfinished project

In Ann EATONS Witness Statement, she states the following:-

As a result of information received at about 9.10am on Wednesday 7th August 1985, I went to 9 Head Street, Goldhanger where I saw two plain clothes policemen and Jeremy Bamber discussing the deaths at white house farm and taking a statement regarding the same.

I cannot be precise of when it was said by the police or Jeremy but during the taking of the statement questions were raised about the Silencer and telescopic sites of the gun. Jeremy made replies to the effect that the Silencer and telescopic sights had to be removed from the gun before it could be stored in one of the cupboards.

 
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 04:00:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
The following information will lead to the quashing of convictions/release from custody of Jeremy Bamber - Essex police seized Anthony Pargeters silencer from the scene, on the first morning of the police investigation (7th August 1985). it was Seized by 'DS Jones after he returned to the farmhouse as a result of information received from Jeremy Bamber, regarding the fact that there existed 'A SILENCER'and a telescopic sight belonging to 'THE GUN' (as evidenced by the witness, 'Ann Eaton, who went to 9 Head Street at 9.10am that same morning, and overheard that discussion). Two hours later (11.10am) 'DS JONES' left 9 Head \street, Goldhanger, and returned to the scene to look for and collect 'that silencer' and telescopic sight, belonging to 'THE GUN' used in the shootings.

A Uniformed PC who had been instructed to keep a log of anyone who arrived or left the farmhouse building after 10.00am, recorded in his handwritten (timed event) log, records for the fact that 'DS JONES' did return to the scene at that time..




THEY KEEP BLOCKING THIS INFORMATION FROM BEING POSTED...


Please Click on link (below), and type 'Open File', to view unfinished project


http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10449.0;attach=57096

In Ann EATONS Witness Statement, she states the following:-

As a result of information received at about 9.10am on Wednesday 7th August 1985, I went to 9 Head Street, Goldhanger where I saw two plain clothes policemen and Jeremy Bamber discussing the deaths at white house farm and taking a statement regarding the same.

I cannot be precise of when it was said by the police or Jeremy but during the taking of the statement questions were raised about the Silencer and telescopic sites of the gun. Jeremy made replies to the effect that the Silencer and telescopic sights had to be removed from the gun before it could be stored in one of the cupboards.

« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 04:13:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051




'Ann EATON, knew about the existence of 'THE SILENCER' belonging to the gun she thought had been used in the shootings on the morning of 7th August 1985


'DS Jones' knew about the existence of 'THE SILENCER' belonging to the gun he thought had been used in the shootings on the morning of 7th August 1985

'DC Clark' knew about the existence of 'THE SILENCER' belonging to the gun he thought had been used in the shootings on the morning of 7th August 1985

Eaton, Jones, and Clark knew about 'A silencer' to a gun, by 9.10am, on the morning of 7th August 1985, because Jeremy himself told them about 'it'...

By 11.10am, that very same morning (7th August 1985) 'DS Jones, left Jeremy's cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger, and went back to the scene to collect 'THE SILENCER' (which subsequently became exhibit 'SBJ/1' and telescopic sight) that Jeremy had told them about. But he seized 'Anthony Pargeters' silencer, in error. This came about, because Police at the scene 'soon after point of entry' seized 'Anthony Pargeters' .22 bolt action (Brno model), as well as the .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt' rifle, and 'DS Jones' seized 'Anthony Pargerters' silencer which was recovered from the downstairs toilet/bathroom. One of the four 'exhibits' that 'DS Jones' took from whf that morning (in addition to the silencer ('SBJ/1'), was a photograph that 'DS Jones' had taken of the downstairs toilet/bathroom, where 'Anthony Pargeter' always kept his collection of guns, including his .22 (brno) bolt action rifle, accessories, and ammunitions.

'Jeremy Bamber' knew about the existence of the 'THE SILENCER' (which would later on become exhibit 'DB/1'), to his own families .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt' rifle before the tragedy, and also afterwards. He never spoke to 'DS Jones', or 'DC Clark' about the silencer belonging to 'Anthony Pargeters' . 22 rifle. 'Ann Eaton' does not mention anything about the existence of a second silencer when she was listening to the conversation between 'Jones', 'Clark' and 'Jeremy' at 'Jeremy's cottage on that first morning. Hence, why 'DS Jones'  upon finding 'Anthony Pargeters' silencer (the original exhibit, 'SBJ/1' - 'Lab item number 22), in the downstairs toilet/bathroom on his return to the scene (7th August 1985), no further enquiries were made with regards to which silencer belonged to which gun, because as far as 'DS Jones was concerned he was only aware of the existence of one silencer ('SBJ/1' - Lab item number 22) after speaking with Jeremy in the presence of 'DC Clark, and in the hearshot of 'Ann Eaton'..

That 'mistake/error' only came to light after the seizure of 'THE SILENCER'- (Lab item number 23') belonging to the Bamber family owned .22 semi-automatic rifle, found by David Boutflour, in the gun cupboard at the scene (on 10th August 1985), was the self-same gun cupboard where the .22 semi-automatic rifle, telescopic sight and ammunitions were normally kept. It now seems almost certain, and without doubt, that at some point between 'David Boutflour, finding 'THE SILENCER ('DB/1' - Lab item number 23) which belonged to the .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt rifle, on 10th August 1985, and the 12th August 1985, when 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour went along to Witham police station, and informed 'PS Miller' that his son ('David Boutflour') had found 'a silencer' (Lab item number 23) at the scene a couple of days beforehand. Hence, why 'DS Jones, attends the 'Ann/Peter Eaton' residence later that 12th August 1985, evening and collects 'THE SILENCER ('DB/1') belonging to the Bamber family rifle. It becomes clear that by that stage, Essex police were in possession of two different lookalike parker hale silencers, ('SBJ/1' and 'DB/1'), one belonging to the Pargeter gun, and the other one belonging to the Bamber gun...
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 10:49:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051

That 'mistake/error' only came to light after the seizure of 'THE SILENCER'- (Lab item number 23') belonging to the Bamber family owned .22 semi-automatic rifle, found by David Boutflour, in the gun cupboard at the scene (on 10th August 1985), was the self-same gun cupboard where the .22 semi-automatic rifle, telescopic sight and ammunitions were normally kept. It now seems almost certain, and without doubt, that at some point between 'David Boutflour, finding 'THE SILENCER ('DB/1' - Lab item number 23) which belonged to the .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt rifle, on 10th August 1985, and the 12th August 1985, when 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour went along to Witham police station, and informed 'PS Miller' that his son ('David Boutflour') had found 'a silencer' (Lab item number 23) at the scene a couple of days beforehand. Hence, why 'DS Jones, attends the 'Ann/Peter Eaton' residence later that 12th August 1985, evening and collects 'THE SILENCER ('DB/1') belonging to the Bamber family rifle. It becomes clear that by that stage, Essex police were in possession of two different lookalike parker hale silencers, ('SBJ/1' and 'DB/1'), one belonging to the Pargeter gun, and the other one belonging to the Bamber gun...

As 'if' that was 'all' we now know how the police, relatives, Lab' (so called) experts, CPS, and in general quite a lot of people who work in the judicial system and allow this kind of evidence to be used and relied upon to help prosecute someone , please bear with me and allow me to add a little bit more sauce to the broth that is now cooking..

A silencer got fingerprinted three times as part of the investigation into the five deaths at whf (7th August 1985). For the purpose of being very specific, I shall (1) - provide the names of the police officers who carried out the individual fingerprinting of 'silencers' (2) -  bearing the exhibit references in existence, along with (3) - the corresponding Lab item number of each exhibit reference, (4) -  the dates that all three fingerprinting exercises were performed. followed by (5) - the type of fingerprinting technique which was adopted on each of these three separate occasions (in that order:-


'DI Cook' - 'SBJ/1', (22), on 15th August 1985 - 'DUSTING'
'DI Cook' - 'DB/1',  (23), on 23rd August 1985 - 'CYNOACRYLATE FUMES''
'PS Eastwood'/'PC Oakey', ('DRB/1' (22), on 14th September 1985 - ('?')
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 10:31:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051

A silencer got fingerprinted three times as part of the investigation into the five deaths at whf (7th August 1985). For the purpose of being very specific, I shall (1) - provide the names of the police officers who carried out the individual fingerprinting of 'silencers' (2) -  bearing the exhibit references in existence, along with (3) - the corresponding Lab item number of each exhibit reference, (4) -  the dates that all three fingerprinting exercises were performed. followed by (5) - the type of fingerprinting technique which was adopted on each of these three separate occasions (in that order:-

'DI Cook' - 'SBJ/1', (22), on 15th August 1985 - 'DUSTING'
'DI Cook' - 'DB/1',  (23), on 23rd August 1985 - 'CYNOACRYLATE FUMES''
'PS Eastwood'/'PC Oakey', ('DRB/1' (22), on 14th September 1985 - ('?')

When an item such as a silencer is fingerprinted by the 'DUST' technique, it can be further examined using  the 'FUME' technique. So the silencers that were fingerprinted on the 15th August 1985 ('SBJ/1' - Lab item number 22), and 14th September 1985 - ('DRB/1' - Lab item number 23), could have been the same silencer.

Now here's the  'BILLION DOLLAR' astounding remedy that  essentially should 'GET YOU OUT OF JAIL, FREE'. - 'Once an item such as a silencer has been fingerprinted using the 'FUMING' technique like 'DI Cook' did on the 23rd August 1985, it is impossible to even contemplate fingerprinting the item again, because the surface of the exhibit is coated with layers of superglue...

Under these 'TERMS OF REFERENCE', the silencer ('DB/1') - Lab item number 23, 'CANNOT HAVE BEEN THE SAME SILENCER ('DRB/1'), Lab item Number 23, only the same silencer as 'SBJ/1' - Lab' item number 22)..
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 06:37:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
I conclude, therefore, that Silencers 'SBJ/1' - Lab item number 22, which was tested using the 'DUST' technique, when the investigation was being conducted as 'FOUR MURDERS AND A SUICIDE (crime reference number - SC/688/85), 'DRB/1' - Lab item number 23, which was tested using the 'FUMES' technique, once the investigation had become transformed into one of 'FIVE MURDERS' (crime reference number SC/786/875), that both were, in fact, 'one and the same silencer'...

Silencers 'SBJ/1' - Lab item number 22, (when the police investigation was 'FOUR MURDERS AND A SUICIDE' (crime reference number SC/688/85) and 'DB/1' - Lab item number 23, (when the police investigation had turned into one of 'FIVE MURDERS' (crime reference number  - SC/786/85) were almost certainly completely separate silencers...

These conclusions, have a significant bearing on other features and aspects of the evidence which was 'relied upon to fool the jury' into convicting 'Jeremy Bamber' as the murderer, for the following reasonsonings :-
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 06:54:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
One of the two silencers had 17 internal baffle plates, whilst the other almost certainly had fewer.

One of these silencers was purchased in 1980, whilst the 0ther one was purchased at the back end of November 1984

One of the silencers, belonged to 'Anthony Pargeter', whilst the other belonged to lets say for purpose of ease, that it belonged to 'Jeremy Bamber'

When the blood group evidence was obtained from inside one of the silencers at the Lab' on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985 (silencer, 'DB/1' submitted to the Lab on the 30th August 1985), this coincided with the other silencer not even being present at the lab, and it did not get submitted there by Essex police until much later (20th September 1985), meaning that the silencer ('DRB/1' - Lab' item number 23) could not have been the same silencer ('DB/1') upon and inside of which the crucial blood group activity (A, EAP BA, HP 2-1, AK1) associated with and to Sheila Caffell was present, found and identified - there is clear proof that the silencer evidence which has been used as a vehicle to introduce the damning 'blood group' and 'crushed red paint particles' that were presented to link the silencer (the 'DRB/1' version) to scratch marks on the kitchen aga, scratch marks which seemingly did not get photographed, until the 14th September 1985 (three days after Ann Eaton handed over silencer 'DRB/1' to the police...

Just to make it absolutely clear, Ann Eaton handed over to police 'THE SILENCER' which ended up bearing exhibit reference 'DRB/1' to the police on the 11th September 1985, (formerly, known by reference to exhibit label, 'SBJ/1') which had originally been seized by 'DS Jones' at the scene on the first morning of the police investigation (7th August 1985) - and in order to pull off this deception, 'that silencer' had to have been returned to the relatives at some point/stage prior to the 11th September 1985. Some evidence that this is what did occur can be found in 'Anthony Pargeters' disclosure that 'David Boutflour' had told him that 'a silencer', his silencer had been returned to the family, something which relatives and Essex police have continually and persistently denied...

Yet, in order for 'Ann Eaton' to have been able to hand over the very same silencer that 'DS Jones' had about one month earlier seized from the farmhouse, it has to be true, that 'a silencer' (formerly, 'SBJ/1') was returned into 'the possession of the relatives' on some occasion prior to 11th September 1985, but Essex police and these relatives have 'fought tooth and nail' to try and keep a lid on these 'unscrupulous activities'.

Paint that was subsequently identified upon the knurled metal end cap of silencer 'DRB/1' - (Lab' item number 23), was not found upon the same metal end cap of the other silencer ('DB/1' - Lab item number 23) inside of which was discovered, removed and identified blood said to have been unique to Sheila Caffell, unless of course, the metal end cap contaminated with red paint from the scratched kitchen aga at the farmhouse, had a universal thread and those involved in this sordid affair quite simply unscrewed it from one ('DB/1') and exchanged it with the other from 'DRB/1' - it would also follow that if it was the unique blood belonging to Sheila Caffell that was found upon several of the 17 baffle plates from inside silencer 'DB/1', that once the metal end cap from the same silencer had become exchanged with the same from silencer 'DRB/1', that some of Sheila Caffells dried blood might still have been present or detectable inside the exit aperture on the metal end cap, thus hoping to lend some credibility to the proposal that silencer 'DRB/1' was the silencer used to shoot and kill all the victims, including Sheila Caffell, but that would have been impossible, because unless both silencers were used in the murder of Sheila Caffell, and were either used to fire a single shot each into Sheila Caffells neck/throat with the silencers either on and fitted to the same gun (rifle), or to two different guns..
« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 04:34:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
Please, be reassured, that 'Jeremy Bamber' did not murder in cold blood, 'any single member of his own family'...

I will explain in due course!
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 11:15:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
Further proof that there were/are at least two different parker hale silencers at the heart of this miscarriage of justice, can be found by reference to photographs that were taken by 'DI Cook' of one of the silencers ('DB/1') prior to 'its' submission to the Lab' on 30th August 1985 (the silencer belonging to 'Jeremy Bamber'), when in actual fact the 'Pargeter silencer' in the 'guise of exhibit reference 'SBJ/1' which later turned out to bear the  exhibit reference 'DRB/1' was resubmitted to the Lab on that date. The other silencer ('DB/1') was the silencer that 'DS Eastwood/DS Davi(D)son'' and 'DC Oakley' fingerprinted on 14th September 1985. To put it frankly, it has to be more than a coincidence that 'DS Davi(D)son' and ' DC Oakley' fingerprinted 'the silencer' on the very same date (14th September 1985) that the very first photograph of any scratch marks on the underside of the kitchen aga mantelpiece at the farmhouse was captured, and that this more or less corresponds to the date (10th September 1985, onwards) of witness statements where relatives first make mention of any scratch marks being present there, or of any reference to there being a substance which might/could have been dried blood, and red paint particles on 'that' silencer..

 
« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 05:01:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
The evidence is now 'stacking up', in favour of the case against 'Jeremy Bamber' having been / is a very serious and somewhat 'disturbing' miscarriage of Justice
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Robittybob1

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 99
The evidence is now 'stacking up', in favour of the case against 'Jeremy Bamber' having been / is a very serious and somewhat 'disturbing' miscarriage of Justice
Keep up the good work.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
Keep up the good work.

I am gathering more and more evidence to help Jeremy Bamber get some real justice...

Thanks for your encouragement..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
ACC Peter Simpson (Essex police) _ in a news conference shortly after the tragedy, said that police recovered a silencer from the scene at Whitehouse farm at the beginning of the investigation..

Yet...

Essex Police, the CPS, CCRC, and the Home Secretary of the day (Douglas Hurd) who  imposed 'a life tarrif with no prospect of release', ignore 'the fact' that a minimum of 'two (?) different silencers' were in the possession of Essex Police  during the investigation into the five deaths. But when did any police officer recover, find or seize any silencer at all from the scene? Since, according to the official version of events, the only person to have found, recovered, or seized a silencer at the scene, was 'David Boutflour', and this took place according to the evidence on the 10th August 1985...
« Last Edit: October 19, 2020, 01:46:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051

But when did any police officer recover, find or seize any silencer at all from the scene? Since, according to the official version of events, the only person to have found, recovered, or seized a silencer at the scene, was 'David Boutflour', and this took place according to the evidence on the 10th August 1985...

In a witness statement made by 'David Boutflour', made in September 1985, he describes two different locations inside the same gun cupboard in the downstairs office where he supposedly found the same silencer! Rather astonishing, documentary evidence recorded by Essex police, mentions that on the 11th September 1985, that 'Ann Eaton' had handed (the) a silencer to DC Oakry. This coincided with her brother, 'David Boutflour' telephoning Essex police on the following day  (12th September 1985) to inform them that he had found the silencer belonging to the gun that was used in the shootings...

Somewhat interestingly, a team of SOCO, attended at the scene (whf) and amongst other things took the very first photographs showing the scratch mark on the underside of the red painted mantelpiece of the kitchen aga. That very same day, DS Eastwood and DC Oakey fingerprinted the silencer which 'Ann Eaton' had given to DC Oakey three days earlier! This silencer was not submitted to Huntingdom Forensic Laboratory until 20th September 1985 (which serves to confirm that the bloodstains that were linked or associated with 'Sheila Caffell' were found inside and upon the internal baffle plates of a different silencer ('DB/1') which had been submitted to the lab's, on 30th August 1985. This is significant, because the silencer which was Court exhibit number 9 during the trial, did not have the exhibit reference 'DB/1', but rather 'DRB/1'.

It would have been/is impossible for the silencer bearing the witness exhibit reference of 'DB/1', to be the same silencer, as the one bearing the witness exhibit reference 'DRB/1', because evidence is now available to confirm that one of them 'DB/1' went to the lab' on the 30th August 1985, whilst the other ('DRB/1') went there for the first time 21 days later (20th September 1985). How could 'Ann Eaton' and the other relatives have still got possession of 'THE SILENCER' by/until the 11th September 1985, if it was or had been the same silencer taken to the Lab' on 13th August 1985 ('SBJ/1'), and or when silencer 'DB/1' was sent or taken there, on 30th August 1985?

It is impossible for the silencer marked 'DB/1' sent to the lab's on 30th August 1985 which was examined and bloodstains which were found analysed producing the results (A, EAP BA, AK1, HP 2-1) which were obtained from those samples on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, to have been the exact same silencer (court exhibit 9), 'DRB/1' ...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49051
How coincidental, that the only lab' records pertaining  to the submission of a silencer, relate to the silencer ('SBJ/1') 22, on 13th August 1985, and ('DRB/1') 23, on 20th September  1985, and none for the submission of silencer 'DB/1' 23, supposedly sent or 'taken' to the same lab' on the 30th August 1985?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...