Author Topic: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'  (Read 284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2020, 10:32:AM »
So why hasn't this been published ?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2020, 03:11:PM »
Has my post on the first thread been censored because I've got the 500 error just on that page ?

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8958
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2020, 03:47:PM »
That is not evidence of your claim that he only saw one wound on SC due to carelessness and alcohol consumption.

The fact Sheila had two gunshot in the crime scene photos yet he only noticed one and he had a bottle of whiskey on him at the time is in itself proof he was careless in his observation due to alcoholism.   ::)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2020, 03:51:PM by David1819 »

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11527
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2020, 04:01:PM »
The fact Sheila had two gunshot in the crime scene photos yet he only noticed one and he had a bottle of whiskey on him at the time is in itself proof he was careless in his observation due to alcoholism.   ::)

No it's not.  Is it a flask or a bottle? A bottle would obviously be deemed worse than a flask. Either way it is no proof whatsoever regarding the cause of failing to see a wound. A doctor attending the scene of a mass killing with knowledge that a surviving relative was present, may well choose to administer a dose of spirits to the relative. It was the 1980's David.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2020, 04:01:PM by Roch »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #19 on: November 09, 2020, 04:19:PM »
Including Craig, there were 6 people who'd spoken of " the wound ". The coroners report on the 9th of August had stated " The appearance  suggested in the case of Sheila Caffell THE WOUND had been inflicted by her own hand ".

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49122
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #20 on: November 09, 2020, 04:29:PM »
Why did Edsex police, and the CPS keep the role of a team of headquarters SOCO, and the carrying out of 'informatives' by senior police officers, st the scene between 9.00am - 10.00am at the scene?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8958
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2020, 12:28:PM »
No it's not.  Is it a flask or a bottle? A bottle would obviously be deemed worse than a flask. Either way it is no proof whatsoever regarding the cause of failing to see a wound. A doctor attending the scene of a mass killing with knowledge that a surviving relative was present, may well choose to administer a dose of spirits to the relative. It was the 1980's David.

The fact of the matter is - Sheila was shot twice, he only noticed one gunshot wound. Hence he did not take a close look and was careless (whatever the underlying reason may be).

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49122
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #22 on: November 15, 2020, 11:59:AM »
The fact of the matter is - Sheila was shot twice, he only noticed one gunshot wound. Hence he did not take a close look and was careless (whatever the underlying reason ).
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49122
Re: Why did the contents of 'Doctor Craig's witness statement' get edited?'
« Reply #23 on: November 15, 2020, 12:35:PM »
The fact of the matter is - Sheila was shot twice, he only noticed one gunshot wound. Hence he did not take a close look and was careless (whatever the underlying reason may be.)

Why did everyone else who also visited the main bedroom crime scene after Dr Craig had pronounced Sheila as being dead at 8.44am, until around 9.10am, make witness statements stating that Sheila had 'a wound' to her neck at the time they viewed her body, within a 26 minute time period between when Dr Craig saw one wound, or a wound to Sheila's neck, (8.44am) and until around 9.10 am, when DS Jones, and DC Clark left the scene so that they could take a witness statement from Jeremy Bamber at his cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger?

Thereafter, other officers in attendance at the scene inside the main bedroom, refer to Sheila having two bullet entry wounds to her neck, from 9.13 - 9.15pm, onwards?

How could officers  and Dr Craig only see one bullet entry wound upon Sheila's neck between 8.44 am - 9.13pm, and yet thereafter, from then onwards (9.23am) every other officer saw two bullet entry wounds there?

Something happened to Sheila Caffell whilst her body was upstairs in the main bedroom from 8.44am when Dr Craig viewed her body, and 9.10am, when DS Jones visited, and then left the main bedroom (Sheila got shot a second time in the neck during a basic training exercise, known as 'informatives which were authorised by senior officers at the scene and ACC Peter Simpson, via use of a landline phone at the farmhouse. This telephone exchange lasted from 8.09Am until 8.59 - 9.00 am.  To date, there has never yet been any attempts to clarify what had been talked about between Senior officers during this crucial telephone exchange, between them at the scene and ACC Simpson at his home address..
« Last Edit: November 15, 2020, 05:22:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...