Author Topic: Witness statement of PC Mildenhall, consisting of 6 pages, dated, 20th September  (Read 2253 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38977
Witness statement of PC Mildenhall, consisting of 6 pages, dated, 20th September, 1985:-

Each of the 4 pages, signed by PC Mildenhall, denoting original notes...
« Last Edit: October 09, 2011, 03:40:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38977
Although it states that this statement consists of 6 pages, there are only 4 pages in this edited version...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline arkanoid

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Although it states that this statement consists of 6 pages, there are only 4 pages in this edited version...
I think you're being deliberately disingenuous here Mike.

You know full well why the statement has only 4 printed pages even though it says 6 on the front page. I have see it explained several times on this forum.

And yet you choose to suggest it is an "edited version" thus implying some kind of conspiracy when you know that not to be the case.

I'm afraid you do yourself no favours behaving like this - it makes the reader wonder when else they are being deliberately mislead  :(

andrea

  • Guest
oh i say its tough, i have had enough can you stop cavalry.

Offline smiffy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2000
Mildenhall were covering mainly red side from the red/white corner. Obstructions more or less prevented any cover being offered to white side from their position.
White side was covered by Webb and Rozga it seems. They got called into the house and Rozga claims they ran together. Both fail to mention the 2 cars parked near the white side door that would have restricted observation on the ground floor of the kitchen and door area but which would have provided some cover on their approach.
However when they ran to go inside ...no one was covering them or covering white side for a while as Mildenhall and Brown would take some time to get to new positions to cover white side. A common sense approach would be to only send Webb and Rozga into the house when cover for them and white side was in place. This did not happen.  This seems a serious failing going by the story presented by EP.

 Unless there was a most serious pressing need to have them in the house with the greatest urgency it seems utterly foolhardy. Their statements suggest this was not the case. Alternatively if the perceived threat (ie Sheila) was known to be no longer the threat ...ie injured/dead/location known etc then risk would be considered minimal and providing a continuous effective cover was no longer an issue but a fairly low level precaution----then Webb and Rozga entering as they did and the lack of full cover on white side is of no great significance in regards to risk to life and limb.


Offline smiffy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2000
Mildenhall and Brown were the only ones outside the house able to view the main bedroom well.

Going by the police version of events from the statements etc.
By the time activity went on in the bedroom they had already been moved from where they had been located so saw none of it. Had they stayed there they may have seen Sheila moving about or police officers moving about etc.

One does wonder on whether they were called away from where they had been sited on white/red corner deliberately to keep them in the dark and prevent them seeing what was going to happen.

If cover was really  needed on white side despite there being no credible reason for Webb to have entered going by the police accounts then surely only one officer was needed to provide this cover, thus leaving one officer still covering red from the white/red corner. However both Mildenhall and Brown were called to provide cover on white side thus leaving no cover at all from red/white corner. Such a decision makes no sense if the threat was still real.

So we have both Mildenhall and Brown providing  white side cover when only one was really needed and no one on red/white corner to observe the main bedroom goings on. Mildenhall gets called in ...which is rather odd as Webb had no real role and could have done what Mildenhall was tasked to do unless of course he was busy as Hall and Manners were pre-occupied with another thing (sheila?).

So Mildenhall gets called in leaving just Brown to provide white side cover. Now if Mildenhall was not called in it could be contended that leaving 2 officers to cover white side and no one on white/red corner would look extremely suspicious....especially with all the activity in the main bedroom! Surely if there was no need to call Mildenhall in the argument could be made that 2 persons on white side was excessive ...which would hold up as valid as eventually Brown ended up covering it on his own.

There should have been no problem in leaving one officer covering white/red corner (covering main bedroom etc) and having just one drawn from that spot to cover white side. If another officer was required in the house then one could have been drawn from either of these 2 spots with the other officer moving to cover the side considered most important if required.
eg.  Mildenhall only could have moved to white side and later Brown could have gone into the house or Brown moved to join Mildenhall to allow Mildenhall to enter the house.



What we could have is  Webb called into the house(with Rozga) when not really needed to create a demand on white side to pull Mildenhall and Brown away from red/white corner observing the main bedroom through its window. Again to justify this false demand  and lack of anyone on red/white corner, Mildenhall is called into the house  so an excess of 2 persons is not on white side with an absence of anyone on red/white corner.

Offline smiffy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2000
A minor discrepancy such as a typo maybe...despite people supposedly checking statements after signing them or is it something more.

Mildenhall mention drawing his personal weapon (number 6) prior to going to the farm. However on his return to the range he hands in "weapons"...plural.
If this is no typo mistake then it may suggest he drew more than one weapon OR that maybe he handed another officers weapon or weapons back in along with his own.  This could lead to a possibliity of people trying to mess up records as to which officer took and returned weapons used in the events at WHF.