Author Topic: WIRELESS MESSAGE LOG  (Read 3466 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Admin

  • Administrator
  • Junior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 44
WIRELESS MESSAGE LOG
« on: February 23, 2011, 07:35:PM »
WIRELESS MESSAGE LOG
 

The Wireless Message Log has become a document of central importance to the application for an appeal from the CCRC. Page one states that at 5.25am the police were ‘in conversation with person from inside the farm’. Correspondence with the police during the past few months has led to them admitting that only page one of the Wireless Message Log was available to the defence at trial, thereby conceding that all other fourteen pages of the Wireless Log that were not available would be classed as non-disclosed evidence. The complete document consisting of 21 pages was only made available for the defence when sent to them on 3rd March 2004 by the Essex Police.

However neither the police or the prosecution intended page one of the Wireless Message Log to be seen by the defence, the judge or the jury and according to the 2004 Witness Statements none of them did see it. The only reason it came to be in court at all was because it had been written or re-written onto the back of the Essex Police Telephone Communication Log. This document was photocopied and distributed to everyone in court but the reverse side containing the information from a page of the Wireless Message Log was not. Quite why this Wireless Message Log appears on the reverse of an unrelated document and not on the proper form like the other fourteen pages of the Wireless Message Log is yet another unexplained anomaly in this case.

The point that the police now rely on is that even if the entry relating to them being in conversation with a person inside the farm at 5.25am is true then this document was in the court file for inspection and so it cannot be their fault that this issue was not explored at trial. This of course misses the key point that no original document is ever looked at unless there is a dispute in court over an issue of reproduction on the photocopy given to the lawyers, judge and jury and as no dispute arose concerning the photocopy of the Police Communication Log there was no application to look at the original in court. Therefore there was never an opportunity for anyone to stumble across these very poignant entries contained on the reverse of this document. There is the question concerning why the court were not given photocopies of the reverse in any event but that answers itself in that the police would not want the court to know that two hours after arriving at the farm with Jeremy Bamber they were in conversation with a person inside the house. Not only does that totally undermine their case but it would cause other investigations to be started, revealing further evidence to assist the defence, forcing them to hand over the rest of the Wireless Message Log and other documents.

This becomes evidently clear when pages 4 and 7 in particular are looked at. An entry on page 4 states that at 7.37am ‘one dead male and one dead female in kitchen’. When this entry is looked at in conjunction with the pathology evidence from Sheila Caffell that proves she may have been alive at this time it becomes apparent that this would have been a vital piece of evidence.

There are two possibilities here. Either Sheila was found dead in the kitchen and for reasons not yet disclosed the police carried her upstairs and placed her by the side of the bed in the master bedroom or the identification of her being dead was premature and while the police were busy searching the back of the house or the back room (upstairs from the kitchen) Sheila fled upstairs and killed herself.
The police cannot possibly suggest that the identification of a dead female and dead male was a mistake as there was nothing in the small kitchen that could be mistaken for a dead woman. To make the distinction between dead male and a dead female implies they had a clear view of both bodies. The lights were on, it was light outside, the window was large and did not have curtains or blinds. It was another fifteen minutes before the police searched upstairs at the front of the house so it cannot be confusion between which deceased person was found where as at that time no one else was known to be dead.

There are a considerable amount of evidential facts which establish that Sheila was seen and positively identified in the kitchen at 7.37am by the police. However, to ensure that these facts cannot be distorted to lessen their impact they will be sent to the CCRC and confirmed before being made public. Of course the audio recording made from the open telephone line in the kitchen would reveal exactly what was heard in the kitchen at 7.36am when the incident room states that movement and voices were heard. The key question is what sort of movement and what was being said and by whom? Surely the police and prosecution would want to produce these audio recordings that up to date have still not been revealed if they assisted their case? It seems clear that these audio tapes will show that not only was Sheila alive at 5.25am and in conversation with the police but that she was seen in the kitchen at 7.37am assumed dead but then fled upstairs. Are these voices on the tape Sheila’s or the police or both? What we can be sure of is had this document not been concealed at trial then these audio tapes would have been played to the jury with devastating results to the prosecutions case because if Sheila was alive or dead in the kitchen at 7.37am how could the police explain that to the jury without proving Jeremy Bamber’s innocence.

The next issue which appears in the Wireless Message Log which assists the defence case appears on page 7. It states at 8.09am that ‘all five persons found – DEAD’ At trial and at appeal the police stated that Dr Craig pronounced that everyone was dead at the scene. Furthermore all the police who entered the house that morning prior to the crime scene photos being taken have sworn Witness Statements saying that none of them moved anything or touched any of the deceased, apart from one officer who repositioned a stool in the kitchen. This cannot be true as one of the police officers had to have felt for a pulse from each person to state they were dead and not just unconscious or seriously injured. Dr Craig did not arrive at the farm until after 8.25am, fifteen minutes after the police had radioed in that everyone was dead. This accounts for the bloodied finger marks which appear on the pulse points on the necks of the deceased and has confused the court about how they occurred and may also account for the bloodied hand print which appears on Sheila’s nightdress. The fact is that the police concealed that they caused the bodies to be contaminated with blood on the neck pulse points and knowing they had done this, led everyone to believe that Dr Craig pronounced everyone dead when they themselves had done this fifteen minutes before his arrival.

Without this Wireless Message Log the finger marks on the necks of the deceased would have remained a mystery.

This Wireless Message Log also exposes that a crucial ground of appeal in 2002 was lost due to the police failing to admit who made the telephone call from the farm house phone that morning and who it was made to. This was important for a number of reasons because had the defence known who this telephone call was between then it could have been proven that the telephone receiver in the kitchen was replaced and then re-staged prior to the photographs being taken.

The appeal judges refused to allow the defence to call DCI Ainsley to establish that this happened as they ruled any evidence he had about the use of the house phone was hearsay. This meant that this ground of appeal could not be established and accordingly allowed the judges to dismiss it. However, had this Wireless Message Log been available at appeal and trial then the entry at 8.20am would have established that ACC ‘O’ Mr Simpson requested to speak to DCI Harris on the land line. From this both the Deputy Chief Constable and DCI Harris could have been called to account for why the telephone had been used prior to the photos being taken, why the scene had been re-staged, why whatever forensics on the phone had been lost and why the last number called from that phone was lost as this could have been ascertained from the examination of the exchange dialled facility depending on which phone DCI Harris used. The fact is that the police always knew who used this phone in the house but misled the appeal court by saying that every Firearms Officer was asked about using the phone but all wrote Witness Statements saying they hadn’t. It must have been known by some that it was their Commanding Officer who used the phone and concealing that information led to the court ruling wrongly against the defence.

It will be interesting now for Mr Simpson to account for his silence on yet another important issue in this case, knowing as we do that it was he who replaced DCI Jones, who had been in charge of the case and firmly believed Jeremy Bamber to be innocent. He was replaced with DCI Ainsley after a secret meeting with Robert Boutflour and was very keen to see him charged.

Point 4 from page 7 of this Wireless Message Log is yet more real time evidence that has been concealed from the defence. The 8.41am entry states ‘OG10 and two officers with Dictaphones and 5 tapes to go asap to scene’. It is assumed that they arrived as ordered and that they made detailed audio recordings as ordered of the scene. These tapes would contain further information that was never contained in Witness Statements which were often made weeks later. Had this information been known about at trial then these tapes along with all the other audio tape recordings of the telephone and radio messages would have been called for to assist in proving the innocence of Jeremy Bamber.

The next issue relates to the calling of two ambulance crews to White House Farm on the morning of 7th August 1985. Entries on page 4 of the Wireless Message Log states:

‘ CA07 (control car at scene) 6.20am 2 ambulances required, one for immediate one for standby’

‘IR (incident room) 6.22am 2 ambulances arranged’

‘IR at r.v. point going to scene with 2 ambulances escorted by CA06 (police vehicle) 6.40am’

‘ CA06 8.1 (officer code) at Pages Lane (road which leads to WHF) 7.04am Necessary escort dealt with’

In 1985 it was not normal practice to call ambulances to an incident where the Tactical Firearms Unit were deployed. This is clear because the police TFU were deployed to White House Farm at 4.04am and it was another two and a quarter hours before the ambulances were requested. The decision was obviously made by the police at the scene of any incident as to whether or not it was necessary to call in medical crews to assist.

It is known that officers Bews and Myall had positively identified a person in the window of the upstairs master bedroom shortly before 4am and this was reported back to the incident room. The audio recordings will confirm this, although officer Bews stated in court he wasn’t sure it was a person, more likely a shadow or trick of the light. Officer Myall has never been available to confirm that he positively saw a person, although he did request for this persons fingerprints to be looked for and tricks of light or shadows do not leave fingerprints.

We also know that the two ambulances were called after the police had reported as being in conversation with someone from inside the farm at 05.25am. Although clearly written in the Wireless Message Log, again the police deny that the person was inside the house, instead suggesting that the person they were in conversation with was Jeremy Bamber who was clearly outside. Why would they then change from calling him by name to calling him ‘a person’ and why and more relevantly at 05.29am when the police state that they attempted to continue this conversation with the person from inside the farm was the ‘challenge met with no response’ if he was with them? It is not feasible that they should be ‘ in conversation’ with him and then 4 minutes later have to ‘challenge’ him. Why would he be refusing to reply when he had just been in conversation with them? This explanation by the police is weak and implausible.

So what was the nature of the conversation the police had with the person from inside the farm and what else happened between 05.29am when all conversation ceased and the call for ambulances at 06.20am which were required for immediate use and the other for back up? Something must have been seen, heard or said from inside White House Farm which made the police request ‘immediate’ medical assistance. Whatever caused this urgent request may have been recorded from the open phone line in the kitchen. Furthermore, if recordings are kept at Ambulance Headquarters then the reason for the deployment of ‘immediate’ assistance will be stated in those records.

These documents have never been made available to the defence and may hold vital clues over why the police needed immediate medical assistance at 06.20am, over an hour before they actually entered the farm house and discovered the bodies of one dead male and one dead female in the kitchen. This is confirmed in two separate documents: the Wireless Message Log entry page 4 07.37am ‘one dead male and one dead female in kitchen’ and an Essex Police Communication Log page 6 timed at 07.38am ‘one dead male, one dead female found on entry to premises’ Police statements confirm that it was at least ten minutes later than 07.38am that police went upstairs at the front of the house and found anyone else dead. This leaves the question of what happened to the dead female identified as being found in the kitchen as in later statements both females are found upstairs.

It has been mentioned many times that there are numerous audio cassette recordings from the open phone line, the radio traffic, phone calls from the incident room and Dictaphone tapes made at the scene. None of which have been made available to the defence. It may be suggested by the police that all of these audio cassettes have since been destroyed, however for an item of evidence to be destroyed it has to be registered in a log and authorisation given by a senior officer for this to happen. All of the logs have been reviewed and no audio cassette recordings have ever been listed as having been destroyed. This means they should still exist.

The recorded facts from the scene now prove that someone was alive inside the house after Jeremy Bamber arrived with the police at 03.45am. At least two police officers saw a person alive at the bedroom window, other police officers were in conversation with a person from inside the house. Something then occurred inside the house that caused the police to call 2 ambulances, one for immediate use. Then police officers identify a dead male and dead female in the kitchen. The dead female later disappears and is photographed upstairs in the main bedroom. Time of death evidence proves that Sheila Caffell died between 05.30am and 07.30am.

There are many other interesting and useful entries contained within this Wireless Message Log but these entries alone prove the non-disclosure of this document at the trial of Jeremy Bamber severely prejudiced the jury, allowing them to wrongly believe by a 10:2 majority that he was guilty. This is evidence enough that Jeremy Bamber could not have been responsible for the murder of his family and is as he has always maintained – INNOCENT.