Author Topic: COLP interview of Robert Boutflour, dated 4th September 1991, 45 Pages:-  (Read 3502 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10808
That does not explain how they knew things that could only later be established in with laboratory apparatus.

No it has not. Stop making things up.

Since when does trampling a carpet clean it?

The blood in silencer was: A, PGM+1, EAP BA, AK 1, Hp 2-1

The twins have blood group 0 not A 
The twins have PGM 2+1+ not PGM+1
The twins have Hp 2 not HP 2-1

His conviction rests purely on it.
There was a lot of blood in the silencer, as John Hayward admitted to Mark Webster. Some blood was swabbed which was exclusive to Sheila Caffell. I know that Nevill Bamber and Daniel and Nicholas Caffell were Blood Type O but all victims save June had the AK 1 enzyme in common. The paint flakes which had fallen from the mantelpiece were dried and could easily have been trampled on underfoot by the Raid Team. Bamber's conviction does not rest solely on the silencer, though should the evidence be discredited after 33 years he would probably be released on a technicality.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2018, 02:09:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
There was a lot of blood in the silencer, as John Hayward admitted to Mark Webster. Some blood was swabbed which was exclusive to Sheila Caffell. I know that Nevill Bamber and Daniel and Nicholas Caffell were Blood Type O but all victims save June had the AK 1 enzyme in common. The paint flakes which had fallen from the mantelpiece were dried and could easily have been trampled on underfoot by the Raid Team. Bamber's conviction does not rest solely on the silencer, though should the evidence be discredited after 33 years he would probably be released on a technicality.


You are just going round in circles with the same nonsense. Why bother explaining things to you for the 500th time.
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47363
Bamber's conviction does not rest solely on the silencer, though should the evidence be discredited after 33 years he would probably be released on a technicality.

Bambers convictions will be quashed because he didn't shoot his sister dead, or stage her death scene as a suicide on the main bedroom floor, the police themselves are responsible for doing these things, and they would have got away with it if DS Jones and DC Clark hadn't confided in Ann Eaton and the other relatives that June and Sheila's bodies had been laid on top of the bed, that there was a bible resting on Sheila's chest, and that she had been shot once by a gun that was resting on the bed in-between both bodies and that Jones and Clark had just visited the crime scene and had both seen that which they had described to all within earshot...

Essex police have got to be brought to task regarding the false narrative they presented in the immediate aftermath of the shooting tragedies, which sought to deliberately cover up the circumstances surrounding Sheila Caffell's death in different parts of the farmhouse. There exists two entirely contradictive accounts regarding how the bodies of victims had been distributed in different parts of the farmhouse, downstairs and upstairs, during a 35 minute period between 7.35am and 8.10am, as opposed to witness statement accounts which mysteriously placed the body of a female upstairs on the main bedroom floor, shot twice by use of a gun she was clutching against her own body...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Any old excuse will do! You avoid the conclusion that David Boutflour found a silencer in September by suggesting that he made the call a month or so after finding it.

You seem to have forgotten that the relatives are supposed to have made such a call straight after the alleged finding on August 10. There is no record of any such call. When asked who made it, Ann Eaton said "It was probably me." 


(Doc P31) Telephone Message Log 38, 11th September 1985 reads:
‘David Boutflour states he found a silencer with blood on it’



Two questions.

1 Why would there be such a reference in the telephone message log made on September 11th of a call which had been made a month before, assuming Ann Eaton was mistaken about who made it?

 2 Or, alternatively why would David Boutflour phone on September 11th to report finding a silencer after it had already been reported by Ann Eaton on August 10th and supposedly had already been collected by Stan Jones as early as August 12th?

Having taken a closer look at this document. Its become apparent to me that this is a photocopy of an excel spread sheet created in 2002. This is not a police log as some have suggested.

Furthermore the same document also mentions DC Bird finding a hand grenade at White house farm then calling the bomb squad. So what in the actual xxxx is this document supposed to be? and who wrote it?

Until we know who typed this and where they got this from it is of no evidentiary value.

« Last Edit: November 24, 2018, 08:35:PM by maggie »
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428
That does not explain how they knew things that could only later be established in with laboratory apparatus.

No it has not. Stop making things up.

Since when does trampling a carpet clean it?

The blood in silencer was: A, PGM+1, EAP BA, AK 1, Hp 2-1

The twins have blood group 0 not A 
The twins have PGM 2+1+ not PGM+1
The twins have Hp 2 not HP 2-1

His conviction rests purely on it.

And yet you said that it has been accepted that the silencer wasn't used?  ::)

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
And yet you said that it has been accepted that the silencer wasn't used?  ::)


Wasn't used in what respect? Not used on the fatal shots inflicted on Sheila. Or not used all together?

The CCRC never disputed the new ballistic evidence. Instead they decided to argue that it being used in the kitchen was good enough. So I can safely deduce from this that they realised it wasn't used in the way that matters (Involving Sheila's death). 









"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428

Wasn't used in what respect? Not used on the fatal shots inflicted on Sheila. Or not used all together?

The CCRC never disputed the new ballistic evidence. Instead they decided to argue that it being used in the kitchen was good enough. So I can safely deduce from this that they realised it wasn't used in the way that matters (Involving Sheila's death).

I don't know David, it's what you have claimed. You have taken what was said incorrectly and your deductions mean SFA!

Offline Harry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181

AE/1 is the cardboard box DRB/2




Sometimes it is the attempt to cover up a deception which exposes it. The police wanted to cover up the fact that a silencer was collected from Ann Eaton by DC Oakey on September 11th. So they tell DC Oakey to leave it out of his statement dated October 25th 1985.

The other items such as the telescopic sight are mentioned, but not the silencer. David1819 accepts it as genuine and gives us his empty box theory. We are meant to believe Oakey collected the items which had been left at the Eatons' house for a whole month after the silencer had been handed in.

But the deceivers go further and try to tell us that AE/1 refers to an empty box and David accepts that also. But sometimes another piece of evidence gives the lie to what is being claimed and we seem to have that here in a pocket book entry by DC Hammersley.

Mike Tesko writes
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9299.msg435668.html#msg435668

Ref' 00032
This is an 'extract' from the pocketbook entry, dated the 16th November 1985, belonging to DC Hammersley (SOCO), in it he makes reference to himself taking possession of exhibits 'AE/1'(being the silencer), 'AE/2' (being the telescopic site), 'DRH/15' (being the rifle), the 'Silencer' and ' the telescopic site', for 'Fingerprinting'...

This is the very first time the silencer was being referred to in Ann Eaton's exhibit reference ('AE/1'), confirming that she handed it over to Essex police on 11th September 1985, along with the telescopic site ('AE/2')..

We have a unique crime reference to aid the new investigation...

'C 601 / 85'..




AE/1 is the silencer, not an empty box

« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 08:06:AM by Harry »

Offline Harry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181

Offline Harry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181


It would be useful if someone could type this out verbatim. I can make out most of it. Hammersley says that he took possession of a silencer AE/1 and a telescopic sight AE/2, If I'm not mistaken.


« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 07:21:AM by Harry »

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47363
And yet you said that it has been accepted that the silencer wasn't used?  ::)

According to information recieved from contact with Smith and Mallinson (2003 / 2004) a silencer came into contact with Sheila's neck, in particular, at the time the lower neck wound was inflicted ...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47363


It would be useful if someone could type this out verbatim. I can make out most of it. Hammersley says that he took possession of a silencer AE/1 and a telescopic sight AE/2, If I'm not mistaken.

I have been telling everyone for decades now, that the silencer relied upon during the trial (DRB/1, Court Exhibit no.9) was originally handed over to DC Oakey by Ann Eaton on 11th September 1985, which originally had the exhibit reference of AE/1, and that the other exhibits she handed over to police on this occasion were AE/2, AE/3 and AE/4, which subsequently had their exhibit reference altered into CAE/1, CAE/2, CAE/3 and CAE/4, then altered again when the police interfered with these and changed them into exhibits DRB/1, DRB/2, DRB/3 and DRB/4. As if all of this wasn't confusing enough, police then changed some of them into exhibit references HGO/1(a), HGO/1(b) and HGO/2, etc, etc, etc (leaving the silencer as DRB/1)..

These alterations were deliberately introduced to try and prevent anyone finding out about the true historical background about where the silencer marked by the exhibit reference 'DRB/1' came from, who found it, who handed it over to the police, when it was first fingerprinted, when it was first submitted to Huntingdon Laboratory, and when it was first examined by experts at the Lab'...

What I have been able to do, is to trace it's (DRB/1) history, all the way back to the time of the shooting tragedy at whf, and to prove that Sheila Caffell's blood was found to have been present inside a silencer (DB/1 - 23) which was present at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985 ( a silencer which had been present at Huntingdon Lab' from 30th August 1985), could not possibly have been a present inside this (DRB/1) silencer at the Lab' on that particular date, by virtue of the fact that the silencer bearing the exhibit reference DRB/1 ( previously also referred to by the exhibit references CAE/1, AE/1) was not at the Lab' any time sooner than the 20th September 1985, and that 'it' did not get examined by any expert there until the 25th September 1985! This means in the clearest terms imaginable that the court which tried Jeremy Bamber for the murders of five members of his family were dishonestly decieved, in particular, Bambers legal team, and the jury were led down the garden path, by the antics of Essex police and the prosecution services, because the key exhibit (DRB/1) in the entire proceedings was nothing but a red herrin' - you can't possibly use 'a prop' (which was what 'this' silencer was) in the prosecution of somebody, facing counts of multiple murders, and claim that the convictions can be justified and are legitimate, once it has been exposed as 'faked' evidence! I have proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that 'this' silencer (DRB/1, Court Exhibit No.9) relied upon during the trial of Jeremy Bamber could 'not possibly have been the silencer' inside which it was falsely (as it turns out) claimed had been found the unique blood of Sheila Caffell, a false flag piece of evidence, purporting to prove that Sheila Caffell could not possibly have killed herself with 'this' silencer attached to the end of the guns barrel, fell down dead on the bedroom floor, and at sometime thereafter, she had taken off 'this' silencer in question (that silencer being DRB/1, Court Exhibit no.9), walked all the way downstairs to the den, concealed 'it' (DRB/1) in a box in the gun cupboard, and then gone back upstairs to the main bedroom, only to lay down dead again on the floor in possession of the rifle, now minus the (DRB/1) aforementioned silencer! The fact is that she hadn't done this with that (DRB/1) silencer, and the fact is that neither Jeremy Bamber, nor any third party involved in Sheila's death, had done this with that (DRB/1) silencer!

This deception was something which Essex police and other interested parties deliberately sought to pull off, and there must have been a reason for them having all pulled their own weight toward fooling everyone into relying upon this (DRB/1) silencers existence, as some sort of proof that (a) Sheila hadn't killed herself, and (b) that Jeremy Bamber, was the killer, because as the trial judge said in his summing up, (c) there was 'no evidence of any third party involvement in these murders', it had to have been either Sheila, or Jeremy!

The absolute truth in this matter, was that the police were the third party involvement in Sheila Caffell's death!

Not only do the various contents recorded in the individually timed police radio message logs cast doubt on the witness statement version of the events regarding where Sheila Caffell's body had originally been seen, found, and pronounced (wrongly) dead, but the police got themselves into this pickle because a silencer which they had seized (SBJ/1) originally from the scene on the first morning of the shooting tragedy was subsequently returned back to the farmhouse on the evening of Friday, 9th August 1985, only for 'it' (SBJ/1) to be re-seized along with a second silencer (AE/1, CAE/1, DRB/1) by David Boutflour from the gun cupboard on the following day (10th August 1985). On the evening of 12th August 1985, Peter Eaton had handed over one (SBJ/1) of these two silencers (the one believed to have been owned by Anthony Pargeter) to DS Jones, the second silencer (AE/1, CAE/1, DRB/1) which was not handed over by Ann Eaton until 11th September 1985, was owned by the Bambers and was purchased in November 1985 - the unique blood belonging to Sheila Caffell could not have been found inside the silencer (DRB/1) belonging to the anshuzt rifle, if it was found inside any silencer at all, it could only have been found inside the other silencer (SBJ/1), the one belonging to Anthony Pargeters bolt action rifle!!!

please note, that any reference to the first silencer bearing the exhibit reference of SBJ/1, should also be treated as reference to the same silencer, mentioned at different times in the police file, as SJ/1 and DB/1. Similarly, any reference to the other silencer DRB/1, should also be referred to as CAE/1, and AE/1...
« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 12:43:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
AE/1 is the cardboard box the silencer was found in.

All the documents (both typed and handwritten) and the testimony of those involved, show the silencer was handed to the police on the 13th of August. The idea that all this was made up is a theory that cannot be substantiated. If one wants to believe in a giant conspiracy because they cant read two or three pieces of paper properly, that is their problem.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 05:36:PM by David1819 »
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47363
AE/1 is the cardboard box the silencer was found in. Exhibit AE/1 was the silencer found in the ammunition box..

All the documents (both typed and handwritten) and the testimony of those involved, a shallow investigation on your part, does not prove that the original AE/1 exhibit was the ammunition box! In fact the original exhibit AE/1 was in fact one of the two silencers which David Boutflour recovered from the gun cupboard arguably on the 10th August 1985..show the silencer was handed to the police on the 13th of August. No, it wasn't, the first time one of the two silencers was handed back to police was on the evening of 12th August 1985, handed 'back' to DS Jones on this date, at this time, by Peter Eaton!The idea that all this was made up is a theory that cannot be substantiated. You have got to be kidding! Of course what I am saying can be substantiated, the reason your saying all this nonsense on your part is because you are lazy and don't even take into account the relevance of the details recorded, and known about! If one wants to believe in a giant conspiracy because they cant read two or three pieces of paper properly, that is their problem. By the same token, those that believe everything wholeheartedly what Jeremy is expecting his supporters to believe, and those same supporters who shout from the rooftops the lies which Jeremy is relying upon all of them to buy into his explanation, then all I can say is that you are all sad bastards! If Jeremy wasn't involved in this tragedy, any part of it, how come he knows everything that took place, when he has no greater right to anybody else (like me) to know 100% what did take place?  You all might be his friend now as we speak but sooner or later he will dump you, just like he has dumped everybody else who has tried to help him! He isn't bothered about anybody but himself!

All that being said, I still wholeheartedly believe that he hadn't, and he didn't shoot dead his sister, and after he had killed her, he didn't"t, and he hadn't staged her death as a suicide there on the main bedroom floor!

« Last Edit: November 26, 2018, 09:06:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Harry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
AE/1 is the cardboard box the silencer was found in.

All the documents (both typed and handwritten) and the testimony of those involved, show the silencer was handed to the police on the 13th of August. The idea that all this was made up is a theory that cannot be substantiated. If one wants to believe in a giant conspiracy because they cant read two or three pieces of paper properly, that is their problem.

You have not given any explanation why DC Hammersley refers to the silencer and the telescopic sight as AE/1 and AE/2. The simple explanation of this is that the silencer and the telescopic sight were collected by DC Oakey from Ann Eaton on September 11th.

Oakey leaves the collection of the silencer out of his statement, but Hammersley mentions taking it into his possession along with the telescopic sight. The fact is, in such a conspiracy there are likely to be such mistakes, but they tend to be brushed aside.   

The plan, evidently, was to claim that the telescopic sight and other items were left at the Eatons' house for a whole month after the silencer was allegedly handed in on August 13th. But Hammersley has given it away that he took possession of it along with the silencer AE/1, after they both had been collected on September 11th by DC Oakey.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2018, 10:11:AM by Harry »