Author Topic: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac  (Read 6463 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
Timed entries, or timed events, relied upon in this case, need to be looked at, and treated accurate to within a maximum of 60 seconds either way, scaled down second by second to a minimum adjustment of 1 second either way. For example, let's take the 3.30am call which Jeremy made to Julie. We say the call took place at this particular time, but was it made 1 second, 2 seconds, 3 seconds, on a scale all the way up to the 60th second of 3.30am? This is very interesting because if for example Jeremy's call to Julie, had started at 03:30:01, and the call had lasted barely a minute, it could be argued that his call to Julie had been made at 3.31am. If the call lasted 2 minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the duration had been three minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy called Julie at 3.33am. Alternatively, if Jeremy's call to Julie had started at 03:30:60, and it barely had lasted 1 minute, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the call had lasted 2 minutes, it could have been argued, Jeremy had called Julie at 3.33am. Similarly, if Jeremy's call to Julie had lasted 3 minutes, it could have been argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.34am...

The purpose of trying to demonstrate how it might be possible to show that any timed reference of an event might only be accurate to within a minute either way, depending upon the duration of event. Where duration exceeds 1 minute in its entirety, the accuracy of a timed event could be out by half of the duration period either way. To simplify matters, adopting the principle, of rather than saying Jeremy's call to Julie took place at 3.30am, another way of saying the same thing is that the call lasted between 3.29 and 3.31am, or 3.28 and 3.32, or 3.27 and 3.33am. But adopting this approach is still problematic. This problem may only be rectified if the precise time, in hours, minutes, and seconds are known at the start of event!!!
« Last Edit: January 14, 2017, 11:37:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
Timed entries, or timed events, relied upon in this case, need to be looked at, and treated accurate to within a maximum of 60 seconds either way, scaled down second by second to a minimum adjustment of 1 second either way. For example, let's take the 3.30am call which Jeremy made to Julie. We say the call took place at this particular time, but was it made 1 second, 2 seconds, 3 seconds, on a scale all the way up to the 60th second of 3.30am? This is very interesting because if for example Jeremy's call to Julie, had started at 03:30:01, and the call had lasted barely a minute, it could be argued that his call to Julie had been made at 3.31am. If the call lasted 2 minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the duration had been three minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy called Julie at 3.33am. Alternatively, if Jeremy's call to Julie had started at 03:30:60, and it barely had lasted 1 minute, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the call had lasted 2 minutes, it could have been argued, Jeremy had called Julie at 3.33am. Similarly, if Jeremy's call to Julie had lasted 3 minutes, it could have been argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.34am...

The purpose of trying to demonstrate how it might be possible to show that any timed reference of an event might only be accurate to within a minute either way, depending upon the duration of event. Where duration exceeds 1 minute in its entirety, the accuracy of a timed event could be out by half of the duration period either way. To simplify matters, adopting the principle, of rather than saying Jeremy's call to Julie took place at 3.30am, another way of saying the same thing is that the call lasted between 3.29 and 3.31am, or 3.28 and 3.32, or 3.27 and 3.33am. But adopting this approach is still problematic. This problem may only be rectified if the precise time, in hours, minutes, and seconds are known at the start of event!!!

Every event which occurred in connection with this case, did not start at the same point in the second cycle in a minute. Some might have started 2 seconds into the second cycle, or 3, or 10 seconds in. Others might not have started until the 28th seconds into a minutes second cycle of 60 seconds, and so on, and so forth!!!
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
I mention this here, because the only differences in times to certain events which took place in this case, are those which might crop up by reference to these anomalies.For example, moving the timing of Jeremy's call to Julie back to 3.15am, or 3am, and even moving it forward to 3.38am,  do not fit into this calculation mechanism. Jeremy's call to Julie, did not occur at 3.00am, 3.15am, 3.30am, and 3.38am. Somebody is lying, or has lied...

That person is not Jeremy Bamber...
« Last Edit: January 10, 2017, 09:15:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
Or, do people count the time forward, and backward, from the point an event occurs, so that 60 seconds after an event commenced, the next minute is cited?
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 07:26:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
A minute cycle of 60  seconds:-
Showing starting point of events, a, b, c, d and e in same cycle

Adding 60 seconds to the starting point of an 'Event' moves the time into the next minute. If an event lasts 120 seconds it moves the time into minute, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

1
2
3
4 - Event a
5
6 - Event b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 - Event c
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 - Event d
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 - Event e
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 06:48:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
Adding 60 seconds to the starting point of an 'Event' moves the time into the next minute. If an event lasts 120 seconds it moves the time into the next minute, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

1
2
3
4 - Event a (second minute)
5
6 - Event b (second minute)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 - Event c (second minute)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 - Event d (second minute)
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 - Event e (second minute)
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 07:27:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993

Adding 60 seconds to the starting point of an 'Event' moves the time into the next minute. If an event lasts 120 seconds it moves the time into minute, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

1
2
3
4 - Event a (third minute)
5
6 - Event b (third minute)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 - Event c (third minute)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 - Event d (third minute)
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 - Event e (third minute)
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
Some events which occurred in this case, overlapped other events, or ran into other events, or ran out after other events had ended...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
The closer in time to an event, or in a series of events, the more obvious it becomes apparent that events started either at the same time of a 60 second minute, or at a different time in the same cycle. The further away in time, these events might appear to have happenned simultaneously, for example by reference to the minute cycle of an hour, the hourly cycle of a day, a daily cycle of a week, a weekly cycle of a month, a monthly cycle of a year, a yearly cycle of a decade, a decade cycle of a century, and so on and so forth...

Today, we are into the decade cycle of a century in the Bamber case, within which exists yearly cycles of a decade, monthly cycles of a year, weekly cycles of a month, daily cycles of a week, hourly cycles of a day, minute cycles of an hour, and second cycles of a minute...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
The closer in time to an event, or in a series of events, the more obvious it becomes apparent that events started either at the same time of a 60 second minute, or at a different time in the same cycle. The further away in time, these events might appear to have happenned simultaneously, for example by reference to the minute cycle of an hour, the hourly cycle of a day, a daily cycle of a week, a weekly cycle of a month, a monthly cycle of a year, a yearly cycle of a decade, a decade cycle of a century, and so on and so forth...

Today, we are into the decade cycle of a century in the Bamber case, within which exists yearly cycles of a decade, monthly cycles of a year, weekly cycles of a month, daily cycles of a week, hourly cycles of a day, minute cycles of an hour, and second cycles of a minute...

Hence, why as we look back at the present moment in time and we say, the occupants of CA07 left Witham police station at around 3.15am to deal with another Job, that Neville may have tried to contact Witham at around 3.20am, that Neville called Jeremy at around 5.25am, that Neville made the 3.26am call to the police, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back at around 3.26am, that Jeremy unsuccessfully tried to contact Witham police station by 3.29am, that Jeremy called Julie at 3.30am, that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am, that they were deployed to the incident (3.35am) acting on behalf of the information passed to police earlier by Neville Bamber at 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed to the scene at 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station at 3.36am, and was put on hold for 5 minutes, that 'PC West'', spoke to a female operator at 3.42am, that Jeremy left his cottage at 3.46am to go to the farmhouse, that at 3.48am the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene at 3.48am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the farmhouse by 3.52am, that the operator did not get back in touch with police until 3.56am to tell them that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook, that it was not until after Jeremy's arrival at the scene (3.52am) that he told the occupants of CA07 about the collection of shotguns and .410's kept by Neville inside the farmhouse, which was relayed back to the control room afterwards, the details of which were added to the (C1) Communications log, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

Some of these timed events overlapped, or ran into, or out of the other events. There may have been periods of unreported activity in-between some of these events...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
I do not believe for one moment that Jeremy Bamber can be any more accurate regarding the timing of these events, than say I am. This is because in 1989 /1990 I know that Jeremy hadn't got a clue about the times of these events, let alone know that such events had occurred. I should know because I made it part of my remit to investigate things like this on his behalf. For my part, this is what I strived to do right up to the beginning of 2004 whilst still engaged as Jeremy's McKensie man, and ever since by self interest and self motivation. There are no grounds  for believing that times of events as relied upon by Jeremy at this present time, are more accurate than my own times...
« Last Edit: January 12, 2017, 07:09:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
It is a fact, for example, that Jeremy's call to Julie could not possible have been made at either 2am, 3am, 3.15am, or at 3.38am, by reference to the system of time keeping which I am alluding to in this thread. The correct time of his call to Julie being 3.30am, or to put it another way, between 3.29am and 3.31am (based on his call to her lasting 2 minutes)...
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 09:17:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
It is a fact, for example, that Jeremy's call to Julie could not possible have been made at either 2am, 3am, 3.15am, or at 3.38am, by reference to the system of time keeping which I am alluding to in this thread. The correct time of his call to Julie being 3.30am, or to put it another way, between 3.29am and 3.31am (based on his call to her lasting 2 minutes)...

Similarly,  we can adopt this principle, in relation to other timed events because we do not know at which point in the 'Seconds cycle of the minute' each event occurred - as a result it could be argued that Nevilles call to the police was made between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to contact Witham Police Station between 3.28am and 3.30am, that Jeremy called Julie between 3.29am and 3.31am, that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident between 3.34am and 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed between 3.34am and 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station between 3.35am and 3.37am, that PC West contacted the female operator between 3.41am and 3.43am, that Jeremy left his cottage between 3.45am and 3.47am, that the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene between 3.47am abd 3.49am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the scene between 3.51am and 3.53am, that the female operator reported back to police that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook between 3.55am and 3.57am, these are facts which enable the enquirer to get as close as possible to the 'actual time' this event, as opposed to that event occurred,  allowing for 'overlap', where 'one event' may have ran into, or out of 'two or more other events', including the possibility that 'periods of (unreported) inactivity' occurred or took place inbetween any of these events...
« Last Edit: January 12, 2017, 08:06:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
Similarly,  we can adopt this principle, in relation to other timed events because we do not know at which point in the 'Seconds cycle of the minute' each event occurred - as a result it could be argued that Nevilles call to the police was made between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to contact Witham Police Station between 3.28am and 3.30am, that Jeremy called Julie between 3.29am and 3.31am, that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident between 3.34am and 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed between 3.34am and 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station between 3.35am and 3.37am, that PC West contacted the female operator between 3.41am and 3.43am, that Jeremy left his cottage between 3.45am and 3.47am, that the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene between 3.47am abd 3.49am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the scene between 3.51am and 3.53am, that the female operator reported back to police that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook between 3.55am and 3.57am, these are facts which enable the enquirer to get as close as possible to the 'actual time' this event, as opposed to that event occurred,  allowing for 'overlap', where 'one event' may have ran into, or out of 'two or more other events', including the possibility that 'periods of (unreported) inactivity' occurred or took place inbetween any of these events...

Adopting this method allows any enquirer to get as 'close to the truth' as possible...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47993
There was obviously a 'sequential link' between 'one' or other of the '19 events' which I have identified, where the 'circumstances of one event', 'overlapped', ran 'into', ran 'out' of, or 'stood alone' in its own truth...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...