Author Topic: The telephone off the hook  (Read 1779 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #30 on: October 08, 2018, 04:30:PM »
a phone call was made from the house, so who made it? if you think JB is the killer he could have made it but then he would have needed an accomplice to pick up the call at his cottage, and there is no evidence he had an accomplice.  NB could have started the call and then SB could have started killing the twins , I don't believe he would have called AFTER she started killing the twins that is if NB had been aware she was killing the twins it would be more likely he would have called 999

There is no evidence that any call was made from WHF.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45981
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #31 on: October 08, 2018, 07:54:PM »
There is no evidence that any call was made from WHF.

Unfortunately, a call was made from white house farm to Jeremy's cottage, and therefore two different ways you can look at this matter!

Firstly, (a) you can look at it on the basis that Jeremy was the killer, in which he needed to be able to prove that such a call had been made from the scene to his cottage, and secondly, (b) you could look at this matter on the footing that he (Jeremy) did receive such a call and that he was not the killer...

The guilters' are guilty of ignoring any information or evidence which tends to support Jeremy Bambers innocence, rather than accepting the fact that one way or another, the call from white house farm would have needed to be established as having occurred!

The guilters', want their cake, and they want to eat it all themselves!

It stands to reason that in whatever manner the news that there was something going on back at the farmhouse, that such a call as was being claimed had been made and was recieved by Jeremy, would need to be verified!

« Last Edit: October 08, 2018, 07:56:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45981
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #32 on: October 08, 2018, 07:58:PM »
Please...

Why would Jeremy make such a claim that his father had made that call to him, if for one moment he couldn't expect it to be proven that such a call had been made by his father?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45981
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #33 on: October 08, 2018, 07:59:PM »
Please...

Why would Jeremy make such a claim that his father had made that call to him, if for one moment he couldn't expect it to be proven that such a call had been made by his father?

I am saying to you all, that it can be proven that Neville Bamber had made that call to Jeremy, followed by his call to police at 3.26am..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10701
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #34 on: October 08, 2018, 09:43:PM »
Unfortunately, a call was made from white house farm to Jeremy's cottage, and therefore two different ways you can look at this matter!

Firstly, (a) you can look at it on the basis that Jeremy was the killer, in which he needed to be able to prove that such a call had been made from the scene to his cottage, and secondly, (b) you could look at this matter on the footing that he (Jeremy) did receive such a call and that he was not the killer...

The guilters' are guilty of ignoring any information or evidence which tends to support Jeremy Bambers innocence, rather than accepting the fact that one way or another, the call from white house farm would have needed to be established as having occurred!

The guilters', want their cake, and they want to eat it all themselves!


It stands to reason that in whatever manner the news that there was something going on back at the farmhouse, that such a call as was being claimed had been made and was recieved by Jeremy, would need to be verified!
No we wonder why a call was concealed by the authorities at such an early stage.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #35 on: October 08, 2018, 10:33:PM »
Unfortunately, a call was made from white house farm to Jeremy's cottage, and therefore two different ways you can look at this matter!

Firstly, (a) you can look at it on the basis that Jeremy was the killer, in which he needed to be able to prove that such a call had been made from the scene to his cottage, and secondly, (b) you could look at this matter on the footing that he (Jeremy) did receive such a call and that he was not the killer...

The guilters' are guilty of ignoring any information or evidence which tends to support Jeremy Bambers innocence, rather than accepting the fact that one way or another, the call from white house farm would have needed to be established as having occurred!

The guilters', want their cake, and they want to eat it all themselves!

It stands to reason that in whatever manner the news that there was something going on back at the farmhouse, that such a call as was being claimed had been made and was recieved by Jeremy, would need to be verified!

I hate cake - what evidence?

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6319
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #36 on: October 09, 2018, 02:21:AM »
No we wonder why a call was concealed by the authorities at such an early stage.


This is from Julie's September 8th 1985 statement.


Page 14


"He said before he had phoned me that morning Mathew had phoned from the house, which I took to be the farm, and said that everything had been completed"


Page 15

He also told me that there would be a phone call made from the house because the last phone call made would be recorded. He said the call would be made from the White House to his house. He didn’t say who would make it or why.

Whoever was getting Julie to say this needed her to peddle a version of events whereby a call took place from WHF to Goldhanger around 3.15am only that it was not Nevill making that call.
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27335
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #37 on: October 09, 2018, 08:06:AM »
I am saying to you all, that it can be proven that Neville Bamber had made that call to Jeremy, followed by his call to police at 3.26am..

It's quite useless to say 'it' can be proven without A) 'it' having BEEN proven B) providing IRREFUTABLE proof of how it was. To the best of my knowledge, any way of proving negatives has yet to be discovered. SUCH a shame Jeremy had switched off his answering machine, don't you think? Not only would he A) (not having a bedside phone) have not needed to get himself out of bed and downstairs at silly o'clock B) could have allowed the answer machine to pick up the message.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 20559
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #38 on: October 09, 2018, 08:17:AM »
Answering machines are left on 24/7.

Nevill would only ring to leave a message on Bamber's answering machine while he was sleeping. Although this doesn't help Nevill.

Bamber would have supplied the message to the police the following day.

So there was no call from Nevill.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2018, 08:20:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13526
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #39 on: October 09, 2018, 10:46:AM »
Answering machines are left on 24/7.

Nevill would only ring to leave a message on Bamber's answering machine while he was sleeping. Although this doesn't help Nevill.

Bamber would have supplied the message to the police the following day.

So there was no call from Nevill.
Unfortunately, you have no proof that answering machinrs are left on 24/7.'.back in 1985 Mine certainly wasn't.  If you were in and available to answer your phone it was switched off as so annoying to not answer before the machine kicked in.  Sometimes you would forget to switch it on at night or choose not to.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #40 on: October 09, 2018, 10:47:AM »

This is from Julie's September 8th 1985 statement.


Page 14


"He said before he had phoned me that morning Mathew had phoned from the house, which I http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.phptook to be the farm, and said that everything had been completed"


Page 15

He also told me that there would be a phone call made from the house because the last phone call made would be recorded. He said the call would be made from the White House to his house. He didn’t say who would make it or why.

Whoever was getting Julie to say this needed her to peddle a version of events whereby a call took place from WHF to Goldhanger around 3.15am only that it was not Nevill making that call.

Jeremy told her - no one else had reason to bring anyone else into the equation.

Offline Janet (Formerly known as

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #41 on: October 09, 2018, 11:06:AM »
Doesn't Mugford contradict herself in those two sentences? First she says Bamber told her that Mathew had phoned from the house, then she says he told her there would be a call from the house but didn't say who would make it or why.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27335
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #42 on: October 09, 2018, 11:08:AM »
Unfortunately, you have no proof that answering machinrs are left on 24/7.'.back in 1985 Mine certainly wasn't.  If you were in and available to answer your phone it was switched off as so annoying to not answer before the machine kicked in.  Sometimes you would forget to switch it on at night or choose not to.

Presumably, if one was going to be out all day, ie having an away-day or sitting in a tractor, an answering machine, unless one forgot?, would be switched on. Jeremy tells us that he had "a quick bath". He also goes into lengthy detail about programmes he watched. He makes no mention of coming in from work, listening to messages before switching off the answer machine to ensure his sleep wasn't disturbed. We can apply "what if's" to every situation till cows return.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13526
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #43 on: October 09, 2018, 11:32:AM »
Presumably, if one was going to be out all day, ie having an away-day or sitting in a tractor, an answering machine, unless one forgot?, would be switched on. Jeremy tells us that he had "a quick bath". He also goes into lengthy detail about programmes he watched. He makes no mention of coming in from work, listening to messages before switching off the answer machine to ensure his sleep wasn't disturbed. We can apply "what if's" to every situation till cows return.
Of cause we can, however opinions and sweeping statements prove absolutely nothing whichever side of the fence one argues from.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27335
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #44 on: October 09, 2018, 11:39:AM »
Of cause we can, however opinions and sweeping statements prove absolutely nothing whichever side of the fence one argues from.


I try very hard to only give my own opinions...................and even harder to prevent my statements from sweeping ;D