Author Topic: The telephone off the hook  (Read 1781 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #90 on: October 11, 2018, 01:06:AM »

Seriosly? Every time you have to make something fit its because of evidence showing Sheila was the shooter.

The scene of crime and all the details around it is evidence and always will be. Insisting that the Jeremy made it all look that way in a hypothetical scenario does not nullify the scene for what it is.

Why do you think RWB came up with the idea that Jeremy gave Sheila the gun and told her to shoot herself? Why did Bernard Knight said it would be extrodinary to stage a suicide like this without the victim objecting? Because the evidence shows she shot herself. The evidence is so great even guilters resort to a senario where Sheila is a willing participant in staging her own death as suicicde but under orders from Jeremy. These stupid theories are a result of the evidence of Sheila's involment.

I'll ask again - what evidence?

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6319
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #91 on: October 11, 2018, 02:04:AM »
I'll ask again - what evidence?


And I will tell you again. The scene of the crime and the circumstances of the bodies at the scene.


 
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6319
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #92 on: October 11, 2018, 02:32:AM »
Mike has already said Bamber left his answering machine phone on 24/7.


The same Mike that already said Jeremy had this answer machine by his bed?  ::)


Mikes word often proves to be a double edged sword for many peoples theory's and arguments such as this instance. Hence people seldom use Mike as source of info.  :-\
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 20559
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #93 on: October 11, 2018, 06:26:AM »

The same Mike that already said Jeremy had this answer machine by his bed?  ::)


Mikes word often proves to be a double edged sword for many peoples theory's and arguments such as this instance. Hence people seldom use Mike as source of info.  :-\

Do you not think an answering machine is still useful when someone is at home ? People do -

Sleep
Shower
Entertain.
Vaccum
Play loud music
Watch TV
Not want to speak to anyone.
Cook.
Use a sun bed.

Having an answering machine on 3-8 rings gives people at home the chance of answering a call,  ignoring it & letting someone leave a message or letting a message be left if they have not heard the phone.

But appreciate supporters have to say Bamber was the only person in the country who switched his answering machine off. Otherwise the call from Nevill 100% did not happen.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 06:29:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 20559
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #94 on: October 11, 2018, 07:21:AM »
The CT will never bring up Bamber's answering machine, as it is reactive & defensive evidence.

Nevill's call to the police & Sheila being alive in the kitchen is pro active & positive evidence. Saying 'this shows Bamber is innocent'. Rather than fire fighting.

Besides which, no one will believe Bamber switched off his answering machine so better to pretend it didn't exist.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 08:21:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 20559
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #95 on: October 11, 2018, 08:02:AM »
Replacing answering machines in many households was BT's 1571 service.

This was a 24/7 service which could not be switched off & on, as no one used to switch their answering machines off/on.

Customers had to cancel with BT if they did not want it.

Bamber is lucky he did not have this service. He & supporters can at least claim he switched off his manual answering machine, to keep the dream alive.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 08:14:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45981
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #96 on: October 11, 2018, 08:31:AM »
The tones for engaged and off the hook were the same.

But not to the operator who can eavesdrop a telephone handset which is 'off its cradle', whereas ordinary consumer individuals can't and couldn't! As I say the operator could tell the difference - it's possible that prior to around 5.55am that everytime the operator checked the line the phones handset at the scene was off its cradle (off the hook), and that no-one was trying to make any calls to the farmhouse and no-one at the house was talking to anyone on the line at the times of the operators check. This was when the operator could say with certainty that the phone at white house farm was 'off the hook'. The information I have been given by bt engineers is that with the telephones handset thus arranged, anyone other than the operator attempting to make contact with the occupants inside the farmhouse would be greeted by a continuous 'engaged tone'. Furthermore, I was assured that in the following circumstances, even when a telephone handset is let's say 'off the hook' at ground zero where neither anyone is already trying to make contact with the occupants of the premises, and the operator is not checking the current status of the phone line at the scene, but that when the following occurs, the operator is or was unable to tell whether the phone at the scene is simply 'off the hook', when prior to the operators check a third party has tried to contact the people inside the premises by telephone - this activity prevented the operator from being able to tell whether the handset in question was 'off the hook', because the line to the property is being overloaded at the local exchange by the third parties attempted call the house...

At this time the following is / was true:-

(1) - The handset at whf is "off the hook'

(2) - Anyone trying to call whf at this time gets an engaged tone

(3) - Except the Operator who has the facilities at his/her disposal to be able to check the line to see if someone is actually talking to someone, or if the handset being checked is simply 'off the hook'

(4) - If someone is trying to call the house with conditions (1) and (2) in play the operator will be unable to tell whether or not the phone still has its handset 'off the hook' at (3) because the phone line at the local exchange (substation) has become overloaded, resulting in the operator only being able to get an engaged tone equivalent to the conditions met at (2)

(5) - when the conditions at (4) are met, the operator could be mistaken into believing that Someone at the farmhouse is / was talking to a third party on the line because at that time the operator gets a constant 'engaged tone'


« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 08:36:AM 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 #97 on: October 11, 2018, 08:44:AM »
I won't let the answer phone issue be forgotten - the police thought it was capable of settling the matter of Neville Bamber having made that call to Jeremy or not!

And..

What's more, just because the police have not disclosed the evidence they found when examining those five audio tapes belonging to Jeremy's answer phone machine does not necessarily mean that the actual call to Jeremy by Neville Bamber  was not recorded therein, because the report concerning these examinations has never been disclosed and is withheld under pii..

So, it would be futile for anyone to proceed on the footing that no such call was made, or had been made...

For all anyone knows, the call from Neville could have been recorded on the answer phone audio tapes taken from Jeremy's cottage!

If so, 'THEN WHAT'?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 08:46:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #98 on: October 11, 2018, 12:27:PM »

And I will tell you again. The scene of the crime and the circumstances of the bodies at the scene.

So, just your own theories then. Thought so.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #99 on: October 11, 2018, 12:30:PM »
But not to the operator who can eavesdrop a telephone handset which is 'off its cradle', whereas ordinary consumer individuals can't and couldn't! As I say the operator could tell the difference - it's possible that prior to around 5.55am that everytime the operator checked the line the phones handset at the scene was off its cradle (off the hook), and that no-one was trying to make any calls to the farmhouse and no-one at the house was talking to anyone on the line at the times of the operators check. This was when the operator could say with certainty that the phone at white house farm was 'off the hook'. The information I have been given by bt engineers is that with the telephones handset thus arranged, anyone other than the operator attempting to make contact with the occupants inside the farmhouse would be greeted by a continuous 'engaged tone'. Furthermore, I was assured that in the following circumstances, even when a telephone handset is let's say 'off the hook' at ground zero where neither anyone is already trying to make contact with the occupants of the premises, and the operator is not checking the current status of the phone line at the scene, but that when the following occurs, the operator is or was unable to tell whether the phone at the scene is simply 'off the hook', when prior to the operators check a third party has tried to contact the people inside the premises by telephone - this activity prevented the operator from being able to tell whether the handset in question was 'off the hook', because the line to the property is being overloaded at the local exchange by the third parties attempted call the house...

At this time the following is / was true:-

(1) - The handset at whf is "off the hook'

(2) - Anyone trying to call whf at this time gets an engaged tone

(3) - Except the Operator who has the facilities at his/her disposal to be able to check the line to see if someone is actually talking to someone, or if the handset being checked is simply 'off the hook'

(4) - If someone is trying to call the house with conditions (1) and (2) in play the operator will be unable to tell whether or not the phone still has its handset 'off the hook' at (3) because the phone line at the local exchange (substation) has become overloaded, resulting in the operator only being able to get an engaged tone equivalent to the conditions met at (2)

(5) - when the conditions at (4) are met, the operator could be mistaken into believing that Someone at the farmhouse is / was talking to a third party on the line because at that time the operator gets a constant 'engaged tone'

The operator didn't distinguish the phone state by the tone (which were the same). They were able to break into the line and determine if there was a conversation going on or not - therefore able to determine if the phone was engaged (a conversation taking place) or just off the hook (no conversation taking place). It had nothing to do with the tone.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 12:32:PM by Caroline »

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6319
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #100 on: October 11, 2018, 04:24:PM »
So, just your own theories then. Thought so.


WHF being occupied by four bodys shot excessively along with the body of a mentally ill woman holding a gun with two contact wounds under her chin is no theory.
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13526
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #101 on: October 11, 2018, 04:51:PM »
Replacing answering machines in many households was BT's 1571 service.

This was a 24/7 service which could not be switched off & on, as no one used to switch their answering machines off/on.

Customers had to cancel with BT if they did not want it.

Bamber is lucky he did not have this service. He & supporters can at least claim he switched off his manual answering machine, to keep the dream alive.
FACT Adam..Nothing to do with keeping any 'dream alive' it is simply the way it was.
1571 was not introduced until the 1990s anyway.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45981
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #102 on: October 11, 2018, 05:07:PM »
    The operator didn't distinguish the phone state by the tone (which were the same). They were able to break into the line and determine if there was a conversation going on or not - therefore able to determine if the phone was engaged (a conversation taking place) or just off the hook (no conversation taking place). sorry but you have got it wrong. I had it explained to me by two bt engineers, the operator could (back in August 1985) eavesdrop a phone off the hook which was producing a constant engaged tone when the line was being checked by the operator, but that when a third party was trying to ring the same number, and at the same time the operator was doing a check the operator would not be able to eavesdrop the 'phone off the hook', or be able to speak to the third party because of an overload created at the exchange substation. The operator would only be able to either eavesdrop the phone that was off the hook when the third party discontinued their attempt to make a call to the phone off its hook, or in the case of somebody replacing the phone off the hook into its cradle, only then would the operator have been able to break into the caller's line and either eavesdrop them, or speak to them! Back in August 1985, operators were restricted on what they could or could not do! I found all this out whilst looking into the possibility of obtaining itemised call billing in connection with the phone lines at whf? They didn't have itemised billing back then in the area where whf was situated, but I found out that it was possible to break the duration of all calls which had been calculated at the local substation using a metering system, that could be analysed in such away by specially trained bt engineers, to calculate the length of all the individual calls in that metering system, but not the date and time of such calls! This technology was available to bt and the police at the time of the tragedy, and was the forerunner to the itemised billing technology that we enjoy today! The substation involved back in August 1985 was out dated, and would soon be replaced with and by a modern exchange.. It had nothing to do with the tone. it did, but it mattered regarding different permutations, as I have described - the operator could not eavesdrop a line when it was overloaded back at the local substation involving a phone off the hook at one location, and somebody trying to ring that telephone, from another location and getting the engaged tone, the operator would get an engaged tone, but would have to wait until one or other party, either replaced the off the hook phone onto its cradle, or the caller discontinued their call, and only then would the operator have been able to eavesdrop the remaining phone line in use...
    [/i]
    [/list]
    « Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 05:12: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 #103 on: October 11, 2018, 05:23:PM »
    Since it was possible for a specialist bt engineer to have examined the metering system back in the local substation which dealt with calls to and from white house farm, and because Essex police seized Jeremy's answer phone and five audio tapes for the purpose of determining whether there had been a call from white house farm to Jeremy's cottage, it must also follow, that by adopting the same technical analysis to the telephone metering associated with the phone line at white house farm toJeremy's cottage, it stands to reason that Essex police must have and did get confirmation one way or another, that there were two calls, one identifiable from the metering records associated with white house farm, and the other associated with the line at Jeremy's cottage, where one was an outgoing call, and the other an incoming call, both of identical length! Furthermore, that insofar as the metering system associated with Jeremy's cottage at Head Street, Goldhanger, the breakdown of the individual calls he had made to Julie Mugford', and then to PC West at Chelmsford police station would have been available to Essex police, if they had needed to go that / this far!

    Anyway, you can believe what you want, I know what I was told, and there was no reason for either of these two bt engineers to tell me lies about it!
    « Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 05:27: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 #104 on: October 11, 2018, 05:41:PM »
    It was from one of these two bt engineers that I was told of a possible reason why the call from Neville to Jeremy had suddenly gone dead, as if cut off - apparently the round finger type telephone which was photographed in the kitchen at white house farm, had a common fault in that sometimes the two plungers on the base of the phone sometimes / often got stuck in the down position, and when this occurred the lines would neither give a dialling tone, or an engaged tone, it would effectively have been as Jeremy described the state of the connection during Neville Bambers call! Of course I checked the crime scene photographs to see whether or not the two plungers on the round finger dial phone were stuck in the down position or not, but they weren't. So I asked the BT engineers when I next got to see them, was there another way that the phone line could have gone dead in the manner with which Jeremy had described, and I was told there were a number of different things that could produce that result, but that the most likeliest reason was probably because somebody had depressed one or other, or both plungers and had held them in the downward position momentarily before releasing them! When released the caller would get a new dialling tone even if the recipient (Jeremy) was still holding the handset of his own phone!
    "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...