Author Topic: The telephone off the hook  (Read 1777 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #105 on: October 11, 2018, 05:49:PM »

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.

No, it's a staged crime scene.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23263
Re: The telephone off the hook
« Reply #106 on: October 11, 2018, 05:51:PM »

    I also had it explained by a BT engineer and from BT archives. They wouldn't have needed an operator to break into the call if a tone distinguished off the hook from engaged.

    Offline Jane

    • Hero Member
    • ******
    • Posts: 27335
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #107 on: October 11, 2018, 05:52: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 p

    lice 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!

    Are you suggesting that a highly qualified engineer who worked in the area on the system in question, lied to Caroline. Perhaps you could also suggest what reason he'd have had for so doing?

    Offline Adam

    • Hero Member
    • ******
    • Posts: 20559
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #108 on: October 11, 2018, 06:20:PM »
    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.

    What's the 90's got to do with it ? I said 24/7 1571 replaced 24/7 answering machines.

    Everyone knows people diidn't turn answering machines on/off. Only lights & heating would be turned on/off when entering/exiting a property.

    A phone, fridge, kettle, washing machine, dish washer, TV, stereo, video, sun bed & toaster would be permananly plugged in. On standby ready to be used regulary or always working (fridge).

    The answering machine would also be permanently plugged in & on. Ready to be used when the occupant is either out or in.

    People didn't walk around their property switching all these things off/on at the plug when arriving/exiting home. Espescially an answering machine which would still be often useful when the occupant is at home.

    This is the same as today although people with home phones will now have BT's 24/7 1571. Internet connection will also be permanently plugged in.
    « Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 06:49:PM by Adam »
    'Only I know what really happened that night'.

    Offline JackieD

    • Senior Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 998
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #109 on: October 11, 2018, 07:21:PM »
    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.

    Absolutely Maggie

    Offline Adam

    • Hero Member
    • ******
    • Posts: 20559
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #110 on: October 11, 2018, 07:58:PM »
    Absolutely Maggie

    Do you believe Bamber turned his answering machine off before going to bed on the massacre night ?  Maybe he unplugged his toaster as well.

    I've heard of people turning lights off & alarms on before bed..... 
    'Only I know what really happened that night'.

    Offline mike tesko

    • Administrator
    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 45981
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #111 on: October 11, 2018, 08:31:PM »
    I also had it explained by a BT engineer and from BT archives. They wouldn't have needed an operator to break into the call if a tone distinguished off the hook from engaged.

    You were misinformed, or you misunderstood what you were being told - since, back in the day, an operator could break into a line with its handset off the hook, or even when a live call was in progress between two parties, but in the circumstances involving one party having their handset off the hook, and the other party trying to ring their number, the basic equipment at the local (exchange) substation became 'overloaded' and prevented the operator from breaking into the off the hook line, or the caller's line, because the situation created an impasse in the electronic circuitry at the substation. The operator would have to wait until either one of two conditions was met before he / she could break into the line still in its active condition, i.e. the phone off the hook, or the caller still trying to contact the phone which was off the hook! I had the benefit of access to two bt engineers, one who is a personal friend of Jeremy's (Ian), and a retired BT engineer who was a specialist in the workings, analysis of the metering system in use at the substation (exchange) of concern...

    I was satisfied with the information I received at the time, and knew that behind the scenes, Essex police could have proved, or disprove the claim made by Jeremy that he had received a call from his father, when Jeremy had said he had, and did...

    Essex police had the means to put Jeremy's script to the sword, but they were unable to do so, despite having the technological know how to go about it!

    On top of this, Essex police had the drugs operation surveillance evidence gathered during the period when the shooting tragedy at white house farm unfolded - the drugs squad had low flying aircraft taking video footage in the vicinity of white house farm, and Jeremy Bambers Head Street, Goldhanger, cottage, on 6th August 1985, onward. They had telephone tapping evidence obtained under a warrant (telephone communications act), and were actually monitoring the phones at white house farm, Head Street, and Julie Mugford's residence, when the shootings were taking place, so there was actually no need for Essex police to have to unravel the metering at all the locations mentioned, because the drugs squad had all the evidence confirming this at their disposal, already!
    « Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 08:35: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 #112 on: October 11, 2018, 08:38:PM »
    Everybody keeps saying that Jeremy was a small time drug dealer, but his activities suggested something far bigger, he was involved in national and international drug trafficking, along with Julie Mugford', Sheila, Freddie Emani, and contacts they had in Scotland, Amsterdam and Belgium...
    « Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 08:39: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 #113 on: October 11, 2018, 08:46:PM »
    Everybody keeps saying that Jeremy was a small time drug dealer, but his activities suggested something far bigger, he was involved in national and international drug trafficking, along with Julie Mugford', Sheila, Freddie Emani, and contacts they had in Scotland, Amsterdam and Belgium...

    Jeremy's vauxhall astra motor vehicle was fitted with a black box tracking device, they knew everywhere that Jeremy went in his car, and the drugs squad had the added intelligence that Julie Mugford' was providing them with as a result of her role of agent provocateur, informant, and low life criminal! For the benefit of this not in the know, I can tell you that Julie Mugford' was deliberately put into Jeremy Bamber, she was never his girlfriend, it was all part of an act, she was receiving massive financial payments from the police for the role she took on...

    There is an informants register in London, and her name appears on it, along with all the payments she received for information she provided about Jeremy, his associates and their activities!
    "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 #114 on: October 11, 2018, 09:00:PM »
    You were misinformed, or you misunderstood what you were being told - since, back in the day, an operator could break into a line with its handset off the hook, or even when a live call was in progress between two parties, but in the circumstances involving one party having their handset off the hook, and the other party trying to ring their number, the basic equipment at the local (exchange) substation became 'overloaded' and prevented the operator from breaking into the off the hook line, or the caller's line, because the situation created an impasse in the electronic circuitry at the substation. The operator would have to wait until either one of two conditions was met before he / she could break into the line still in its active condition, i.e. the phone off the hook, or the caller still trying to contact the phone which was off the hook! I had the benefit of access to two bt engineers, one who is a personal friend of Jeremy's (Ian), and a retired BT engineer who was a specialist in the workings, analysis of the metering system in use at the substation (exchange) of concern...

    I was satisfied with the information I received at the time, and knew that behind the scenes, Essex police could have proved, or disprove the claim made by Jeremy that he had received a call from his father, when Jeremy had said he had, and did...

    Essex police had the means to put Jeremy's script to the sword, but they were unable to do so, despite having the technological know how to go about it!

    On top of this, Essex police had the drugs operation surveillance evidence gathered during the period when the shooting tragedy at white house farm unfolded - the drugs squad had low flying aircraft taking video footage in the vicinity of white house farm, and Jeremy Bambers Head Street, Goldhanger, cottage, on 6th August 1985, onward. They had telephone tapping evidence obtained under a warrant (telephone communications act), and were actually monitoring the phones at white house farm, Head Street, and Julie Mugford's residence, when the shootings were taking place, so there was actually no need for Essex police to have to unravel the metering at all the locations mentioned, because the drugs squad had all the evidence confirming this at their disposal, already!

    No I wasn't - I actually tracked down an engineer who worked at the Maldon exchange (Geoff) - he didn't know Bamber and wasn't a personal friend. If anyone wants to get the information for themselves, they can email the BT Archives - which are also a good source. https://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/BTsHistory/BTgrouparchives/index.htm

    Interesting that you're telling us Bamber knew a BT engineer though, so much for not understanding how the system worked. He certainly had a useful source of information to hand.


    Offline Steve_uk

    • Hero Member
    • ******
    • Posts: 10701
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #115 on: October 11, 2018, 10:22:PM »
    Jeremy's vauxhall astra motor vehicle was fitted with a black box tracking device, they knew everywhere that Jeremy went in his car, and the drugs squad had the added intelligence that Julie Mugford' was providing them with as a result of her role of agent provocateur, informant, and low life criminal! For the benefit of this not in the know, I can tell you that Julie Mugford' was deliberately put into Jeremy Bamber, she was never his girlfriend, it was all part of an act, she was receiving massive financial payments from the police for the role she took on...

    There is an informants register in London, and her name appears on it, along with all the payments she received for information she provided about Jeremy, his associates and their activities!

    Will the evidence will be forthcoming for this or is this also held under PII?
    « Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 10:23:PM by Steve_uk »

    Offline David1819

    • Veteran Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6319
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #116 on: October 12, 2018, 12:16:AM »
    No, it's a staged crime scene.

    Now that is a theory.
    « Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 12:20:AM by David1819 »
    "A theory without facts is fantasy"

    Offline Caroline

    • Hero Member
    • ******
    • Posts: 23263
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #117 on: October 12, 2018, 01:42:AM »
    Now that is a theory.

    Of course it is David, none of us were there so we take the best from the crime scene. No matter which side you support - it's theoretical.

    Offline David1819

    • Veteran Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6319
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #118 on: October 12, 2018, 04:09:AM »
    Of course it is David, none of us were there so we take the best from the crime scene. No matter which side you support - it's theoretical.


    No. The murder suicide is not theoretical. Its a logical inference based on the known facts.

    If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

    It looked like a frenzied murder suicide to Vanezis, It looked like a frenzied murder suicide to Prof Knight. If it looks like a frenzied murder suicide to those who know how to differentiate a suicide from a staged suicide and have seen frenzied murder scenes. Then its probably a frenzied murder suicide.

    There is no tangible evidence at the scene of crime or anywhere else that indicates any other version of events. To say that scene is staged is to say its a scene of a perfect murder.
    "A theory without facts is fantasy"

    Offline mike tesko

    • Administrator
    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 45981
    Re: The telephone off the hook
    « Reply #119 on: October 12, 2018, 07:47:AM »
    Will the evidence will be forthcoming for this or is this also held under PII?

    Mugford's name is in the Informants register held in London, as are the payments she received for the information she provided which was destined to result in the arrest and prosecution of Jeremy for drug related offences, but when the shooting tragedy at white house farm presented itself, Essex police settled for him being successfully prosecuted for the five murders! Unfortunately, I am not in control of what is or is not withheld under pii...

    But I do know about the existence of the Informants Register in London..
    "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...