Neville Bamber - he never slept in his bed during night he was shot and killed!

[mike tesko]

He separated the inner and outer component parts of 'it' and rather disturbingly creates a distinctive gap between the removed metal end cap, top washer, and the first half a dozen or so internal baffle plates...

The remaining internal baffle plates remaining compacted...

Cook then rebuilds the silencer he has interfered with, and proceeds to screw 'it' directly onto the external thread on the end of the anshuzt rifles barrel, a barrel end which was photographed in very close proximity to leaking blood on Sheila Caffell's neck, throat and face!

On the following day (30th August 1985, Cook arranges for the silencer and rifle to be sent separately (one not screwed into the other) to the Lab'...

The anshuzt rifle is submitted on that date, as exhibit DRH/15 (Lab' item number 18), whereas the silencer that went to the Lab' on the same occasion was submitted as exhibit 'DRB/1' (Lab' item number 23)..

When the silencer had previously been taken to the Lab' by DI Cook on the 13th August 1985, it had the exhibit reference 'SJ/1' (Lab' item number 22)..

The silencer which was exhibited during the trial, had a totally different exhibit reference of 'DRB/1' ( Lab' item number 22), Court Exhibit number 9...

[mike tesko]

Cook then rebuilds the silencer he has interfered with, and proceeds to screw 'it' directly onto the external thread on the end of the anshuzt rifles barrel, a barrel end which was photographed in very close proximity to leaking blood on Sheila Caffell's neck, throat and face!

On the following day (30th August 1985, Cook arranges for the silencer and rifle to be sent separately (one not screwed into the other) to the Lab'...

The anshuzt rifle is submitted on that date, as exhibit DRH/15 (Lab' item number 18), whereas the silencer that went to the Lab' on the same occasion was submitted as exhibit 'DRB/1' (Lab' item number 23)..

When the silencer had previously been taken to the Lab' by DI Cook on the 13th August 1985, it had the exhibit reference 'SJ/1' (Lab' item number 22)..

The silencer which was exhibited during the trial, had a totally different exhibit reference of 'DRB/1' ( Lab' item number 22), Court Exhibit number 9...

The jury were never informed about any of the problems regarding 'the' silencer having contradictory exhibit references, and Lab' item numbers, at different stages (the full list is SBJ/1, SJ/1(22), DB/1(23), and DRB/1(22), with yet another silencer thrown in for good measure on the 11th September 1985 by Ann Eaton, a silencer which is believed to have originally been allocated the exhibit references of either AE/1, or CAE/1 the silencer AE/1 - CAE/1, believed to be the DRB/1 silencer, which was fingerprinted by DS Eastwood and DS Davison on 13th September 1985, and not submitted to Huntingdon Lab' until the 20th September 1985 for the very first time! Of course what this means is that the court which tried Bamber for the five murders were decieved into believing that the blood group results obtained from an examination of blood supposedly discovered inside silencer DRB/1 at the Lab' on 12th September 1985, cannot any longer be tenable, or reliable, because to cut to the chase, silencer DRB/1 wasn't at the Lab' at Huntingdon on or by that date, and would not arrive there until over a week afterwards (20th September 1985)!

The blood group evidence which was the crowning glory in the prosecution's case, was / is nothing but a fabrication, introduced for the sole purpose of trapping Jeremy Bamber into being convicted as the murderer!

The very first time that silencer AE/1-CAE/1, DRB/1, was examined at Huntingdon Lab' was on the 25th September 1985, by which time fragments of red paint which were found to be ingrained into the knurled pattern around the outer circumference of the silencers end cap were noted for the very first time, flakes of crushed red paint which by 2nd October 1985 were matched to a paint sample (RWC/1) taken by DI Cook from the kitchen mantelpiece on 14th August 1985...

[mike tesko]

The jury were never informed about any of the problems regarding 'the' silencer having contradictory exhibit references, and Lab' item numbers, at different stages (the full list is SBJ/1, SJ/1(22), DB/1(23), and DRB/1(22), with yet another silencer thrown in for good measure on the 11th September 1985 by Ann Eaton, a silencer which is believed to have originally been allocated the exhibit references of either AE/1, or CAE/1 the silencer AE/1 - CAE/1, believed to be the DRB/1 silencer, which was fingerprinted by DS Eastwood and DS Davison on 13th September 1985, and not submitted to Huntingdon Lab' until the 20th September 1985 for the very first time! Of course what this means is that the court which tried Bamber for the five murders were decieved into believing that the blood group results obtained from an examination of blood supposedly discovered inside silencer DRB/1 at the Lab' on 12th September 1985, cannot any longer be tenable, or reliable, because to cut to the chase, silencer DRB/1 wasn't at the Lab' at Huntingdon on or by that date, and would not arrive there until over a week afterwards (20th September 1985)!

The blood group evidence which was the crowning glory in the prosecution's case, was / is nothing but a fabrication, introduced for the sole purpose of trapping Jeremy Bamber into being convicted as the murderer!

The very first time that silencer AE/1-CAE/1, DRB/1, was examined at Huntingdon Lab' was on the 25th September 1985, by which time fragments of red paint which were found to be ingrained into the knurled pattern around the outer circumference of the silencers end cap were noted for the very first time, flakes of crushed red paint which by 2nd October 1985 were matched to a paint sample (RWC/1) taken by DI Cook from the kitchen mantelpiece on 14th August 1985...

Of course, DI Cook handed to DS Davidson (SOCO) at the scene on 8th August 1985, a paint sample 'RC/1' in connection with some red paint that had been discovered ingrained onto the barrel end of a gun which had been found downstairs inside the farmhouse (this was spoken by DS Davidson to the COLP investigators during a police interview they had with him under caution) COLP queried whether Davidson was referring to some red paint which had been found ingrained onto the end of a silencer by that stage (8th August 1985), but Davidson made it absolutely clear that he was talking about paint which had been found on the end of a guns barrel at that time, not a silencer...

Cook denied taking a paint sample 'RC/1' at the scene on 8th August 1985, but either he was lying or DS Davidson was...

I believe DS Davidson's account, but distrust anything that Cook had involvement with, particularly the silencer(s), and the blood and paint evidence associated with and to the silencer(s), Cook certainly had a hand in getting the dodgy silencer (DRB/1 (22) Court Exhibit no.9) evidence accepted which bolstered up the prosecution's case...

[mike tesko]

Also deeply involved in the dodgy silencer, blood and paint associated with 'it' was PI Miller, who encourage different witnesses to alter exhibit references relating to the silencer in their witness statements as part of the plan to try and merge all the different silencers, into a single one, under the exhibit reference of DRB/1 (22) Court Exhibit No.9...

Everyone was fooled by this con trick - the defence, the court, the Jury, the trial judge, the public. It was a deception which involved a small group of corrupt individuals who successfully kept the truth regarding the use of at least two different silencers, Dody blood group evidence, and some red paint from the kitchen aga at the scene linked to a series of scratch marks, some of which had as we now know been made by the barrel end of a guns barrel coming into contact with it (and certainly not a silencer)...

[mike tesko]

Another rather intriguing piece of previously undisclosed evidence concerns a report made by DI Cook address to DCS Ainsley, where Cook makes mention of that fact that it was an established scientific fact, that where blood is exposed to the harmful Cyanoacrylate fumes used in Superglue treatment, it can have an adverse effect on any blood group results obtained, but Cook pointed out that this did not apply in the instant case, because the blood results had been obtained from the blood said to have be found inside the silencer, prior to the silencer in question being exposed to the harmful Cyanoacrylate fumes used in the fingerprint process...

Cook lied...

[mike tesko]

Another rather intriguing piece of previously undisclosed evidence concerns a report made by DI Cook address to DCS Ainsley, where Cook makes mention of that fact that it was an established scientific fact, that where blood is exposed to the harmful Cyanoacrylate fumes used in Superglue treatment, it can have an adverse effect on any blood group results obtained, but Cook pointed out that this did not apply in the instant case, because the blood results had been obtained from the blood said to have be found inside the silencer, prior to the silencer in question being exposed to the harmful Cyanoacrylate fumes used in the fingerprint process...

Cook lied...

For a start, DCS Ainsley did not take over control of the investigation until either on or about the 7th September 1985. With this in mind, Cook couldn't have submitted that report to him any time before that date...

[mike tesko]

For a start, DCS Ainsley did not take over control of the investigation until either on or about the 7th September 1985. With this in mind, Cook couldn't have submitted that report to him any time before that date...

Secondly, the blood was supposedly found inside the silencer (DB/1)23, which had been sent to the Lab' at Huntingdon on 30th August 1985, (on the 12th September 1985, when the ballistics expert, Fletcher, dismantled 'it'), which fell after Cook had exposed the silencer 'SJ/1' (22) to Superglue treatment, which he completed on the 23rd August 1985 at Sandridge police research and development centre - anyone can easily see that the silencer with the blood inside it had been exposed to the harmful effects of Cyanoacrylate fumes, long before the ballistic expert Fletcher found the blood inside the silencer (12th September 1985), since the 23rd August 1985 clearly fell long before the 12th September 1985!

[mike tesko]

Secondly, the blood was supposedly found inside the silencer (DB/1)23, which had been sent to the Lab' at Huntingdon on 30th August 1985, (on the 12th September 1985, when the ballistics expert, Fletcher, dismantled 'it'), which fell after Cook had exposed the silencer 'SJ/1' (22) to Superglue treatment, which he completed on the 23rd August 1985 at Sandridge police research and development centre - anyone can easily see that the silencer with the blood inside it had been exposed to the harmful effects of Cyanoacrylate fumes, long before the ballistic expert Fletcher found the blood inside the silencer (12th September 1985), since the 23rd August 1985 clearly fell long before the 12th September 1985!

However, it still remains a possibility that what Cook was saying in his report addressed to DCS Ainsley, regarding the fact that the blood had been found inside the silencer before the silencer was exposed to Cyanoacrylate fuming, by drawing upon the fact that Ann Eaton had handed over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, a second silencer (AE/1 - CAE/1, which ultimately became DRB/1), since this silencer was not fingerprinted by the Cyanoacrylate fuming method by DS Eastwood and DS Davison until the 13th September 1985 ( the day after Fletcher had discovered the blood inside the other silencer (DB/1) at the Lab' already...

The second silencer (DRB/1) was not submitted to Huntingdon Lab' for the very first time until 20th September 1985, the blood could hardly have been found inside it at the Lab' on an occasion which fell some 9 days prior to this / that...

[mike tesko]

Thus far, up to and including the occasion when Cook submitted the damning report to DCS Ainsley, highlighting the adverse effects of Cyanoacrylate fumes to certain scientific processes, including blood grouping, it appears that Essex police sought to try and deliberately conceal any information about the handing over of the second silencer (DRB/1) by Ann Eaton to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, and instead treating 'it' as though it had been the same silencer which police had submitted to the Lab' at Huntingdon on 30th August 1985, under the guise of exhibit DB/1...

By adopting this deception, the Lab' records would show that Fletcher discovered the crucial blood inside 'the' silencer, on the 12th September 1985, and that on the very same date that blood expert John Hayward took possession of the said silencer and blood to try and obtain blood group results! The fact that DS Eastwood and DS Davison did not fingerprint the silencer by way of Cyanoacrylate fuming until the following day (13th September 1985), fell a day after the blood had been recovered in the other silencer (12th September 1985) - it all boiled down to a simple case of those involved treating all the different silencers as the same one, they simply tried to merge all the events involving mention of a silencer, into one silencer, when there was clearly two different ones!

[David1819]

Thus far, up to and including the occasion when Cook submitted the damning report to DCS Ainsley, highlighting the adverse effects of Cyanoacrylate fumes to certain scientific processes, including blood grouping, it appears that Essex police sought to try and deliberately conceal any information about the handing over of the second silencer (DRB/1) by Ann Eaton to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, and instead treating 'it' as though it had been the same silencer which police had submitted to the Lab' at Huntingdon on 30th August 1985, under the guise of exhibit DB/1...

By adopting this deception, the Lab' records would show that Fletcher discovered the crucial blood inside 'the' silencer, on the 12th September 1985, and that on the very same date that blood expert John Hayward took possession of the said silencer and blood to try and obtain blood group results! The fact that DS Eastwood and DS Davison did not fingerprint the silencer by way of Cyanoacrylate fuming until the following day (13th September 1985), fell a day after the blood had been recovered in the other silencer (12th September 1985) - it all boiled down to a simple case of those involved treating all the different silencers as the same one, they simply tried to merge all the events involving mention of a silencer, into one silencer, when there was clearly two different ones!

Mike. You have a copy of Cooks handwritten COLP notes that holds key info on this subject. Would you mind re-uploading them?

[mike tesko]

Mike. You have a copy of Cooks handwritten COLP notes that holds key info on this subject. Would you mind re-uploading them?

I do have a copy of Cooks handwritten notes to COLP which I will try to upload this evening in their entirety..

[David1819]

I do have a copy of Cooks handwritten notes to COLP which I will try to upload this evening in their entirety..

Thanks Mike.

[mike tesko]

The blood group evidence(A, EAP BA, AK1 and Hp2-1) obtained from examination of blood on 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, found inside one of the silencers (DB/1) 23 by the 12th September 1985, could not have been present in the second silencer DRB/1 (22), because the second silencer was not submitted to the Lab' at Huntingdon until the 20th September 1985, which becomes an impossibility. Similarly, the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga was present on the second silencer (DRB/1) 22, only received at the Lab' on that date, and therefore could not also have been present on the first silencer (DB/1) 23 recieved at the Lab, at Huntingdon on the 30th August 1985, otherwise there would have existed red paint from the kitchen mantelpiece on the two different silencers (DRB/1 (22), and (DB/1) 23 ) - how could two different silencers have been fitted to the same gun barrel which supposedly got scratched during an altercation between the shooter and Neville Bamber in the kitchen prior to Neville Bamber being killed off?

Furthermore, the claim that Sheila Caffell's unique blood was found inside the second silencer (DRB/1) 22, by default, and which 'was' found to be present inside the first silencer (DB/1) 23, produces a situation whereby on the face of it, Sheila Caffell's blood has been associated with being inside two different silencers, but if the shooting dead of Sheila Caffell was by way of a one gun crime with the anshuzt rifle being the gun in question that was used to shoot her dead, how did both silencers end up on the end of the same guns barrel when Sheila was shot? Why would the shooter have used two different silencers on the same gun to shoot Sheila dead?

Whoever shot and killed Sheila Caffell, could on the face of it have used one silencer when they shot Sheila on the first occasion, and that they either switched silencers so that by the time it came to the second occasion when Sheila got shot the second silencer was fitted to the same gun, or alternatively, the second silencer was fitted to the barrell of a second rifle which fired the second shot!

The only other explanation is that the blood group evidence, supposedly found to be present in one (DRB/1) 22 silencer, or the other (DB/1) 23, was a fabrication, and no matter but which way you choose to believe in, the evidence does not appear to sit well without some doubt or concern or other nagging in the back of the mind...

[David1819]

I believe the events transpired as follows.

1: Nevill calls Jeremy for help from the downstairs kitchen.
2: Sheila enters the main bedroom and begins fireing the five non fatal shots at June Bamber.
3: Nevill abruptly ends the conversation on the phone and runs upstairs.
4: After fireing five shots into June. Sheila realises Nevile is on his way up.
5: Sheila then pivots herself to aim the gun towards the stairs.
6: June then gets out of bed to try and escape into the box room.
7: Sheila then fires the last four shots in the magazine at Nevill.
8: Nevill now injured retreats back to the kitchen and Sheila goes after him.
9: June is now on the other end of the bedroom a few feet from the box room.
10: With Sheila's attention turned to Nevill. June decides to go after her to try and help Nevill.
11: June collapses in shock and dies when she gets to the hallway door.


IIRC Jeremy states he left the magazine "Almost full" This tallies up with the nine shots described above.
All nine shots have effectively neutralized both adults and there is now nothing to stop Sheila from reloading, inflicting more overkill shots and of course shooting the twins.

The above senario fits all the physical evidence thus gives me yet another reason (among many others) for why I dont believe Nevile called the police. There is simply no realistic way to have Nevill making two urgent calls 10 minutes apart.

"The rifle was a German made Anschutz model 525 .22 self-loading rifle in good working order. Cartridges are loaded into a magazine, which has a capacity of 10. It is, as the jury found when they conducted the exercise themselves, progressively harder to load as the number of cartridges increases. Loading the tenth is exceptionally hard."

Further explains the initail 9 shot volley.

[mike tesko]

Thanks Mike.

Here is a true unsigned copy of a 2nd version of Cooks COLP statement, undated, consisting of 39 pages...