Author Topic: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.  (Read 2951 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2018, 08:16:AM »
DS Jones took possession of a silencer at the scene on the first morning of the police investigation, soon after 11.15am which coincided with his second visit to the farmhouse that particular morning, when he seized a total of 4 exhibits, namely, earmarked, SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2, and SBJ/1. Yet, for some reason, only three of these four exhibits found their way into the original property register, those being SBJ/4, SBJ/3, and SBJ/2..

It stands to reason, that because of the existence of these three exhibits, recorded in the original property register, that a fourth exhibit bearing the unique exhibit reference SBJ/1 must also have existed at around the time the other three items of evidential value were seized from the scene by DS Jones on the first morning of the investigation - it is well documented elsewhere, that cops and the lab' dealt with, handled, or examined a silencer bearing the unique exhibit reference 'SBJ/1' and so we can be certain that DS Jones seized that particular silencer at the farmhouse on 7th August 1985, along with the other three exhibits he also had taken possession of on that occasion...

SBJ/1, therefore, was the very first silencer Essex police had possession of, and it had not been found at the scene by any relative..

This first silencer almost certainly belonged to Anthony Pargeters .22 Brno bolt action rifle..

What we know is that Anthony Pargeter has given two conflicting accounts with regards to the whereabouts of his Brno bolt action rifle, and Parker Hale silencer, at the time of this shooting tragedy. Initially, he made a witness statement to Essex police in which he stated that he kept his rifle and silencer at the farmhouse, and that he used to go shooting on the farmland at week-ends. Adding that although white house farm was the place where his weapon, silencer, and ammunition was kept, he had the habit of removing the bolt from the rifle and taking the bolt home with him to Bourne End in Buckinghamshire so that no-one could use or fire his rifle in his absence! Much later, when he was visited by the COLP investigators, Pargeter made another witness statement to them, stating that his rifle and silencer was not present at the farmhouse at the time of the shootings, he stated that he had taken his gun and silencer home with him to Buckinghamshire on the penultimate week-end before the tragedy...

The contents of these two witness statements contradict one another, which leads me to strongly believe that infact, the Pargeter rifle and silencer were present at the scene at the time of the shootings, and that the rifle fired at least one shot, or more, and that his silencer (SBJ/1) was fitted onto the end of his rifle at the time a shot, or a number of shots had been fired. I do not believe that he removed the bolt from his rifle when he left the weapon at the farmhouse, or that he took the bolt home, on the pretense that no-one could fire his weapon in his absence! Anthony Pargeter was not licensed to take the bolt home with him, since it is a component part of a registered firearm, namely, the Brno bolt action rifle, governed by terms mentioned in his firearms certificate!

Neville Bamber was a magistrate and he wouldn't have permitted Anthony Pargeter to remove the bolt from his rifle, and take the bolt away with him...

Essex police had possession and control of the Pargeter silencer from the first morning of the police investigation into these shootings, that silencer was originally exhibit SBJ/1..
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 11:01:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2018, 08:29:AM »
What we also know arising out of the COLP enquiry, was that Essex police had not only spoken to Anthony Pargeter about his .22 Brno rifle, but that they had looked at it for signs of it having any noticeable damage upon it! We know that this happened because Anthony Pargeter mentions this in his COLP witness statement, yet there is no corresponding witness statement from any police officers that deals with the examination of Pargeters rifle (or silencer), which strikes me as being odd..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #17 on: December 28, 2018, 08:41:AM »
What we also know arising out of the COLP enquiry, was that Essex police had not only spoken to Anthony Pargeter about his .22 Brno rifle, but that they had looked at it for signs of it having any noticeable damage upon it! We know that this happened because Anthony Pargeter mentions this in his COLP witness statement, yet there is no corresponding witness statement from any police officers that deals with the examination of Pargeters rifle (or silencer), which strikes me as being odd..

This moves me on to the finding or the recovery of the first silencer by a relative (David Boutflour) - since, if the first silencer had been recovered by DS Jones on the 7th August 1985, which he took away from the scene on that date, how was it possible for David Boutflour to find the same silencer in the so-called gun cupboard in the Den at the Farmhouse 3 days later?

I believe the solution to this particular matter rests with the likelihood that the police had returned Pargeters rifle and silencer back to the farmhouse and that this action almost certainly took place on the evening of Friday the 9th August 1985 when DCI Jones and DS Jones handed back the keys to the farmhouse over to Anne and Peter Eaton. I believe a good case can be made out for the return of the rifle and it's silencer back to the farmhouse on this occasion..

Some evidence exists in the form of handwritten notes made by an Eton in which she makes reference to her husband Peter putting the gun back inside the Farmhouse on the occasion when the police handed them back the keys to the farmhouse, that Friday evening..

With this in mind, I would suggest that between the evening of Friday the 9th of August 1985 and the evening of Monday the 12th of August 1985 that Essex Police did not have possession of any silencer because it had been returned to the family in the circumstances described..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2018, 09:02:AM »

With this in mind, I would suggest that between the evening of Friday the 9th of August 1985 and the evening of Monday the 12th of August 1985 that Essex Police did not have possession of any silencer because it had been returned to the family in the circumstances described..

Also, I do not believe for one moment that David Boutflour supposedly 'refound that silencer' (which had originally been SBJ/1) in the Gun cupboard as stated on Saturday 10th of August 1985. What I think actually happened was that when the other relatives including Robert Boutflour learnt about the return of the Pargeter rifle and silencer, that this caused Robert Boutflour to attend Witham police station on the afternoon of Tuesday the 12th of August 1985 and to raise the matter of this rifle and it's silencer with the police! On this occasion he must have told the police that they needed to take back possession of the gun and it's silencer because it could have been used in the shootings. Since without any ballistics tests having been done by that stage how could the police know that none of the bullets fired during the shooting tragedy had been fired via that rifle and it's silencer?

Consequently arrangements were made for Ds Jones to visit Peter Eaton that same evening and to collect the rifle and its silencer and take it back into police possession! These are the circumstances in which I believe that the first silencer ended up back under the control of Essex Police, albeit at such a late stage, without any exhibit reference associated with it or to it..

The silencer then found its way into the possession of DI Cook by the following morning which enabled him to transport it to Huntingdon laboratory so that the silencer could be examined by Glynis Howard on the 13th August 1985. On this occasion because Cook realised there was no exhibit label attached to the silencer at that time he attached one himself and labelled it SJ/1, which became lab item number 22..

This silencer was subsequently returned to Cook that same day by Glynis Howard, enabling Cook to fingerprint it on the 15th of August 1985 using oblique light technique,  and again on the 23rd of August 1985 using Super Glue treatment. Furthermore by the 29th of August 1985 Cook had taken it upon himself to dismantle that silencer removing it's baffle plates from it's sleeve separating them and then rebuilding it before screwing the rebuilt silencer directly onto the thread on the end of the anschutz rifle barrel (not the end of the Brno rifles barrel) -  a series of exercises which he duly photographed...
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 09:11:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2018, 09:19:AM »
Any scratch marks which Ann Eaton pointed out to Cook, Miller and Jones, on the kitchen mantelpiece shelf during a visit to the scene on the 14th August 1985, were marks that police already knew about, which had been caused by the end of a guns barrel coming into contact there, not by a silencer (in his COLP interview DS Davidson would outline the case for paint from the mantelpiece having been found on the end of a guns barrel, not on any silencer)...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2018, 09:22:AM »
The only silencer found by David Boutflour in the gun cupboard almost certainly occurred on either the 10th or the 11th September 1985...
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 09:22:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2018, 09:38:AM »
You can tell what the cops, experts at the lab' and the relatives have done, involving these two silencers, effectively both have been merged into a single silencer, brought about because of the mishandling of the first silencer, by the police and relatives and some involvement of Glynis Howard, which had huge question marks around it's credibility - Cook tampering with the internal mechanism of the first silencer which he had dismantled and rebuilt, with the added interference by David Boutflour of scraping a flake of blood from 'it' using a razor blade which was almost certainly the source for the key blood group activity attributed as belonging uniquely to Sheila...

They desperately needed a second silencer, one which had not been exposed to the harmful effects of Superglue treatment, a second silencer untouched by Cook, one which they could say had been found or recovered a month sooner than it actually had been - Ann Eaton handed over this second silencer to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985, her brother David Boutflour contacted Essex police that very same day to officially inform them that he had found the silencer to the gun! How utterly pathetic and corny is that? You would think that if Boutflour had found the silencer on 10th August 1985, that Essex police would have already known it had been he who had found the silencer a month into the police investigation?

The second silencer ( which we could call it by any of the following exhibit references, AE/1, CAE/1, and DRB/1) not submitted to the lab' until 20th September 1985, too late for anybody to suggest that Sheila's unique blood had been found inside it - I mean how could it have, when the second silencer wasn't even present at the lab' (12th September 1985) when Sheila's blood was supposedly or allegedly found inside it?

Even more bizarrely, why fingerprint the second silencer on 14th September 1985 (Eastwood and Davison), considering that Cook had already fingerprinted the first silencer on 15th and the 23rd August 1985? The cops, experts and the relatives have framed Bamber for these five killings using dodgy silencer, blood and paint evidence, there can be no other solution or explanation for what has been uncovered...

« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 10:16:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2018, 10:55:AM »
Everything is pointing to the deliberate contamination of the second silencer (used to make additional scratch mark on kitchen mantelpiece during September 1985) with the red paint from the kitchen mantelpiece, and false allocation of the blood group results obtained from testing of a flake, during tests performed on 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, when the second silencer hadn't even been to the Lab' and would not be sent there until 20th September 1985, with its first examination not taking place until 25th September 1985...
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 11:18:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2018, 02:19:PM »
Everything is pointing to the deliberate contamination of the second silencer (used to make additional scratch mark on kitchen mantelpiece during September 1985) with the red paint from the kitchen mantelpiece, and false allocation of the blood group results obtained from testing of a flake, during tests performed on 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, when the second silencer hadn't even been to the Lab' and would not be sent there until 20th September 1985, with its first examination not taking place until 25th September 1985...

At the heart of this matter rests two silencers, or two sound moderators, or two suppressors, which have been interchangeable between the police, the relatives and experts at the Lab'..

There should never be an item of evidential value which has had, different exhibit references, and different lab' item numbers, at different stages of the proceedings, and in some instances , had two or more different exhibit references at the same time, which reared up later on, even after it had already been altered into the latest one! For example, at one time or another the claim that there has only ever been one silencer involved in the police investigation, one silencer found by the relatives, one silencer handed over to the police by the relatives, one silencer examined at the lab' and red paint from the kitchen aga found upon one silencer, and the unique blood belonging to Sheila Caffell found inside one silencer, there exist far too many inconsistencies and contradictions that remain unexplained, so many different exhibit references introduced for there to have only been one silencer involved, SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1, AE/1, CAE/1, and DRB/1. The key to resolving this mystery rests with the fact that one silencer had a lab' item no.22, another alleged silencer lab' item no.23 (which was probably the flake of dried blood which David Boutflour had scraped from the outside of one of the silencers with a razor blade - sent to Lab' on 30th August 1985), and the subsequent submission of the second silencer (AE/1, CAE/1 , DRB/1) to the lab' on the 20th September 1985, under lab' item no.75, which later got vacated and allocated to the handswabs taken from Sheila Caffell which had originally had the lab' item no.17 but had got rejected when originally sent to the lab' by Essex police on 9th August 1985..

In a nutshell the following items of evidential value originally had the following lab' item reference no.'s..


No.17 - original handswabs (Sheila Caffell)
No.22 - (1st) silencer SJ/1
No.23 - flake of dried blood scraped from outside of first silencer DB/1
No.75 - (2nd) silencer DRB/1

The following amendments had to be carried out as part of the plan to merge both silencers together

Item No.17 (hand swabs from Sheila Caffell) amended to lab' item No.75
Item No.23 (flake) amended back to coincide with lab' item No.22 (silencer)
Item No.75 (second silencer), amended to lab' item No.22 (silencer)..

Court Exhibit No.9 - silencer, DRB/1, (22), red paint , and Sheila Caffells blood, linked to it..
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 02:30:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2018, 02:32:PM »
Orchestrating all these amendments, and alterations which needed to be made in witness statements, reports and Lab' documentation, was 'THE OFFICE MANAGER', none other than Police Inspector 'Bob Miller'...

Bob Miller was at the heart of the silencer deception - he had a hand in ensuring that the two silencers became merged into a solitary one (where any references to SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1, AE/1, and CAE/1, were all references to the same silencer bearing the identification mark DRB/1 (22), Court Exhibit No.9)...

But..

It was all a big lie!!!
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 02:38:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #25 on: December 28, 2018, 02:51:PM »
The police, the relatives and the experts at the lab' knew something of a secret which nobody queried during the trial, or later at the 2002 appeal hearing, concerning the conflicting internal designs of the silencer, as of August 1985, and much later, by late September 1985. For example, the first silencer which fell into the possession of Essex police had 17 baffle plates, a top washer, and an end cap which all fitted snugly into a metal sleeve. Whereas, a second silencer examined at the lab' on 25th September 1985 had only got xx internal baffle plates, a top washer, and a metal end cap, which all fitted snugly into its corresponding metal sleeve. This apparent difference unnoticed by the defence, which would have opened up a can of worms had someone asked the all important question - 'to whom did the silencer DRB/1 (22), Court Exhibit No.9, belong to'?

Anthony Pargeter?

The Bambers?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 02:53:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #26 on: December 28, 2018, 03:06:PM »
This apparent difference unnoticed by the defence, which would have opened up a can of worms had someone asked the all important question - 'to whom did the silencer DRB/1 (22), Court Exhibit No.9, belong to'?

Anthony Pargeter?

The Bambers?

The answer of course we now know to have been the Bamber owned silencer with only xx internal baffle plates! The first silencer which came into the possession of Essex police on the first morning of the police investigation, which was handed back to the family on the evening of Friday the 9th August 1985, and the silencer which David Boutflour had used a razor blade to scrape a flake of dried blood off the sleeve of the first silencer, and the silencer which Peter Eaton handed over to DS Jones on the evening Monday 12th August 1985, which in turn DS Jones had been told by Bob Miller to hand that silencer to Ron Cook because he was due to pay a visit to the Lab' at Huntingdon on the following day (13th August 1985), and the silencer which Glynis Howard provisionally examined at the Lab' on that date, which she returned back to Ron Cook because he wanted to carry out fingerprint examinations of it, which he did do on the 15th and the 23rd August 1985, and the silencer which Cook took it upon himself to dismantle, removing that silencers end cap, top washer and all 17 baffle plates from its metal sleeve, was not the same silencer exhibited during the trial bearing the exhibit reference DRB/1 (22), Court Exhibit No.9 - because that silencer only had xx internal baffle plates..
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 03:08:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #27 on: December 28, 2018, 03:31:PM »
The flake of blood which David Boutflour scraped from the outside of the sleeve of the 17 baffled silencer did not belong to the Bamber rifle, but during the trial this blood group evidence was dishonestly presented as having been found or detected inside and upon the xx baffle plates of the Bamber owned silencer! Local gun dealer RADCLIFFE' based in Colchester High Street, Essex sold the anshuzt rifle and xx baffled silencer to Neville Bamber on 30th November 1984 - the gun and silencer had to be ordered from the manufacturers, and just per chance Parker Hale Silencers Ltd started producing new models with only xx internal baffle plates from the beginning of November 1984. Prior to this and from 1980, onward, they had only manufactured silencers which had 17 internalised baffle plates. By a stroke of luck it transpired that Anthony Pargeter had purchased his Parker Hale silencer in 1980, thereby making it possible to identify the first silencer at the heart of this deception as belonging to him, and his Brno bolt action rifle, yet excluding it as being the silencer exhibited during the trial (DRB/1) which only had xx internal baffle plates!
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 03:32:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #28 on: December 28, 2018, 03:34:PM »
At the heart of the failed 2002 appeal bid was the wrong Parker Hale silencer!
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47406
Re: Robert Boutflours tampon and silencer theory.
« Reply #29 on: December 28, 2018, 03:43:PM »
At the heart of the failed 2002 appeal bid was the wrong Parker Hale silencer!

The judgement from the failed 2002 appeal could never have imagined how accurate they were when they said that the silencer could have easily been contaminated through mishandling by a variety of different people, including original jury members - imagine how even more easily some form of contamination occurred involving both of the silencers (the 17 baffled silencer, and the xx baffled silencer)..

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...