Author Topic: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!  (Read 2529 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #105 on: February 06, 2019, 12:35:AM »
Not that it matters in any way, but I don't agree with you. I think it's bits of paper stuck on (probably by Mike).

Its been cut. You can see the scissor marks going past the vertical cut.

"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #106 on: February 06, 2019, 12:39:AM »
If anyone is wondering where I got that uncut page of DBs trial testimony. Mike has uploaded here.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,632.msg14357.html#msg14357



"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23439
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #107 on: February 06, 2019, 03:15:AM »

What are you talking about? All I have that I wont share are a few witness statements made in 2010/11 and some photos. And I wont share them because I promised those who gave them to me not to. Good enough reason?

You gave the impression that you had seen other versions of AE;s statement? If you haven't then fair enough but if not, your speculation is OTT.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #108 on: February 06, 2019, 03:36:AM »
You gave the impression that you had seen other versions of AE;s statement? If you haven't then fair enough but if not, your speculation is OTT.


I have seen (in parts) bits of non cut out testimony since Mike has posted them up.

I can see from the scans that the paper is different, one copy is yellow the other copy is white. Hence thats how I know multiple copies exist!





"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #109 on: February 06, 2019, 09:08:PM »



"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #110 on: February 14, 2019, 10:37:AM »
Here is part of AEs September statement.

"I hoovered the kitchen floor and the remainder of the ground floor rooms. I then washed the kitchen floor. Whilst standing at the sink unit which is in front of the kitchen window I saw smudge marks on the inside of the glass and the window frame itself.

On the inside window sill I saw diluted blood marks which I assumed were what had been left after the kitchen had been cleaned. I cleaned these marks up. There were also three buckets in the kitchen containing washing in soak. One contained two pairs of bloodstained ladies knickers. I then locked up and returned to my home. About 3 p.m. that same day."



Here she never mentions washing the knickers out. In her handwritten notes she writes about washing the floor but nothing about washing the knickers either. Only that she brought them home with her.

Come Jeremy's trial she had apparently washed them out then left them at the WHF.

Come 1991 when the police go over her notes, she had to admit talking them home but does so indirectly. That being she mentions throwing them in the bin. Then a few pages off topic later before saying she took the bin home.

It seems AE does not want people to know she brought them home. But instead wants people to think she washed them out and left them at WHF.  Why might that be? Had Jean Boutell not been in the kitchen with her. I would bet AE would deny the existence of them!
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23439
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #111 on: February 14, 2019, 11:49:AM »
Here is part of AEs September statement.

"I hoovered the kitchen floor and the remainder of the ground floor rooms. I then washed the kitchen floor. Whilst standing at the sink unit which is in front of the kitchen window I saw smudge marks on the inside of the glass and the window frame itself.

On the inside window sill I saw diluted blood marks which I assumed were what had been left after the kitchen had been cleaned. I cleaned these marks up. There were also three buckets in the kitchen containing washing in soak. One contained two pairs of bloodstained ladies knickers. I then locked up and returned to my home. About 3 p.m. that same day."



Here she never mentions washing the knickers out. In her handwritten notes she writes about washing the floor but nothing about washing the knickers either. Only that she brought them home with her.

Come Jeremy's trial she had apparently washed them out then left them at the WHF.

Come 1991 when the police go over her notes, she had to admit talking them home but does so indirectly. That being she mentions throwing them in the bin. Then a few pages off topic later before saying she took the bin home.

It seems AE does not want people to know she brought them home. But instead wants people to think she washed them out and left them at WHF.  Why might that be? Had Jean Boutell not been in the kitchen with her. I would bet AE would deny the existence of them!

Who'd have thought that Sheila's washing would be the key to solving the case  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27425
Re: The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!
« Reply #112 on: February 14, 2019, 12:04:PM »
Here is part of AEs September statement.

"I hoovered the kitchen floor and the remainder of the ground floor rooms. I then washed the kitchen floor. Whilst standing at the sink unit which is in front of the kitchen window I saw smudge marks on the inside of the glass and the window frame itself.

On the inside window sill I saw diluted blood marks which I assumed were what had been left after the kitchen had been cleaned. I cleaned these marks up. There were also three buckets in the kitchen containing washing in soak. One contained two pairs of bloodstained ladies knickers. I then locked up and returned to my home. About 3 p.m. that same day."



Here she never mentions washing the knickers out. In her handwritten notes she writes about washing the floor but nothing about washing the knickers either. Only that she brought them home with her.

Come Jeremy's trial she had apparently washed them out then left them at the WHF.

Come 1991 when the police go over her notes, she had to admit talking them home but does so indirectly. That being she mentions throwing them in the bin. Then a few pages off topic later before saying she took the bin home.

It seems AE does not want people to know she brought them home. But instead wants people to think she washed them out and left them at WHF.  Why might that be? Had Jean Boutell not been in the kitchen with her. I would bet AE would deny the existence of them!


Perhaps she was asked to say what she did on a certain day. Perhaps she took them home/washed them through/left them there/or anything else she might have done, the following day. Just a thought, WHATEVER she did, and when, with the knickers, how does it have any bearing on Jeremy's guilt? The family was long dead before the knickers were found.