Jeremy Bamber Forum

JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on January 10, 2017, 08:59:PM

Title: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 10, 2017, 08:59:PM
Timed entries, or timed events, relied upon in this case, need to be looked at, and treated accurate to within a maximum of 60 seconds either way, scaled down second by second to a minimum adjustment of 1 second either way. For example, let's take the 3.30am call which Jeremy made to Julie. We say the call took place at this particular time, but was it made 1 second, 2 seconds, 3 seconds, on a scale all the way up to the 60th second of 3.30am? This is very interesting because if for example Jeremy's call to Julie, had started at 03:30:01, and the call had lasted barely a minute, it could be argued that his call to Julie had been made at 3.31am. If the call lasted 2 minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the duration had been three minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy called Julie at 3.33am. Alternatively, if Jeremy's call to Julie had started at 03:30:60, and it barely had lasted 1 minute, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the call had lasted 2 minutes, it could have been argued, Jeremy had called Julie at 3.33am. Similarly, if Jeremy's call to Julie had lasted 3 minutes, it could have been argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.34am...

The purpose of trying to demonstrate how it might be possible to show that any timed reference of an event might only be accurate to within a minute either way, depending upon the duration of event. Where duration exceeds 1 minute in its entirety, the accuracy of a timed event could be out by half of the duration period either way. To simplify matters, adopting the principle, of rather than saying Jeremy's call to Julie took place at 3.30am, another way of saying the same thing is that the call lasted between 3.29 and 3.31am, or 3.28 and 3.32, or 3.27 and 3.33am. But adopting this approach is still problematic. This problem may only be rectified if the precise time, in hours, minutes, and seconds are known at the start of event!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 10, 2017, 09:06:PM
Timed entries, or timed events, relied upon in this case, need to be looked at, and treated accurate to within a maximum of 60 seconds either way, scaled down second by second to a minimum adjustment of 1 second either way. For example, let's take the 3.30am call which Jeremy made to Julie. We say the call took place at this particular time, but was it made 1 second, 2 seconds, 3 seconds, on a scale all the way up to the 60th second of 3.30am? This is very interesting because if for example Jeremy's call to Julie, had started at 03:30:01, and the call had lasted barely a minute, it could be argued that his call to Julie had been made at 3.31am. If the call lasted 2 minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the duration had been three minutes, it could be argued that Jeremy called Julie at 3.33am. Alternatively, if Jeremy's call to Julie had started at 03:30:60, and it barely had lasted 1 minute, it could be argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.32am. If the call had lasted 2 minutes, it could have been argued, Jeremy had called Julie at 3.33am. Similarly, if Jeremy's call to Julie had lasted 3 minutes, it could have been argued that Jeremy had called Julie at 3.34am...

The purpose of trying to demonstrate how it might be possible to show that any timed reference of an event might only be accurate to within a minute either way, depending upon the duration of event. Where duration exceeds 1 minute in its entirety, the accuracy of a timed event could be out by half of the duration period either way. To simplify matters, adopting the principle, of rather than saying Jeremy's call to Julie took place at 3.30am, another way of saying the same thing is that the call lasted between 3.29 and 3.31am, or 3.28 and 3.32, or 3.27 and 3.33am. But adopting this approach is still problematic. This problem may only be rectified if the precise time, in hours, minutes, and seconds are known at the start of event!!!

Every event which occurred in connection with this case, did not start at the same point in the second cycle in a minute. Some might have started 2 seconds into the second cycle, or 3, or 10 seconds in. Others might not have started until the 28th seconds into a minutes second cycle of 60 seconds, and so on, and so forth!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 10, 2017, 09:14:PM
I mention this here, because the only differences in times to certain events which took place in this case, are those which might crop up by reference to these anomalies.For example, moving the timing of Jeremy's call to Julie back to 3.15am, or 3am, and even moving it forward to 3.38am,  do not fit into this calculation mechanism. Jeremy's call to Julie, did not occur at 3.00am, 3.15am, 3.30am, and 3.38am. Somebody is lying, or has lied...

That person is not Jeremy Bamber...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 10, 2017, 09:16:PM
Or, do people count the time forward, and backward, from the point an event occurs, so that 60 seconds after an event commenced, the next minute is cited?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 10, 2017, 09:39:PM
A minute cycle of 60  seconds:-
Showing starting point of events, a, b, c, d and e in same cycle

Adding 60 seconds to the starting point of an 'Event' moves the time into the next minute. If an event lasts 120 seconds it moves the time into minute, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

1
2
3
4 - Event a
5
6 - Event b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 - Event c
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 - Event d
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 - Event e
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 06:50:AM
Adding 60 seconds to the starting point of an 'Event' moves the time into the next minute. If an event lasts 120 seconds it moves the time into the next minute, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

1
2
3
4 - Event a (second minute)
5
6 - Event b (second minute)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 - Event c (second minute)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 - Event d (second minute)
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 - Event e (second minute)
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 06:54:AM

Adding 60 seconds to the starting point of an 'Event' moves the time into the next minute. If an event lasts 120 seconds it moves the time into minute, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

1
2
3
4 - Event a (third minute)
5
6 - Event b (third minute)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 - Event c (third minute)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 - Event d (third minute)
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 - Event e (third minute)
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 07:54:AM
Some events which occurred in this case, overlapped other events, or ran into other events, or ran out after other events had ended...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 08:12:AM
The closer in time to an event, or in a series of events, the more obvious it becomes apparent that events started either at the same time of a 60 second minute, or at a different time in the same cycle. The further away in time, these events might appear to have happenned simultaneously, for example by reference to the minute cycle of an hour, the hourly cycle of a day, a daily cycle of a week, a weekly cycle of a month, a monthly cycle of a year, a yearly cycle of a decade, a decade cycle of a century, and so on and so forth...

Today, we are into the decade cycle of a century in the Bamber case, within which exists yearly cycles of a decade, monthly cycles of a year, weekly cycles of a month, daily cycles of a week, hourly cycles of a day, minute cycles of an hour, and second cycles of a minute...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 08:37:AM
The closer in time to an event, or in a series of events, the more obvious it becomes apparent that events started either at the same time of a 60 second minute, or at a different time in the same cycle. The further away in time, these events might appear to have happenned simultaneously, for example by reference to the minute cycle of an hour, the hourly cycle of a day, a daily cycle of a week, a weekly cycle of a month, a monthly cycle of a year, a yearly cycle of a decade, a decade cycle of a century, and so on and so forth...

Today, we are into the decade cycle of a century in the Bamber case, within which exists yearly cycles of a decade, monthly cycles of a year, weekly cycles of a month, daily cycles of a week, hourly cycles of a day, minute cycles of an hour, and second cycles of a minute...

Hence, why as we look back at the present moment in time and we say, the occupants of CA07 left Witham police station at around 3.15am to deal with another Job, that Neville may have tried to contact Witham at around 3.20am, that Neville called Jeremy at around 5.25am, that Neville made the 3.26am call to the police, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back at around 3.26am, that Jeremy unsuccessfully tried to contact Witham police station by 3.29am, that Jeremy called Julie at 3.30am, that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am, that they were deployed to the incident (3.35am) acting on behalf of the information passed to police earlier by Neville Bamber at 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed to the scene at 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station at 3.36am, and was put on hold for 5 minutes, that 'PC West'', spoke to a female operator at 3.42am, that Jeremy left his cottage at 3.46am to go to the farmhouse, that at 3.48am the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene at 3.48am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the farmhouse by 3.52am, that the operator did not get back in touch with police until 3.56am to tell them that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook, that it was not until after Jeremy's arrival at the scene (3.52am) that he told the occupants of CA07 about the collection of shotguns and .410's kept by Neville inside the farmhouse, which was relayed back to the control room afterwards, the details of which were added to the (C1) Communications log, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

Some of these timed events overlapped, or ran into, or out of the other events. There may have been periods of unreported activity in-between some of these events...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 08:48:AM
I do not believe for one moment that Jeremy Bamber can be any more accurate regarding the timing of these events, than say I am. This is because in 1989 /1990 I know that Jeremy hadn't got a clue about the times of these events, let alone know that such events had occurred. I should know because I made it part of my remit to investigate things like this on his behalf. For my part, this is what I strived to do right up to the beginning of 2004 whilst still engaged as Jeremy's McKensie man, and ever since by self interest and self motivation. There are no grounds  for believing that times of events as relied upon by Jeremy at this present time, are more accurate than my own times...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 11, 2017, 09:15:AM
It is a fact, for example, that Jeremy's call to Julie could not possible have been made at either 2am, 3am, 3.15am, or at 3.38am, by reference to the system of time keeping which I am alluding to in this thread. The correct time of his call to Julie being 3.30am, or to put it another way, between 3.29am and 3.31am (based on his call to her lasting 2 minutes)...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:02:AM
It is a fact, for example, that Jeremy's call to Julie could not possible have been made at either 2am, 3am, 3.15am, or at 3.38am, by reference to the system of time keeping which I am alluding to in this thread. The correct time of his call to Julie being 3.30am, or to put it another way, between 3.29am and 3.31am (based on his call to her lasting 2 minutes)...

Similarly,  we can adopt this principle, in relation to other timed events because we do not know at which point in the 'Seconds cycle of the minute' each event occurred - as a result it could be argued that Nevilles call to the police was made between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to contact Witham Police Station between 3.28am and 3.30am, that Jeremy called Julie between 3.29am and 3.31am, that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident between 3.34am and 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed between 3.34am and 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station between 3.35am and 3.37am, that PC West contacted the female operator between 3.41am and 3.43am, that Jeremy left his cottage between 3.45am and 3.47am, that the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene between 3.47am abd 3.49am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the scene between 3.51am and 3.53am, that the female operator reported back to police that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook between 3.55am and 3.57am, these are facts which enable the enquirer to get as close as possible to the 'actual time' this event, as opposed to that event occurred,  allowing for 'overlap', where 'one event' may have ran into, or out of 'two or more other events', including the possibility that 'periods of (unreported) inactivity' occurred or took place inbetween any of these events...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:13:AM
Similarly,  we can adopt this principle, in relation to other timed events because we do not know at which point in the 'Seconds cycle of the minute' each event occurred - as a result it could be argued that Nevilles call to the police was made between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back between 3.25am and 3.27am, that Jeremy tried to contact Witham Police Station between 3.28am and 3.30am, that Jeremy called Julie between 3.29am and 3.31am, that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident between 3.34am and 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed between 3.34am and 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station between 3.35am and 3.37am, that PC West contacted the female operator between 3.41am and 3.43am, that Jeremy left his cottage between 3.45am and 3.47am, that the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene between 3.47am abd 3.49am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the scene between 3.51am and 3.53am, that the female operator reported back to police that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook between 3.55am and 3.57am, these are facts which enable the enquirer to get as close as possible to the 'actual time' this event, as opposed to that event occurred,  allowing for 'overlap', where 'one event' may have ran into, or out of 'two or more other events', including the possibility that 'periods of (unreported) inactivity' occurred or took place inbetween any of these events...

Adopting this method allows any enquirer to get as 'close to the truth' as possible...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:17:AM
There was obviously a 'sequential link' between 'one' or other of the '19 events' which I have identified, where the 'circumstances of one event', 'overlapped', ran 'into', ran 'out' of, or 'stood alone' in its own truth...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:19:AM
What caused Jeremy, to try to ring Neville back between 3.25am and 3.27am?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:20:AM
What caused Neville to contact police between 3.25am and 3.27am?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 12, 2017, 08:22:AM
What caused Jeremy, to try to ring Neville back between 3.25am and 3.27am?

There requires proof that he did. Having previously left the phone off the hook, he know what would be the result of making a call to that number.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:24:AM
What could have happenned, to make Jeremy's attempt to re-establish contact with Neville,  between 3.24am to 3.26am. A dialling tone obtained by Neville Bamber at the farmhouse, or him having dialled a number produces a constant 'engaged tone'?

Think about 'it'?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:41:AM
There requires proof that he did. Having previously left the phone off the hook, he know what would be the result of making a call to that number.

It's already proven - it has always been maintained by Jeremy that 'he tried to call Neville back', but that he 'got an engaged tone'. During the trial the prosecution sought to mislead the court by suggesting that because the phone was off the hook inside the farmhouse, that the line between the farmhouse and Jeremy's cottage remained open, preventing him from using the phone inside Jeremy's cottage to make any outbound calls! However, Jeremy has always maintained that he did attempt to call Neville back', and that on each of these two occasion he got an engaged tone. It now transpires, that after contacting Jeremy, had Neville Bamber simply tapped the receiver once, that this activity would have produce a dialling tone at the farmhouse. This would have allowed for Neville to then make his call to police (between 3.25am and 3.27am) at 3.26am. As a result, when Jeremy  tried to call Neville back' (between 3.25am and 3.27am) , he would get an engaged tone, he did get an engaged tone! It didn't even rely upon Neville already being in contact police, since by the simple action of the cradle of the phone at the farmhouse being depressed, thus producing a 'dialling tone'...

Jeremy didn't know, that immediately after the call from Neville got cut short, that Neville had depressed the cradle of the farmhouse phone, giving Neville a dialling tone, after which Neville rang the police between 3.25am and 3.27am - activities which would have caused Jeremy's attempt to recontact Neville to get an engaged tone...

Now, that we know these facts, it makes a huge difference against the credibility of otherwise of Jeremy's account! His account is more believable today, than it was at the time of his 1986 trial...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 12, 2017, 08:56:AM
It's already proven - it has always been maintained by Jeremy that 'he tried to call Neville back', but that he 'got an engaged tone'. During the trial the prosecution sought to mislead the court by suggesting that because the phone was off the hook inside the farmhouse, that the line between the farmhouse and Jeremy's cottage remained open, preventing him from using the phone inside Jeremy's cottage to make any outbound calls! However, Jeremy has always maintained that he did attempt to call Neville back', and that on each of these two occasion he got an engaged tone. It now transpires, that after contacting Jeremy, had Neville Bamber simply tapped the receiver once, that this activity would have produce a dialling tone at the farmhouse. This would have allowed for Neville to then make his call to police (between 3.25am and 3.27am) at 3.26am. As a result, when Jeremy  tried to call Neville back' (between 3.25am and 3.27am) , he would get an engaged tone, he did get an engaged tone! It didn't even rely upon Neville already being in contact police, since by the simple action of the cradle of the phone at the farmhouse being depressed, thus producing a 'dialling tone'...

Jeremy didn't know, that immediately after the call from Neville got cut short, that Neville had depressed the cradle of the farmhouse phone, giving Neville a dialling tone, after which Neville rang the police between 3.25am and 3.27am - activities which would have caused Jeremy's attempt to recontact Neville to get an engaged tone...

Now, that we know these facts, it makes a huge difference against the credibility of otherwise of Jeremy's account! His account is more believable today, than it was at the time of his 1986 trial...

 Cutting out all the frills, how is Jeremy's maintaining something, proof of anything?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 09:34:AM
Jeremy's account regarding the 'engaged tone' he got when he tried to ring Neville back (between 3.25am and 3.27am), is further proven to be a truthful and an honest explanation, because of the following:-

The occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am), prior to the call that Jeremy himself had made to Chelmsford police station (between 3.35am and 3.37am) at 3.36am. The appellate court accepted this as being mystifyingly true! This of course, was something which the appellate court concluded in the absence of the two phone call record contents, of Neville Bambers (C1) Communication log timed at 3.26am, and 'PC Wests' 3.36am, Police Message Report. Had the contents of these two phone logs been made readily available in 2002, I feel confident that the appellate court would have been compelled to conclude that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse, not only prior to Jeremy's call to police, was governed by the information received by PC West from Neville Bamber at 3.26am. I feel confident that the appellate court would have 'reasoned' that the contents of these two phone records had been 'made by different people', the first (3.26am) by Neville Bamber, the second (3.36am) made by Jeremy. Resolution of this conflict was 'the province of the jury', not by the trial judge, or by they 'themselves'. Simply, upon the basis that it had been a significant part of the prosecutions case that, had Sheila, Bambers sister, Neville's daughter, been running amok with 'the gun', or ' one of the guns belonging to Neville Bambers, he would have contacted the police, not Jeremy (the Son)? I feel confident that during the trial, the contents of both of these phone logs (3.26am, and the 3.36am calls) were not made available to the court, or to the defence team, otherwise, the defence would have certainly challenged 'that' assumption, that the existence of the 3.26am phone log contents, and Jeremy's 3.36am, phone log contents, undermined this feature in the prosecutions case, and that not only had Neville Bamber contacted Jeremy at around 3.25am (between 3.24am and 3.26am), but that Neville Bamber had very quickly terminated his call to Jeremy because his intention was only to alert Jeremy, before he called  police at 3.26am!!!

The existence of both phone records (3.26am, and 3.36am) were facts which the jury were entitled to know about, consider, and either reject, or accept, as being true!!!

The jury were deliberately denied the opportunity to consider this matter - not because of any 'fault' on behalf of the defence, but rather based upon the deliberate action of the prosecuting authorities!!!  They have to be held accountable for this deception, no-one else. The only reason both phone log contents (3.26am, and 3.36am) were not disclosed by the prosecution authorities during or before the October 1986 trial, because to have done so, not only undermined their own arguments, but more importantly it showed in clear unambiguous terms, that Jeremy Bamber had told the truth, that he was telling the truth, and that these convictions had been, were secured by a 'dishonest' approach on their part...

A jury should have decided 'these facts', but alas, the prosecuting authorities chose to play 'god' they took it upon themselves to withhold the contents of the two separate phone logs (3.26am, versus the 3.36am). This, as I feel sure all those currently in the 'guilty camp' , will agree that this approach was 'inpropper'!!!



Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 11:00:AM
The occupants of CA07 deployed to the incident at the farmhouse at 3.35am, prior to Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station at 3.36am!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 11:04:AM
The occupants of CA07 deployed to the incident at the farmhouse at 3.35am, prior to Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station at 3.36am!!!
This proves the call made to Chelmsford police station at 3.26am, was made by Neville, not by Jeremy Bamber! The wording and the phraseology recorded in the 3.26am log reads as though the information came from Neville, and it could only relate to a call made by Neville prior to the deployment of CA07 at 3.35am...

Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station, was after the deployment of CA07 (3.35am), not beforehand!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 12, 2017, 12:46:PM
Jeremy's account regarding the 'engaged tone' he got when he tried to ring Neville back (between 3.25am and 3.27am), is further proven to be a truthful and an honest explanation, because of the following:-

The occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am), prior to the call that Jeremy himself had made to Chelmsford police station (between 3.35am and 3.37am) at 3.36am. The appellate court accepted this as being mystifyingly true! This of course, was something which the appellate court concluded in the absence of the two phone call record contents, of Neville Bambers (C1) Communication log timed at 3.26am, and 'PC Wests' 3.36am, Police Communications log. Had the contents of these two phone logs been made readily available in 2002, I feel confident that the appellate court would have been compelled to conclude that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse, not only prior to Jeremy's call to police, was governed by the information received by PC West from Neville Bamber at 3.26am. I feel confident that the appellate court would have 'reasoned' that the contents of these two phone records had been 'made by different people', the first (3.26am) by Neville Bamber, the second (3.36am) made by Jeremy. Resolution of this conflict was 'the province of the jury', not by the trial judge, or by they 'themselves'. Simply, upon the basis that it had been a significant part of the prosecutions case that, had Sheila, Bambers sister, Neville's daughter, been running amok with 'the gun', or ' one of the guns belonging to Neville Bambers, he would have contacted the police, not Jeremy (the Son)? I feel confident that during the trial, the contents of both of these phone logs (3.26am, and the 3.36am calls) were not made available to the court, or to the defence team, otherwise, the defence would have certainly challenged 'that' assumption, that the existence of the 3.26am phone log contents, and Jeremy's 3.36am, phone log contents, undermined this feature in the prosecutions case, and that not only had Neville Bamber contacted Jeremy at around 3.25am (between 3.24am and 3.26am), but that Neville Bamber had very quickly terminated his call to Jeremy because his intention was only to alert Jeremy, before he called  police at 3.26am!!!

The existence of both phone records (3.26am, and 3.36am) were facts which the jury were entitled to know about, consider, and either reject, or accept, as being true!!!

The jury were deliberately denied the opportunity to consider this matter - not because of any 'fault' on behalf of the defence, but rather based upon the deliberate action of the prosecuting authorities!!!  They have to be held accountable for this deception, no-one else. The only reason both phone log contents (3.26am, and 3.36am) were not disclosed by the prosecution authorities during or before the October 1986 trial, because to have done so, not only undermined their own arguments, but more importantly it showed in clear unambiguous terms, that Jeremy Bamber had told the truth, that he was telling the truth, and that these convictions had been, were secured by a 'dishonest' approach on their part...

A jury should have decided 'these facts', but alas, the prosecuting authorities chose to play 'god' they took it upon themselves to withhold the contents of the two separate phone logs (3.26am, versus the 3.36am). This, as I feel sure all those currently in the 'guilty camp' , will agree that this approach was 'inpropper'!!!

Again, dispensing with the frills. No one has ever denied that there was an engaged tone. The phone was off the hook.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 12, 2017, 02:06:PM
. . . Neville Bambers (C1) Communication log . . .
Pc West used a C1 form, but Bonnett used a similar form that wasn't a C1 form (as far as I know).
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: notsure on January 12, 2017, 04:53:PM
I can't get my head round all this timing business, 😂
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 12, 2017, 04:59:PM
I can't get my head round all this timing business, 😂

Take out the frills and you're left with the facts, Notsure.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 05:26:PM
Pc West used a C1 form, but Bonnett used a similar form that wasn't a C1 form (as far as I know).

The way I understand it, PC Wests contribution was the 3.36am 'Message Report', and 'Malcom Bonnetts' 3.26am, was the Communications log...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 05:33:PM
Take out the frills and you're left with the facts, Notsure.

And the facts speak for themselves...

Hence, why as we look back at the present moment in time and we say, the occupants of CA07 left Witham police station at around 3.15am to deal with another Job, that Neville may have tried to contact Witham at around 3.20am, that Neville called Jeremy at around 5.25am, that Neville made the 3.26am call to the police, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back at around 3.26am, that Jeremy unsuccessfully tried to contact Witham police station by 3.29am, that Jeremy called Julie at 3.30am, that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am, that they were deployed to the incident (3.35am) acting on behalf of the information passed to police earlier by Neville Bamber at 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed to the scene at 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station at 3.36am, and was put on hold for 5 minutes, that 'PC West'', spoke to a female operator at 3.42am, that Jeremy left his cottage at 3.46am to go to the farmhouse, that at 3.48am the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene at 3.48am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the farmhouse by 3.52am, that the operator did not get back in touch with police until 3.56am to tell them that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook, that it was not until after Jeremy's arrival at the scene (3.52am) that he told the occupants of CA07 about the collection of shotguns and .410's kept by Neville inside the farmhouse, which was relayed back to the control room afterwards, the details of which were added to the (C1) Communications log, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

Some of these timed events overlapped, or ran into, or out of the other events. There may have been periods of unreported activity in-between some of these events...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 05:37:PM
And the facts speak for themselves...

Hence, why as we look back at the present moment in time and we say, the occupants of CA07 left Witham police station at around 3.15am to deal with another Job, that Neville may have tried to contact Witham at around 3.20am, that Neville called Jeremy at around 5.25am, that Neville made the 3.26am call to the police, that Jeremy tried to ring Neville back at around 3.26am, that Jeremy unsuccessfully tried to contact Witham police station by 3.29am, that Jeremy called Julie at 3.30am, that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am, that they were deployed to the incident (3.35am) acting on behalf of the information passed to police earlier by Neville Bamber at 3.26am, that the occupants of CA05 were deployed to the scene at 3.36am, that Jeremy called Chelmsford police station at 3.36am, and was put on hold for 5 minutes, that 'PC West'', spoke to a female operator at 3.42am, that Jeremy left his cottage at 3.46am to go to the farmhouse, that at 3.48am the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene at 3.48am, that Jeremy himself arrived at the farmhouse by 3.52am, that the operator did not get back in touch with police until 3.56am to tell them that the phone inside the farmhouse was off the hook, that it was not until after Jeremy's arrival at the scene (3.52am) that he told the occupants of CA07 about the collection of shotguns and .410's kept by Neville inside the farmhouse, which was relayed back to the control room afterwards, the details of which were added to the (C1) Communications log, thereafter, and so on, and so forth...

Some of these timed events overlapped, or ran into, or out of the other events. There may have been periods of unreported activity in-between some of these events...

Jeremy's account regarding the 'engaged tone' he got when he tried to ring Neville back (between 3.25am and 3.27am), is further proven to be a truthful and an honest explanation, because of the following:-

The occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am), prior to the call that Jeremy himself had made to Chelmsford police station (between 3.35am and 3.37am) at 3.36am. The appellate court accepted this as being mystifyingly true! This of course, was something which the appellate court concluded in the absence of the two phone call record contents, of Neville Bambers (C1) Communication log timed at 3.26am, and 'PC Wests' 3.36am, Police Message Report. Had the contents of these two phone logs been made readily available in 2002, I feel confident that the appellate court would have been compelled to conclude that the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse, not only prior to Jeremy's call to police, was governed by the information received by PC West from Neville Bamber at 3.26am. I feel confident that the appellate court would have 'reasoned' that the contents of these two phone records had been 'made by different people', the first (3.26am) by Neville Bamber, the second (3.36am) made by Jeremy. Resolution of this conflict was 'the province of the jury', not by the trial judge, or by they 'themselves'. Simply, upon the basis that it had been a significant part of the prosecutions case that, had Sheila, Bambers sister, Neville's daughter, been running amok with 'the gun', or ' one of the guns belonging to Neville Bambers, he would have contacted the police, not Jeremy (the Son)? I feel confident that during the trial, the contents of both of these phone logs (3.26am, and the 3.36am calls) were not made available to the court, or to the defence team, otherwise, the defence would have certainly challenged 'that' assumption, that the existence of the 3.26am phone log contents, and Jeremy's 3.36am, phone log contents, undermined this feature in the prosecutions case, and that not only had Neville Bamber contacted Jeremy at around 3.25am (between 3.24am and 3.26am), but that Neville Bamber had very quickly terminated his call to Jeremy because his intention was only to alert Jeremy, before he called  police at 3.26am!!!

The existence of both phone records (3.26am, and 3.36am) were facts which the jury were entitled to know about, consider, and either reject, or accept, as being true!!!

The jury were deliberately denied the opportunity to consider this matter - not because of any 'fault' on behalf of the defence, but rather based upon the deliberate action of the prosecuting authorities!!!  They have to be held accountable for this deception, no-one else. The only reason both phone log contents (3.26am, and 3.36am) were not disclosed by the prosecution authorities during or before the October 1986 trial, because to have done so, not only undermined their own arguments, but more importantly it showed in clear unambiguous terms, that Jeremy Bamber had told the truth, that he was telling the truth, and that these convictions had been, were secured by a 'dishonest' approach on their part...

A jury should have decided 'these facts', but alas, the prosecuting authorities chose to play 'god' they took it upon themselves to withhold the contents of the two separate phone logs (3.26am, versus the 3.36am). This, as I feel sure all those currently in the 'guilty camp' , will agree that this approach was 'inpropper'!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 05:51:PM
Neville Bambers call to PC West between 3.25am and 3.27am (3.26am) could not have been made by Jeremy because the occupants of CA07 (Bews, Myall, and Saxby) were deployed to the incident at the farmhouse between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am), before Jeremy made his own call to Chelmsford police station, between 3.35am and 3.37am (3.36am). The gist of what Jeremy eventually told PC West, as per the 3.36am Police Message Report, is consistent (father to son, about sons sister) with what Nevilee told PC West at 3.26am, as per the (C1) Communications log (what father told police) written out by Bonnett. What Neville told Jeremy, was repeated by Neville using different words when he spoke to PC West, than the words he used when speaking to Jeremy beforehand! When Jeremy eventually spoke to PC West, he recounted as close as possible the words spoken to him by Neville, and PC West recorded what Jeremy said Neville had had time to say. Jeremy is excluded from making the 3.26am call to PC West, by virtue of the fact that he himself had not called the police at Chelmsford until after the occupants of CA07 had been deployed to the scene from Witham police station at 3.35am...

Nothing could be any clearer...

Not only could the 3.26am call only have been made by Neville Bamber, but the message he passed on that occasion are couched in the words he would have use when reporting the matter to the police about his daughter...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 06:01:PM
When Neville contacted Jeremy, he would not have referred to Sheila, as his daughter, he would have spoken about her either by her name, 'Sheila', or said your 'Sisters' got he gun, or 'She has' got the gun. When Jeremy relayed what Neville told him, Jeremy wouldn't have said, 'my (dads) daughter has got one of his guns'. Of course not, and PC West would not have reported to Malcom Bonnett it differently. Besides Jeremy didn't call Chelmsford police station until after the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the incident from Witham police station at 3.35am, so there is nothing to argue. The 3.26am call was a different call altogether than the 3.36am call by Jeremy. It had to be...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 06:12:PM
Since Jeremy did not leave his cottage until between 3.45 and 3.47am (3.46am) to go to the farmhouse, the occupants of CA07 could not be notified that Jeremy had been sent to the farmhouse to meet the police, until after the occupants of CA07 were already en route to the incident (already some 10 minutes into their journey...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 06:17:PM
Since Jeremy did not leave his cottage until between 3.45 and 3.47am (3.46am) to go to the farmhouse, the occupants of CA07 could not be notified that Jeremy had been sent to the farmhouse to meet the police, until after the occupants of CA07 were already en route to the incident (already some 10 minutes into their journey...

PC West did not contact the female operator between 3.41am, and 3.43am (3.42am), until after the occupants of CA07 and CA05 had all been deployed to the farmhouse. This was whilst West still had Jeremy on the line after 3.36am...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:00:PM
CA07 occupants, were at the heart of'everything' capable of undermining the prosecutions case against Jeremy Bamber!

(1) - they were deployed from Witham police station to the incident at the farmhouse between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am) acting upon information which Jeremy Bamber 'could not'  have given to police in time for that to happen. So, without question, where did police get 'that' information from? Was it obtained from Neville Bamber in his 3.26am call? Or, the attack alarm which Special Branch had installed at the farm because of 'threats to kill Neville Bamber and his family?

(2) - CA07 were involved n the sighting of the figure seen moving around in the main bedroom via the window, which Bews has since described as nothing but 'a trick of light'. Of course, if he had said it was a person he had seen, Jeremy would never have been put on trial...

(3) - CA07 relayed the key messages from the scene back to the control room, particularly the 7.37am message, 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, found upon entry', the 7.38am message, 'one dead male, one dead female', and at 8.10am, 'after a thorough search, a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total'...

How suspicious is all of that?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:32:PM
CA07 occupants, were at the heart of'everything' capable of undermining the prosecutions case against Jeremy Bamber!

(1) - they were deployed from Witham police station to the incident at the farmhouse between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am) acting upon information which Jeremy Bamber 'could not'  have given to police in time for that to happen. So, without question, where did police get 'that' information from? Was it obtained from Neville Bamber in his 3.26am call? Or, the attack alarm which Special Branch had installed at the farm because of 'threats to kill Neville Bamber and his family?

The mystery of the two telephone calls to police, one by Neville Bamber at 3.26am, and the other by Jeremy to police at 3.36am relate directly to this event!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 08:38:PM
CA07 occupants, were at the heart of'everything' capable of undermining the prosecutions case against Jeremy Bamber!

(2) - CA07 were involved in the sighting of the figure seen moving around in the main bedroom via the window, which Bews has since described as nothing but 'a trick of light'. Of course, if he had said it was a person he had seen, Jeremy would never have been put on trial...

Bews and Myall could have provided Jeremy Bamber with an alibi, simply by telling the truth regarding what they had witnessed via the main bedroom window. A living person, moving around in the main bedroom, at a time that Jeremy was outside in the grounds of the farmhouse, in the company of two police officers. This being true, how could Jeremy have killed everyone in the farmhouse, have staged the scene to make it look like his sister had killed the others, before he phoned Chelmsford police at 3.36am?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 12, 2017, 08:39:PM
The mystery of the two telephone calls to police, one by Neville Bamber at 3.26am, and the other by Jeremy to police at 3.36am relate directly to this event!
Myall and Bews both say it was 3.45am?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 12, 2017, 08:44:PM
Myall and Bews both say it was 3.45am?

Justice, I'm frightfully confused with all these disparate timings but it's good fun trying to work them out. A jury would be totally confused but I guess that would work in the prosecution's favour...................or do I mean the defence's?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 09:00:PM
CA07 occupants, were at the heart of'everything' capable of undermining the prosecutions case against Jeremy Bamber!

(3) - CA07 relayed the key messages from the scene back to the control room, particularly the 7.37am message, 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, found upon entry', the 7.38am message, 'one dead male, one dead female', and at 8.10am, 'after a thorough search, a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total'...

The occupants of CA07 relayed this key information from the scene to the control room. They knew that two bodies were found upon entry, a male, and a female. They knew that by 8.10am, there were only three bodies upstairs. 14 months later, when the matter came to trial, the occupants of CA07 remained tight lipped when the prosecution outlined it's case, 'one body downstairs in the kitchen, and four bodies upstairs'. Staff in the control room at the time CA07 passed the key messages, 7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am, never came forward to testify on the defendants behalf that the body count of victims downstairs, and upstairs, had dramatically changed after 8.10am, that morning...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 12, 2017, 09:05:PM
I bet Bamber wishes Sheila had gone crazy earlier in the day. When Bamber was on the farm or with other people. He would then have an alibi.

It's bad luck he was alone in bed when Sheila went crazy. At 3am.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 09:08:PM
Myall and Bews both say it was 3.45am?

What are you saying happenned at 3.45am, according to Bews, and Myall?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 09:22:PM
Why did CA07 pass these key messages (7.37am, 7.38am and 8.10am), if the contents were not true?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 09:24:PM
Why did CA07 pass these key messages (7.37am, 7.38am and 8.10am), if the contents were not true?

Who did they get this information from? And, who did they pass it to?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 12, 2017, 09:27:PM
What are you saying happenned at 3.45am, according to Bews, and Myall?
They both give a time of 3.45am, also in Myall trial transcript that was excepted in cross examination by the look of it?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3132.0;attach=38123

It's also in Myall court testimony?  Like you said it could be 3.40 it could be 3.44 or 3.43 people have an habit of rounding off time.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 09:39:PM
How come, we have heard nothing at all, from the tellers, or the listeners, who were all embroiled in the message passing by the occupants of CA07?

Where are they all?

Why aren't any of them saying, 'hang on a minute, how did the second body, the female end up upstairs, when her body was originally downstairs in the kitchen? How had a fourth body ended upstairs, after 8.10am, when by that stage it had been reported only three bodies present upstairs...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 10:08:PM
They both give a time of 3.45am, also in Myall trial transcript that was excepted in cross examination by the look of it?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3132.0;attach=38123

It's also in Myall court testimony?  Like you said it could be 3.40 it could be 3.44 or 3.43 people have an habit of rounding off time.

First thing which needs to be said, is that the statement is not handwritten, nor does it bear PS Bews signature in ink!

People prepare these witness statements for witnesses. It is a very telling indictment of the facts that no handwritten version of this statement exists. Nor are there any notes in Bews, Myalls, and Saxby notebook matching what is typed here. What seems  to have been attempted here, is to move the time CA07 were deployed 10 minutes, but whoever put the statement together made a boo boo, and recorded the time as 3.45am because they got wind of 10 minutes difference between the two calls (3.26am, and 3.36am). Maybe, whoever is responsible for making the typed Bews statement should have put the correct time of their deployment 10 minutes backwards to 3.25am from 3.35am. This timing (3.45am) is obviously wrong, proveable by reference to the first entry in a police document known as 'The Major Incident Project', where it states '03.45am - 001 unidentified male seen at whf'...

How can CA07 have been deployed to the scene from Witham at 3.45am, and yet already be at the scene at 3.45am?

Shall we refer to it, as 'a trick of time'?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 12, 2017, 10:12:PM
First thing which needs to be said, is that the statement is not handwritten, nor does it bear PS Bews signature in ink!

People prepare these witness statements for witnesses. It is a very telling indictment of the facts that no handwritten version of this statement exists. Nor are there any notes in Bews, Myalls, and Saxby notebook matching what is typed here. What seems  to have been attempted here, is to move the time CA07 were deployed 10 minutes, but whoever put the statement together made a boo boo, and recorded the time as 3.45am because they got wind of 10 minutes difference between the two calls (3.26am, and 3.36am). Maybe, whoever is responsible for making the typed Bews statement should have put the correct time of their deployment 10 minutes backwards to 3.25am from 3.35am. This timing (3.45am) is obviously wrong, proveable by reference to the first entry in a police document known as 'The Major Incident Project', where it states '03.45am - 001 unidentified male seen at whf'...

How can CA07 have been deployed to the scene from Witham at 3.45am, and yet already be at the scene at 3.45am?

Shall we refer to it, as 'a trick of time'?

The other thing worth pointing out, is that it does not state 'at 3.45am', it states, 'at about 3.45am'. The correct time, was 10 minutes sooner, at 3.35am...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 12, 2017, 10:19:PM
First thing which needs to be said, is that the statement is not handwritten, nor does it bear PS Bews signature in ink!

People prepare these witness statements for witnesses. It is a very telling indictment of the facts that no handwritten version of this statement exists. Nor are there any notes in Bews, Myalls, and Saxby notebook matching what is typed here. What seems  to have been attempted here, is to move the time CA07 were deployed 10 minutes, but whoever put the statement together made a boo boo, and recorded the time as 3.45am because they got wind of 10 minutes difference between the two calls (3.26am, and 3.36am). Maybe, whoever is responsible for making the typed Bews statement should have put the correct time of their deployment 10 minutes backwards to 3.25am from 3.35am. This timing (3.45am) is obviously wrong, proveable by reference to the first entry in a police document known as 'The Major Incident Project', where it states '03.45am - 001 unidentified male seen at whf'...

How can CA07 have been deployed to the scene from Witham at 3.45am, and yet already be at the scene at 3.45am?

Shall we refer to it, as 'a trick of time'?
It does say it in Bews hand written statement, but it looks as though the 5 has been altered?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5038.0;attach=35437
Myall says 3.39 in his?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5953.0;attach=38288
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 07:46:AM
It does say it in Bews hand written statement, but it looks as though the 5 has been altered?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5038.0;attach=35437
Myall says 3.39 in his?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5953.0;attach=38288

The handwritten notes you are referring to, are his notebook entry made up after 10am that morning (7th August 1985), when he was tired.  He had been on duty since 19.30hrs the previous day. If you study other timed events recorded in the same notebook the times are specific. Whereas, although he and the others arrived at the scene at 3.48am, he writes 'about 3.45am' that he was on duty with Myall and Saxby when  as a result of information received  he went to whf and met Jeremy Bamber. Yes, the figure '5' in the time 3.frame has been altered, and the reason for that is because he received information that the son of Mr Bamber (Jeremy) would meet them after they arrived at the scene. This information could only have been given to him (CA07) whilst they were en route to the incident after already being deployed 10 minutes earlier at 3.35am. I believe I am correct in saying that he originally put the time of his arrival at whf (3.48am) but realised that they had received the information that Jeremy would meet them at the farm prior to themselves arriving there, so he altered the time to 3.45am. The information could not have been relayed to Bews until after Jeremy left his cottage to go to the scene at 3.46am. It may well be that the figure '5' was overwritten over the figure '6' as in 3.46am, the time he received the information about Jeremy meeting them when they arrived at the scene. Interestingly enough, if you apply the time adjustment method I allude to, it still fits snugly into the grand scheme of things, because it could not have been any sooner than 3.46am that Bews received information from the control room that Jeremy would be meeting them at the farmhouse. In other words, between 3.45am and 3.47am (3.46am). The key feature being that CA07 was still travelling towards whf when Bews received 'that' information about Jeremy, before arriving at the scene  between 3.47am and 3.49am (3.48am), 3 or 4 minutes before Jeremy himself arrived, between 3.51am and 3.53am (3.52am). I do not believe that Bews set off to go to the incident at the farmhouse at 3.45am, for all the reasons given, otherwise Jeremy would have phoned Chelmsford police station between 3.35am and 3.37am (3.36am) before the occupants of CA07 were deployed to the scene, and we know that they got deployed to the incident before Jeremy had even spoken to PC West after being placed on hold for around 5 minutes. Elsewhere, it is argued that Jeremy was only placed on hold for three minutes, which I am prepared to accept because by adopting the time adjustment mechanism I allude to, it would or might depend where in the seconds cycle of a minute, he called Chelmsford police station? What I am getting at, is that depending upon whether Jeremy's call to Chelmsford  actually commenced at 3.35am, (3.36am), or 3.37am, there is potential for a 3 minute delay whilst he was placed on hold, being treated as 5 minutes (3.35am, 3.36am, 3.37am, 3.38am to 3.39am)...

The other thing worth mentioning is that Bews has clipped other notes to the pages of his pocketbook notes, something which he should not have been doing, it's against accepted practice. He commits a disciplinary offence if he adopts such tactics. What I want to know is, what was written on the attachments?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 11:30:AM
In his trial transcript, PC Myall, states, 'at about 3.45am' he went with Police Sergeant Bews and police constable Saxby to white house farm in a police vehicle. He confirmed that he made his note up at 10am that morning. This corresponds with the time that PS Bews made up his own note, in his pocketbook. How strange, that neither Bews, or Myall make any reference to the sighting of the figure at the main bedroom window, which as we are led to believe caused them and Jeremy to hot tail themselves out of the grounds of the farmhouse, back to the patrol-car which was parked up in a lay-by adjacent to the farm cottages in Pages Lane? Very strange that, it was only 6 hours previously that they had all run like frightened rabbits from the farmhouse back to the police car, at which stage PS Bews, passed a situation report concerning the sighting of that person who might possibly have been armed with a loaded rifle? No mention by 10 am the same morning, arguably one of the highlights of their involvement in the case upon arrival at the scene by them at 3.48am, and Jeremy's arrival at around 3.52am! More disturbingly, no record of the information which Bews passed back to the control room requesting the firearms officers to attend? What, 'Please send out your firearm officers because of a trick of light which made me crap in my pants'?

Something is wrong here, something is very wrong!

You see, the situation as far as the occupants of CA07 was concerned, is that they did see someone moving around, and at times standing near to the main bedroom window. It was not a trick of light, it was a real person, someone who was almost certainly one or other of the three adult victims, who later were either found already dead, and Sheila, (the sister, the daughter), who was believed to have been shot dead at the time the firearm team entered the farmhouse! The occupants of CA07 were themselves a party to these facts, since they it were who relayed information from the scene back to the control room at 7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am. So, therefore, at these times, not only did they hear a running commentary by the firearm officers in a blow by blow account of the entry, CA07 relayed that activity from the scene back to the control room - they knew that Sheila had been shot in the kitchen by 7.37am, shot only once by that stage, presumed killed. They knew that by 8.10am, there had only been three bodies upstairs, and that Sheila Caffell, was not one of those three bodies!!!

It is a very telling indictment to discover that the occupants of CA07 did not leave the incident at whf until 9.30am, that morning, and that by that stage, they had witnessed the transformation in the body count (two down/three up) alter by 8.44am, into one body downstairs, four bodies upstairs! No doubt, they were warned about making any reference in their note making from 10am that morning, of anything to do with the sighting of a person, alive in the first floor bedroom, or the fact that between 7.37am and 8.10am, there had been two bodies in the kitchen, and only three other bodies upstairs. By 9.30am, the occupants of CA07 had almost certainly been briefed not to mention anything about seeing anybody alive inside the farmhouse at any stage, and not to report the discovery of the two bodies found upon entry, because by 9.30am, that female body (Sheila) was by that stage dead upstairs in the main bedroom, and they were privy to information by that stage that police were going to present the case as having found all five persons dead upon entry, which was totally false. Bews, Myall and Saxby, all knew this to be true, but like coppers do, they all stick together in a crisis. So the occupants of CA07 omitted any reference to the fact that they had seen a living person moving around in the bedroom shortly after arriving at the scene, and that a second body (female/Sheila) had not been found upon entry, nor had only three bodies been present upstairs until after 8.10am...

The occupants of CA07 were Jeremy Bambers alibi, to the fact that he did not shoot and kill his sister on the main bedroom floor, prior to calling Chelmsford police at 3.36am. How could he have done something which was impossible to have done, when all along the occupants of CA07 knew and know that Sheila got shot when police forced their way into the kitchen. Hers was the female body in the kitchen from 7.37am, onwards, until after 8.10am...

I can prove this to be true!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 11:40:AM
In his trial transcript, PC Myall, states, 'at about 3.45am' he went with Police Sergeant Bews and police constable Saxby to white house farm in a police vehicle. He confirmed that he made his note up at 10am that morning. This corresponds with the time that PS Bews made up his own note, in his pocketbook. How strange, that neither Bews, or Myall make any reference to the sighting of the figure at the main bedroom window, which as we are led to believe caused them and Jeremy to hot tail themselves out of the grounds of the farmhouse, back to the patrol-car which was parked up in a lay-by adjacent to the farm cottages in Pages Lane? Very strange that, it was only 6 hours previously that they had all run like frightened rabbits from the farmhouse back to the police car, at which stage PS Bews, passed a situation report concerning the sighting of that person who might possibly have been armed with a loaded rifle? No mention by 10 am the same morning, arguably one of the highlights of their involvement in the case upon arrival at the scene by them at 3.48am, and Jeremy's arrival at around 3.52am! More disturbingly, no record of the information which Bews passed back to the control room requesting the firearms officers to attend? What, 'Please send out your firearm officers because of a trick of light which made me crap in my pants'?

Something is wrong here, something is very wrong!

You see, the situation as far as the occupants of CA07 was concerned, is that they did see someone moving around, and at times standing near to the main bedroom window. It was not a trick of light, it was a real person, someone who was almost certainly one or other of the three adult victims, who later were either found already dead, and Sheila, (the sister, the daughter), who was believed to have been shot dead at the time the firearm team entered the farmhouse! The occupants of CA07 were themselves a perty to these facts, since they it were who relayed information from the scene back to the control room at 7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am. So, therefore, at these times, not only did they hear a running commentary by the firearm officers in a blow by blow account of the entry, CA07 relayed that activity from the scene back to the control room - they knew that Sheila had been shot in the kitchen by 7.37am, shot only once by that stage, presumed killed. They knew that by 8.10am, there had only been three bodies upstairs, and that Sheila Caffell, was not one of those three bodies!!!

It is a very telling indictment to discover that the occupants of CA07 did not leave the incident at whf until 9.30am, that morning, and that by that stage, they had witnessed the transformation in the body count (two down/three up) alter by 8.44am, into one body downstairs, four bodies upstairs! No doubt, they were warned about making any reference in their note making from 10am that morning, of anything to do with the sighting of a person, alive in the first floor bedroom, or the fact that between 7.37am and 8.10am, there had been two bodies in the kitchen, and only three other bodies upstairs. By 9.30am, the occupants of CA07 had almost certainly been briefed not to mention anything about seeing anybody alive inside the farmhouse at any stage, and not to report the discovery of the two bodies found upon entry, because by 9.30am, that female body (Sheila) was by that stage dead upstairs in the main bedroom, and they were privy to information by that stage that police were going to present the case as having found all five persons dead upon entry, which was totally false. Bews, Myall and Saxby, all knew this to be true, but like coppers do, they all stick together in a crisis. So the occupants of CA07 omitted any reference to the fact that they had seen a living person moving around in the bedroom shortly after arriving at the scene, and that a second body (female/Sheila) had not been found upon entry, nor had only three bodies been present upstairs until after 8.10am...

The occupants of CA07 were Jeremy Bambers alibi, to the fact that he did not shoot and kill his sister on the main bedroom floor, prior to calling Chelmsford police at 3.36am. How could he have done something which was impossible to have done, when all along the occupants of CA07 knew and know that Sheila got shot when police forced their way into the kitchen. Hers was the female body in the kitchen from 7.37am, onwards, until after 8.10am...

I can prove this to be true!!!

At the heart of this mystery, is why the hand written SOCO register has never been disclosed?

There is good reason for this - because the original hand written version contains reference to the shooting of Sheila in the kitchen at around 7.37am (or beforehand), followed up by the shooting of her upstairs in the bedroom after 8.44am...

At the beginning of the (edited) typed version of the report, it states the following:-

Arrive 9.20am : Information given - siege and persons shot dead.
A person or persons shot dead - A person had committed suicide.
(Source of information not known).


Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 11:50:AM
Arrive 9.20am : Information given - siege and persons shot dead.
A person or persons shot dead - A person had committed suicide.
(Source of information not known).


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read what it says - there had been a 'siege and' that 'persons' had been 'shot dead', not found shot dead!!!

Next Line - 'A person or persons' have been 'shot dead', not found shot dead! 'A person had committed suicide' - yes but when, and where?

Where does the presence of Sheila's body in the kitchen between 7.37am and not upstairs until some time after 8.10am, fit in with this?

What could the occupants of CA07 tell us all that would make us all suspicious of these comments at the beginning of the typed version of the 'Scenes of Crime Register'?

Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 12:15:PM
What becomes clear to me in any case, is that by 9.30am on the first morning of the incident, is that the occupants of CA07 were still present at the scene by the time DI 'Ron' Cook and other SOCO arrived at the scene by 9.20am, and that there was a 10 minute overlap between 9.20am, and 9.30am, when the occupants of CA07 and SOCO exchanged information. At this time, 'Ron' Cook learned of the shooting of Sheila in two different parts of the house, albeit upon arrival he mistakenly believed that possibly two of the victims had been shot by police, one in the kitchen at the time of entry, and a second victim shot upstairs in the main bedroom. It was not until later that he found out, that the same person had been shot twice, once in a different part of the farmhouse. Namely, in the kitchen and the main bedroom...

This obviously impacted upon the information passed in the key police messages passed by CA07 from the scene to the control room, at 7.73am, 7.38am and 8.10am...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 04:41:PM
What becomes clear to me in any case, is that by 9.30am on the first morning of the incident, is that the occupants of CA07 were still present at the scene by the time DI 'Ron' Cook and other SOCO arrived at the scene by 9.20am, and that there was a 10 minute overlap between 9.20am, and 9.30am, when the occupants of CA07 and SOCO exchanged information. At this time, 'Ron' Cook learned of the shooting of Sheila in two different parts of the house, albeit upon arrival he mistakenly believed that possibly two of the victims had been shot by police, one in the kitchen at the time of entry, and a second victim shot upstairs in the main bedroom. It was not until later that he found out, that the same person had been shot twice, once in a different part of the farmhouse. Namely, in the kitchen and the main bedroom...

This obviously impacted upon the information passed in the key police messages passed by CA07 from the scene to the control room, at 7.73am, 7.38am and 8.10am...

The occupants of CA07 knew the truth, it is documented that they must have known the truth, but they never 'fessed up to what they saw, to what they heard, or to what they knew, things which make Jeremy innocent!!!

Rotten coppers, through and through, looking after their own, protecting eachother, lying for eachother, staying silent for each other, selfish lying vile scumbag pieces of pigs shit!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 13, 2017, 04:52:PM
Nobody in the entire chain of command, has ever or even said, 'hang on a minute, there's something wrong here', not one of them has spoken out regarding the two bodies found upon entry to the farmhouse kitchen at 7.37am, 'Woah, hang on a minute two bodies found upon entry downstairs by 7.37am, and the other 3 bodies upstairs by 8.10am', so 'how did Sheila's body make the transition from kitchen to main bedroom after 8.10am'? And, 'If Sheila had already been shot twice downstairs in the kitchen prior to 8.10am, how could she have possibly made her own way from the kitchen downstairs after 7.37am, to the main bedroom upstairs after 8.10am'? Impossible according to the pathologists conclusion, who states that 'death would have followed instanteneously once the second shot had been inflicted'...

So, if Sheila had been the female body in the kitchen, known about by the occupants of CA07, and others involved in this circle of lies, then in order for her to have made her own way upstairs to the main bedroom after 8.10am, she must not have suffered the second (fatal) shot until after she left the kitchen, at some point after 8.10am...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 13, 2017, 08:00:PM
Hence, why as we look back at the present moment in time and we say, the occupants of CA07 left Witham police station at around 3.15am to deal with another Job
What's the source for that?

Neville made the 3.26am call to the police
Bonnett put 03:26 as the time when Pc West called him, so the call to Pc West could well have occurred a bit earlier, at, say, 03:25 or 03:24.

. . . that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am
What's the source for that time?

. . . the details of which were added to the (C1) Communications log
Pc West stated that he used a C1 form. Bonnett didn't state that he used a C1 form and the Communications log he wrote was written on a form with a different appearance. Continuing to write "(C1)" in front of references to Bonnett's Communications log is unnecessary and confusing.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 14, 2017, 10:31:AM

Bonnett put 03:26 as the time when Pc West called him, so the call to Pc West could well have occurred a bit earlier, at, say, 03:25 or 03:24.
What's the source for that time?

So, both phone logs had got the wrong time of Jeremy's call - the cops want to make their minds up! Julie Mugford and her gang of drug abusers/dealers want to make their minds up about the time Julie received the all important, irrelevant call, and Jeremy needs to stop speculating about the time he called Chelmsford police station and Julie. The fact is that in 1989 / 1990, that Jeremy did not know any of these times, he only knew the sequence he received the call from Neville, that he attempted to call Neville back (twice), that he then tried to contact Witham police station, that he then spoke to Julie, that he then phoned Chelmsford police station, and that he was placed on hold for about 5 minutes, and that he was told to go to the farmhouse where he would be met by police officers who had been deployed there, and that by the time he arrived there that the occupants of CA07 were already there!

I have hand written notes, made by the COLP investigators, and access to previously unpublished material...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 14, 2017, 11:40:AM
...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 14, 2017, 12:39:PM
In my view, Jeremy made 'a pigs ear' of his complaints to the 'COLP' investigators!

He wrongly accused PC Bird of finding the original silencer ('DB/1', 'SJ/1', 'SBJ/1'), when it was 'DS 'Stan' Jones who did on the morning of '7th August 1985'...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 14, 2017, 12:42:PM
There is no doubt that there was deliberately created all this confusion surround the timing of phone calls received and made by Jeremy, as a diversionary feature to try to cover for police involvement in the shooting of Sheila Caffells in the kitchen, and upstairs later in the bedroom!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 14, 2017, 02:07:PM
There is not doubt that there was deliberately created all this confusion surround the timing of phone calls received and made by Jeremy, as a diversionary feature to try to cover for police involvement in the shooting f Sheila Caffells in the kitchen, and upstairs later in the bedroom!

Mike,you've hit the nail 100% squarely on the head. There has very definitely been deliberately created confusion surrounding the alleged timings of phone calls.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 14, 2017, 09:35:PM
Jeremy . . . only knew the sequence he received the call from Neville, . . .
If Jeremy forgot some things, there must be a possibility that he is mistaken to some extent about some things as well, such as the order in which certain events took place. Did he ever tell you directly or by letter that he tried to telephone Witham police station (without getting through to anyone)  before calling Pc West or before calling Julie? He didn't mention trying to call Witham in his statements or interviews.

What was the source for your effective assertion that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am? In other words, where did you get that specific time from?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Steve_uk on January 14, 2017, 09:39:PM
If Jeremy forgot some things, there must be a possibility that he is mistaken to some extent about some things as well, such as the order in which certain events took place. Did he ever tell you directly or by letter that he tried to telephone Witham police station (without getting through to anyone)  before calling Pc West or before calling Julie? He didn't mention trying to call Witham in his statements or interviews.

What was the source for your effective assertion that the occupants of CA07 returned back to Witham police station by 3.34am? In other words, where did you get that specific time from?
I thought Jeremy specifically said he'd tried to telephone Witham.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 14, 2017, 10:49:PM
He did according to some police officers, but I don't think it's mentioned in their earliest statements. It's been asserted some time ago that Jeremy has denied trying to call Witham; I don't recall whether that comes from the OS or from Mike Tesko.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 14, 2017, 11:50:PM
He did according to some police officers, but I don't think it's mentioned in their earliest statements. It's been asserted some time ago that Jeremy has denied trying to call Witham; I don't recall whether that comes from the OS or from Mike Tesko.

Why would it be in their earlier statements taken before Jeremy was a suspect?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 03:50:AM
Actually, it was mentioned in the statement by Ps Bews dated 16th August 1985. If that mention was true, it shows that Jeremy "forgot about it" when making his statement dated 7th August 1985 and in his interviews in September 1985 (though he wasn't asked a specific question about it in those interviews). Was Ps Bews being truthful? Let's see now whether Ps Bews is a reliable witness.

Ps Bews deliberately give false information on 19th September 1985 about the trip that was made by himself and Myall earlier that day between Spring Cottage in Tollesbury Road (approximately where Jeremy had been overtaken) and the point in Pages Lane where CA7 had parked on 7th August 1985. The point of that trip was to measure accurately its distance and the time taken to drive it at a modest speed. The trip was then repeated at high speed. Ps Bews stated that the first trip was accomplished at a speed varying between 25 and 30 mph, that the distance was exactly 1 mile as shown by the trip meter in the police vehicle used, and that the journey time was 2 minutes 45 seconds, as measured with a police stop watch. That timing can't be true (or anything like true). At 25 mph it would take 2 minutes 24 seconds to travel a mile, and at 30 mph it would take 2 minutes 0 seconds. Ps Bews stated that taking 2 minutes 45 seconds for this trip would correspond to an average speed for the trip of 27 1/2 mph, which is also incorrect. At that speed, it would take 2 minutes 11 seconds to travel a mile. The figures that Ps Bews gave couldn't have been minor arithmetic slips; Ps Bews must have been lying.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: David1819 on January 15, 2017, 03:51:AM
He did according to some police officers, but I don't think it's mentioned in their earliest statements. It's been asserted some time ago that Jeremy has denied trying to call Witham; I don't recall whether that comes from the OS or from Mike Tesko.

What police statements do you know?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 04:46:AM
In connection with the matter currently under discussion, I used the statements made by Jeremy, Pc West, Ps Bews and Pc Myall. In his statement dated 15th August 1985, Pc Myall also mentioned that Jeremy said he had tried to call Witham police station, but hadn't got a reply. However, various parts of his statement are almost identical to corresponding parts of the statement that Ps Bews made the next day, so the two statements weren't made independently. I don't know of any statement given by Pc Saxby in August 1985; his statement given in September 1985 doesn't mention Jeremy referring to trying to call Witham police station.

In the special trips that I referred to, Pc Myall was doing the driving, so it's reasonable to assume that Ps Bews was operating the stop-watch.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 15, 2017, 08:13:AM
Actually, it was mentioned in the statement by Ps Bews dated 16th August 1985. If that mention was true, it shows that Jeremy "forgot about it" when making his statement dated 7th August 1985 and in his interviews in September 1985 (though he wasn't asked a specific question about it in those interviews). Was Ps Bews being truthful? Let's see now whether Ps Bews is a reliable witness.

Ps Bews deliberately give false information on 19th September 1985 about the trip that was made by himself and Myall earlier that day between Spring Cottage in Tollesbury Road (approximately where Jeremy had been overtaken) and the point in Pages Lane where CA7 had parked on 7th August 1985. The point of that trip was to measure accurately its distance and the time taken to drive it at a modest speed. The trip was then repeated at high speed. Ps Bews stated that the first trip was accomplished at a speed varying between 25 and 30 mph, that the distance was exactly 1 mile as shown by the trip meter in the police vehicle used, and that the journey time was 2 minutes 45 seconds, as measured with a police stop watch. That timing can't be true (or anything like true). At 25 mph it would take 2 minutes 24 seconds to travel a mile, and at 30 mph it would take 2 minutes 0 seconds. Ps Bews stated that taking 2 minutes 45 seconds for this trip would correspond to an average speed for the trip of 27 1/2 mph, which is also incorrect. At that speed, it would take 2 minutes 11 seconds to travel a mile. The figures that Ps Bews gave couldn't have been minor arithmetic slips; Ps Bews must have been lying.

Why must he have been lying? Were the maths principle one which would require input from Stephen Hawking then yes, he may have taken the chance to lie, however, as it is a simple arithmetic sum why on earth would he be so stupid as to lie - and over a few seconds?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 11:02:AM
If Jeremy forgot some things, there must be a possibility that he is mistaken to some extent about some things as well, such as the order in which certain events took place. Did he ever tell you directly or by letter that he tried to telephone Witham police station (without getting through to anyone)  before calling Pc West or before calling Julie? He didn't mention trying to call Witham in his statements or interviews.


Jeremy told me in person on multiple occasions the sequence of events, including where in that sequence he had tried to contact Witham police station! I believe I also have a number of letters written by him to me between 1990 and 2004, in which he mentions the same. I believe I am correct in saying that this cropped up in our conversations because of the issue involving whether he called the police before or after he called Julie? He could not remember specific times of events, but he was adamant that he only spoke with a police officer on the phone at Chelmsford after he had already spoken to Julie when he had told her, 'there's something wrong at home', and she told him, 'go back to bed'. I had reminded him that during one of his police interviews in September1985, that it had been put to him that on some previous occasion he had said that he had called police after he said he had called Julie, and before he had called Julie. He was put on the spot by the interviewing officer as to which version of his explanation was true?  Jeremy told me he spoke to somebody at Chelmsford after he had already spoken to Julie! I recall asking him if that were the case, why would you have told somebody that you had called police before you called Julie? It was as a result of this prompting by me, that Jeremy said that he only spoke to a police officer after he had spoken with Julie, but that he did try to contact Witham police station prior to calling Julie, but nobody answered, and he said that was where the reference to calling police before he called Julie came from! He said nobody answered the call he made to Witham police station, so it depended how you treated both calls, ie the first call to police at Witham police station before he called Julie, which was unanswered, or the second call he made to police at Chelmsford, after he had called Julie, which was answered. An answered call that he made to the police after calling Julie!  It seemed a truthful explanation, albeit to a certain extent a confusing one. What it boiled down to, then was to which call was being referred to? In what context each call might have been alluded to, at different times of the police investigation, and whether or not the person recording that issue paraphrased his answer, accurately eliminating for any possibility of a misunderstanding, in relation to an unanswered call to police, as opposed to an answered call to police?

I don't think police were particularly interested in Jeremy's unsuccessful  attempt to contact Witham police station before he called Julie during the initial part of the police investigation which accepted that Sheila had shot and killed the others. A month later when Jeremy fell under suspicion for whatever reason, it then became an issue!  As a victim, it mattered very little that he had unsuccessfully tried to contact Witham before he called Julie. However, once he became treated as a suspect it appears it did matter! But, once it became an issue, it depends how Jeremy perceived to which call police were referring to a month further on? Did they mean attempts to call police, or did police mean a call to police in which he actually spoke to the police? This has to be seen in the light of the actual time Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station was recorded by PC West (3.36am), and the recorded words logged by PC West in the 3.36am police message log! I do not believe there is anything suspicious in any answers Jeremy has given regarding the time he called the police? Whether it was before, or after he had called Julie at 3.30am. Since, he called the police before and after he had called her!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 12:54:PM
We know that the occupants of CA07 were deployed (3.35am) to the event prior to Jeremy calling Chelmsford police station (3.36am). Around 3.46am, Jeremy left his cottage ( give or take a minute, one way or the other) to go to the farmhouse. This means that in order for CA07 to have overtaken Jeremy on Tollesbury Road a mile from the farmhouse that Jeremy must have been ahead of 'them'  on the 'Tollesbury Road!  If this took place a mile from the farmhouse and CA07 arrived at around 3.48am (give or take a minute either side) why would it have taken Jeremy three or four minutes (again using the minute either side formula) to arrive at the farm cottages in Pages Lane? It wouldn't have, and if it had police would have made a huge issue of that fact! By adopting the 'a minute before, a minute after', approach, it sheds more light on how it was possible for the occupants of CA07 to have been deployed to the event at whf between 3.34am and 3.36am (3.35am), for Jeremy to have contacted Chelmsford police station between 3.35am and 3.37am (3.36am), for Jeremy to have left his cottage as instructed by PC West between 3.45am and 3.47am (3.46am), for the occupants of CA07 to have arrived at the farm cottages between 3.47am, and 3.49am (3.48am), and for Jeremy to have arrived there between 3.51am and 3.53am (3.52am). What this means is that technically speaking, it was nearer 2 minute's difference between the arrival of CA07 and Jeremy at the scene (between 3.49am and 3.51am)! This 2 minute difference being accounted for by the rapid speed of the travelling police car racing to the scene in excess of 60 mph, compared to the speed that Jeremy was reported to have been travelling at, (around, or under 30 mph) a mile from the farmhouse on the 'Tollesbury Road'!

The police car must have been travelling between 'twice and or three times faster' than Jeremy in his car, at the time CA07 overtook him! Jeremy had driven faster than normal until he saw the glaring lights of the police vehicle hurtling along 'Tollesbury Road' behind him, which caused him to slow down, quite naturally to allow for safe overtaking! There is no get out clause to warrant Jeremy speeding in front of a police car which has its lights flashing. Being told by PC West to go to the scene where he would be met by police officers who had been deployed to the event, but that he should under no circumstances approach the farmhouse until police met him there, must have contributed to Jeremy's mindset after leaving his cottage at around 3.46am, and when he became aware of the flashing lights of the police car as it sped along the country road at frightening speed! What was Jeremy to do? Disregard what PC West had told him? Break the speed limit on a country road in front of a speeding police car under flashing lights? One thing seems certain and that was that Jeremy was already on Tollesbury Road, ahead of CA07! I wonder what was going through Jeremy's mind within minutes of being told to go to the farmhouse, and he leaving his cottage in Head Street, seeing a police car with flashing lights hurtling along 'Tollesbury Road' behind him? How could he have known that the occupants of CA07 were responding to the event as discribed by himself to PC West only minutes beforehand? Chelmsford police station was far away, and he knew to the best of his knowlege and belief that there had been no police on duty at nearby Witham police station because he had earlier tried to contact them there and got no response! Jeremy did what any normal person would have done upon seeing a speeding police car hurtling along under blue flashing lights - he slowed down to enable the police car to get beyond him and on its way. The fact that it was the police who had been deployed to the farmhouse, as it turned out, must have puzzled Jeremy much later at his trial, and later still in and after 2002, when he eventually was provided with the content and detail in Malcolm Bonnet 3.26am 'Communications log' (CA07 deployed to incident at 3.35am, arrived at 3.48am). Astonishingly Rivlin QC did not pick up on 'this' at the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial!
It was being argued during 'PC Wests' testimony that he might have read the clock wrong, and recorded the time as 3.36am, instead of 3.26am! By the time Rivlin QC was cross examining him, he was conceding that he always recorded the time he received a call, not the time it ended! He confirmed that on his message log, he had recorded the time 3.36am. He confirmed that the contents of a witness statement made in his name, were not mentioned or recorded in the message log he created. In the same witness statement he had recorded the time of his call from Jeremy as 3.26am. He accepted by the end of his cross examination by RivlinQC, that he could not be sure which time was accurate, the 3.36am recorded by himself in his own police message log, or the time 3.26am recorded in someone else's Communications log? What becomes clear to me, is that the Communications log bearing the time 3.26am, cannot be a true record of what PC West could have told Bonnet by 3.26am! Impossible, there was a delay in Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station of up to 5 minutes (or less) whilst Jeremy was placed on hold. So, what has been going on here, then?

The contents of Bonnets (communication log) must not have been made available to Rivlin QC, otherwise he would surely have picked up on the 'wording' and the 'phraseology' used in it, to make out a case for Neville Bamber having called police after all!!!

Moreover, he would have seen that the occupants of CA07 had been deployed to the event at 3.35am, arriving at the scene at 3.48am! Here, would have been a golden opportunity for Rivlin QC to make a mockery of 'PC Wests' claim that he may have read the clock wrongly, and recorded the incorrect time 3.36am, instead of the correct time 3.26am! By the time Rivlin QC had finished his cross examination of 'PC West', his credibility as a police officer was in question! He didn't even know which of the two times 3.36am, and 3.26am) he had received Jeremy's call even though it was his normal practice to always write down the time a call was received, and he had written, 3.36am, as well as ticking the option on the same message form that 3.36am had been the time he 'received' Jeremy's call!

This being the case, and had Rivlin QC seen the 'Communication log' and it's contents, Rivlin would have been able to go much further in his cross examination of 'PC West', by inviting him to comment, for example, on how if the occupants of CA07 had been deployed to this event at 3.35am, they had managed to be overtaking Jeremy on Tollesbury Road, considering that he had not instructed Jeremy to go to the scene until around 3.46am (10 minutes after he received Jeremy's call)? This question would have been put to PC West on the basis that the occupants of CA07 had been deployed to the event from Witham police station at 3.35am! How had CA07 managed to overtake Jeremy on the 'Tollesbury Road' between, as it were 3.46am and 3.49am (3.48am), if they had begun their journey to go to the incident at the farmhouse from Witham police station, as opposed to Jeremy's starting point of his cottage (3.46am) at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger? How had the occupants of CA07 managed to travel all the way from Witham police station to be in a position to overtake Jeremy, like they say they had done, at any point between 3.46am, and 3.49am? He would have correctly established, that there was something very sinister going on with the time keeping on the part of Essex police, in this matter!!!

A jury would have been convinced of it, after such questioning by Rivlin QC, if he had got an opportunity to pose such questions!

Something is seriously wrong in this matter!!!

The old saying ' if you want to know the time ask a policeman', is thrown out of the window, at least in Essex!  They make it a certain time, depending upon what they need to say a time is, 'time travellers', that's what they are, 'a trick of light', 'a trick of time', a 'trick of bodies, downstairs and upstairs', a 'trick of bullets', a 'trick of silencers', 'tricksters' incorporated...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 05:01:PM
Why must he have been lying?
Ps Bews said the car he was in took 1 minute 45 seconds to cover a distance of exactly a mile. Careless use of his stop-watch could have meant that time was inaccurate by a second or two, but not by 34 seconds. Careless observation of the vehicle's speedometer could have caused him to overestimate the vehicle's speed from time to time, but not for most of the journey, as would have had to be the case if the vehicle was actually averaging only about 21 mph.

There's only one possible explanation: Ps Bews never made this trip in the manner that he described. Perhaps he did the trip but travelled from a different place. Perhaps he failed to start the stop-watch and decided to guess the duration of the trip instead of repeating the trip. Perhaps he made no observation of the vehicle's speed and then just wrote down a range of speeds that were in agreement with an average speed that he had miscalculated. However, that would have meant that he didn't even notice the difference between being driven at around 21 mph and being driven at around 27 1/2 mph., which is implausible. I don't know what occurred, but the observations he said he made are inconsistent and cannot all be correct. Nor can the inconsistency be due to faulty arithmetic. That might account for an error in the calculated average speed, but not for the observed speed.

The inconsistencies cannot be plausibly explained by just carelessness or poor arithmetic. Ps Bews must have been lying.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 05:28:PM
Ps Bews said the car he was in took 1 minute 45 seconds to cover a distance of exactly a mile. Careless use of his stop-watch could have meant that time was inaccurate by a second or two, but not by 34 seconds. Careless observation of the vehicle's speedometer could have caused him to overestimate the vehicle's speed from time to time, but not for most of the journey, as would have had to be the case if the vehicle was actually averaging only about 21 mph.

There's only one possible explanation: Ps Bews never made this trip in the manner that he described. Perhaps he did the trip but travelled from a different place. Perhaps he failed to start the stop-watch and decided to guess the duration of the trip instead of repeating the trip. Perhaps he made no observation of the vehicle's speed and then just wrote down a range of speeds that were in agreement with an average speed that he had miscalculated. However, that would have meant that he didn't even notice the difference between being driven at around 21 mph and being driven at around 27 1/2 mph., which is implausible. I don't know what occurred, but the observations he said he made are inconsistent and cannot all be correct. Nor can the inconsistency be due to faulty arithmetic. That might account for an error in the calculated average speed, but not for the observed speed.

The inconsistencies cannot be plausibly explained by just carelessness or poor arithmetic. Ps Bews must have been lying.

I have often thought something odd about the fact that one of the three occupants worked out of Colchester police station, whilst the other two worked out of Witham. Did all three travel there in the same vehicle? Or, did one of them arrive before the two others in CA07?  I have my doubts over 'PC Myall' travelling to the scene in the company of Bews, and Saxby! This could be behind the reason for Bews telling lies...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 15, 2017, 06:01:PM
Ps Bews said the car he was in took 1 minute 45 seconds to cover a distance of exactly a mile. Careless use of his stop-watch could have meant that time was inaccurate by a second or two, but not by 34 seconds. Careless observation of the vehicle's speedometer could have caused him to overestimate the vehicle's speed from time to time, but not for most of the journey, as would have had to be the case if the vehicle was actually averaging only about 21 mph.

There's only one possible explanation: Ps Bews never made this trip in the manner that he described. Perhaps he did the trip but travelled from a different place. Perhaps he failed to start the stop-watch and decided to guess the duration of the trip instead of repeating the trip. Perhaps he made no observation of the vehicle's speed and then just wrote down a range of speeds that were in agreement with an average speed that he had miscalculated. However, that would have meant that he didn't even notice the difference between being driven at around 21 mph and being driven at around 27 1/2 mph., which is implausible. I don't know what occurred, but the observations he said he made are inconsistent and cannot all be correct. Nor can the inconsistency be due to faulty arithmetic. That might account for an error in the calculated average speed, but not for the observed speed.

The inconsistencies cannot be plausibly explained by just carelessness or poor arithmetic. Ps Bews must have been lying.

OK, so Bews lied because of 34 seconds but Bamber must have make a mistake when it comes down to his phone call timings? 03:10 - call from Nevill, 03:36 Bamber finally calls the police. We have 26 minutes askew here is which is a sight longer than 34 seconds. Couldn't possibly be down to poor judgement - Bamber lied!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 15, 2017, 06:19:PM
OK, so Bews lied because of 34 seconds but Bamber must have make a mistake when it comes down to his phone call timings? 03:10 - call from Nevill, 03:36 Bamber finally calls the police. We have 26 minutes askew here is which is a sight longer than 34 seconds. Couldn't possibly be down to poor judgement - Bamber lied!
Dont forget the 10 mins he said it took him to look the Chelmsford police station number up, changes to 2 mins Caroline.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 15, 2017, 06:27:PM
Dont forget the 10 mins he said it took him to look the Chelmsford police station number up, changes to 2 mins Caroline.

Even at the outside, that might cover 10 minutes, so in that instance, there would be 16 unaccounted for. If it only took two minutes then there are 24.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 06:31:PM
There's a big difference, Caroline, between getting something wrong and deliberately lying about it. Jeremy didn't say he spent 10 minutes looking up the police telephone number(s). When asked (5 weeks later) how long that took, he replied "10 minutes at the outside", and also said "times are approximate".

I recall asking him if that were the case, why would you have told somebody that you had called police before you called Julie? It was as a result of this prompting by me, that Jeremy said that he only spoke to a police officer after he had spoken with Julie, but that he did try to contact Witham police station prior to calling Julie, but nobody answered, and he said that was where the reference to calling police before he called Julie came from!
I'm willing to accept that as you seem to have a good recollection of it. Can you clarify when that occurred? Was that conversation with him held while you were in the same prison as him or did it take place after you had been released? How come you never posted these details for the best part of a decade at least? Jeremy specifically stated during his interviews "I don't remember the sequence of events". He effectively stuck with that, even to the extent of stating that his first statement would have been truthful. In his first statement, though, he stated "I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened." Now, you're asserting that due to persistent questioning by you, he effectively realized that he might have mentioned calling Witham (perhaps without specifically mentioning its name) in conversation with the police on 7th August 1985, but then made no mention of it in his formal statement made on that date. You are now telling us that Jeremy indeed didn't remember the full sequence of events during his interview, but later came to realize the correct sequence after talking to you.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 15, 2017, 06:36:PM
There's a big difference, Caroline, between getting something wrong and deliberately lying about it. Jeremy didn't say he spent 10 minutes looking up the police telephone number(s). When asked (5 weeks later) how long that took, he replied "10 minutes at the outside", and also said "times are approximate".
I'm willing to accept that as you seem to have a good recollection of it. Can you clarify when that occurred? Was that conversation with him held while you were in the same prison as him or did it take place after you had been released? How come you never posted these details for the best part of a decade at least? Jeremy specifically stated during his interviews "I don't remember the sequence of events". He effectively stuck with that, even to the extent of stating that his first statement would have been truthful. In his first statement, though, he stated "I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened." Now, you're asserting that due to persistent questioning by you, he effectively realized that he might have mentioned calling Witham (perhaps without specifically mentioning its name) in conversation with the police on 7th August 1985, but then made no mention of it in his formal statement made on that date. You are now telling us that Jeremy indeed didn't remember the full sequence of events during his interview, but later came to realize the correct sequence after talking to you.
Oh, I must have Miss read you when you posted this?

I think it took even less time than that, because it's quite easy to find police telephone numbers. I think Jeremy said it took 2 minutes at most
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 15, 2017, 06:37:PM
There's a big difference, Caroline, between getting something wrong and deliberately lying about it. Jeremy didn't say he spent 10 minutes looking up the police telephone number(s). When asked (5 weeks later) how long that took, he replied "10 minutes at the outside", and also said "times are approximate".


There certainly is Reader and it's a LOT easier to cock up 34 seconds than it is 26 minutes! The discrepancy has nothing to do with looking up numbers - the 26 minutes is the time he stated he received a call from Nevill and the time he called the police.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 15, 2017, 06:38:PM
There are threads on the 26 minutes between Bamber recieving Nevill's call and phoning the police.

No one can explain what Bamber was doing.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 07:01:PM

I'm willing to accept that as you seem to have a good recollection of it. Can you clarify when that occurred? Was that conversation with him held while you were in the same prison as him or did it take place after you had been released? How come you never posted these details for the best part of a decade at least? Jeremy specifically stated during his interviews "I don't remember the sequence of events". He effectively stuck with that, even to the extent of stating that his first statement would have been truthful. In his first statement, though, he stated "I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened." Now, you're asserting that due to persistent questioning by you, he effectively realized that he might have mentioned calling Witham (perhaps without specifically mentioning its name) in conversation with the police on 7th August 1985, but then made no mention of it in his formal statement made on that date. You are now telling us that Jeremy indeed didn't remember the full sequence of events during his interview, but later came to realize the correct sequence after talking to you.

The conversations I had with Jeremy would have been in late 1989, before I got released on bail pending appeal (26th July 1990). At least that was when it became obvious to me that Jeremy had no recollection of any timed events in his memory! I believe that I can pinpoint the exact date I raised these matters with him. How could I possibly forget the occasion, because it was the only occasion in my entire incarceration at HMP Full Sutton, that I spent Christmas day locked in Jeremys cell for over 4 hours whilst prison staff enjoyed an extended lunch break! It was a one off event where inmates had the option of eating Christmas dinner alone, or you could invite another inmate to share Christmas dinner with! We all had cells/ rooms of our own. We had Sky TV, and an en suite toilet with its own washbasin. That Christmas (1989) was the only occasion in my memory that prison staff allowed us inmates this arrangement. It was during this 4 hour period that Jeremy and self talked out the sequence of events as remembered by him, without times!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 07:09:PM
Around 3.46am, Jeremy left his cottage (give or take a minute...) to go to the farmhouse.
We don't know that, and it's inconsistent with various times recorded by Pc West and Malcolm Bonnett. You've not suggested that Jeremy departed as late as 3:46am until very recently, and it's probably 3 to 5 minutes later than his actual departure time if he called Pc West at 3:36am.

. . . he had written 3.36am, as well as ticking the option on the same message form that 3.36am had been the time he 'received' Jeremy's call!
That's not quite what happened. Pc West crossed out "Sent" on the C1 message form, leaving "Received" as the remaining option. He could presumably have added "(call ended)" in the box if that were true, but didn't do so.

Regarding the fact that Pc Myall was based at Colchester, that's apparently true, but it's not unusual for an officer based at one police station to be temporarily working out of another station., especially during August, which is a popular month for taking leave.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 07:17:PM
I think Jeremy said it took 2 minutes at most
I agree, as I think "2 minutes at the outside" was misrecorded in his interview transcript as "10 minutes at the outside" (as they would sound similar). I don't think it is stated anywhere that Jeremy has since said it took 2 minutes at most.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 15, 2017, 07:28:PM
I agree, as I think "2 minutes at the outside" was misrecorded in his interview transcript as "10 minutes at the outside" (as they would sound similar). I don't think it is stated anywhere that Jeremy has since said it took 2 minutes at most.
So this is you who is saying it took 2 mins and not Jeremy then?  Has his defence or Jeremy ever said it took 2 mins and disputed what was written, 10 mins at the outside?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 07:31:PM
. . . the 26 minutes is the time he stated he received a call from Nevill and the time he called the police.
That's how you're choosing to calculate it, but we don't know how he estimated the time of Nevill's call to him as about 3:10am - he may have based that estimate on a time mentioned to him by the police. He had earlier told the police officers that he met outside WHF that Nevill's call to him had occurred about half an hour previously, which would place it at about 3:22am. That would leave 14 minutes, during which he presumably tried to call Nevill back several times, looked up police telephone numbers, possibly tried to call Witham police station, called Julie, and got dressed. He possibly also pondered what would be the best course of action.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 07:41:PM
So this is you who is saying it took 2 mins and not Jeremy then?  Has his defence or Jeremy ever said it took 2 mins and disputed what was written, 10 mins at the outside?
I am not aware of Jeremy or the defence having raised this point at any time. Others have suggested that 2 minutes should have sufficed, but I am possibly the first person to suggest that what he said during his interview was actually "2 minutes", but was misrecorded as "10 minutes" in the transcript of the interview. This possibility didn't occur to me until fairly recently. Although "2 minutes" and "10 minutes" look different, they can sound very similar when spoken.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 15, 2017, 08:01:PM
I am not aware of Jeremy or the defence having raised this point at any time. Others have suggested that 2 minutes should have sufficed, but I am possibly the first person to suggest that what he said during his interview was actually "2 minutes", but was misrecorded as "10 minutes" in the transcript of the interview. This possibility didn't occur to me until fairly recently. Although "2 minutes" and "10 minutes" look different, they can sound very similar when spoken.

I've no idea how you've come to this Reader but you've made a mistake. The police asked Jeremy how long it took, they suggested 10 minutes he replied half that. Half that being 5 minutes. You need to go back to the police interviews.

It seems you've confused yourself.

Half of 2 minutes is a minute.

Which sounds nothing like 5 minutes!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 08:04:PM
We don't know that, and it's inconsistent with various times recorded by Pc West and Malcolm Bonnett. You've not suggested that Jeremy departed as late as 3:46am until very recently, and it's probably 3 to 5 minutes later than his actual departure time if he called Pc West at 3:36am.

It has always been known to me that Jeremy left his cottage 10 or 11 minutes after he made his call to PC West at 3.36am. This as far as I know places his departure from his cottage at around 3.46am. It was a simple calculation, arrived at a long long time ago. Jeremy wasn't on the phone talking to police the whole of that 10 /11 period. He was placed on hold for as many as five minutes, but I am prepared to accept it could have been as little as 3 minutes!
That's not quite what happened. Pc West crossed out "Sent" on the C1 message form, leaving "Received" as the remaining option. He Same difference! could presumably have added "(call ended)" in the box if that were true, but didn't do so. Occupants of CA07 were deployed to the event at the farmhouse (3.35am) prior to Jeremy making his call to Chelmsford police station according to the appellate court. This alone excludes his call to Chelmsford police station any sooner than 3.35am!

Regarding the fact that Pc Myall was based at Colchester, that's apparently true, but agreed! it's not unusual for an officer based at one police station to be temporarily working out of another station., especially during August, which is a popular month for taking leave. the reason I mentioned that was because of the play involved in the times being handed about regarding the time all three occupants arrived at the farmhouse. In a 'Major Incident Project register for example, the very first entry 001 at 3.45am, an unidentified male seen at white house farm! How was it possible for PC Myall to have seen an 'unidentifiable male' at the farmhouse before CA07 arrived at around 3.48am?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 08:17:PM
I agree, as I think "2 minutes at the outside" was misrecorded in his interview transcript as "10 minutes at the outside" (as they would sound similar). I don't think it is stated anywhere that Jeremy has since said it took 2 minutes at most.

Jeremy Bamber didn't take 10 minutes to look up the telephone number to Chelmsford police station , because he was placed on hold for a period of between 3 to 5 minutes. This being true, it possibly took Jeremy 5 minutes to look for the number, but he might have been getting himself dressed as well!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 09:01:PM
I've no idea how you've come to this Reader but you've made a mistake. The police asked Jeremy how long it took, they suggested 10 minutes he replied half that. Half that being 5 minutes. You need to go back to the police interviews.
You seem to be referring to a different part of the interviews. See below, where highlighted.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 15, 2017, 09:14:PM
Jeremy Bamber didn't take 10 minutes to look up the telephone number to Chelmsford police station , because he was placed on hold for a period of between 3 to 5 minutes.
I've reposted the relevant part of the interview above. As you can see, Jeremy's words are recorded as "Ten minutes at the outside." The period that he was on hold is presumably not intended to be part of that period, as he was asked how long he took to look up the number and get through, not how long he took to look up the number, make the call and complete the call.

It's possible that the police thought he said "ten minutes" rather than "two minutes" as their next question includes the wording "another ten minutes". However, "another" could have been intended to mean "further". In any case, it's factually correct that "Two minutes" and "Ten minutes" can sound very similar, and it's factually correct that two minutes is ample time for looking up a police number and then getting through to the police on that number. Unless Jeremy can now remember this part of the interview and clarify his reply, we can't definitively resolve this matter.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 09:57:PM
Jeremy's 3.36am call to PC West at 3.36am, extended by 10 minutes, produces a time of 3.46am that he left his cottage, to go to  the event at whf! (3.45am to 3.47am)! The way I see it, this potentially provided a 2 minute window of opportunity for the occupants of CA07 to overtake Jeremy on the 'Tollesbury Road' en route to the event!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 10:06:PM
I've reposted the relevant part of the interview above. As you can see, Jeremy's words are recorded as "Ten minutes at the outside." The period that he was on hold is presumably not intended to be part of that period, as he was asked how long he took to look up the number and get through, not how long he took to look up the number, make the call and complete the call.

It's possible that the police thought he said "ten minutes" rather than "two minutes" as their next question includes the wording "another ten minutes". However, "another" could have been intended to mean "further". In any case, it's factually correct that "Two minutes" and "Ten minutes" can sound very similar, and it's factually correct that two minutes is ample time for looking up a police number and then getting through to the police on that number. Unless Jeremy can now remember this part of the interview and clarify his reply, we can't definitively resolve this matter.

In conversations I had with Jeremy, the overall length of his call to Chelmsford lasted 10/11 minutes, of which 5 of these minutes he was placed on hold!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 15, 2017, 10:20:PM
Additionally, he told me that it was about 10 minutes after Neville contacted him, that he had called Chelmsford police station (3.36am) a period in which he had tried to call Neville back twice, phoned Witham police station, called Julie, before he searched for Chelmsford police station telephone number! We then have the 10 minute period of Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station (3.36am) which ends at around 3.46am, a 20/21 minute overall period between 3.25am, and 3.46am!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Steve_uk on January 15, 2017, 11:08:PM
Additionally, he told me that it was about 10 minutes after Neville contacted him, that he had called Chelmsford police station (3.36am) a period in which he had tried to call Neville back twice, phoned Witham police station, called Julie, before he searched for Chelmsford police station telephone number! We then have the 10 minute period of Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station (3.36am) which ends at around 3.46am, a 20/21 minute overall period between 3.25am, and 3.46am!
It seems from the above statement that he did telephone Julie before he called Police, which does seem strange. Of course if he never received a call from Nevill at all the order of Jeremy's subsequent calls matters not one jot, as he knew that all within were dead.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 16, 2017, 04:41:AM
Jeremy's 3.36am call to PC West at 3.36am, extended by 10 minutes, . . .
We don't know the length of the call. It could have lasted only 6 minutes.

In conversations I had with Jeremy, the overall length of his call to Chelmsford lasted 10/11 minutes, of which 5 of these minutes he was placed on hold!
If Jeremy was on hold for 3 to 4 minutes, that could have seemed longer to Jeremy, given his anxiety at the time and the fact that Pc West tended to speak slowly (which would tend to make an anxious listener impatient), so we can't assume that 10 to 11 minutes is an accurate estimate of the duration of the call. Pc West's log and evidence at trial suggests that the call had ended and Pc West had spoken to both Insp. Targrass and the operator before he entered 03:42 in his log.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 16, 2017, 04:59:AM
Additionally, he told me that it was about 10 minutes after Neville contacted him, that he had called Chelmsford police station
That estimate shouldn't be assumed to be particularly accurate, given that Jeremy did several things during that interval. The actual duration could easily have been 12 or 13 minutes, which would comfortably allow his dad's call to him to have occurred before 3:25am. That would be consistent with your theory that Nevill was calling the police when Jeremy tried to return his call.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 11:27:AM
It seems from the above statement that he did telephone Julie before he called Police, which does seem strange. Of course if he never received a call from Nevill at all the order of Jeremy's subsequent calls matters not one jot, as he knew that all within were dead.

Jeremy did call Julie before he made his answered call to Chelmsford police station. But he had made an unanswered call to Witham police station before calling her!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 11:30:AM
We don't know the length of the call. It could have lasted only 6 minutes.

Jeremy told me his answered call to Chelmsford police station lasted 10/11 minutes from start to finsh, including a 5 minute period when he was placed on hold!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 16, 2017, 11:39:AM
Jeremy did call Julie before he made his answered call to Chelmsford police station. But he had made an unanswered call to Witham police station before calling her!
Did Jeremy tell you about this call to Witham?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 11:59:AM
If Jeremy was on hold for 3 to 4 minutes, that could have seemed longer to Jeremy, given his anxiety at the time and the fact that Pc West tended to speak slowly (which would tend to make an anxious listener impatient), so we can't assume that 10 to 11 minutes is an accurate estimate of the duration of the call. Pc West's log and evidence at trial suggests that the call had ended and Pc West had spoken to both Insp. Targrass and the operator before he entered 03:42 in his log.
Jeremy said to me 10/11 minutes duration of call to Chelmsford, of course, that was his estimation, it could have been longer, it could have been shorter in real time. He told me he was placed on hold at the beginning of his call for a period of 5 minutes. Again, this could have been slightly longer, or slightly shorter! According to Malcolm Bonnetts log, the operator did not get back to police until 3.56am to say that the phone at the farmhouse was off its hook! Either that or it was 3.56am when 'PC West' told Bonnett that the phone at the farm was off its hook! There is no evidence to prove that the sequence with which Jeremy says the events occurred (to me) did not happen in that sequence. On the flip side, there will be those people who will try to argue that there is no evidence to prove that the sequenced events as told to me by Jeremy happenned like he says they did! In response, I would say, it was not for Jeremy to have to prove anything! It was for the prosecution to prove his account was a dishonest one! In light of the fact that the contents of Malcolm Bonnetts Communication log was not made available to Rivlin QC during the trial, proved to be a very telling feature, since had it been disclosed it seems likely that Rivlin QC  would have been able to persuade the jury that Neville Bamber himself had called the police, and that (he) his call to police had also not been via a '999' call!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 12:11:PM
Did Jeremy tell you about this call to Witham?

Yes, he did - we thrashed out the sequence of events (as remembered by him) during that 4 hour period I spent in his cell on Christmas day over Christmas Dinner (1989)! He said that after trying unsuccessfully to phone Neville back, that he had then tried to contact the police at Witham police station. He said the phone had been ringing at the Witham end, but that no-one answered, he left it ringing for between one and two minutes, then he rung off. After he rung off, he then immediately phoned Julie, to tell her, 'there's something wrong at home', and she told him, 'to go back to bed'! After speaking to Julie, he started to get dressed, and looked for Chelmsford police station telephone number. Found it, and then he had rang the police at Chelmsford!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 16, 2017, 12:13:PM
Yes, he did - we thrashed out the sequence of events (as remembered by him) during that 4 hour period I spent in his cell on Christmas day over Christmas Dinner (1989)! He said that after trying unsuccessfully to phone Neville back, that he had then tried to contact the police at Witham police station. He said the phone had been ringing at the Witham, but that no-one answered, he left it ringing for between one and two minutes, then he rung off. After he rung off, he then immediately phoned Julie, to tell her, 'there's something wrong at home', and she told him, 'to go back to bed'! After speaking to Julie, he started to get dressed, and looked for Chelmsford police station telephone number. Found it, and then he had rang the police at Chelmsford!
Thanks Mike, so Bews was telling the truth.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 12:18:PM
Thanks Mike

I made notes at the time of our discussions on pieces of A4 sized paper, obtained from the education department printer! These notes are still retained by me, somewhere amongst the case file documents in my possession!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 12:24:PM
Thanks Mike, so Bews was telling the truth.

He told the truth in so far as Jeremy mentioning to him at some stage, that Jeremy had tried unsuccessfully ringing the police at Witham, getting no response! Bews would have known that prior to being deployed to the event (3.35am) that there was no one Manning Witham police station beforehand because police had left and been absent from Witham on another Job, prior to returning and being deployed to whf!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 12:37:PM
He told the truth in so far as Jeremy mentioning to him at some stage, that Jeremy had tried unsuccessfully ringing the police at Witham, getting no response! Bews would have known that prior to being deployed to the event (3.35am) that there was no one Manning Witham police station beforehand because police had left and been absent from Witham on another Job, prior to returning and being deployed to whf!

It was somewhat confusing, therefore, during his police interviews a month later, why police sought to make such a big issue of whether he called police before, or after he telephoned Julie? Infact, he did both. His unanswered call to Witham, and his answered call to Chelmsford police station!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 12:38:PM
At the time of this exercise in December 1989, Jeremy did not know the times of each of these events. He did mention times referred to by other people, but I told him I was only inteterested in the times he could remember, because some of the times he mentioned were contradicting other times for the same events! Jeremy had no idea of specific times, so I said to him, don't worry needlessly about the times for now, we can sort the actual times out later when we gather all of the documentation that I advised him to apply for afterwards! I told him it was important to establish the actual sequence of events as remembered by him of the events that night. It was at this time, that I recorded the exact sequence of events as remembered by Jeremy of the night in question. I was satisfied that he was telling the truth regarding the call from Neville, Jeremy trying twice to ring Neville back, Jeremy trying unsuccessfully to contact Witham police, before he phoned Julie, then he phoned Chelmsford police station, then left his cottage to go to the farmhouse as requested by the police to do so, how he met the police there, how he had gone to have a look around the farmhouse with two police officers and they had seen a living person inside the bedroom moving around as viewed by them via the main bedroom window, etc, etc, etc...

It isn't Jeremy's fault that the police and prosecution witnesses have provided different timings for the same event! Jeremy's demise should not be hung upon such unreliable evidence which exists in this case, on the part of the police, and its witnesses. Jeremy doesn't need to rely upon any timings, providing he can remember the actual sequence of the important events referred to, by himself! This time, and that time, of this event or that event is not the be all or end all of whether Jeremy is guilty, or innocent! What counts is the sequence which he says events occurred. It is for the prosecuting authorities to prove that these events could not have happenned like Jeremy says they happenned. I don't think they proved that to be the case! The argument they sought to rely upon by suggesting that Neville would have contacted the police, and not Jeremy is now undermined by the discovery of the contents of Malcom Bonnets 3.26am Communications log, 'My daughter has got one of my guns'. Infact, Neville did call the police, just like the prosecution said he would have done! They deliberately did not disclose the contents of the 3.26am Communications log, because to have done so, undermined their own case! Rivlin QC would almost certainly been able to persuade the jury, that the 3.26am Communication logs details, were eviodence of Nevilles call to police at 3.26am. This being the case, it must follow (he would have been able to argue), that if Neville had made his own call to police at 3.26am, then it supported what Jeremy told police in his 3.36am call to Chelmsford police station, namely that he had received a call from Neville earlier, about the same matter, the details of which were recorded in PC Wests police message log form!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 16, 2017, 01:43:PM
He told the truth in so far as Jeremy mentioning to him at some stage, that Jeremy had tried unsuccessfully ringing the police at Witham, getting no response! Bews would have known that prior to being deployed to the event (3.35am) that there was no one Manning Witham police station beforehand because police had left and been absent from Witham on another Job, prior to returning and being deployed to whf!
Mike I keep reading, that Jeremy said he never phoned Witham, he is supposed to have said this at trial?  Must admit I cannot find evidence for this?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 03:16:PM
Mike I keep reading, that Jeremy said he never phoned Witham, he is supposed to have said this at trial?  Must admit I cannot find evidence for this?

Be reassured that he did try to contact Witham police station but that no-one answered his call.  By Christmas 1989 he told me in person that he had tried to contact Witham inbetween trying to phone Neville back, and him calling Julie. If Jeremy is now claiming he made no such attempt at all to contact Witham police station I think what he is now saying may have been taken out of context, the truth being that he did not speak to anyone over the phone at Witham police station. He only spoke to someone when he contacted Chelmsford police station!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 03:32:PM
I think it was demonstrated by Rivlin QC in his cross examination of PC West when Rivlin QC got West to concede that most of the detail contained in one of his witness statements was not recorded in PC Wests police message log, that PC Wests account was an unreliable one! How utterly remarkable that Malcom Bonnett did not testify and produce the exhibit (Communications log) timed at 3.26am, supposedly written by himself at 3.26am, after being contacted by PC West?

During the trial, PC West had conceded that prior to contacting Bonnett after he received Jeremys call, that he had already been in touch with Bonnett regarding a different matter, without being able to remember exactly what that other matter involved! I believe that other matter was Nevilles call to police, and that once Jeremy called PC West at 3.36am, PC West updated Bonnett as to that fact, causing Bonnett to update Neville Bambers 3.26am Communications log, ' son passed a message to CD', etc, etc, etc...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 03:51:PM
The prosecution did not call Malcom Bonnett to produce his 3.26am Communications log, with its details, ' my daughter has got one of my guns', and the times of the occupants of CA07 were not only deployed to the incident at 3.35am, but that they arrived there at the scene at 3.48am, and how that impacted upon not only the time (3.36am) Jeremy called Chelmsford police station, but the time (around 3.45am) that CA07 had been contacted en route to the scene about Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police at 3.36am, informing them that the son would meet them at the farm! By the time CA07 had been updated regarding the call made by Jeremy, it is a very telling indictment which confirms they were deployed to the event at whf by a reliance upon other information, prior to Jeremy contacting Chelmsford police station at 3.36am!!!

It had the potential to open up a can of worms for PC West, Malcom Bonnett, and the occupants of CA07, and Inspector Tagrass!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 04:05:PM
With the occupants of CA07, PC West,  Malcom Bonnett, and Inspector Tagrass falling under scrutiny at trial, someone with Rivlin QC's ability to expose dishonesty where dishonesty was being practiced, would have found it relatively simple to make the lot of them squirm in the witness box, at peril of losing their jobs, and to facing criminal prosecutions!

With the occupants of CA07 in the spotlight, and but for the fact that the prosecution deliberately withheld withholding the key police message log contents, 7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am, in which CA07 were invloved in the relaying information from the scene to the control room that two bodies in the kitchen had been found upon entry, with the other three bodies upstairs!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 16, 2017, 04:45:PM
Jeremy said to me 10/11 minutes duration of call to Chelmsford, of course, that was his estimation, it could have been longer, it could have been shorter in real time.
Of course it was his estimation, but as Pc West's log gives 03:36 as the start time of the call, and 3:42 as the time of an event that occurred shortly after the call (probably obtaining both times from the same clock), it's much more likely that Jeremy overestimated the duration of his call than underestimated it. That's also supported by the time of 03:48 noted by Bonnett, as, if accurate, that time indicates that Jeremy had already been overtaken at that time, which is very unlikely if Jeremy had left home less than 3 minutes earlier. It seems likely that Jeremy gave a high estimate because he thought he was on hold for longer than he actually was. As for the time recorded by Bonnett, it seems that a separate operator check of the line was made (not requested by Pc West), which would make sense.

The extra information you've given about how long Jeremy told you he spent trying to get through to Witham is interesting. Why haven't you mentioned it before?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 16, 2017, 09:38:PM
Of course it was his estimation, but as Pc West's log gives 03:36 as the start time of the call, and 3:42 as the time of an event that occurred shortly after the call (probably obtaining both times from the same clock), it's much more likely that Jeremy overestimated the duration of his call than underestimated it. That's also supported by the time of 03:48 noted by Bonnett, as, if accurate, that time indicates that Jeremy had already been overtaken at that time, which is very unlikely if Jeremy had left home less than 3 minutes earlier. I believe that the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene somewhere between 3.47am and 3.49am (3.48am), and that Jeremy left to go to the farmhouse between 3.45am and 3.47am (3.46am). This being the case, there was clearly an opportunity for the occupants of CA07 to overtake Jeremy a mile from the scene somewhere around 3.49am, with Jeremy already potentially as many as 4 minutes into his journey. This being the case if Jeremy left to go to the scene in the second cycle of 3.45am, rather than in the second cycle of 3.46am! This being the case, the occupants of CA07 may have arrived at the scene a maximum of two minutes before Jeremy. This being because at the point they claim to have overtaken him one mile from the scene along the Tollesbury Road, they were travelling at twice his speed upon overtaking him, and along the remaining mile to the scene. This adequately explains the arrival of CA07 at the scene two minutes before Jeremy did. If the occupants had been travelling three times faster than Jeremy at that stage, they might easily have arrived at the scene up to as much as three minutes before Jeremy, and so forth, and so and so! It seems likely that Jeremy gave a high estimate because he thought he was on hold for longer than he actually was. No, he timed the call using his wristwatch! As for the time recorded by Bonnett, it seems that a separate operator check of the line was made (not requested by Pc West), which would make sense. There is no evidence that police requested a second check of the telephone prior to 4.00am!!

The extra information you've given about how long Jeremy told you he spent trying to get through to Witham is interesting. Why haven't you mentioned it before?Is there any reason why I should have?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 17, 2017, 01:09:AM
I believe that the occupants of CA07 arrived at the scene somewhere between 3.47am and 3.49am (3.48am), and that Jeremy left to go to the farmhouse between 3.45am and 3.47am (3.46am). This being the case, there was clearly an opportunity for the occupants of CA07 to overtake Jeremy a mile from the scene somewhere around 3.49am, with Jeremy already potentially as many as 4 minutes into his journey.
You're making use of the time of 03:36 recorded by Pc West, but choosing not to use the time of 03:42 recorded by him. It would have taken the police the best part of a minute to cover the last mile of their journey, even at very high speed, so they couldn't have overtaken Jeremy at around 3:49, travelled nearly a mile, slowed down and parked, and got through to Bonnett on their radio in time for Bonnett to note their arrival time as 03:48. Also, 4 minutes isn't enough from when Jeremy finished his call to Pc West to when Jeremy was overtaken. You have to take into account the time it took him to leave his house, go to his car, get into the car, close the car door, insert the key in the ignition lock, start the engine, release the handbrake, put the car into gear, etc. That eats into the 4 minutes sufficiently to make it impossible for him to reach where he was overtaken within 4 minutes without driving like a maniac (which he had no reason to do).

This being the case if Jeremy left to go to the scene in the second cycle of 3.45am, rather than in the second cycle of 3.46am! This being the case, the occupants of CA07 may have arrived at the scene a maximum of two minutes before Jeremy. This being because at the point they claim to have overtaken him one mile from the scene along the Tollesbury Road, they were travelling at twice his speed upon overtaking him, and along the remaining mile to the scene. This adequately explains the arrival of CA07 at the scene two minutes before Jeremy did.
It doesn't adequately explain it, as Jeremy would have travelled half of that last mile while the police travelled all of it if the average speed of the police was twice the average speed of Jeremy. It wouldn't have taken Jeremy another two minutes to cover the last half mile unless he reduced his average speed to 15 mph.

No, he timed the call using his wristwatch!
That's implausible, as he had no reason to do so. Had he done that timing accurately, he would have been able to tell you the length of the call accurately, rather than passing it on as 10 or 11 minutes. Also, he would have been able to give at least some reasonably accurate timing information to the police during his interviews in September 1985, rather than giving estimates and saying "times are approximate".

There is no evidence that police requested a second check of the telephone prior to 4.00am!!
The noted time shortly before 4am is such evidence. There was no reason for Pc West to lie about the time of 03:42 or for the police (or Bonnett) to invent a second check of the line prior to 4am.

Is there any reason why I should have?
Yes, as you've been asked about the times on many occasions, and on many occasions you have referred to the time that Jeremy arrived at where CA7 parked near WHF as 3:52am, despite the time of 03:48 noted by Bonnett. You've been writing at length about the fact that all the times recorded by Bonnett and the police shouldn't be taken as being accurate to the second, which nobody disputes anyway.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 17, 2017, 01:22:AM
During the trial, PC West had conceded that prior to contacting Bonnett after he received Jeremys call, that he had already been in touch with Bonnett regarding a different matter, without being able to remember exactly what that other matter involved!
Precisely what part of the transcript of Pc West's evidence at trial mentions this previous communication with Bonnett?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 17, 2017, 10:06:AM
You're making use of the time of 03:36 recorded by Pc West, but choosing not to use the time of 03:42 recorded by him. It would have taken the police the best part of a minute to cover the last mile of their journey, even at very high speed, so they couldn't have overtaken Jeremy at around 3:49, travelled nearly a mile, slowed down and parked, and got through to Bonnett on their radio in time for Bonnett to note their arrival time as 03:48. Also, 4 minutes isn't enough from when Jeremy finished his call to Pc West to when Jeremy was overtaken. You have to take into account the time it took him to leave his house, go to his car, get into the car, close the car door, insert the key in the ignition lock, start the engine, release the handbrake, put the car into gear, etc. That eats into the 4 minutes sufficiently to make it impossible for him to reach where he was overtaken within 4 minutes without driving like a maniac (which he had no reason to do).
It doesn't adequately explain it, as Jeremy would have travelled half of that last mile while the police travelled all of it if the average speed of the police was twice the average speed of Jeremy. It wouldn't have taken Jeremy another two minutes to cover the last half mile unless he reduced his average speed to 15 mph.
That's implausible, as he had no reason to do so. Had he done that timing accurately, he would have been able to tell you the length of the call accurately, rather than passing it on as 10 or 11 minutes. Also, he would have been able to give at least some reasonably accurate timing information to the police during his interviews in September 1985, rather than giving estimates and saying "times are approximate".
The noted time shortly before 4am is such evidence. There was no reason for Pc West to lie about the time of 03:42 or for the police (or Bonnett) to invent a second check of the line prior to 4am.
Yes, as you've been asked about the times on many occasions, and on many occasions you have referred to the time that Jeremy arrived at where CA7 parked near WHF as 3:52am, despite the time of 03:48 noted by Bonnett. You've been writing at length about the fact that all the times recorded by Bonnett and the police shouldn't be taken as being accurate to the second, which nobody disputes anyway.

One thing becomes clear to me, and that is that events involving different participants were not in the exact moment in the seconds cycle of a minute. References to any specific time by one person, may not have occurred at the same time, even though two or more parties rely upon the same time. It remains a distinct possibility that there may well have been a deviation one way or the other of a mentioned time, by one minute! Therefore, lets take Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station (3.36am). I have already pointed out that in real time, or lets call this 'universal time', that call could have been made any time inbetween 3.35am and 3.37am! The deployment of the occupants of CA07 (3.35am) could have occurred between 3.34am and 3.36am! I have used the time (3.36am) as the point that Jeremy contacted Chelmsford police station, because I believe that not only was PC West trained to record the time he received a call of the nature involving Jeremy, but that he recorded that time, and he emphasized upon the message form he completed that 3.36am was the time he 'received' Jeremy's call. This was not the case regarding him contacting the female operator at 3.42am, because PC West did not verify that at 3.42am, he 'received' information that the phone at the farmhouse was off the hook. There were no independent provisions on the police message he completed, for him to record that that was the time he made that call to the female operator, or the time he received her reply notifying him that the phone at the farmhouse was off the hook! It seems reasonable to me, that PC West made that enquiry of the female operator at 3.42am, not that he received her response by that stage! Of course, I am going to rely upon the time of 3.36am, as being the time that Jeremy phoned Chelmsford police station, it's been officially recorded. PC west had no reason to record the wrong time! He didn't record the wrong time! What we are dealing with here, after the event, is an attempt by Essex police to move the time of 'this' call, for ulterior motive! We all know what the purpose of trying to do that / this was for!!!

Essex police had a ''bee in their bonnet about trying to show that Jeremy had lied about the time he had received this call, or made that call. You only have to look at all the conflicting discrepancies in the timings of his call to Julie, and his call to Chelmsford police station, to see evidence of this! What I am saying, is that by December 1989 Jeremy himself did not know the exact timings of these events! But he did recollect the sequence of the events, which he spoke to me about, and which I recorded on foolscap paper for posterity! I believe that there was sufficient time for the occupants of CA07 to overtake Jeremy en route to the event a mile from the farmhouse. This event could have occurred in the second cycle of the minute 3.49am, or thereabouts! If Jeremy arrived at the scene in the seconds cycle of 3.51am, this fits in with the overall circumstances which he told me about Christmas 1989! I believe that Jeremy could have been on the Tollesbury Road to enable the occupants of CA07 to overtake him around a mile from the scene! It's all there, in black and white. Adopting my system enables the necessary 'overlap', between one, two or more events, what I propose has a 'ring of truth' about it!

My system, one minute either side of a specified time, allows for overlap where time cycles involving different people, allow for deviation. I don't require approval of my approach by another, I know that this approach works!!!

There is no evidence to prove that upon being overtaken by the occupants of CA07, that Jeremy had not slowed down, or sped up!

What we are dealing with, is 'a wounded animal' (Essex police)!!!

It is 'they' who can be seen to have created all the confusion, regarding this call, or that call, this event that event!

Same tactics, different feature!

We have the exhibit references of the silencer at different stages of the police investigation! SBJ/1 (7th August 1985), SJ/1 (13th August 1985), DB/1 (30th August 1985), and DRB/1 (20th September 1985), all of which were supposedly references to the exact same silencer!!!

We have a badly fragmented piece of bullet (7th August 1985), which grows into a whole bullet (by 20th September 1985)!!!

We have Peter Eaton handing over the silencer (SJ/1) to DS Jones on the evening of the 12th August 1985, and we have Ann Eaton handing over the silencer, DRB/1, to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985!!!

We have Sheila's blood found in one silencer (DB/1) on or prior to the 12th September 1985!! And we have red paint from the aga surround found upon the silencer (DRB/1) not sent to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres, until the 20th September 1985!!!

We have blood already identified as belonging to the same blood group activity as Sheila Caffell (results obtained 12th, 13th, 18th, and the 19th September 1985) obtained from blood found in one silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1), prior to the 20th September 1985, which ended being associated with the second silencer (DRB/1) not sent to the lab' for its first time, until the 20th September 1985!!!

Jeremy Bamber was framed as the killer of five members of his family! The people that framed him, need to be prosecuted, and sentenced to a minimum of 30 years imprisonment with no prospect of being granted parole! Let the conspirators die in custody!!!

But, we all know that won't happen because the Criminal Justice system is corrupt!!!

Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 17, 2017, 11:06:AM
You're making use of the time of 03:36 recorded by Pc West, but choosing not to use the time of 03:42 recorded by him. It would have taken the police the best part of a minute to cover the last mile of their journey, even at very high speed, so they couldn't have overtaken Jeremy at around 3:49, travelled nearly a mile, slowed down and parked, and got through to Bonnett on their radio in time for Bonnett to note their arrival time as 03:48. Also, 4 minutes isn't enough from when Jeremy finished his call to Pc West to when Jeremy was overtaken. You have to take into account the time it took him to leave his house, go to his car, get into the car, close the car door, insert the key in the ignition lock, start the engine, release the handbrake, put the car into gear, etc. That eats into the 4 minutes sufficiently to make it impossible for him to reach where he was overtaken within 4 minutes without driving like a maniac (which he had no reason to do).
It doesn't adequately explain it, as Jeremy would have travelled half of that last mile while the police travelled all of it if the average speed of the police was twice the average speed of Jeremy. It wouldn't have taken Jeremy another two minutes to cover the last half mile unless he reduced his average speed to 15 mph.
That's implausible, as he had no reason to do so. Had he done that timing accurately, he would have been able to tell you the length of the call accurately, rather than passing it on as 10 or 11 minutes. Also, he would have been able to give at least some reasonably accurate timing information to the police during his interviews in September 1985, rather than giving estimates and saying "times are approximate".

What about the time it would have taken him to dress, clean his teeth, sort his hair out. I imagine with hair the length he had it then, he would have required a hair product or water to damp it down.

Then he needed to lock the door on his way out, it was dark so it may have taken longer than normal.

Once in his car he would have needed to put the car lights on, his seat belt, check his mirror etc..

How long did it take his car to start? Did he have to start it more than once, allow time for it to warm up..

How long exactly did he spend in the bathroom? Did he use the bathroom? Had he showered or washed before he went to meet the police?

Surely he's told someone about the timings and of what he did that morning after the alleged call from his father? 32 years anthe debate still continues?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 17, 2017, 11:23:AM
What about the time it would have taken him to dress, clean his teeth, sort his hair out. I imagine with hair the length he had it then, he would have required a hair product or water to damp it down.

Then he needed to lock the door on his way out, it was dark so it may have taken longer than normal.

Once in his car he would have needed to put the car lights on, his seat belt, check his mirror etc..

How long did it take his car to start? Did he have to start it more than once, allow time for it to warm up..

How long exactly did he spend in the bathroom? Did he use the bathroom? Had he showered or washed before he went to meet the police?

Because Jeremy's story was made up, he didn't fit any of those details in. He didn't mention showerinh the night before (until later) because it didn't happen, he didn't mention getting dressed because he was already dressed.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 17, 2017, 11:31:AM
Because Jeremy's story was made up, he didn't fit any of those details in. He didn't mention showerinh the night before (until later) because it didn't happen, he didn't mention getting dressed because he was already dressed.

Of course he didn't fit in any of those things, he was dressed and ready to go, as you state Caroline. If his supporters are still debating his timings after 32 years and suggesting anomalies, they should be asking themselves why Jeremy has avoided concentrating on his timings and what he did that night/morning as opposed to attempting to muddy the waters.

Jeremy's timings don't add up because he lied.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 17, 2017, 11:52:AM
Of course he didn't fit in any of those things, he was dressed and ready to go, as you state Caroline. If his supporters are still debating his timings after 32 years and suggesting anomalies, they should be asking themselves why Jeremy has avoided concentrating on his timings and what he did that night/morning as opposed to attempting to muddy the waters.

Jeremy's timings don't add up because he lied.

Exactly!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 17, 2017, 12:30:PM
One thing becomes clear to me, and that is that events involving different participants were not in the exact moment in the seconds cycle of a minute.
Everyone knows that 03:35 doesn't necessarily mean (and usually doesn't mean) exactly 03:35. That's a trivial matter and doesn't need to be described in multiple paragraphs involving such peculiar wording as "the exact moment in the seconds cycle of a minute" or "the second cycle of the minute". That doesn't alter the fact that answering Jeremy's call, listening to what Jeremy said, making some notes, telling Jeremy to hold the line, contacting HQ and identifying himself to Bonnett, giving Bonnett brief details of the situation, someone contacting Pc Saxby and asking him to go to WHF, and so on, would have taken a significant amount of time. For any detailed timeline you choose to consider, you can calculate Jeremy's average speed for his drive to where he was overtaken, and consider whether that average speed is plausible. Would an average speed of 72 mph (for Jeremy's trip to where he was overtaken) be plausible? If not, the corresponding timeline is implausible. Typing one or more "!" symbols at the end of your sentences doesn't make them more plausible.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 17, 2017, 12:51:PM
Everyone knows that 03:35 doesn't necessarily mean (and usually doesn't mean) exactly 03:35. That's a trivial matter and doesn't need to be described in multiple paragraphs involving such peculiar wording as "the exact moment in the seconds cycle of a minute" or "the second cycle of the minute". That doesn't alter the fact that answering Jeremy's call, listening to what Jeremy said, making some notes, telling Jeremy to hold the line, contacting HQ and identifying himself to Bonnett, giving Bonnett brief details of the situation, someone contacting Pc Saxby and asking him to go to WHF, and so on, would have taken a significant amount of time. For any detailed timeline you choose to consider, you can calculate Jeremy's average speed for his drive to where he was overtaken, and consider whether that average speed is plausible. Would an average speed of 72 mph (for Jeremy's trip to where he was overtaken) be plausible? If not, the corresponding timeline is implausible. Typing one or more "!" symbols at the end of your sentences doesn't make them more plausible.

Excellent post Reader.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 17, 2017, 05:09:PM
Everyone knows that 03:35 doesn't necessarily mean (and usually doesn't mean) exactly 03:35. That's a trivial matter and doesn't need to be described in multiple paragraphs involving such peculiar wording as "the exact moment in the seconds cycle of a minute" or "the second cycle of the minute". That doesn't alter the fact that answering Jeremy's call, listening to what Jeremy said, making some notes, telling Jeremy to hold the line, contacting HQ and identifying himself to Bonnett, giving Bonnett brief details of the situation, someone contacting Pc Saxby and asking him to go to WHF, and so on, would have taken a significant amount of time. For any detailed timeline you choose to consider, you can calculate Jeremy's average speed for his drive to where he was overtaken, and consider whether that average speed is plausible. Would an average speed of 72 mph (for Jeremy's trip to where he was overtaken) be plausible? If not, the corresponding timeline is implausible. Typing one or more "!" symbols at the end of your sentences doesn't make them more plausible.

Hoorah!!! A voice of sweet reason. Seconds cycle of a minute, my as**e. Gobbledygook used as a distraction.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 17, 2017, 05:41:PM
Hoorah!!! A voice of sweet reason. Seconds cycle of a minute, my as**e. Gobbledygook used as a distraction.

 ;D ;D
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 17, 2017, 07:01:PM
What about the time it would have taken him to dress, clean his teeth, sort his hair out. I imagine with hair the length he had it then, he would have required a hair product or water to damp it down. Your pedantic approach is easily explained! He was getting dressed in the spare moments he had inbetween the events he took part in, i.e. Receiving the call from Neville, trying to ring Neville back, trying to contact Witham police station, calling Julie, calling Chelmsford police station at 3.36am, and being placed on hold for around 5 minutes, before eventually being told by PC West to go to the farmhouse where he would be met by police who had already been deployed there (prior to Jeremy making his call to Chelmsford)!

Then he needed to lock the door on his way out, We don't know whether he did lock the door, or if it was a self locking yale lock type door! How many doors did his cottage have? Maybe he climbed out of a window! it was dark so it may have taken longer than normal. I don't see how it would take longer to exit his cottage, whether it was daylight, or dark!

Once in his car he would have needed to put the car lights on, his seat belt, check his mirror etc.. Pedantic twaddle...

How long did it take his car to start? Maybe he had run out of petrol and he had to use a jerry can to put a gallon or so into the fuel tank! What about his car having a flat battery and he having to bump start it? Did he have to start it more than once, Maybe he accidentally got into the passenger side of his vehicle and had to reach across to insert the ignition key, and then finely tune his car radio to his favorite middle of the night program or channel? He had to wait for the engine to warm up so that the windscreen demisted!allow time for it to warm up.. Maybe he had a flat tyre and it took up precious time having to get the foot pump out of the hatch to inflate the tyre?

How long exactly did he spend in the bathroom? As long as you want to make it!Did he use the bathroom? He must have done! Anything to suggest he delayed leaving to go to the farm!Had he showered or washed before he went to meet the police? He probably hopped into his hot tub!

Surely he's told someone about the timings and of what he did that morning after the alleged call from his father? 32 years anthe debate still continues?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 17, 2017, 07:09:PM
Once in his car he would have needed to put the car lights on, his seat belt, check his mirror etc..
Pedantic twaddle...

Are you suggesting he didn't wear a seat belt? If so, this would have been reckless and indeed against the law.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 12:41:AM
Everyone knows that 03:35 doesn't necessarily mean (and usually doesn't mean) exactly 03:35. That's a trivial matter and doesn't need to be described in multiple paragraphs involving such peculiar wording as "the exact moment in the seconds cycle of a minute" or "the second cycle of the minute". That doesn't alter the fact that answering Jeremy's call, listening to what Jeremy said, making some notes, telling Jeremy to hold the line, contacting HQ and identifying himself to Bonnett, giving Bonnett brief details of the situation, someone contacting Pc Saxby and asking him to go to WHF, and so on, would have taken a significant amount of time. For any detailed timeline you choose to consider, you can calculate Jeremy's average speed for his drive to where he was overtaken, and consider whether that average speed is plausible. Would an average speed of 72 mph (for Jeremy's trip to where he was overtaken) be plausible? If not, the corresponding timeline is implausible. Typing one or more "!" symbols at the end of your sentences doesn't make them more plausible.

West didn't take notes before placing Jeremy on hold! He was already in contact with Bonnett regarding another Matter!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 18, 2017, 01:21:AM
West didn't take notes before placing Jeremy on hold
At the trial, Pc West was asked "When did you make the notes?" and replied "That particular form is filled out as the conversation takes place."
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:09:AM
At the trial, Pc West was asked "When did you make the notes?" and replied "That particular form is filled out as the conversation takes place."

Yes, which was after Jeremy had been placed on hold for 5 minutes!

Where does it state in 'PC West's message log', that he placed Jeremy on hold for 5 minutes? Seems to me that West 'omitted' arguably the most significant feature of Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station, a feature which would have helped to establish that the earlier call (3.26am) had been made to police by Neville Bamber, and that the occupants of CA07 (3.35am) and CA05 (3.36am) had all been deployed to the event prior to PC West taking any notes from Jeremy, and they had not been deployed to the event at whf acting solely upon what Jeremy eventually told West. They had gone there acting on information given to police at 3.26am by Neville Bamber!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:21:AM
Yes, which was after Jeremy had been placed on hold for 5 minutes!

Where does it state in 'PC West's message log', that he placed Jeremy on hold for 5 minutes? Seems to me that West committed arguably the most significant feature of Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station, a feature which would have helped to establish that the earlier call (3.26am) had been made to police by Neville Bamber, and that the occupants of CA07 3.35am) and CA05 (3.36am) had all been deployed to the event prior to PC West taking any notes from Jeremy, had all been deployed acting solely upon what Jeremy eventually told West!

Seems to me, that CA07 and CA05 were deployed to the event acting on information passed earlier by Neville at 3.26am, and details were subsequently added to PC West's message log, once West eventually got to speak to Jeremy (after he had been placed on hold for 5 minutes)!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:26:AM
What also seems certain is that 'PC West' placed Jeremy's call in a queue because 'PC West' was dealing with another matter (which he couldn't remember what it was about, other than he had already been in touch with Bonnett regarding a different matter), so he placed Jeremy's 3.36am call on hold for around 5 minutes!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:33:AM
There's no mention of Jeremy being placed on hold in 'PC West's message log', and no mention in Malcolm Bonnetts 'Communications log', that the son had been placed on hold whilst police were dealing with Neville Bambers call at 3.26am!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:41:AM
There's no mention of Jeremy being placed on hold in 'PC West's message log', and no mention in Malcolm Bonnetts 'Communications log', that the son had been placed on hold whilst police were dealing with Neville Bambers call at 3.26am!

It clearly states in Bonnetts 3.26am 'Communications log', that 'son had passed a message to CD', not that the contents of Bonnets 'Communication log' were given to police at 3.26am, by the son! That small part in Bonnetts 'Communation log' which mentions the son, was added later after Jeremy called Chelmsford police station at 3.36am, and he had already been placed in a queue on hold for 5 minutes, in the same way, that information was later added to PC Wests message log (3.36am) regarding the deployment of police units to the event at the farmhouse!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:44:AM
Why did PC West omit the fact that at 3.36am when he originally received Jeremy's call that he was in a queue and placed on hold for 5 minutes?  It's ommission has caused untold mischief in this matter!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:46:AM
Why did PC West omit the fact that at 3.36am when he originally received Jeremy's call that he was in a queue and placed on hold for 5 minutes?  It's ommission has caused untold mischief in this matter!

Seems to me, that in view of the nature of Neville Bambers call (3.26am), and Jeremy's call (3.36am), the fact that Jeremy had been placed in a queue on hold for around 5 minutes was something worth recording in 'PC West's (3.36am) message log! Why omit such an important feature of Jeremy's call? Could it be that to 'include it' might have highlighted the fact that the occupants of CA07 (3.35am), and CA05 (3.36am) had been deployed to the event at whf before 'PC West'  had got an opportunity to talk to Jeremy around 5 minutes into his 3.36am call to Chelmsford police station?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:53:AM
Seems to me, that in view of the nature of Neville Bambers call (3.26am), and Jeremy's call (3.36am), the fact that Jeremy had been placed in a queue on hold for around 5 minutes was something worth recording in 'PC West's (3.36am) message log! Why omit such an important feature of Jeremy's call? Could it be that to 'include it' might have highlighted the fact that the occupants of CA07 (3.35am), and CA05 (3.36am) had been deployed to the event at whf before 'PC West'  had got an opportunity to talk to Jeremy around 5 minutes into his 3.36am call to Chelmsford police station?

Yes!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 09:53:AM
Let's get the facts right!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 10:02:AM
We are led to believe that what with all the training these rookie cops get put through at cop academy, and what with the necessity to make pocketbook notes, fill out Message logs, Communication logs, Reports, etc, that a police officer (not just one in the entire Essex police force) should be able to tell the time, should be able to record the correct time in almost all things they do! But we are being asked to believe that in this case, cops didn't get 'timings' right! Of course they got the timings right, it's their job to get them right! All the timed references in 'PC West's message log' timed at 3.36am, are correct and accurate! Same applies in Bonnetts Communication log! No need to speculate at all, the timings are all there! You cannot go changing the times in these official police records just because the recorded timed events tend to show that Jeremy Bamber has been telling the truth all along for over 30 years, that he received a call from Neville Bamber, etc...

Next, people will be trying to say that Jeremy fooled police into recording the wrong timings in all these different police records!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 11:09:AM
Here we can see 'timed events recorded in Malcolm Bonnetts 'Communication log' (3.26am), and 'timed events' recorded in 'PC Wests' (3.36am), 'message log' ...

the only 'timed' reference in 'PC West's message log is 3.36am!!!

3.36am

In stark contrast, there are several 'timed events' recorded in 'Malcom Bonnetts Communication log' timed at 3.26am


3.26am
3.35am
3.36am
3.48am
3.56am
4.22am
4.23am
4.35am
4.37am
4.58am


We have every right to assume that all these 'timed events' were recorded accurately!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 11:25:AM
There is no mention at all in 'PC West's 'message log (3.36am) to the effect that he contacted a female operator at 3.42am, to request her to check the phone at the farmhouse?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 11:28:AM
The 'timings' in the police records have to be treated differently to "timings' mentioned by non police witnesses, such as Julie Mugford, and her house mates, because it is part of a police officers duty to be able to tell the time accurately, and to record the time accurately!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 11:30:AM
The 'timings' in the police records have to be treated differently to "timings' mentioned by non police witnesses, such as Julie Mugford, and her house mates, because it is part of a police officers duty to be able to tell the time accurately, and to record the time accurately!!!

Imagine, the public being frightened of asking an Essex police officer the time of day? Because they would have us all believe that non of them can give a truthful time!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: David1819 on January 18, 2017, 11:48:AM
Imagine, the public being frightened of asking an Essex police officer the time of day? Because they would have us all believe that non of them can give a truthful time!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 11:50:AM
The truth of the matter is, that in almost every instance which involves an action to be performed by a police officer it depends on the mindset of a particular officer in recording the facts, which includes making mention of timed events! The truth of the matter in this instance is that at the time 'PC West' fell to record the time of Jeremy's call (3.36am), 'PC West' was already aware of Neville Bambers 3.26am call to police! That being the case, he thought nothing at the time Jeremy contacted police in recording the actual time of Jeremy's call as being received at 3.36am! However, once the nature of the investigation changed after 7th September 1985, his mindset had changed, and he was alert to the danger of the existence of the earlier 3.26am 'Communication log' content, details of which were passed to police by Neville Bamber! Once PC West's mindset was altered around the 13th September 1985, he introduced the statement making mention that he might have got the time (3.36am) wrong - 3.26am!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 12:18:PM
The truth of the matter is, that in almost every instance which involves an action to be performed by a police officer it depends on the mindset of a particular officer in recording the facts, which includes making mention of timed events! The truth of the matter in this instance is that at the time 'PC West' fell to record the time of Jeremy's call (3.36am), 'PC West' was already aware of Neville Bambers 3.26am call to police! That being the case, he thought nothing at the time Jeremy contacted police in recording the actual time of Jeremy's call as being received at 3.36am! However, once the nature of the investigation changed after 7th September 1985, his mindset had changed, and he was alert to the danger of the existence of the earlier 3.26am 'Communication log' content, details of which were passed to police by Neville Bamber! Once PC West's mindset was altered around the 13th September 1985, he introduced the statement making mention that he might have got the time (3.36am) wrong - 3.26am!!!

It should also come as no surprise to everybody, that by the 13th September 1985, when 'PC West's mindset became altered', into a 'state of confusion', that 'DS 'Stan' Jones was getting up to his tricks during Jeremy's police interviews, trying to prove Jeremy to be a liar, regarding whether he called Julie, before, or after he called police!!! It was also no coincidence that around this time, that Julie's housemates introduced conflicting times, of Jeremy's call to Julie on the morning of the tragedy! It was no longer 3.30am, it became, 3.15am, 3am and even 2am!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 12:23:PM
Mindset of the police at the time a particular duty fell to be performed influences what is wrote down, was is reportedly said by this witness, or that witness! On the first day of this police investigation for a duration of approximately one month, police  treated Jeremy as a 'victim'! A month into the investigation, he became 'a suspect!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 12:26:PM
Mindset of the police at the time a particular duty fell to be performed influences what is wrote down, was is reportedly said by this witness, or that witness! On the first day of this police investigation for a duration of approximately one month, police  treated Jeremy as a 'victim'! A month into the investigation, he became 'a suspect!!!

Suddenly, where timed events had previously been recorded accurately whilst Jeremy was 'a victim', now there was doubt, or confusion, once he became a 'suspect' !!!

There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the chief culprit behind all of this mischief, was none other than 'DS 'Stan' Jones!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 12:35:PM
Suddenly, where timed events had previously been recorded accurately whilst Jeremy was 'a victim', now there was doubt, or confusion, once he became a 'suspect' !!!

There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the chief culprit behind all of this mischief, was none other than 'DS 'Stan' Jones!

Even the occupants of CA07 were getting themselves in on the act, by claiming they went to whf at 3.45am, rather than at 3.35am! It becomes clear that the introduction of the 3.45am as the time CA07 went to the scene, was somehow designed to highlight the possible difference of 10 minutes between Neville's 3.26am, and Jeremy's 3.36am telephone calls to police, as a possible mix up / error! If CA07 had left at 3.45am to go to the scene, how could they possibly have arrived there by 3.48am?

There is something very seriously wrong here!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 12:55:PM
Even the occupants of CA07 were getting themselves in on the act, by claiming they went to whf at 3.45am, rather than at 3.35am! It becomes clear that the introduction of the 3.45am as the time CA07 went to the scene, was somehow designed to highlight the possible difference of 10 minutes between Neville's 3.26am, and Jeremy's 3.36am telephone calls to police, as a possible mix up / error! If CA07 had left at 3.45am to go to the scene, how could they possibly have arrived there by 3.48am?

There is something very seriously wrong here!!!

None of these contradictory features would occur if police in these matters had simply, told the truth, rather than tampering with timed events, to try and make Jeremy look like a liar! He was far from being a liar, he has always been truthful! Even when he took a lie detector test, or to refer to it by its other name, the polygraph test, he has been proven not to have had anything to do with the shootings of his family! He was not inside the farmhouse at any stage when any of the five victims were shot and killed! Still the authorities won't admit that the system has made a mistake! Essex police and the CPS and it's witnesses did everything within its power to try to present Jeremy to the jury as an out and out liar!!!

But, he was no liar!!!

The prosecution in all it splendour deliberately kept the timed events between 7.37am and 8.10am, out of sight and earshot of the court which tried this matter! Not even Rivlin QC knew about the glaring inconsistency in the body count of victims, downstairs and upstairs being different after 8.10am! Two bodies found upon entry to kitchen', (7.37am) a further three bodies upstairs' by 8.10am. Just imagine the prosecution not only having to deal with police officers that cannot be relied upon to tell and record the correct time, but also that other Essex police officers had problems counting the number of bodies found upon entry to the kitchen, 'two' or was it 'one '? And, upstairs, was it 'three', or 'four'?

We have learned a lot about Essex police in our quest to get to the truth! We now know that the lot of them have great difficulty recognising the figures, 1, 2, 3, and 4! It makes you wonder they call themselves 'detectives', when they can't even get basic things right like telling the time accurately, or being able to count how many bodies of victims there were above '1'?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 18, 2017, 01:05:PM
Problems with time keeping, problems with body count, problems with bullets, problems with silencers, problems with blood belonging to Sheila being found inside the same silencer contaminated by red paint from the kitchen aga, problems with the migrating rifle from a first floor window onto Sheila's body after around 7.15am, so many problems, so many mistruths, so many  inconsistencies, too many contradictions for the prosecutions claims to be even remotely true! You couldn't make up the vast number of irregularities in this prosecution. These were not mistakes, or errors, these were part and parcel of state run corruption!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 19, 2017, 08:35:AM
Yes, which was after Jeremy had been placed on hold for 5 minutes!
Pc West stated that he placed Jeremy on hold after asking him for details of his sister and father, including his sister's name and age and where they lived. Jeremy hasn't disputed that. Hence Pc West had a short conversation with Jeremy before placing him on hold. He testified that the C1 message form he used is normally completed as the conversation with a caller takes place.

Where does it state in 'Pc West's message log', that he placed Jeremy on hold for 5 minutes?
What Pc West wrote doesn't state specifically for how long Jeremy was on hold. Hence I don't understand why you first assert that Jeremy was placed on hold for 5 minutes and then ask where this is stated in Pc  West's message log.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 19, 2017, 08:46:AM
What also seems certain is that 'PC West' placed Jeremy's call in a queue
That's incorrect. Pc West made it clear that he put Jeremy on hold so that he could contact HQ. There was no queue system, so Jeremy's call wasn't put in a queue. Jeremy hasn't disputed that Pc West gave him that reason for being put on hold.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 19, 2017, 08:50:AM
Why did PC West omit the fact that at 3.36am when he originally received Jeremy's call that he was in a queue and placed on hold for 5 minutes?
No such queue existed, so he didn't omit it, as it didn't happen, and couldn't have happened.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 19, 2017, 09:24:AM
Once PC West's mindset was altered around the 13th September 1985, he introduced the statement making mention that he might have got the time (3.36am) wrong - 3.26am!!!
That doesn't make sense. Pc West put 03:26 in his statement dated 9th August 1985. Thus, he made a statement on that date that agreed with Bonnett's noted time and conflicted with the time he had written on 7th August 1985. In his statement dated 13th September 1985, he gave the time of Jeremy's call as 3:36am, but wrote nothing in that statement to suggest that his mindset had been altered at around that date.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:41:AM
That doesn't make sense. Pc West put 03:26 in his statement dated 9th August 1985. Thus, he made a statement on that date that agreed with Bonnett's noted time and conflicted with the time he had written on 7th August 1985. In his statement dated 13th September 1985, he gave the time of Jeremy's call as 3:36am, but wrote nothing in that statement to suggest that his mindset had been altered at around that date.

Sorry, but let me see the handwritten version of that witness statement signed by PC West! What we have in this case, is an admission that somebody within the CPS admits to editing and making witness statements on behalf of police officers and other witnesses! How can anybody, therefore, be sure that a particular witness, made a particular statement, on a specific date? Nobody can be!

Show me, the handwritten witness statement dated other August, 1985, written in PC West's own handwriting, bearing his signature, and I might be persuaded by your argument! Note, that during the trial, that Rivlin QC targeted 'PC West's witness statement', dated the 13th September 1985, not the one made by somebody else, dated, 9 the August 1985!

Stop, for one moment, and ask yourself why in his 13th September 1985 witness statement, 'PC West' talks about being 'unsure' about the time he received Jeremy's call (3.36am / 3.26am), yet he supposedly states in a witness statement dated, 9th August, 1985, that the time of Jeremy's call to police was at 3.26am?

What we are dealing with here, is the introduction of witness statements by 'another', strictly for the purpose of causing mischief!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:48:AM
It doesn't fit!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:52:AM
It doesn't fit!!!

The contents of 'PC West's' 9th August 1985, witness statement, is contradicted by the contents of 'PC West's' 13th September, 1985, witness statement!  The former can't be correct, if the latter is correct, or vice versa!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:53:AM
What we are dealing with here, is state corruption!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:56:AM
People, within the CPS are fabricating evidence, by introducing witness statement contents, of what they would like a particular witness to say occurred, ignoring what actually did occur!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:59:AM
People, within the CPS are fabricating evidence, by introducing witness statement contents, of what they would like a particular witness to say occurred, ignoring what actually did occur!

These Criminals need to be held accountable for 'perverting the course of justice', and given the maximum sentences possible, in order to send out a clear message to anyone thinking about constructing a false witness statement, that such a dishonest practice will not be tolerated, and to reassure the general public, that only the guilty get convicted!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:04:AM
The general public, is frequently fooled, into thinking that everything a police officer says, is the absolute truth. Stop right there, for one moment! Consider the following, as being a statement of truth - it might depend upon many factors, including the 'mindset of the police', at a particular time...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:07:AM
The general public, is frequently fooled, into thinking that everything a police officer says, is the absolute truth. Stop right there, for one moment! Consider the following, as being a statement of truth - it might depend upon many factors, including the 'mindset of the police', at a particular time...

What I am saying, is that the contents of 'PC West's' witness statement, dated the 9th August, 1985, is inconsistent with 'PC West's' witness statement, dated the 13th September, 1985!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:10:AM
What I am saying, is that the contents of 'PC West's' witness statement, dated the 9th August, 1985, is inconsistent with 'PC West's' witness statement, dated the 13th September, 1985!!!

The contents of one (9th August, 1985), does not match, or sit well with the contents of the other (13th September, 1985)!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:11:AM
This, I suggest is because 'PC West' is lying!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:17:AM
This, I suggest is because 'PC West' is lying!!!

Not only is 'PC West lying, but he has opened himself up, to being manipulated by somebody in the CPS, who prepared a witness statement for him, backdated, to the 9th August, 1985, to say that the timing of Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station was at 9.26am!

If I am wrong, then produce the hand written version of the same witness statement, dated, 9th August, 1985, bearing 'PC West's ' signature!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:19:AM
You, will not be able to, because the contents of the 9th August 1985 statement, were made by somebody at the CPS, on what they wanted 'PC West' to say, not what he was prepared to say!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 19, 2017, 10:28:AM
. . . ask yourself why in his 13th September 1985 witness statement, 'PC West' talks about being 'unsure' about the time he received Jeremy's call (3.36am / 3.26am)
I don't see anything about being unsure of the time in that statement. Perhaps you're referring to the evidence Pc West gave at trial.

His statements of 9th August and 13th September 1985 give different times, and that's consistent with a dispute about the time of Jeremy's call. However, they don't provide enough information to indicate that Pc West's mindset changed at around 13th September 1985.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 19, 2017, 01:49:PM


................What we are dealing with here, is the introduction of witness statements by 'another', strictly for the purpose of causing mischief!!!

Hmm.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 04:51:PM
I don't see anything about being unsure of the time in that statement. Perhaps you're referring to the evidence Pc West gave at trial

Yes, sorry when he testified and was put on the spot regarding the times in both his witness statements!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 19, 2017, 05:41:PM
The bottom two sentences clearly show that West was reluctant to give ground.  That is a significant level of defiance, given that he was a witness for the prosecution. 

Rivlin really didn't perform.  Why was Bamber given a prosecution barrister for his defence?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 19, 2017, 05:48:PM
The bottom two sentences clearly show that West was reluctant to give ground.  That is a significant level of defiance, given that he was a witness for the prosecution. 

Rivlin really didn't perform.  Why was Bamber given a prosecution barrister for his defence?

It was his choice Roch and gives another clue to his psychopathy.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 19, 2017, 05:51:PM
It was his choice Roch and gives another clue to his psychopathy.

So he deliberately chose a prosecution barrister to defend him - and this was part of his plan to get-off with the killings?  Also an indicator of his alleged psychopathy?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Stephanie on January 19, 2017, 06:01:PM
So he deliberately chose a prosecution barrister to defend him - and this was part of his plan to get-off with the killings?  Also an indicator of his alleged psychopathy?

Why not? I'm not suggesting in isolation this is an indicator, I'm adding it to the already long list available, before he stands trial. For all we know this was part of his plan if he were to eventually be arrested.

Have you ever asked to see the psychopathy report his then legal team used to suggest he was a psychopath? Has Jeremy ever disclosed this to anyone?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 19, 2017, 06:36:PM
The bottom two sentences clearly show that West was reluctant to give ground.  That is a significant level of defiance, given that he was a witness for the prosecution. 

Rivlin really didn't perform.  Why was Bamber given a prosecution barrister for his defence?
Not sure on this one but, I think I read where Bamber tried to get the main man from the law firm but he wasn't available?  Not sure though will try and check this.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 19, 2017, 06:42:PM
I don't know how true this is?

Jeremy wanted Sir David Napley, the best-known solicitor in London, to defend him. Napley’s reputation for taking on tough defences was as imposing as his gold-coloured Rolls-Royce. (Jeremy approached the seventy-old Sir David through his new girlfriend, Anji Greaves, sister of Virginia.) Sir David couldn’t personally take the case and introduced one of his partners, a young solicitor called Paul Terzeon. News that Napley’s firm had agreed to handle Jeremy’s case signalled to all that the trial would be even more sensational than first suspected.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 08:00:PM
Yes, sorry when he testified and was put on the spot regarding the times in both his witness statements!

'PC West'
'I was informed I actually spoke to the Information room prior to the one I recorded so I can only assume that  I have wrote --- I actually have recorded the wrong time, as it were'...
Rivlin, QC
'The situation is that you looked at the clock and recorded 3.36am. You were told subsequently that was almost certainly wrong. And you said you may have misread the clock'.
'PC West'
'Well, there was a dispute over the times. I doubt know whose time is right, and whose time is wrong'.

This is very interesting, since during his trial testimony, 'PC West implied that it might not have been he who might have misread the clock'! He was certainly implying that 'Malcom Bonnett' might have recorded the wrong time! This sheds a different light on the matter!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 19, 2017, 08:01:PM
I don't see anything about being unsure of the time in that statement. Perhaps you're referring to the evidence Pc West gave at trial.

Yes, sorry when he testified and was put on the spot regarding the times in both his witness statements!
Actually, Pc West did mention the time discrepancy near the end of his 13th September statement as well. He stated "As far as I am aware, this clock is normally accurate, although it is possible that when I noted the time of the original call from Mr Jeremy Bamber at 3.36 a.m. I may have misread it for 3.26 a.m. However, I cannot be sure of that." As he had put 3:36 a.m. at the beginning of this statement, he seemed to think that time was correct, but there's nothing to indicate when he formed that opinion.

As Pc West was asked about the time of Jeremy's call during the trial, but not asked to explain why it was given as 03.26 in his statement of 9th August 1985, it's possible that he wrote that statement without checking what he had written on 7th August, instead using a time that had been mentioned to him by the police sergeant who had asked him to write the statement or by some other officer.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 08:52:PM
'PC West'
'I was informed I actually spoke to the Information room prior to the one I recorded so I can only assume that  I have wrote --- I actually have recorded the wrong time, as it were'...
Rivlin, QC
'The situation is that you looked at the clock and recorded 3.36am. You were told subsequently that was almost certainly wrong. And you said you may have misread the clock'.
'PC West'
'Well, there was a dispute over the times. I don't know whose time is right, and whose time is wrong'.

This is very interesting, since during his trial testimony, 'PC West implied that it might not have been he who might have misread the clock'! He was certainly implying that 'Malcom Bonnett' might have recorded the wrong time! This sheds a different light on the matter!!!

'PC West' did not fully explain what he meant by his reference to there being a dispute over the times!

This suggests that 'PC West thought that if anyone had got the time of Jeremy's call wrong, it was probably 'Malcom Bonnetts'  error, not his own! Since, West refers to 'the times', not simply 'the time' he recorded!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:02:PM
What if Malcom Bonnett had misread the clock in the information room?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:24:PM
What if Malcom Bonnett had missed the clock in the information room?

What if neither West or Bonnett misread the clocks they relied upon, and there really had been two different calls to police? One by Neville Bamber at around 3.26am, and the other by Jeremy Bamber at 3.36am? What if this nonsense regarding the suggestion that 'PC West' had got the time of Jeremy's call wrong, for whatever reason, was part of a deliberate attempt to suppress the truth regarding the fact that Neville Bamber had infact called the police, just like the prosecution claimed he would have done, had his daughter really gone berserk and got one of his guns! The plan being to try to merge the two different calls into the same one!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 09:51:PM
You see, I don't accept that what Jeremy eventually told PC West, was somehow relayed to Malcom Bonnett, using different terminology, so that 'Malcom Bonnett' recorded it differently! I don't buy into that nonsense! Furthermore, this goes beyond the suggestion that 'PC West' misread the control room clock, and got a digit wrong! This could not possibly be true, because Jeremy was placed on hold for five minutes or whatever, and 'PC West' could not possibly have obtained the information recorded in Bonnetts, 3.26am, simply on the back of West misreading the digit '2' for the digit '3' - the existence of Bonnetts 3.26am 'Communications log, makes it certain that the correct explanation for the existence of these two conflicting message logs, does not rest upon 'PC West' misreading the control room clock, misreading a digit! Oh, no...

Because - for this to be remotely true, where does the delay involving Jeremy having been placed on hold for 5 minutes, fit into this scenario?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:05:PM
You see, I don't accept that what Jeremy eventually told PC West, was somehow relayed to Malcom Bonnett, using different terminology, so that 'Malcom Bonnett' recorded it differently! I don't buy into that nonsense! Furthermore, this goes beyond the suggestion that 'PC West' misread the control room clock, and got a digit wrong! This could not possibly be true, because Jeremy was placed on hold for five minutes or whatever, and 'PC West' could not possibly have obtained the information recorded in Bonnetts, 3.26am, simply on the back of West misreading the digit '2' for the digit '3' - the existence of Bonnetts 3.26am 'Communications log, makes it certain that the correct explanation for the existence of these two conflicting message logs, does not rest upon 'PC West' misreading the control room clock, misreading a digit! Oh, no...

Because - for this to be remotely true, where does the delay involving Jeremy having been placed on hold for 5 minutes, fit into this scenario?

Surely, Malcom Bonnett could not have received the information from 'PC West' at 3.26am, if West misread a digit on the control room clock, since there would still need to be the 5 minute delay of Jeremy being placed on hold, which simply doesn't fit into the explanation that there was only one call, recorded at different times on the back of 'PC West' misreading a digit on the control room clock!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:10:PM
Surely, Malcom Bonnett could not have received the information from 'PC West' at 3.26am, if West misread a digit on the control room clock, since there would still need to be the 5 minute delay of Jeremy being placed on hold, which simply doesn't fit into the explanation that there was only one call, recorded at different times on the back of 'PC West' misreading a digit on the control room clock!

I know that what I am saying is correct!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:17:PM
If Rivlin QC had had the contents of Bonnets (3.26am) 'communication log', and Wests(3.36am) police 'message log', he would have arrived at the same conclusion as me! If 'PC West's ' police 'message log' was timed wrongly, then so too must Malcom Bonnets, 'Communication log' have been wrongly timed!!!

Something is very wrong here, and the prosecution used all its powers to keep these contradictory log contents from the jury, because to admit them both in their entirety, would almost certainly have spelt failure of the prosecutions case!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:18:PM
At the heart of this conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, were the activities of the occupants of CA07!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:24:PM
CA07 were deployed to the event at whf before Jeremy contacted Chelmsford police station, and he Jeremy eventually got to speak to PC West after being placed on hold for 5 minutes! 'PC West' is an unreliable witness, who cannot be trusted when it comes to the timing of events, referred to in police documents! Including his reference to the fact that Jeremy was only on hold for 3 minutes, not 5! How can anybody rely on the time keeping of 'PC West', in this investigation? He cannot tell the time, let alone estimate a time period that he placed Jeremy on hold, without the benefit of referring to the control room clock!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:29:PM
CA07 were deployed to the event at whf before Jeremy contacted Chelmsford police station, and he Jeremy eventually got to speak to PC West after being placed on hold for 5 minutes! 'PC West' is an unreliable witness, who cannot be trusted when it comes to the timing of events, referred to in police documents! Including his reference to the fact that Jeremy was only on hold for 3 minutes, not 5! How can anybody rely on the time keeping of 'PC West', in this investigation? He cannot tell the time, let alone estimate a time period that he placed Jeremy on hold, without the benefit of referring to the control room clock!

However long it took, for Jeremy to be placed on hold by PC West, plus the time it took for Jeremy to eventually tell 'PC West' about what Neville had said to Jeremy, and then for PC West to relay all of this to Malcom Bonnett, could 'not have happenned by 3.26am!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:30:PM
If 'PC West's 'message log' contents timed at 3.36am are wrong! Then so is Bonnetts (3.26am) 'Communications log contents wrong!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:35:PM
If 'PC West's 'message log' contents timed at 3.36am are wrong! Then so is Bonnetts (3.26am) 'Communications log contents wrong!!!

This is because it doesn't fit, by claiming that 'PC West' might have made a mistake and misread the control room clock, misread a digit '2' for a '3' , because such an error had it been made by PC West, would have been reflected in the actual time 'PC West relayed what Jeremy had eventually told him to Malcom Bonnett, including the 5 minute delay when 'PC West' had placed Jeremy on hold!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 10:56:PM
The conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by Essex police is undone by the lie which has been told regarding 'PC West having misread the control room clock! He allegedly mistook the digit '2' for the digit '3'! Yet, had that simply been the case, it would have taken PC West the 5 minutes or so that he placed Jeremy on hold, before Jeremy told him what he told him, and the time it took for PC West to repeat what Jeremy told him, to Malcom Bonnett, before Bonnett could start to record what 'PC West had told him, that Jeremy had told PC West!!!

None of this is reflected in Malcom Bonnetts 3.26am 'Communications log...

It's a fake claim that the contents of the 3.26am 'communication log', is a record of Jeremy's 3.36am 'message log' ...

I have explained why one was not the other!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 19, 2017, 11:00:PM
Of course, if the audio recording of Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police had not been deliberately withheld, we would not be here now, arguing these differences between the two (3.26am, and 3.36am) logs!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 01:34:AM
There's no reason to suppose there was such an audio recording.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 03:36:AM
. . . it would have taken PC West the 5 minutes or so that he placed Jeremy on hold, before Jeremy told him what he told him, and the time it took for PC West to repeat what Jeremy told him, to Malcom Bonnett, before Bonnett could start to record what PC West had told him, that Jeremy had told PC West
Pc West stated clearly that he had a conversation with Jeremy before telling him to hold,which is consistent with Jeremy's description of what happened. Thus Pc West  had already been told the basic information that he passed on to Bonnett while Jeremy was on hold. This means that Jeremy's call to Pc West preceded Pc West's call to Bonnett by probably at least a minute. If Jeremy had called Pc West considerably earlier than 03:36, as some now claim, that time would have been 03:25 or 03:24, rather than 03:26, which wouldn't have left PC West sufficient time to take Jeremy's details, his reason for calling, etc., and call HQ using the exchange line, without the time being 03:27 when Bonnett wanted to enter it in his log. There is a slight possibility that Jeremy happened to call Pc West at only just after 03:26 and Pc West was then able to receive the details from Jeremy, put Jeremy on hold, dial the number for the police HQ and speak to Bonnett all within less than about a minute. A little extra time for this could have been available if the clock Pc West used was slightly fast and/or the clock that Bonnett used was slightly slow.

However, Pc West had been told that Sheila was aged about 27, whereas Bonnett noted Sheila's age as 26. Also, Pc West said that he asked Bonnett which police station covered the area where WHF is, but Bonnett makes no mention of this in his statements.

Neither Pc West nor Bonnett make any mention of having any difficulty in contacting one of the officers at Witham, yet it was not until 03:35 that Bonnett logged the departure of CA7.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 20, 2017, 07:16:AM
Pc West stated clearly that he had a conversation with Jeremy before telling him to hold,which is consistent with Jeremy's description of what happened. Thus Pc West  had already been told the basic information that he passed on to Bonnett while Jeremy was on hold. This means that Jeremy's call to Pc West preceded Pc West's call to Bonnett by probably at least a minute. If Jeremy had called Pc West considerably earlier than 03:36, as some now claim, that time would have been 03:25 or 03:24, rather than 03:26, which wouldn't have left PC West sufficient time to take Jeremy's details, his reason for calling, etc., and call HQ using the exchange line, without the time being 03:27 when Bonnett wanted to enter it in his log. There is a slight possibility that Jeremy happened to call Pc West at only just after 03:26 and Pc West was then able to receive the details from Jeremy, put Jeremy on hold, dial the number for the police HQ and speak to Bonnett all within less than about a minute. A little extra time for this could have been available if the clock Pc West used was slightly fast and/or the clock that Bonnett used was slightly slow.

However, Pc West had been told that Sheila was aged about 27, whereas Bonnett noted Sheila's age as 26. Also, Pc West said that he asked Bonnett which police station covered the area where WHF is, but Bonnett makes no mention of this in his statements.

Neither Pc West nor Bonnett make any mention of having any difficulty in contacting one of the officers at Witham, yet it was not until 03:35 that Bonnett logged the departure of CA7.

Odd, don't you think, that not only did Jeremy not know Sheila's age, possibly giving it as 26 or 27, but if we're to believe that Nevill called the police, neither he nor Jeremy knew her married name?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 20, 2017, 08:52:AM
The times are not really important anymore.

Reader said Bonnet was not taking calls from the public that night. So did not recieve a call from Nevill.

The only call received was by West, from Bamber.

West correctly classed Bamber's call as an emergency and rang it through to Bonnet. This matches Bamber  saying he was put on hold by West for several minutes.

West, Bonnet, Taff Jones and all other policeman have never said they received a call from Nevill.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 09:27:AM
. . . neither he nor Jeremy knew her married name?
Did June want Sheila to stop using her married name after her divorce?

The only call received was by West, from Bamber.
It seems Nevill preferred to call Chelmsford police station rather than dial 999 (assuming that he called) and that Pc West was later told to keep quiet about that call. Pc West didn't give the urgency of the call as his reason as his reason for calling HQ.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 20, 2017, 09:56:AM
Did June want Sheila to stop using her married name after her divorce?
It seems Nevill preferred to call Chelmsford police station rather than dial 999 (assuming that he called) and that Pc West was later told to keep quiet about that call. Pc West didn't give the urgency of the call as his reason as his reason for calling HQ.

Lol. Yes both Nevill & Bamber preferred to call the 5th furthest away police station.

The CT argument is closed.  As you said Bonnett was not taking calls from the public that night.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 10:15:AM
Nevill could have tried to call Witham police, but not got a reply. To call Bonnett, he would have had to dial 999 and be put through via the British Telecom operator.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 20, 2017, 11:24:AM
Did June want Sheila to stop using her married name after her divorce?
It seems Nevill preferred to call Chelmsford police station rather than dial 999 (assuming that he called) and that Pc West was later told to keep quiet about that call. Pc West didn't give the urgency of the call as his reason as his reason for calling HQ.

Surely what June wanted was neither here nor there. Unless there's proof to the contrary, it's reasonable to think Sheila might have wished to have had the same name as her boys.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 20, 2017, 11:26:AM
Nevill could have tried to call Witham police, but not got a reply. To call Bonnett, he would have had to dial 999 and be put through via the British Telecom operator.

Oh so now Bonnett was taking calls from the public. However only if the person had dialled 999 first.  Didn't think a 999 operative would do that.

So Bonnett received a call from West, confirmed by Bamber who said he was put on hold. And a call from Nevill, which a 999 operative had put through to him.

Is there not a log from the 999 operative ? Must be one of the hidden documents.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 20, 2017, 11:52:AM
Odd, don't you think, that not only did Jeremy not know Sheila's age, possibly giving it as 26 or 27, but if we're to believe that Nevill called the police, neither he nor Jeremy knew her married name?

Yes, I have said this before - both logs contain exactly the same information just written in a different way.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 12:07:PM
The CT no longer suggest that Nevill dialled 999, thus implying that he telephoned Chelmsford police station. He could, of course, have already tried to contact another police station without getting a reply.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 20, 2017, 12:16:PM
The CT no longer suggest that Nevill dialled 999, thus implying that he telephoned Chelmsford police station. He could, of course, have already tried to contact another police station without getting a reply.

But as you said, Bonnett was only taking calls from the public that had been transferred from a 999 operative.

The only way Nevill could get directly through to Bonnett is if it was like the Batman films. Where Chief Commissioner Gordon could dial a special number & Bruce Wayne's bat phone would ring.

Did Nevill have a special number for Bonnett in case his daughter who didn't live with him, tried to massacre his family ?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 20, 2017, 12:36:PM
The CT no longer suggest that Nevill dialled 999, thus implying that he telephoned Chelmsford police station. He could, of course, have already tried to contact another police station without getting a reply.

He seems to have spent quite a long while on the phone while Sheila is going crazy?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 20, 2017, 12:38:PM
Nevill could have tried to call Witham police, but not got a reply. To call Bonnett, he would have had to dial 999 and be put through via the British Telecom operator.

Theory: Nevill may have telephoned police twice.

Once to notify West (which was witnessed by Cracknell and Norcup and resulted in CA5 & CA7).  The second call to 999 which was passed through to Bonnett.  Jeremy's call to West was sandwiched in between.   


When Jeremy couldn't get through to WHF, it was because of Neville's call to West. 

When West couldn't get through to WHF, it was because of Nevill's call to 999.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 20, 2017, 12:44:PM
Theory: Nevill may have telephoned police twice.

Once to notify West (which was witnessed by cracknell and Norcup and resulted in CA5 & CA7).  The second call to 999 which was passed through to Bonnett.  Jeremy's call to West was sandwiched in between.   When Jeremy couldn't get through to the farmhouse, it was because of Neville's call to West.  When West couldn't get through to WHF, it was because of Nevill's call to 999.

Where does it state that Nevill's call was witnessed by anyone? Neither West nor Bonnett have said they spoke to Nevill - quite the opposite. Does it not seem odd to you that whenever anyone tried to get through to Nevill, the phone was engaged and then low and behold, he just happened to leave it off the hook and when anyone listened in, they heard nothing?

Also, if West was worried about having to state he could have been wrong about the time of Jeremy's call, how come he was happy to keep completely quiet about Nevill's call - something that would put an innocent man in prison?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 20, 2017, 12:49:PM
Where does it state that Nevill's call was witnessed by anyone? Neither West nor Bonnett have said they spoke to Nevill - quite the opposite. Does it not seem odd to you that whenever anyone tried to get through to Nevill, the phone was engaged and then low and behold, he just happened to leave it off the hook and when anyone listened in, they heard nothing?

Also, if West was worried about having to state he could have been wrong about the time of Jeremy's call, how come he was happy to keep completely quiet about Nevill's call - something that would put an innocent man in prison?

I'll have a go at answering later on.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 20, 2017, 01:06:PM
It seems to me we have a surfeit of floundering here. Nevill MAY have made two phone calls to the police. Nevill MAY have spoken with someone not previously mentioned. All very iffy. We have minutes now broken down into 6 decanates, presumably to give Jeremy more time. I wonder what a potential COA would make of it?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 20, 2017, 01:15:PM
It seems to me we have a surfeit of floundering here. Nevill MAY have made two phone calls to the police. Nevill MAY have spoken with someone not previously mentioned. All very iffy. We have minutes now broken down into 6 decanates, presumably to give Jeremy more time. I wonder what a potential COA would make of it?

This ....  ::)
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 20, 2017, 01:21:PM
This ....  ::)


Yeah.  ::) is appropriate.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 20, 2017, 01:27:PM
Not floundering.  Just trying to post - but limited time and attention due to work. These things are  not simple. The calls are a very contentious issue.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 20, 2017, 01:32:PM
Not floundering.  Just trying to post - but limited time and attention due to work. These things are  not simple. The calls are a very contentious issue.

Roch, I meant, in general. I didn't mean you in particular.

PS The calls remain contention free for those of us who don't believe Nevill made any :)
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Real justice on January 20, 2017, 01:40:PM
Pc West stated clearly that he had a conversation with Jeremy before telling him to hold,which is consistent with Jeremy's description of what happened. Thus Pc West  had already been told the basic information that he passed on to Bonnett while Jeremy was on hold. This means that Jeremy's call to Pc West preceded Pc West's call to Bonnett by probably at least a minute. If Jeremy had called Pc West considerably earlier than 03:36, as some now claim, that time would have been 03:25 or 03:24, rather than 03:26, which wouldn't have left PC West sufficient time to take Jeremy's details, his reason for calling, etc., and call HQ using the exchange line, without the time being 03:27 when Bonnett wanted to enter it in his log. There is a slight possibility that Jeremy happened to call Pc West at only just after 03:26 and Pc West was then able to receive the details from Jeremy, put Jeremy on hold, dial the number for the police HQ and speak to Bonnett all within less than about a minute. A little extra time for this could have been available if the clock Pc West used was slightly fast and/or the clock that Bonnett used was slightly slow.

However, Pc West had been told that Sheila was aged about 27, whereas Bonnett noted Sheila's age as 26. Also, Pc West said that he asked Bonnett which police station covered the area where WHF is, but Bonnett makes no mention of this in his statements.

Neither Pc West nor Bonnett make any mention of having any difficulty in contacting one of the officers at Witham, yet it was not until 03:35 that Bonnett logged the departure of CA7.
Hi Reader, how I understood it, it was by  Using a radio link PC West contacted Malcolm Bonnet at the Chelmsford H/Q Information Room. PC West then spoke to the appellant again, who complained at the time the officer was taking too long?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 20, 2017, 02:20:PM
Hi Reader, how I understood it, it was by  Using a radio link PC West contacted Malcolm Bonnet at the Chelmsford H/Q Information Room. PC West then spoke to the appellant again, who complained at the time the officer was taking too long?

That sounds right.

Radio link. Did Bonnett not have a phone ?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: lebaleb on January 20, 2017, 02:51:PM
That sounds right.

Radio link. Did Bonnett not have a phone ?

By radio Bonnett could be contacted wherever he was. No mobiles in those days.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 20, 2017, 03:42:PM
Roch, I meant, in general. I didn't mean you in particular.

PS The calls remain contention free for those of us who don't believe Nevill made any :)

No contention here!  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Jane on January 20, 2017, 03:47:PM
No contention here!  ;D ;D


Nor here  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 04:03:PM
Using a radio link PC West contacted Malcolm Bonnet at the Chelmsford H/Q Information Room. PC West then spoke to the appellant again, who complained at the time the officer was taking too long?
In his statement dated 13/09/1985, Pc West gave "I contacted Headquarters Information Room but cannot remember if it was by internal telephone or via the radio channel."

On the communications form that Bonnett used, there is a preprinted box with four choices: 999, Exchange Line, Radio, and Private Wire. Bonnett circled "Exchange Line".

According to the same statement, Pc West then "spoke with, I think, Pc Saxby, at Witham Police Station via the personal radio link between Chelmsford Police Station and Witham Police Station." I consider that wording strange, as I wouldn't expect a radio link between two police stations to be described as personal.

It seems that Bonnett simultaneously contacted Pc Saxby by telephone. Do you want more details?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 20, 2017, 04:14:PM
According to the same statement, Pc West then "spoke with, I think, Pc Saxby, at Witham Police Station via the personal radio link between Chelmsford Police Station and Witham Police Station." I consider that wording strange, as I wouldn't expect a radio link between two police stations to be described as personal.

It was a personal radio link distinct from HQIR radio.   Bonnett would therefore not have heard the conversation between West and Saxby.  HQIR radio was force-wide across Essex.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 20, 2017, 04:33:PM
Pc West stated clearly that he had a conversation with Jeremy before telling him to hold,which is consistent with Jeremy's description of what happened. Thus Pc West  had already been told the basic information that he passed on to Bonnett while Jeremy was on hold. This means that Jeremy's call to Pc West preceded Pc West's call to Bonnett by probably at least a minute. If Yes, at which stage Malcom Bonnett updated his 3.26am 'Communcations log' upon which Bonnett had already recorded Neville Bambers caller information! This is verified by inclusion 'son of Mr Bamber contacted CD' two thirds down the log! The exchange between Jeremy and 'PC West being mentioned by PC West when he spoke to Bonnett, confirming that which Bonnett had already recorded from Neville Bamber in his 3.26am, log! Jeremy had called Pc West considerably earlier than 03:36, as some now claim, There is no evidence that Jeremy called Chelmsford police any time at all before 3.36am, 'PC West' was at pains during the trial to make out a case for him receiving Jeremy's call at any other time, than the 3.36am! What he did say was that he wasn't sure which of the 'times' (3.36am / 3.26am), implying that Bonnetts claim that Jeremy had called PC West at 3.26am, was wrong! that time would have been 03:25 or 03:24, rather than 03:26, which wouldn't have left PC West sufficient time to take Jeremy's details, his reason for calling, etc., and call HQ using the exchange line, without the time being 03:27 when Bonnett wanted to enter it in his log. There is no evidence that Jeremy's call to Chelmsford police station was any sooner than 3.36am! There is a slight possibility that Jeremy happened to call Pc West at only just after 03:26 There is no evidence of this at all... and Pc West was then able to receive the details from Jeremy, put Jeremy on hold, dial the number for the police HQ and speak to Bonnett all within less than about a minute. speculation, only! A little extra time for this could have been available if the clock Pc West used was slightly fast and/or the clock that Bonnett used was slightly slow. the prosecutions case did not rely upon any of this!

However, Pc West had been told that Sheila was aged about 27, whereas Bonnett noted Sheila's age as 26. Also, Pc West said that he asked Bonnett which police station covered the area where WHF is, but Bonnett makes no mention of this in his statements.

Neither Pc West nor Bonnett make any mention of having any difficulty in contacting one of the officers at Witham, yet it was not until 03:35 that Bonnett logged the departure of CA7.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 20, 2017, 04:51:PM
If the prosecution and it's witnesses had not set out to try and muddy the waters, and not to disclose the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, and 'PC West's 3.36am, log, alongside one another, we would not be here now trying to put right the terrible wrong done to Jeremy Bamber in 'he' not receiving a fair trial!  All these issues, and features which we are now debating would have been 'aired in the presence of the jury', and it would have been for 'the jury to decide' what the truth in the matter was! To me, it's a straight forward case of 'the prosecuting authorities deliberately withholding material and evidence which was capable of supporting Jeremy's Bambers innocence'! It's too late now for the prosecution and any of its supporters in this particular case, to be able to now say, 'oh well, the material and the evidence have since been disclosed so there is no problem! Of course there is a problem, it was for the jury to decide whether or not, Neville Bamber did call police after all, just like the prosecution said he would have done! He did, and the prosecution 'hid the evidence' so that they could lead with the argument that if his daughter had gone berserk with one of his guns, Neville Bamber would have phoned the police! Well, he did phone the police! It was not for the prosecution to 'make a decision' to withhold evidence which contradicted it's own case, or for them to 'decide' the call which Neville made, could have been reference to Jeremy's own call! That decision was the 'province of the jury'! They were 'dishonestly prevented' from relying upon the contents of the 3.26am and the 3.36am logs, to help them investigate, consider, accept, or reject the claim that 'Neville had phoned police', after all!

If Neville phoned police, how much more likely that Neville had called Jeremy? How much more likely, that Neville's daughter really had gone berserk! And so had hold of one of Neville's guns?  How much more likely that what Jeremy eventually told PC West what he told him, that this confirmed what Neville had also told the police, or in other words - a circle of truth!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on January 20, 2017, 05:07:PM
Obviously, anything raised as a possibility is speculation. As you say, "the prosecution's case did not rely upon any of this" but instead relied on the jury not speculating in this way.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 21, 2017, 12:55:PM
Obviously, anything raised as a possibility is speculation. As you say, "the prosecution's case did not rely upon any of this" but instead relied on the jury not speculating in this way.

The prosecution obviously did not want to present evidence to the court, which potentially contradicted it's own stance! On the one hand, they were claiming that Neville would have called the police if his daughter was going berserk, and she had one of his guns, whilst on the other hand, the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, appears to confirm that Neville had called police, after all! Rivlin would have had a duty to present the facts contained in the two logs, as evidence that Neville had in fact called the police! In his closing address to the jury, Rivlin would surely have invited the jury to accept the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, as proof that Neville had called police! That his daughter was going berserk, and that his daughter had got one of his guns! Baring in mind, that this is what would have happened based upon the contents of both logs having been disclosed, and available to the defence team, and the court! There was no evidence called to suggest that the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, could not be a record of Neville Bambers call to police! At least, that is what Rivlin would have said! The truth is, because the prosecution did not call any evidence to prove that the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log were not as a result of a call from Neville, Rivlin would have had a field day persuading the jury that Neville Bamber had made the 3.26am call to police!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 21, 2017, 01:01:PM
The prosecution obviously did not want to present evidence to the court, which potentially contradicted it's own stance! On the one hand, they were claiming that Neville would have called the police if his daughter was going berserk, and she had one of his guns, whilst on the other hand, the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, appears to confirm that Neville had called police, after all! Rivlin would have had a duty to present the facts contained in the two logs, as evidence that Neville had in fact called the police! In his closing address to the jury, Rivlin would surely have invited the jury to accept the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, as proof that Neville had called police! That his daughter was going berserk, and that his daughter had got one of his guns! Baring in mind, that this is what would have happened based upon the contents of both logs having been disclosed, and available to the defence team, and the court! There was no evidence called to suggest that the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log, could not be a record of Neville Bambers call to police! At least, that is what Rivlin would have said! The truth is, because the prosecution did not call any evidence to prove that the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log were not as a result of a call from Neville, Rivlin would have had a field day persuading the jury that Neville Bamber had made the 3.26am call to police!!!

Based purely on the claim that both log contents had been disclosed and made available during the trial, it would have been open season for somebody like Rivlin, to ram down the throat's of the jury, that the prosecution had called no evidence to refute the suggestion that Neville had called police at 3.26am! They hadn't called any such evidence because they knew that the 3.26am call had been made by Neville Bamber!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 21, 2017, 01:17:PM
Based purely on the claim that both log contents had been disclosed and made available during the trial, it would have been open season for somebody like Rivlin, to ram down the throat's of the jury, that the prosecution had called no evidence to refute the suggestion that Neville had called police at 3.26am! They hadn't called any such evidence because they knew that the 3.26am call had been made by Neville Bamber!

No doubt, the trial judge, would have also been duty bound, to inform the jury in his summing up address, that there existed two conflicting telephone records, one timed at 3.26am, the other timed at 3.36am. The first recorded in the hand writing of Malcom Bonnett. The second recorded in the hand writing of 'PC West. The former written in language befitting what Neville Bamber would have said, if indeed he had called the police! The latter written in language befitting what Jeremy had told PC West!  There was no evidence called by, or relied upon by the prosecution case, to suggest that the 3.26am log was not a true record of Neville Bambers call to police. The facts are, that in the absence of any evidence which prevents that call having been made by Neville Bamber, that you the jury must accept that Neville Bamber did call the police! If, members of the jury, Neville Bamber did call the police, you can be sure that he told the police that his daughter was going berserk, and that his daughter had got one of his guns! If Neville Bamber told police that, then does that not provide positive proof that Neville's adopted son, Jeremy (the defendant) has been truthful in reporting to police himself afterwards, similar facts already reported by Neville Bamber in his 3.26am call to police? Neville Bambers daughter going berserk, and having possession of one of his guns, might be conclusive proof that Sheila Caffell might have shot the other victims!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Steve_uk on January 21, 2017, 01:35:PM
No doubt, the trial judge, would have also been duty bound, to inform the jury in his summing up address, that there existed two conflicting telephone records, one timed at 3.26am, the other timed at 3.36am. The first recorded in the hand writing of Malcom Bonnett. The second recorded in the hand writing of 'PC West. The former written in language befitting what Neville Bamber would have said, if indeed he had called the police! The latter written in language befitting what Jeremy had told PC West!  There was no evidence called by, or relied upon by the prosecution case, to suggest that the 3.26am log was not a true record of Neville Bambers call to police. The facts are, that in the absence of any evidence which prevents that call having been made by Neville Bamber, that you the jury must accept that Neville Bamber did call the police! If, members of the jury, Neville Bamber did call the police, you can be sure that he told the police that his daughter was going berserk, and that his daughter had got one of his guns! If Neville Bamber told police that, then does that not provide positive proof that Neville's adopted son, Jeremy (the defendant) has been truthful in reporting to police himself afterwards, similar facts already reported by Neville Bamber in his 3.26am call to police? Neville Bambers daughter going berserk, and having possession of one of his guns, might be conclusive proof that Sheila Caffell might have shot the other victims!!!
There's no doubt that a call from Nevill to Police or Jeremy that morning would render the conviction unsafe. The problem the Defence has is that nobody in authority is admitting there has been a cover- up.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 22, 2017, 03:29:PM
There's no doubt that a call from Nevill to Police or Jeremy that morning would render the conviction unsafe. The problem the Defence has is that nobody in authority is admitting there has been a cover- up.

The contents of both message logs, Bonnetts log 3.26am recorded in a manner befitting it having been passed by none other than Neville Bamber himself. A second message log created by PC West 3.36am which recorded what Jeremy told him! During the trial the defence were dishonestly deprived of the contents in both logs! The defence were led to believe that the only issue relating to PC West receiving Jeremy's call was one of timing, not the contents of the other log timed at 3.26am created by Malcom Bonnett! PC West was taken to task by Rivlin regarding the contents of his 3.36am log and his witness statement which did not match! He was not questioned about the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log! This was because Rivlin did not have sight of the earlier log, otherwise he would have taken West to task over it! Rivlin would have been able to put it to PC West had he known about the contents of Bonnetts log, that there were thus three different sources containing different contents regarding what Jeremy told him. One version in his 3.36am message log, a second version in his 13th September Witness statement, and a third version contained in Malcom Bonnetts 3.26am log! This gets more serious by the minute! I don't think those in the guilty camp realise the implications surrounding the existence of these two message logs, and the claim at such a late stage that both logs relate to the same call! If that were true, then we have three different versions of what Jeremy spoke to PC west about! What did PC West record in his pocketbook of the event? So, potentially four different accounts of what Jeremy told PC West, or dare I say it, a handful of different accounts!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 22, 2017, 05:19:PM
The contents of both message logs, Bonnetts log 3.26am recorded in a manner befitting it having been passed by none other than Neville Bamber himself. A second message log created by PC West 3.36am which recorded what Jeremy told him! During the trial the defence were dishonestly deprived of the contents in both logs! The defence were led to believe that the only issue relating to PC West receiving Jeremy's call was one of timing, not the contents of the other log timed at 3.26am created by Malcom Bonnett! PC West was taken to task by Rivlin regarding the contents of his 3.36am log and his witness statement which did not match! He was not questioned about the contents of Bonnetts 3.26am log! This was because Rivlin did not have sight of the earlier log, otherwise he would have taken West to task over it! Rivlin would have been able to put it to PC West had he known about the contents of Bonnetts log, that there were thus three different sources containing different contents regarding what Jeremy told him. One version in his 3.36am message log, a second version in his 13th September Witness statement, and a third version contained in Malcom Bonnetts 3.26am log! This gets more serious by the minute! I don't think those in the guilty camp realise the implications surrounding the existence of these two message logs, and the claim at such a late stage that both logs relate to the same call! If that were true, then we have three different versions of what Jeremy spoke to PC west about! What did PC West record in his pocketbook of the event? So, potentially four different accounts of what Jeremy told PC West, or dare I say it, a handful of different accounts!!!

Some people wouldn't know the truth if it hit them bang in the face!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 09:12:AM
...
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: lookout on January 27, 2017, 10:30:AM
There's no doubt that a call from Nevill to Police or Jeremy that morning would render the conviction unsafe. The problem the Defence has is that nobody in authority is admitting there has been a cover- up.






 The truth will out ! How long did it take Duckenfield and his mob ??
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 27, 2017, 11:06:AM
There's no doubt that a call from Nevill to Police or Jeremy that morning would render the conviction unsafe. The problem the Defence has is that nobody in authority is admitting there has been a cover- up.

Because there hasn't.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 11:32:AM
It was on this very same date (6th September, 1985) that Robert Woodwis Boutflour visited ACC Peter Simpson!!!

Odd, that police including the Chief Constable, Bunyard, and ACC Simpson had just been told by Detective Superintendent Kenneally that as 'a result of his review of the investigation' at that time, that Sheila Caffell was responsible!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 11:33:AM
Because there hasn't.

But, there has been!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 11:43:AM
It was on this very same date (6th September, 1985) that Robert Woodwis Boutflour visited ACC Peter Simpson!!!

Odd, that police including the Chief Constable, Bunyard, and ACC Simpson had just been told by Detective Superintendent Kenneally that as 'a result of his review of the investigation' at that time, that Sheila Caffell was responsible!

This is the bit I don't fully understand, I mean Supt' Kenneally carries out a review of the investigation into the five deaths, and he makes a report of his findings to the Chief Constable, and the Assistant Chief Constable, that everything points to Sheila Caffell being responsible, and yet ACC Simpson is pressurised by Robert Boutflour (or threatened) to appoint Mick Ainsley to carry out a full new investigation (SC/786/85) on the same day, with Jeremy Bamber as the chief suspect!

I mean, what did Robert Boutflour say to Simpson that was so compelling, that it forced Simpson into action?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 11:45:AM
Didn't the police already have the silencer with blood upon it?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 11:49:AM
Didn't the police already have the silencer with blood upon it?

Then again, that was only one of the two silencers at the heart of this case, wasn't it!

Peter Eaton handed the first silencer over to DS 'Jones' on evening of 12th August 1985, his wife, Ann Eaton, handed over the second silencer to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985 - that's the handing over of two different silencers, one in August, the other September 1985!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 11:51:AM
Police didn't physically hand back the first silencer to the Eatons, so where did Ann Eaton get the second silencer from?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: lookout on January 27, 2017, 12:03:PM
Police didn't physically hand back the first silencer to the Eatons, so where did Ann Eaton get the second silencer from?





Was that the one which was gathering dust on " Taff's " desk ?

I wonder why the " changeover " happened from DCI to a mere sergeant in such a massive case ??
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 27, 2017, 12:19:PM




Was that the one which was gathering dust on " Taff's " desk ?

I wonder why the " changeover " happened from DCI to a mere sergeant in such a massive case ??

(I'll probably regret this but .....) What changeover?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 27, 2017, 12:22:PM
There's no doubt that a call from Nevill to Police or Jeremy that morning would render the conviction unsafe. The problem the Defence has is that nobody in authority is admitting there has been a cover- up.

Is this not par for the course though?  Something is denied and denied and denied... then eventually, it is admitted. 

Nobody is going to admit that Jeremy phoned Nevill - because apparently, it wasn't provable either way.  So the best that can be hoped for on that score - is an admission that police tactics were to tell all witnesses that a call from Nevill to Jeremy hadn't taken place (with a further admission that this was a flawed approach that effectively induced bias in the minds of witnesses against Jeremy).
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Adam on January 27, 2017, 12:25:PM
There's no doubt that a call from Nevill to Police or Jeremy that morning would render the conviction unsafe. The problem the Defence has is that nobody in authority is admitting there has been a cover- up.

Unsafe ? It would make him innocent.

The police are not admitting to anything as there is nothing to admit to. Ditto everyone else who has never retracted a word of their testimonies.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 27, 2017, 12:35:PM
Is this not par for the course though?  Something is denied and denied and denied... then eventually, it is admitted. 

Nobody is going to admit that Jeremy phoned Nevill  because apparently, it wasn't provable either way.  So the best that can be hoped for on that score - is an admission that police tactics were to tell all witnesses that a call from Nevill to Jeremy hadn't taken place (with a further admission that this was a flawed approach that effectively induced bias in the minds of witnesses against Jeremy).

Or it never happened in the first place?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 27, 2017, 12:38:PM
Or it never happened in the first place?

Possibly.

However I think Mike's reply to you summed the other possibility up well (on the other thread).  I was going to post something similar in reply to you and had much of it typed out but didn't have time to finish it.  Will return to that and also your other question when i have time.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: lookout on January 27, 2017, 12:50:PM
(I'll probably regret this but .....) What changeover?




From " Taff " to SJ. How did this happen ? Don't say because " Taff " had died,that's too easy.
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 12:59:PM
Police didn't physically hand back the first silencer to the Eatons, so where did Ann Eaton get the second silencer from?

Funny coincidence that Robert Boutflours so called 'Diary Entries' make mention of the use of the silencer!

And that, a few days later, his daughter Ann Eaton hands to DC Oakley a second silencer!

And that the 'U' shaped scratch mark was photographed n the kitchen aga surround around the same time - a 'U' shaped scratch mark that was not present on photographs taken of the aga on the first morning of the investigation!

Maybe, the relatives set out on a joint venture to implicate Jeremy in the shootings by introducing the second silencer knowing that one of the relatives had deliberately scratched the kitchen aga with the silencer that Ann Eaton handed to police on 11th September! How could Ann Eaton have possession of the same silencer the cops already have got possession of? She couldn't have! She had to have got a second silencer, a silencer which for over a month the relatives had all got access to! This could only have been done in the knowlege that there were two identical looking Parker Hale silencers / moderators, or whatever you choose to call them both, or one or other! That's how the relatives and cops got away with introducing the second silencer (DRB/1) on the 11th September, on the proviso that the first silencer handed over by Peter Eaton on 12th August might not have been the silencer to the anshuzt rifle, the 'other' silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) was the silencer owned by Anthony Pargeter, who always kept it at the farmhouse! He had been keeping it at the farm since 1980! He has never claimed to have removed it from the farmhouse, and that strongly suggests that the 'Pargeter silencer' (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) was the Parker hale silencer inside which was discovered Sheila Caffells unique blood! What then, does this suggest? This is very interesting because red paint from the kitchen arga surround was found in the knurl of the other (DRB/1) silencer! This second silencer was obviously the silencer belonging to the anshuzt rifle! It obviously took the relatives (including Anthony Pargeter) a month to sort out which Parker hale silencer Peter Eaton had handed over to DS Jones on 12th August! Pargeter himself would have known that cops had got possession of his Parker Hale silencer, not the one belonging to the anshuzt rifle! I think if I recollect properly at one stage David Boutflour had been speaking to Anthony Pargeter and Dave Boutflour told him, that police had given the silencer back to the family! But, as we all know this did not happen because once Peter Eaton handed the first silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) over to 'Stan' Jones on the 12th August 1985, it remained in police possession via it being shown by Jones to PI 'Bob' Miller, who told him to hand it to 'Ron' Cook, who took it through to the lab' for Glynis Howard to examine it on the 13th August after which she returned it to Cook, who states that for the next 17 days and nights he kept 'that' silencer in his coat pocket, until the 30th August 1985 when he sent it to the lab' at Huntingdon for the attention of their ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, who started to examine it on 12th September 1985, when he discovered the piece of flake trapped between the first two baffle plates of that (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) silencer, a flake which Fletcher passed onto blood expert, John Hayward, who turned the flake into a blood based solution, which he subsequently tested for particular blood group activity, on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, which produced four blood grouping results, A, EAP BA, AK/1 and HP 2-1, which he declared were unique to Sheila Caffell. A 5th blood test was done on the flake recovered from 'that' silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1), by 12th September, to see whether it was human or animal blood! This test was performed on the 20th September, 1985, and produced a positive result for the blood being human in origin! In the meantime, the second silencer (DRB/1) which Ann Eaton handed to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985, was retained by Essex police! On the 13th September, both DS Eastwood, and DS Davidson, fingerprinted 'it' (DRB/1)! Then, on the 20th September 1985, the second silencer was submitted to the lab' at Huntingdon, with instruction for 'it' (DRB/1) to be checked for blood, and fibers! Red paint from this second silencer was subsequently discovered ingrained into the knurl of its end cap!!!

Two identical looking silencers then, one (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) containing blood unique to Sheila, the other (DRB/1) containing red paint from the kitchen aga surround!

By the time of Jeremy Bambers October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial, Sheila's blood, and red paint t from the kitchen aga at the scene, were both attributed as belonging to the same silencer!!!!

How is this possible,cwhen careful study of the now known facts excludes for any possibility of the blood and red paint to have come from the same silencer!!!!!


Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 27, 2017, 01:07:PM
Possibly.

However I think Mike's reply to you summed the other possibility up well (on the other thread).  I was going to post something similar in reply to you and had much of it typed out but didn't have time to finish it.  Will return to that and also your other question when i have time.

So you believe the court stamp was forged?
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Roch on January 27, 2017, 02:18:PM
So you believe the court stamp was forged?

Nah - different thread.  I haven't got involved in that argument yet.  :))
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Caroline on January 27, 2017, 02:55:PM
Nah - different thread.  I haven't got involved in that argument yet.  :))

Not sure which post you mean, send me the link and I will dissect  ;)
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 03:19:PM
Funny coincidence that Robert Boutflours so called 'Diary Entries' make mention of the use of the silencer!

And that, a few days later, his daughter Ann Eaton hands to DC Oakley a second silencer!

And that the 'U' shaped scratch mark was photographed n the kitchen aga surround around the same time - a 'U' shaped scratch mark that was not present on photographs taken of the aga on the first morning of the investigation!

Maybe, the relatives set out on a joint venture to implicate Jeremy in the shootings by introducing the second silencer knowing that one of the relatives had deliberately scratched the kitchen aga with the silencer that Ann Eaton handed to police on 11th September! How could Ann Eaton have possession of the same silencer the cops already have got possession of? She couldn't have! She had to have got a second silencer, a silencer which for over a month the relatives had all got access to! This could only have been done in the knowlege that there were two identical looking Parker Hale silencers / moderators, or whatever you choose to call them both, or one or other! That's how the relatives and cops got away with introducing the second silencer (DRB/1) on the 11th September, on the proviso that the first silencer handed over by Peter Eaton on 12th August might not have been the silencer to the anshuzt rifle, the 'other' silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) was the silencer owned by Anthony Pargeter, who always kept it at the farmhouse! He had been keeping it at the farm since 1980! He has never claimed to have removed it from the farmhouse, and that strongly suggests that the 'Pargeter silencer' (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) was the Parker hale silencer inside which was discovered Sheila Caffells unique blood! What then, does this suggest? This is very interesting because red paint from the kitchen arga surround was found in the knurl of the other (DRB/1) silencer! This second silencer was obviously the silencer belonging to the anshuzt rifle! It obviously took the relatives (including Anthony Pargeter) a month to sort out which Parker hale silencer Peter Eaton had handed over to DS Jones on 12th August! Pargeter himself would have known that cops had got possession of his Parker Hale silencer, not the one belonging to the anshuzt rifle! I think if I recollect properly at one stage David Boutflour had been speaking to Anthony Pargeter and Dave Boutflour told him, that police had given the silencer back to the family! But, as we all know this did not happen because once Peter Eaton handed the first silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) over to 'Stan' Jones on the 12th August 1985, it remained in police possession via it being shown by Jones to PI 'Bob' Miller, who told him to hand it to 'Ron' Cook, who took it through to the lab' for Glynis Howard to examine it on the 13th August after which she returned it to Cook, who states that for the next 17 days and nights he kept 'that' silencer in his coat pocket, until the 30th August 1985 when he sent it to the lab' at Huntingdon for the attention of their ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, who started to examine it on 12th September 1985, when he discovered the piece of flake trapped between the first two baffle plates of that (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) silencer, a flake which Fletcher passed onto blood expert, John Hayward, who turned the flake into a blood based solution, which he subsequently tested for particular blood group activity, on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, which produced four blood grouping results, A, EAP BA, AK/1 and HP 2-1, which he declared were unique to Sheila Caffell. A 5th blood test was done on the flake recovered from 'that' silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1), by 12th September, to see whether it was human or animal blood! This test was performed on the 20th September, 1985, and produced a positive result for the blood being human in origin! In the meantime, the second silencer (DRB/1) which Ann Eaton handed to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985, was retained by Essex police! On the 13th September, both DS Eastwood, and DS Davidson, fingerprinted 'it' (DRB/1)! Then, on the 20th September 1985, the second silencer was submitted to the lab' at Huntingdon, with instruction for 'it' (DRB/1) to be checked for blood, and fibers! Red paint from this second silencer was subsequently discovered ingrained into the knurl of its end cap!!!

Two identical looking silencers then, one (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) containing blood unique to Sheila, the other (DRB/1) containing red paint from the kitchen aga surround!

By the time of Jeremy Bambers October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial, Sheila's blood, and red paint t from the kitchen aga at the scene, were both attributed as belonging to the same silencer!!!!

How is this possible,cwhen careful study of the now known facts excludes for any possibility of the blood and red paint to have come from the same silencer!!!!!

Let's take the matter to the next level, because on the 11th September David Boutflour contacts police to tell them that he has found the gun silencer! Of course he did, it was the one his sister Ann Eaton would hand to DC Oakley that very same date! Oh, and there's more, he wanted to meet police at the farmhouse to show them a scratch mark on the kitchen aga which could be the source of the red paint on the end of the silencer in question! Then, cops attend scene and photograph the 'U' shaped scratch on the front fascia of the aga surround, that was not present there on the morning of the shootings when crime scene photographs were taken!

Make your own conclusions regarding what you think might have happenned!

Worse still, but by 14th September 1985, David Boutflour was telling police that he found the silencer in two possible locations inside the gun cupboard! Now, how can you find one silencer, in two different places?

It's quite obvious that he was saying what he said, because he found two silencers in the cupboard, not one! Only one of these two silencers got handed over to Jones by Peter Eaton on 12th August (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1), but the second one was retained for a month before Ann Eaton handed it (DRB/1) over to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985!

Two silencers then, handed over to police by husband and then wife, the first with the lab' from 30th August 1985, the latter one not sent to the lab' until the 20th September 1985!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: mike tesko on January 27, 2017, 03:35:PM
Of course, Ann Eaton is only going to acknowledge that she only knew about one silencer, a silencer found in the so called gun cupboard by her brother David Boutflour! She hasn't yet denied handing over 'that' silencer to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985 (DRB/1). If pushed she will say that that was the only silencer she knows anything at all about! She will deny knowing that a month earlier her husband Peter had given 'Stan' Jones the other silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1)! So will David Boutflour! But they will be digging a deeper hole for themselves to fall into, because the COLP investigation confirmed that relatives 'found two silencers', and relatives 'handed over both silencers', one month 'separated the handing over of these to police' by the Eatons!

COLP refer to the existence of the 'second silencer' in their interview of DS Davidson!!!
Title: Re: Timed references, anomaly - an adjustment may be necessary in pursuit of Accurac
Post by: Reader on November 27, 2019, 02:05:AM
Pc West's log and evidence at trial suggests that the call had ended and Pc West had spoken to both Insp. Targrass and the operator before he entered 03:42 in his log.
I think A/Insp. Targrass has died since.