Author Topic: THE SILENCER SAGA  (Read 68000 times)

0 Members and 20 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #60 on: August 17, 2021, 07:01:PM »

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #61 on: August 17, 2021, 07:06:PM »

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3331
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #62 on: August 17, 2021, 07:27:PM »


What is the source of this document? It appears to be DB being questioned by other police officers. They mention items in a statement. Do we have a copy of this? This statement includes other items which are not in the statement I have referred to. Has he produced another statement? I find his trial testimony very difficult to follow because of quality issues.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #63 on: August 17, 2021, 07:31:PM »

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3331
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #64 on: August 18, 2021, 12:12:PM »

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7461.0.html

Read away  :))
David Bird and Essex police misled the COLP enquiry to disguise the fact that DB found DB1.


They created a forged statement dated 24/10/85.

This forgery contained reference to DB1 – DB7 not just DB6 socks as is shown on the statement we have.

He made a key error by recording DB1 in his pocket book TWICE. He calls it a mental aberration.

I have read the whole of the document supplied by David1819. It is a long read but is very interesting.
All of my previous assertions about the find and what was done are correct as shown by this document.

For readers who have little time I summarise some of the key points relating to DB1 since there is a lot of other details which do not relate to DB1. I know it will take time but a full reading will give greater clarity and prove that unlike some I do not do selective evidence presentation, unlike some others. I study it all in detail. David 1819 comes to mind. In these endeavours you have to do the ‘hard yards’

Summary


He freely admits that he collected exhibits when at crime scenes Sheet 971. He also had his own exhibit sheets. On sheet 973 they reference a previous comment which suggests there may have been another taped interview because of the dialogue. It may have been a written submission he presented earlier.

He says he was only responsible for collecting odd exhibits sheet 971.

On sheet 975 they question him with regard to documents called CID6’s. In the following pages they question him more closely about these documents. We do not have these documents but it is clear they suspect these have been rewritten or changed because there is a lack of dates recorded. He says the dates are as shown on the top of documents.

I suggest you read pages 982 – 988. These show he had another statement they were discussing. It is here that we see that he recorded the soil sample twice in his pocket book and that he had added the final line for his 10/09/85 entry. He had to do this so that it could be DB1 his first find but he had already recorded it on another later date. A mental aberration! We do not have the other pages of his pocket book.

The new statement contains all his exhibits DB1 – DB7 which now includes DB7 tampons. On sheet 990 they question him about issues with a Holab3 form which they have issues with regard to who compiled it suggests they thought it had been changed or forged.

On sheet 984 timed at 19.12 of the interview. They talk about the fire debris which came from the fire pit. Unfortunately, they do not ask what and how much of this was taken, unlike the soil sample, where he says he collected about a kilo or bag of sugar. They do not pursue how he selected this sample from a ‘huge’ pit of smouldering waste.

On sheets 1014 – 1016 they return to the CID6’s and the text clearly indicates a different statement dated 24/10/85.

This document confirms all the suggestions that I have made
.

He did find DB1 – DB5 on the day collecting the socks DB6 and the Tampons DB7 when he visited the farm on 10/09/85, or it may be that these 2 items were also found on the day but DB7 was not sent to the lab and does not appear on JH’s specimen testing list.

Conclusions

Any full and fair analysis of this taped interview would support my contention that DB found DB1 on the day 07/08/85.

It is also clear that he lied to the enquiry in many instances and sought at times to misrepresent himself as someone low down the pecking order of those working the case and collecting exhibits. He says that on the day he only took photographs and was at the beck and call of others.

As Donald J Trump would say ‘Lock him up’.

Later he made a forged statement for the COLP enquiry. It is clear as I suggested that he made all the finds on the day and they were then all moved back on-bloc to September 10th and 11th after he returned from holiday. They did however have to come up with a replacement DB1 they chose the soil sample. It seems highly likely that EP changed CID6’s and Holab3 forms to back up the forged statement.

I leave it to others to pass judgement on the COLP and their handling of this issue. Should for example they have pressed him further on the Fire Debris and other issues. On the other hand, they had been misled by the forged statement and a pack of lies.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 06:40:PM by Bubo bubo »

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17576
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #65 on: August 18, 2021, 12:37:PM »
David1819 doesn't believe in dishonest or corrupt police practices Bubo. He doesn't believe that our own security services are able to assassinate somebody or make them disappear. Or disguise an operative. Or forge documents. Quite what he believes they can do is a mystery.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #66 on: August 18, 2021, 12:50:PM »
David Bird and Essex police misled the COLP enquiry to disguise the fact that DB found DB1.


They created a forged statement dated 24/10/85.

This forgery contained reference to DB1 – DB7 not just DB6 socks as is shown on the statement we have.

He made a key error by recording DB1 in his pocket book TWICE. He calls it a mental aberration.

I have read the whole of the document supplied by David1819. It is a long read but is very interesting.
All of my previous assertions about the find and what was done are correct as shown by this document.

For readers who have little time I summarise some of the key points relating to DB1 since there is a lot of other details which do not relate to DB1. I know it will take time but a full reading will give greater clarity and prove that unlike some I do not do selective evidence presentation, unlike some others. I study it all in detail. David 1819 comes to mind. In these endeavours you have to do the ‘hard yards’

Summary


He freely admits that he collected exhibits when at crime scenes Sheet 971. He also had his own exhibit sheets. On sheet 973 they reference a previous comment which suggests there may have been another taped interview because of the dialogue. It may have been a written submission he presented earlier.

He says he was only responsible for collecting odd exhibits sheet 971.

On sheet 975 they question him with regard to documents called CID6’s. In the following pages they question him more closely about these documents. We do not have these documents but it is clear they suspect these have been rewritten or changed because there is a lack of dates recorded. He says the dates are as shown on the top of documents.

I suggest you read pages 982 – 988. These show he had another statement they were discussing. It is here that we see that he recorded the soil sample twice in his pocket book and that he had added the final line for his 10/09/85 entry. He had to do this so that it could be DB1 his first find but he had already recorded it on another later date. A mental aberration! We do not have the other pages of his pocket book.

The new statement contains all his exhibits DB1 – DB7 which now includes DB7 tampons. On sheet 990 they question him about issues with a Holab3 form which they have issues with regard to who compiled it suggests they thought it had been changed or forged.

On sheet 984 timed at 19.12 of the interview. They talk about the fire debris which came from the fire pit. Unfortunately, they do not ask what and how much of this was taken, unlike the soil sample, where he says he collected about a kilo or bag of sugar. They do not pursue how he selected this sample from a ‘huge’ pit of smouldering waste.

On sheets 1014 – 1016 they return to the CID6’s and the text clearly indicates a different statement dated 24/10/85.

This document confirms all the suggestions that I have made
.

He did find DB1 – DB5 on the day collecting the socks DB6 and the Tampons DB7 when he visited the farm on 10/09/85, or it may be that these 2 items were also found on the day but DB7 was not sent to the lab and does not appear on JH’s specimen testing list.

Conclusions

Any full and fair analysis of this taped interview would support my contention that DB found DB1 on the day 07/08/85.

It is also clear that he lied to the enquiry in many instances and sought at times to misrepresent himself as a low down the pecking order of those working the case and collecting exhibits. He says that on the day he only took photographs and was at the beck and call of others.

As Donald J Trump would say ‘Lock him up’.

Later he made a forged statement for the COLP enquiry. It is clear as I suggested that he made all the finds on the day and they were then all moved back on-bloc to September 10th and 11th after he returned from holiday. They did however have to come up with a replacement DB1 they chose the soil sample. It seems highly likely that EP changed CID6’s and Holab3 forms to back up the forged statement.

I leave it to others to pass judgement on the COLP and their handling of this issue. Should for example they have pressed him further on the Fire Debris and other issues. On the other hand, they had been misled by the forged statement and a pack of lies.

Now you are just making things up to make your conspiracy theory work.   8)

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #67 on: August 18, 2021, 01:06:PM »
The whole case has been corrupt from start to finish !

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3331
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #68 on: August 18, 2021, 01:13:PM »
Now you are just making things up to make your conspiracy theory work.   8)
No I am not. You clearly have not read what is set out in black and white. Read it all and post a considered reply. You are back in your 'Swat the post' behaviour mode. Let others make up their own minds. It is clear that there is another 24/10/ 85 statement which is very different from the one we have.

Do not tell me that he made two, one with just the socks on and another with all the other items on the same day!

Even with the statement we have, we have to believe that he made it without consulting his Note book  (one month after the event) since if he had he would have recorded the soil sample.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 06:36:PM by Bubo bubo »

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #69 on: August 18, 2021, 01:15:PM »
David1819 doesn't believe in dishonest or corrupt police practices Bubo. He doesn't believe that our own security services are able to assassinate somebody or make them disappear. Or disguise an operative. Or forge documents. Quite what he believes they can do is a mystery.

Really?

If you look back at some of my older posts here around 2015, when I first got involved. You will see that I once believed the police could have planted the silencer and I also believed that Nevil rang 999. Because I naively took everything Mike posted at face value. It wasn't until I carried out my own due diligence and looked though all documents (with the intention of proving these theories) did I realise that these theories had no basis in truth and were factually incorrect.

So the idea that I am not prepared to entertain police corruption is extreme ignorance on your part.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17576
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #70 on: August 18, 2021, 04:12:PM »
Really?

If you look back at some of my older posts here around 2015, when I first got involved. You will see that I once believed the police could have planted the silencer and I also believed that Nevil rang 999. Because I naively took everything Mike posted at face value. It wasn't until I carried out my own due diligence and looked though all documents (with the intention of proving these theories) did I realise that these theories had no basis in truth and were factually incorrect.

So the idea that I am not prepared to entertain police corruption is extreme ignorance on your part.

For play to you if you have completed such due diligence on Mike's claims - but that should not result in dismissing out of hand everyone else's research or claims. You go so far, that you practically invent excuses for EP / authorities, in every aspect of the case (and a lot of other incidents).
« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 04:12:PM by Roch »

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3331
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #71 on: August 18, 2021, 04:21:PM »
I think the 24/10/85 statement we have was probably given to the defence to account for DB's presence on the day in question. They may have redacted other elements, this is a possibility. They had him just collecting the socks at this early stage. COLP would have requested a copy of his statement to clear up issues surrounding DB1. They gave them a forgery for the same date, possibly with other forged documents which COLP thought were 'dodgy' as indicated by their questioning.

My own view is that they soft peddled a bit particularly over the fire debris.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 06:37:PM by Bubo bubo »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44120
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #72 on: August 18, 2021, 06:43:PM »
Really?

If you look back at some of my older posts here around 2015, when I first got involved. You will see that I once believed the police could have planted the silencer and I also believed that Nevil rang 999. Because I naively took everything Mike posted at face value. It wasn't until I carried out my own due diligence and looked though all documents (with the intention of proving these theories) did I realise that these theories had no basis in truth and were factually incorrect.

So the idea that I am not prepared to entertain police corruption is extreme ignorance on your part.

Thank goodness for David's 'due diligence'.

Not only did he change his mind about Mike's theories, he also worked out the police did not create the mountain of forensic evidence & found his own 'hush hush' forensic evidence breakthrough'!

This is in contrast to Bubo Bubo who believes the police were staging the crime scene minutes after breaking into WHF.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2021, 06:44:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #73 on: August 18, 2021, 07:20:PM »
I think the 24/10/85 statement we have was probably given to the defence to account for DB's presence on the day in question. They may have redacted other elements, this is a possibility. They had him just collecting the socks at this early stage. COLP would have requested a copy of his statement to clear up issues surrounding DB1. They gave them a forgery for the same date, possibly with other forged documents which COLP thought were 'dodgy' as indicated by their questioning.

My own view is that they soft peddled a bit particularly over the fire debris.

Again, you have no evidence for this. Its no good claiming things are forgeries simply because they refute your preconceived conspiracy theory.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: THE SILENCER SAGA
« Reply #74 on: August 18, 2021, 07:21:PM »
For play to you if you have completed such due diligence on Mike's claims - but that should not result in dismissing out of hand everyone else's research or claims. You go so far, that you practically invent excuses for EP / authorities, in every aspect of the case (and a lot of other incidents).

Such as?