0 Members and 37 Guests are viewing this topic.
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.
Again, you have no evidence for this. Its no good claiming things are forgeries simply because they refute your preconceived conspiracy theory.
There are clearly 2 statements both dated the same. However they have different details, they are either both correct in which case why two statements they could be amalgamated or one of them is a forgery. I have set out my argument as to why I think the COLP statement is the forgery. Please stop making 'Swat the post arguments without detailing where they are wrong.
There is no "mountain of evidence". It is something you have made up.
According to Birds pocket book. He took two soil samples, one from the scene and the other from a trail to the farm. That explains why its in his pocket book twice.
I have looked at the statement by Bird that you posted earlier and I have looked at the list of all exhibits presented at Jeremy's trial. The statement from Bird that we have only seems to mention the exhibits that were later to be presented at trial. So, I would infer from this that a simplified statement was produced only mentioning relevant exhibits to save time. NGB might be able to add to this.
Another rubbish argument. They were withholding evidence if that is the case. All items collected should be in the statement and reference made to a particular exhibit when discussed at trial. Although as someone used to producing selective pieces of evidence, I am sure that you would favour this approach. Then why did they not send both statements to the COLP enquiry and explain the reason for this. They were withholding evidence from the enquiry.
How can they have been withholding evidence from COLP when COLP have the statement in the first place? (Since it is mentioned in the interview)
You told me there were two statements but they only sent the second one. Another ill thought out rubbish response.I will not be responding to your posts. You complain about Adam and his Gish Gallops but in your own way you are just as bad. Selectively posting evidence. Posting ill thought out responses. Using one line Swat the post entries. Posting links to large amounts of evidence with no reason as to why they have been posted. In your own way you are just as tiresome. As previously stated you do not answer perfectly valid questions probably because you have no answer. Should you post something of value I will consider a response. In the mean time I'm afraid you are on the naughty step with Adam
Your wasting my time again. The answer has already been posted. Read my posts.
