THE SILENCER SAGA

[mike tesko]

Most successful prosecutions, are fundamentally based upon supposition [an imaginary form of the actual truth], which basically amounts, to 'a great leap of faith' [false] without any, said investigator, or prosecution witness - 'speculation at its most damning!!!

Those' in power', beleive that ' if you can think it', 'a jury' could 'easily', 'be' convinced' that 'a defendant', 'is' /'was', 'convicted' of 'any type of criminal activity' '' 'alledged', 'accusation(s)'..

[killingeve]

I have 'access to everything' that 'I need to rely upon', including 'support through 'paranormal avenues' /'activities'..

Need? I thought you had been thrown over and substituted by the support group?

If you were relying on support through 'paranormal avenues/activities' to support a person you believe has been wrongly convicted person then I doubt you would be much use as a Mckenzie friend. 

I am unsure as to how you are able to determine what the police should or should not have done, operationally speaking, if you do not have access to the training/operations manual 1985? 

Do you have a copy?  If not did you attempt to obtain a copy at the time or any time since?

I admire your dedication and loyalty to Bamber's cause but I remain unconvinced its a worthy one pal?

[killingeve]

Most successful prosecutions, are fundamentally based upon supposition [an imaginary form of the actual truth], which basically amounts, to 'a great leap of faith' [false] without any, said investigator, or prosecution witness - 'speculation at its most damning!!!

Those' in power', beleive that ' if you can think it', 'a jury' could 'easily', 'be' convinced' that 'a defendant', 'is' /'was', 'convicted' of 'any type of criminal activity' '' 'alledged', 'accusation(s)'..

I would say most successful prosecutions are based on prosecuting counsel delivering a more believable narrative to the jury than defence counsel. 

[killingeve]

I am still investigating DC Bird.  My post above was really aimed at David1819 who claims the socks were simply left discarded on the main bedroom floor and DC Bird collected from there when it is clear he did not.

From DC Bird's COLP interview:

DS Young: Can you describe to us how you actually got to the scene?

PC Bird: What you mean?

DS Young: From Headquarters to

PC Bird: Oh, we've got a major incident vehicle, its a large transit and I took Mr Cook up there.

DS Young: Right

PC Bird: And that's loaded with all the equipment for other scenes of crime officers so its a mobile store room in effect

[killingeve]

Where does the info come from about DC Bird collecting the blue socks after 9th Aug?

[killingeve]

Each exhibit 'seized', 'found' or 'recovered' at a crime scene should be placed in a plastic exhibit bag [before it is taken away to the police station] , [or, as the case may be], for sending to a lab' to be `scientifically examined` by 'a variety of so called experts' ...

Attached to this plastic exhibits bag, should be an exhibit label, bearing 'the signature of the police officer', who 'first took possession ot the item' [or 'who saw it in the first instance', or as the case may be, 'who referred to its existence before anyone else']. The 'signature of the finder', should 'be on the exhibit label', accompanied by 'a number',(1, 2, 3, 4, etc) to 'confirm the order in which item', was 'taken'. Upon 'arrival at the designated police station', each item has to 'be manually entered into an official documant', known as 'the property other than found register', after which 'the items are transported to a property store at that establishment' - there is a ['separate'] 'property store register' belonging to 'the property store', in which 'everything that is placed into storage there', has 'to be recorded by inclusion of its exhibit recerence', the 'signature of the police officer', of 'the person' who is 'depositting' any number of 'items', there, and 'the date' and 'time', that 'the item's in question', were 'placed into storage', in 'there' . In addition to this, 'there is a police officer' who 'is solely responsible' for controlling 'what is put into storage', 'inside the property store', who is 'duty bound to countersign', 'each entry' in 'the property store register', alongside the 'signature of the depositivees'[adding 'date' and 'time' , against 'his', or 'her signature'[these measures are necessary to prevent 'a police officer' getting access to items of evidential value' and 'tampering', or 'exchanging one item' , for 'another', or from 'deliberately contaminating it' , or ''them' ...

It is 'significant', in this case, that 'no such police documentation', 'confirming these protocols', were 'strictly adhered to', in 'the case' brought, against 'Jeremy Bamber'

Has Bamber shared with you the 100 page doc produced by the review commission in 2012 explaining why it was not referring to appeal court? 

[Bubo bubo]

Where does the info come from about DC Bird collecting the blue socks after 9th Aug?

His statement that we have on the forum and the details of his COLP taped interview also on the forum where they discuss another and obviously different statement.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1037.0;attach=20698;image

This is the first of two pages showing the date. The second page describes him collecting only the socks.

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

[killingeve]

His statement that we have on the forum and the details of his COLP taped interview also on the forum where they discuss another and obviously different statement.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1037.0;attach=20698;image

This is the first of two pages showing the date. The second page describes him collecting only the socks.

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

I can't see anything about the blue bloodstained socks on the second page?

A blue pair of socks is mentioned later on but no mention of bloodstains.  It might be a different pair of socks found in the outbuildings when he took the gloves, gauntlets, fire debris from a pit etc.  Just because a blue pair of socks is mentioned it does not mean it is the pair found near Sheila's body containing bloodstains matching June's blood group. 

[Bubo bubo]

I can't see anything about the blue bloodstained socks on the second page?

A blue pair of socks is mentioned later on but no mention of bloodstains.  It might be a different pair of socks found in the outbuildings when he took the gloves, gauntlets, fire debris from a pit etc.  Just because a blue pair of socks is mentioned it does not mean it is the pair found near Sheila's body containing bloodstains matching June's blood group.

But there was only one pair of blue socks in the main bedroom and they were bloodstained! He could not, as you have shown collected them on that date. Why collect blue socks with no blood stains. On that basis they should have emptied the house of its contents

There are two demonstrably different statements made on the same day showing different items collected. Why make these two statements? You have not explained how this happened.

You seem to be clutching at straws. While possible it seems bizarre that there were another pair of blue socks in an outbuilding.

You seem to be reverting to guilter denial. 

[lookout]

I remember seeing a pic of the kitchen where a pair of pale blue socks were beside a red plastic garbage bin. This pic is somewhere on the forum but can't remember which thread it was under.

[killingeve]

I remember seeing a pic of the kitchen where a pair of pale blue socks were beside a red plastic garbage bin. This pic is somewhere on the forum but can't remember which thread it was under.

Yeah its not like blue socks are uncommon.  I think the socks in question were probably found in the outbuildings with other such items eg gloves, gaunlets.  Just because a blue pair of socks is mentioned doesn't mean it was the bloodstained pair found in the main bedroom. 

DS Jones handed over the keys of the farmhouse to Mrs Eaton late noon on 9th Aug.  At the same time he explained the alarm system.  How were officers able to come and go thereafter?  I think they went in after 9th Aug to check windows and take a paint sample from the Aga mantle and presumably the relatives had to allow access?  Prosecution (and defence?) counsel visited scene of crime prior to trial. 

[killingeve]

But there was only one pair of blue socks in the main bedroom and they were bloodstained! He could not, as you have shown collected them on that date. Why collect blue socks with no blood stains. On that basis they should have emptied the house of its contents

There are two demonstrably different statements made on the same day showing different items collected. Why make these two statements? You have not explained how this happened.

You seem to be clutching at straws. While possible it seems bizarre that there were another pair of blue socks in an outbuilding.

You seem to be reverting to guilter denial.

He doesn't mention the blue socks he collected and referred to as DB/6 as having bloodstains on or that he found them within the farmhouse. 

Why does it seem bizarre another pair of blue socks were found in outbuildings?  They were probably thick outdoor ones worn with wellies or other such outdoor footwear suitable for farming.  They were collected with gloves and gauntlets so obviously a place where such items were kept.

You can't see the woods for the trees matey and its obscuring your vision as to what really happened! 

[lookout]

The bloodstained socks in the bedroom which were near Sheila had droplets of June's blood on them which coincided with the droplets of blood on the carpet which again were June's blood----as were droplets found beneath the sewing room window. It would have seemed that an injured June had wandered around before succumbing to her injuries ?

[Bubo bubo]

He doesn't mention the blue socks he collected and referred to as DB/6 as having bloodstains on or that he found them within the farmhouse. 

Why does it seem bizarre another pair of blue socks were found in outbuildings?  They were probably thick outdoor ones worn with wellies or other such outdoor footwear suitable for farming.  They were collected with gloves and gauntlets so obviously a place where such items were kept.

You can't see the woods for the trees matey and its obscuring your vision as to what really happened!

Please do not call me matey. Is this a mirage.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1037.0;attach=20699;image

Of what possible evidential value was a pair of blue 'Welly' or other use socks from an outbuilding. Did DB have a blue sock fetish?

There was only one pair of blue socks in the main bedroom as per SOC photos. They clearly show blood staining.

Why did he not pass his other finds to DS Davidson. Was he also at the farm that day?

You have still to explain why he made two different statements on the same day.

[killingeve]

Please do not call me matey. Is this a mirage.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1037.0;attach=20699;image

Of what possible evidential value was a pair of blue 'Welly' or other use socks from an outbuilding. Did DB have a blue sock fetish?

There was only one pair of blue socks in the main bedroom as per SOC photos. They clearly shows blood staining.

Why did he not pass his other finds to DS Davidson. Was he also at the farm that day?

You have still to explain why he made two different statements on the same day.

Of what possible evidential value was a pair of gloves and gauntlets from the outbuilding?  If a pair of non-blood stained blue socks were found with the gloves and gauntlets then why take the latter and not the former?