Podcast by Bamber's support group containing information about 03/21 submission

[killingeve]

Why does Bews lie about this incident, he claims that he called for armed backup before returning to the car. In three interviews I have seen it was first Myall, then JB then in the last interview it was himself who saw the reflection / movement.

Why no mention in Bews and Myall statements? it was the moment armed police were called so an important moment that night, were the statements latter re-written?

Look also at the times they left Witham in the statements???

Factually innocent or factually guilty? I don't know but if I find police officers lying he is innocent.

I'm not sure he did lie.  He might have forgotten the order of events when he wrote the statement much the same way Bamber did with regards to whether he called Julie before the police or vice-versa. 

[Adam]

I'm not sure he did lie.  He might have forgotten the order of events when he wrote the statement much the same way Bamber did with regards to whether he called Julie before the police or vice-versa.

That is a good point.

At least Bews has been interviewed & spoken about the 'trick of the light'. Although it was so trivial at the time it seems he can't remember who saw it.

Bamber has never given his version of who first mentioned it & has been forgetful or refused to discuss lots of things.

The only confirmed thing is that they all looked at the window together & saw nothing else. 

[lookout]

JB wasn't the only one who " couldn't remember things ! ". Remember ? No, perhaps you don't, or don't want to.

[Rob_]

I'm not sure he did lie.  He might have forgotten the order of events when he wrote the statement much the same way Bamber did with regards to whether he called Julie before the police or vice-versa.

You are being very kind to him, of course if we could see Bews situation report this could all be cleared up.

I bet there was no mention of a reflection in it!

[killingeve]

You are being very kind to him, of course if we could see Bews situation report this could all be cleared up.

I bet there was no mention of a reflection in it!

Certainly no mention of a reflection in Bamber's witness statement dated 7th Aug 1985.  In fact he makes no mention whatsover of the incident

Maybe lots could be cleared up if Bamber would agree to disclose his statement of reasons doc issued by the commission in 2012 unless you're part of his inner circle and privy to such information.  100 pages of why it didn't refer. 

[killingeve]

JB wasn't the only one who " couldn't remember things ! ". Remember ? No, perhaps you don't, or don't want to.

Its a pity he didn't think to take a pocket book with him.

[lookout]

Its a pity he didn't think to take a pocket book with him.

Why would he when he had nothing to put in it ? If you've done nothing what can you write about ?

[killingeve]

Why would he when he had nothing to put in it ? If you've done nothing what can you write about ?

Of course he had lots to put in it.  'Trick of the light, curtains opening/closing, lights on/off, conversations with police officers, time he called Julie from the call box etc, etc.  Today he would have a smart phone to take images and videos. 

[lookout]

Of course he had lots to put in it.  'Trick of the light, curtains opening/closing, lights on/off, conversations with police officers, time he called Julie from the call box etc, etc.  Today he would have a smart phone to take images and videos.

I thought he told police " that's for you to decide ". The more you put words into someone's mouth, the more they can twist them when they're that way inclined----a bit like here !

[Aunt Agatha]

Jeremy and I discussed the figure at the window some 30 yrs ago.
He has always claimed both he and the police witnessed what they thought was a figure at the window.

[lookout]

AA, unfortunately the initial reporting of this by Bews to HQ was unknown because that particular page of what had been written had been missing ( destroyed ? ) Jeremy had asked for there to be an ESDA test on the page beneath-----and the test had been refused, even though payment had been offered.

This ESDA test was used in the Bridgewater 4 case when a forged paper had been found. Their convictions were overturned 20 years later, thanks to Michael Mansfield.

Would you ask for such a test if you were guilty ?

[killingeve]

I thought he told police " that's for you to decide ". The more you put words into someone's mouth, the more they can twist them when they're that way inclined----a bit like here !

I think you might be getting mixed up with the prosecutor who put it to Bamber he murdered his family. Bamber replied "That's for you to prove".  Prove it he did!  This was the opportunity Lookout for Bamber to set out his stall for the jury about movement at the window etc.  No one put any words into his mouth.  He probably sealed his own fate with a stupid comment!

[killingeve]

Jeremy and I discussed the figure at the window some 30 yrs ago.
He has always claimed both he and the police witnessed what they thought was a figure at the window.

May I ask were you his lawyer?

[killingeve]

AA, unfortunately the initial reporting of this by Bews to HQ was unknown because that particular page of what had been written had been missing ( destroyed ? ) Jeremy had asked for there to be an ESDA test on the page beneath-----and the test had been refused, even though payment had been offered.

This ESDA test was used in the Bridgewater 4 case when a forged paper had been found. Their convictions were overturned 20 years later, thanks to Michael Mansfield.

Would you ask for such a test if you were guilty ?

If this is so I am surprised Michael Turner QC did not raise at Bamber's 2002 appeal but not a word about the whole incident.  He was also involved in the Bridgewater 4 case.

We are really wasting time even discussing this as it will never go anywhere at this stage.  All it could ever have done was sow a seed of doubt in the mind of jurors at trial but after hearing about the silencer and Julie Mugford's evidence I doubt it featured at all. 

[Roch]

We are really wasting time even discussing this as it will never go anywhere at this stage.  All it could ever have done was sow a seed of doubt in the mind of jurors at trial but after hearing about the silencer and Julie Mugford's evidence I doubt it featured at all.

That depends on whether any further documentation has come to light. I doubt any has come to light. It doesn't matter regarding whether it wasn't in Bamber's statement. Where is the sound moderator in relatives' statements concurrent with its discovery?  If something comes to light that shows force arms were drawn after there was movement noticed in the house, then that blows out of the water any trick of the light claims.