Now lets get the facts right:-
(1) Jeremy received the call from his father at about 3:10am
(2) He then called the police...
(3) He then made a call to Julie Mugford at about 3.25am
(4) he then got dressed and made his way to the scene where he was met by the occupants of CA97...
Why would PC West record the timing of Jeremy's call at 3:36am, or by Malcolm Bonnet at 3:26am?
Why would Mugford claim the timing of the call to her from Jeremy took place at about 3:30am, and then later change or alter her account to the call in question having occurred at about 3:15 am?
In answer to your question; Why has JB changed his times? On taped interview last year he said the call from his father was between 3.15 and 3.30.
It was accepted at trial BY BOTH SIDES that the call to police from JB commenced at 3.26.
How do you so easily discount the evidence of 3 independant witnesses who claimed the call to JM was around 2.59 - 3.04.?
These are not facts Mike, they are JB's words.
Let's see the statements when his back's to the wall.
Wasn't it yourself that tried to put up a theory of JB calling the Police at 3.36? There are many posts about the telephone logs and how this showed that the police car was called out Before JB's call, to indicate that Nevill called the Police at 3.26. Will you now remove those posts as If you believe every word of this statement you are contradicting JB himself?
---------------------
One of the problems in this case, is that the police are responsible for trying to move the time of the various calls, not only by being responsible for generating confusion about the control room clock being ten minutes or so out of synchronization, but also because they obtained statements from a few lodgers who lived in the same building as Julie Mugford, to say that the timing of Jeremy's call to Julie had taken place before Julie claimed it had taken place (Julie Mugford also altered the timing of the call from initially taking place around 3:30am, to about 3:15am), and so it is with this in mind, that everything regarding the timings of the calls should be looked at...
At the end of the day...
The timing of events as shown in Jeremy's original witness statement, dated, 7th August 1985, have always been in the possession of the police, and as a result the police have always been in possession of the true facts which they could have checked and challenged from an early stage, if the timings which Jeremy mentioned were untrue, inaccurate, or deliberately misleading. Now, you mention that Jeremy has changed the time of the call that was made to him by his father, by reference to an interview made last year by Jeremy when he said that the timing of the call from his father was between 3:15 and 3;30am? Well, based on the timing referred to in Jeremy's original statement, of that call taking place at about 3:10am, and having regards to the timing of the call received by PC west (3;36am, 3:26am) and the fact that by last year so many different sequences of timed events had been, and were being mentioned by various parties to these proceedings, the timings mentioned by Jeremy in that interview last year which you refer to, could have been made with the time frame put forward by the police in mind, which is what he was talking about, he may have been using the police time frame when he spoke about this matter on that occasion, and this demonstrates how easily matters can be taken out of perspective and misrepresented, sometimes by a witness who is genuinely trying to tell the truth, by a reliance upon his or her own recollection, or with some other timed event as mentioned by other witnesses, with a view of trying to make some sort of sense out of a confused situation. Lets approach this matter from a slightly different perspective just for a moment, and say that if the timings mentioned in Jeremy's 7th August 1985 witness statement is / are true, then of course the phone logs which are now in the public domain, bearing the times of 3:36am and 3:26am, are both wrong, inaccurate and very misleading. Since, the call by Jeremy to the police (PC West) must have taken place long before 3:36am, or as the case may be, before 3:26am...
It is all very well claiming that it is Jeremy who is responsible for changing the timing of these various calls, but the truth of the matter is, other parties are responsible for doing that also, and Jeremy has a right to respond to any timed reference made by any of the other parties, as mentioned by them by a reliance upon any of the time frames these other parties choose to have relied upon at one time or another? Basically put, no-one is denying that Jeremy did not call the police, or that Jeremy did not call Julie Mugford, or that Jeremy did not set off to go to WHF as instructed by the police and that once he got there, he was met by the occupants of CA07, but each of the interested parties refer to these timed events by mention of a different time, depending when you choose to rely on such a timed reference, since this alters as time moves on and various explanations about clocks being ten minutes fast, and fifthteen minutes fast are thrown into the equation, with the sole purpose of muddying the waters. For me I think the most accurate times are those recorded in Jeremy's 7th August 1985 witness statement, for the simple fact that all the other references were introduced later, or as the case may be, have been tampered with...
I do not accept that both sides agreed that the timing of the call made by Jeremy to the police, was at 3:26am, in the circumstances you are trying to convey, since all that was accepted at that time, on that occasion, was that PC West gave an explanation for the clock in the control room being ten minutes fast, and that if true, the timing of the call as set out in the log (3:36am) should have been 3:26am, instead. Now, the CPS and the defense and the crown court had access to Jeremy's original witness statement dated, 7th August 1985, at that stage, so why would the CPS / defense agree that the timing of Jeremy's call to PC west took place at 3:26am, when in Jeremy's own witness statement dated, 7th August 1985, that call could only have taken place sooner, at say just after 3:10am? It wouldn't make any sense for the defense to agree to the timing of the call which Jeremy made to PC West, to have taken place at 3:36am, or with the benefit of the explanation about the control room clock being ten minutes fast, 3:26am? So, with this in mind, what I would say is that the only thing which was accepted during the trial was that the clock in the control room may have been or was ten minutes fast, and that by a reliance on that fact, then any timed reference in the log which gave the time as/of 3:36am, should have read 3:26am? The timings as recorded in Jeremy's 7th August 1985 witness statement contradict any suggestion that Jeremy could have called PC West as late as 3:26am, since based on those contents that call would have had to have taken place a lot sooner than that...
How do I so easily discount the evidence of 3 independant witnesses who claimed the call to JM was around 2.59 - 3.04.?
Here we go again...
You are trying to marry up the time frames of different parties to these proceedings as though there was some sort of universal time that everything has to be judged against. Let me try to put it as simple as I can, without appearing to make it as complicated as I can, so that you can fully understand or appreciate the full picture - If we take the timed references to which you are referring in this example, as being true and accurate, and you look at this against the timing of the call as mentioned by Julie Mugford in her first statement where she gives the time as being 3:30am, you suddenly begin to realize the scale of the problem we are trying to deal with? Worse still, if we then look at the same problem but then choose to rely upon the changed / altered time reference made by Julie who then claimed the call had taken place at about 3:15am, again you see the problem we are faced with? If you then consider the timed references to which you seek to rely on in this part of your query, against both of the different times as mentioned by Julie Mugford, in her first account (3:30am) and second account (3:15am), you then come to understand, or at least you should do, that we are not dealing with a universal clock against which everything can be set in stone and gauged? Then of course, there is the business of the police knowing that many of the residents who lived at the same lodgings as Julie Mugford were drug takers, and users, some of which had many previous convictions for dishonesty and drug offences, now I am not saying that just because of this that anything any resident who lived at the same lodgings as Julie Mugford, said about the timing of an event that took place in the middle of the night, should be disregarded just because of these facts, but if someone like Jeremy had been relying upon the evidence any of these people could give as part of his defense, the prosecution would have been quick to introduce any evidence of wrongdoing and dishonesty into the equation with a view of trying to discredit them as witnesses, if for example, any of them had got previous convictions for dishonesty or drug taking or whatever...
Lets get the facts right, Julie Mugford was a drug taker, herself...
As for your suggestion that I should consider removing earlier posts, about how could a patrol car be deployed to the scene at 3:35am, if the timing of the call from Jeremy to PC West took place at 3:36am, or whatever, and that this helped to prove that Ralph Bamber did in fact make a call to the police, I don't feel that I have to remove anything since those comments which I made at that time, were made having regard to the time frame, as given by PC West in the logs being talked about. The fact that Jeremy made a witness statement, dated, 7th August 1985, saying that he received a call from his father at about 3:10am, and that he then called the police (PC West) and that by about 3:25am how he had called Julie Mugford, does not indicate that Ralph could not have called the police, like he did do - before Jeremy did?
There is no need to remove those posts, since it is clear that I have made correct references to the time frame mentioned by PC West in his log, and the time frame mentioned in the other log made by Malcolm Bonnet, including all the other details and information. One of the major problems with the prosecutions case in this respect is that the timing of events, as relied upon, or mentioned by their own witnesses, is absolutely mind boggling, shocking and unreliable, and it beggars belief that the court should have given these matters the time of day for the jury to consider as though there was some sort of universal clock, that always kept the correct time, by which all events referred to by all witnesses should be judged against, well I am afraid no such universal clock existed in the circumstances of this case, only different sequences of events, and the recollections of different witnesses, who all confirm at least that certain events did happen...
