At last, here are Jeremy's original witness statements, 7th and 8th August 1985?

[grahameb]

Watch your spelling folks. Reader's about.

[SUMMER]

I see what you mean Rochford-Jeremy does indeed make a big "jump" back
in time within this statement.
Could it just be a case of "Oh, I forgot to mention the first 'phone-call to Julie "
after he tells of the second much later one to her?
It seems that in his statement his main focus of attention was on his Father's call to him and then his own call to the Police and going to the Farm and meeting up with the Police.
Perhaps that was so traumatic to him that his first call to Julie seemed irrelevant.
But it also begs the question of why he made the first 'phone call to Julie at all  during such a time!
It is an aspect of his behaviour that I have never understood - why call Julie at  3ish, in the morning, all she tells him is to "go back to sleep" anyway!
That first call was an irrelevance during a crisis that I just don't understand unless he thought he might be injured whilst at the Farm.
Or unless he wanted to make yet another call from his Cottage that would firmly place him in Goldhanger
at that particullar time?

[bob]

I see what you mean Rochford-Jeremy does indeed make a big "jump" back
in time within this statement.
Could it just be a case of "Oh, I forgot to mention the first 'phone-call to Julie "
after he tells of the second much later one to her?
It seems that in his statement his main focus of attention was on his Father's call to him and then his own call to the Police and going to the Farm and meeting up with the Police.
Perhaps that was so traumatic to him that his first call to Julie seemed irrelevant.
But it also begs the question of why he made the first 'phone call to Julie at all  during such a time!
It is an aspect of his behaviour that I have never understood - why call Julie at  3ish, in the morning, all she tells him is to "go back to sleep" anyway!
That first call was an irrelevance during a crisis that I just don't understand unless he thought he might be injured whilst at the Farm.
Or unless he wanted to make yet another call from his Cottage that would firmly place him in Goldhanger
at that particullar time?

Indeed. I think could be on the right track there Summer...

[Roch]

I see what you mean Rochford-Jeremy does indeed make a big "jump" back
in time within this statement.
Could it just be a case of "Oh, I forgot to mention the first 'phone-call to Julie "
after he tells of the second much later one to her?
It seems that in his statement his main focus of attention was on his Father's call to him and then his own call to the Police and going to the Farm and meeting up with the Police.
Perhaps that was so traumatic to him that his first call to Julie seemed irrelevant.
But it also begs the question of why he made the first 'phone call to Julie at all  during such a time!
It is an aspect of his behaviour that I have never understood - why call Julie at  3ish, in the morning, all she tells him is to "go back to sleep" anyway!
That first call was an irrelevance during a crisis that I just don't understand unless he thought he might be injured whilst at the Farm.
Or unless he wanted to make yet another call from his Cottage that would firmly place him in Goldhanger
at that particullar time?

I'm not sure I agree with bob but I can certainly see that take on things.  Look at his comments when he refuses to accept Nevill is dead.  Look at what he says about Julie.

[smiffy]

I see what you mean Rochford-Jeremy does indeed make a big "jump" back
in time within this statement.
Could it just be a case of "Oh, I forgot to mention the first 'phone-call to Julie "
after he tells of the second much later one to her?
It seems that in his statement his main focus of attention was on his Father's call to him and then his own call to the Police and going to the Farm and meeting up with the Police.
Perhaps that was so traumatic to him that his first call to Julie seemed irrelevant.
But it also begs the question of why he made the first 'phone call to Julie at all  during such a time!
It is an aspect of his behaviour that I have never understood - why call Julie at  3ish, in the morning, all she tells him is to "go back to sleep" anyway!
That first call was an irrelevance during a crisis that I just don't understand unless he thought he might be injured whilst at the Farm.
Or unless he wanted to make yet another call from his Cottage that would firmly place him in Goldhanger
at that particullar time?

Phone call to JM.
If JB was the killer the call to the police would be enough to place him at his home at the time it was made. There would be no need to make a call to JM.
If JB was the killer a call to JM would more likely draw suspicion on him ...though it could be argued he used it as a double bluff. Far better would have been no call to JM if he had a desire to hide the truth of what he had done.
On balance it does not suggest guilt at all in my view.

If innocent and Ralph made the call as JB claims...then the act of Ralph calling him and not the police means that Ralph did not want to involve the police. This argument holds with being credible.
If the call had not been ended abruptly as JB  claimed then its likely JB could have gone to whf to assist his father in dealing with Sheila. This muddied the waters as something had happened to end the call which JB would be unaware of.
So a dilemma is created in which JB will be unsure what to do and what to make of the call he had. Does he involve the police or deal with it himself which is probably what his father wanted and was the purpose of the call. A difficult decision in my view.

Now if the call to JM was before the police were called it is quite credible that in wondering what to do he wanted to seek advice from JM about what was the best course of action. Seemingly JM was not interested in even listening so was of no help whatsoever.
If the call to JM was after the police then JB for comfort/re-assurance may have phoned her as he seemed nervous(going by his slow drive to whf), again she seemed to show no interest and seemed to just want to get her sleep rather than be bothered with something going on in the early hours of the morning that might be nothing at all or some silly fasle alarm.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why the jump in the statement?

We are not sure if some of the statement is missing or not...the bit about a person being observed in the bedroom would fit in.
Also we need to consider the person taking the statement leads the statement and thus things are in their control and jumping around in the statement is often their doing.
An additional element that affects the first statement considerably is the presence of others when the statement was taken. Even more so when some of them (according to their own statements) have butted in and interrupted things or asked questions of either the police officer concerned or of JB.
Thus this statement cannot be relied on as much as some could as it was taken in rather adverse conditions that were far from satisfactory. The presence of others, especially persons known to the witness, can affect what the witness will say and stops them being fully open or may inhibit answers or influence answers.

[curiousessex]

The original statement also includes something it is now known and accepted by all sides to be untrue.

'After a few seconds, the phone went dead. There was a pause for a few seconds before he spoke to me. I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened'

[Hartley]

The original statement also includes something it is now known and accepted by all sides to be untrue.

'After a few seconds, the phone went dead. There was a pause for a few seconds before he spoke to me. I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened'

Hi Curious, could you explain a little further about which part you are suggesting that we all know to be untrue?

I'm going to guess that you are referring the the 'I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police'.

[curiousessex]

The original statement also includes something it is now known and accepted by all sides to be untrue.

'After a few seconds, the phone went dead. There was a pause for a few seconds before he spoke to me. I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened'

Hi Curious, could you explain a little further about which part you are suggesting that we all know to be untrue?

I'm going to guess that you are referring the the 'I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police'.

Hartley

You have guessed correctly.

It is now accepted and admitted by both defence and prosecution that Jeremy did not immediately phone Chelmsford police.

In my opinion this was the first inconsistency picked up by the police, particularly as Jeremy had already stated in statement that he received a telephone call from Nevill about 3.10am. The Police will have been able to check the time Jeremy had made a call to Chelmsford police. In my opinion this opened the door to legitimately ask more questions about the telephone calls on the morning of 7th August. Instead of obtaining clarity more inconsistency appeared which lead to more questions etc.

[smiffy]

The original statement also includes something it is now known and accepted by all sides to be untrue.

'After a few seconds, the phone went dead. There was a pause for a few seconds before he spoke to me. I tried to phone back immediately and found my father's phone to be engaged. I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police to inform them of what had happened'

Hi Curious, could you explain a little further about which part you are suggesting that we all know to be untrue?

I'm going to guess that you are referring the the 'I immediately phoned Chelmsford Police'.

Hartley

You have guessed correctly.

It is now accepted and admitted by both defence and prosecution that Jeremy did not immediately phone Chelmsford police.

In my opinion this was the first inconsistency picked up by the police, particularly as Jeremy had already stated in statement that he received a telephone call from Nevill about 3.10am. The Police will have been able to check the time Jeremy had made a call to Chelmsford police. In my opinion this opened the door to legitimately ask more questions about the telephone calls on the morning of 7th August. Instead of obtaining clarity more inconsistency appeared which lead to more questions etc.

Could the "immediately" have been a police interpretation of what JB said...
or could it be that due to the presence of numerous others that JB did not want to admit he dithered and could not decide what to do for several minutes....admitting that in front of others would have been embarressing for him.
quite frankly...the taking of that witness statement was carried out very badly indeed and cannot be relied on.
is it a real issue....NO.


Maybe a whole group of others lied because they together as a group planned and carried out the murders at whf.  If we treat a little lie as a sign of guilt...then thats pushing it....as major lies and incriminating evidence if used alone points guilt at others.

[DavidE]

statement one he leaves the gun in the kitchen, statement 2 he's left it in the hallway -

[mike tesko]

statement one he leaves the gun in the kitchen, statement 2 he's left it in the hallway -

As you go in through the door which the police forced entry to the farmhouse, you enter into a room which has often been referred to as a kitchen, but it is also the hallway that you are referring to, so there is no mystery there...

[DavidE]

correction. The hall way leads from the front door,past the staircase bottom, and past the 2 doors that enter the front rooms of the house. Straight opposite the front door at the bottom of the hall is a door to the kitchen

[mike tesko]

correction. The hall way leads from the front door,past the staircase bottom, and past the 2 doors that enter the front rooms of the house. Straight opposite the front door at the bottom of the hall is a door to the kitchen

You believe what you want to believe, but if you look through the window to the left of the courtyard rear door, you look into a room that was often called the kitchen. If you look through the window to the right of the aforementioned door, you look into the main kitchen...

In the photograph below, the small kitchen area I am referring to is to the right of the door, and the internal door which leads into the main kitchen is to the left of the door. The settle that Jeremy spoke about upon which he placed the rifle upon during the evening of 6th August 1985, is in this general area. This room would be viewed through the window to the left of the back external door shown in the latter photograph, the window to the right of the external door would be the main kitchen...

[mike tesko]

It doesn't matter which way Jeremy described leaving the rifle on the evening before the shootings, it all amounts to that place being the same place, on the settle in the small kitchen and hallway at the rear of the farmhouse - this room was also often referred to as the laundry...