Author Topic: Telecoms in 1985  (Read 15619 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #150 on: January 08, 2022, 08:38:PM »
Or he already knew the phone call could not be traced.

Which was correct.

Either way not a problem for Bamber.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #151 on: January 08, 2022, 08:40:PM »
The more important issue is Bamber would never have answered a call from Nevill.

Why?

Because he would be 'sleeping like a log' upstairs & his AM would pick up the call.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2022, 08:40:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #152 on: January 08, 2022, 08:42:PM »
Because they didn't have such facility will be the simplest answer

A pity. It would either show -

No call was made.

What time Bamber called his AM.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

guest29835

  • Guest
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #153 on: January 08, 2022, 08:46:PM »
Are you kiddin?! It's my opinion and yes assumptions. My assumption are based upon my understanding I am sharing it.  The amount of assumptions you make is more than anyone I have seen here. You ask question but when  it does not satisfy you,  you are patronising and I find you passive aggressive. Don't pretend.

Sorry that you have that view, but I'm just approaching the case logically.  I think your reaction is more a reflection on you, really.  I've noticed that aggression and insults is a typical response from the guilt camp when your arguments are pulled apart.  Of course, you may not agree that your arguments are flawed, but the manner in which you typically respond suggests to me otherwise.  You (i.e. the guilt camp as a whole) don't come back with anything substantial, you just complain about how you perceive me rather than challenging my arguments.  It's childish really and doesn't reflect well on your intellectual abilities.

Offline Rob_

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4869
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #154 on: January 08, 2022, 08:47:PM »
It does not exist.

Keep up.

"It does not exist" Yes I know Adam thanks

JB had two choices:

He fakes the call because he believes the call can be traced, in which case the call is at 3.10 and he just does not have time. Or he simply lies about the call in which case no need for the time difference between Nevil calling and JB phoning the police.

If you don't mind me saying I think QC has given you a bit of a drubbing today Adam!
« Last Edit: January 08, 2022, 08:50:PM by Rob_ »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #155 on: January 08, 2022, 08:49:PM »
"It does not exist" Yes I know Adam thanks

JB had two choices:

He fakes the call because he believes the call can be traced, in which case the call is at 3.10 and he just does not have time. Or he simply lies about the call in which case no need for the time difference between Nevil calling and JB phoning the police.

If you don' mind me saying I think QC has given you a bit of a drubbing today Adam!

Why?

And he still has time.

« Last Edit: January 08, 2022, 08:50:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #156 on: January 08, 2022, 08:53:PM »
"It does not exist" Yes I know Adam thanks

JB had two choices:

He fakes the call because he believes the call can be traced, in which case the call is at 3.10 and he just does not have time. Or he simply lies about the call in which case no need for the time difference between Nevil calling and JB phoning the police.

If you don't mind me saying I think QC has given you a bit of a drubbing today Adam!

Bamber said he was looking for the numbers of Witham & Chelmsford police.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #157 on: January 08, 2022, 08:54:PM »
"It does not exist" Yes I know Adam thanks

JB had two choices:

He fakes the call because he believes the call can be traced, in which case the call is at 3.10 and he just does not have time. Or he simply lies about the call in which case no need for the time difference between Nevil calling and JB phoning the police.

If you don't mind me saying I think QC has given you a bit of a drubbing today Adam!

Anyway feel free to answer reply 151.

Or is it like a Sheila scenario - not important.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #158 on: January 08, 2022, 08:56:PM »
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1091.msg33705.html#msg33705

Bamber does say 'about 3.10am.

Considering how erratic he's been with his timings over the last 36 years, the supporter nit picking falls flat.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #159 on: January 08, 2022, 09:03:PM »
"It does not exist" Yes I know Adam thanks

JB had two choices:

He fakes the call because he believes the call can be traced, in which case the call is at 3.10 and he just does not have time. Or he simply lies about the call in which case no need for the time difference between Nevil calling and JB phoning the police.

If you don't mind me saying I think QC has given you a bit of a drubbing today Adam!

A pity.

Only Bamber knows if he actually called his AM. Although even he may not know what time he did.

Or if he just took the WHF phone off the hook.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Rob_

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4869
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #160 on: January 08, 2022, 09:04:PM »
Anyway feel free to answer reply 151.

Or is it like a Sheila scenario - not important.

No not important Adam, it think it's time you came up with a plausible JB scenario, you know what details I have doubts about. Your chance to switch me to a guilter?

Not one line bullet points, but detailed please.

Offline Munksa

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #161 on: January 08, 2022, 09:05:PM »
Sorry that you have that view, but I'm just approaching the case logically.  I think your reaction is more a reflection on you, really.  I've noticed that aggression and insults is a typical response from the guilt camp when your arguments are pulled apart.  Of course, you may not agree that your arguments are flawed, but the manner in which you typically respond suggests to me otherwise.  You (i.e. the guilt camp as a whole) don't come back with anything substantial, you just complain about how you perceive me rather than challenging my arguments.  It's childish really and doesn't reflect well on your intellectual abilities.

And others are not looking at the case logically? Only you are?

I have challenged and answered  every question of yours! But instead of counter arguing you say, I am not thinking logically, I offended you, I didn't come with answers to satisfy you blah blah blah...

It's you who perceive others below you, you patronize  and criticize.

Please don't blow your own trumpet trying to sound intelligent, you really arnt! The FACT is you know nothing more than I or anyone else here do! Get that into your skull. Now, how does that sound?

I don't want to spoil for others but time to ignore you again.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2022, 09:07:PM by Munksa »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #162 on: January 08, 2022, 09:05:PM »
No not important Adam, it think it's time you came up with a plausible JB scenario, you know what details I have doubts about. Your chance to switch me to a guilter?

Not one line bullet points, but detailed please.

You've seen my scenario. It matches the evidence. Munksa agrees.

And yes it was dark outside.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #163 on: January 08, 2022, 09:08:PM »
Suspect with his 12 months of planning he knew a call could not be traced.

However was planning to use the office phone. For obvious reasons.

So didn't phone his cottage. Just left an obvious stage - phone off the hook.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2022, 09:10:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Rob_

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4869
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #164 on: January 08, 2022, 09:09:PM »
You've seen my scenario. It matches the evidence. Munksa agrees.

And yes it was dark outside.

Yes I have seen it Adam and like Cc do not agree with it sorry, if someone does something it's for a reason.

As Munksa said JB planned the crime for months, perhaps your scenario can reflect this? at the moment it looks like the red mist came down and JB did the crime on the spur of the moment?