Telecoms in 1985

[ILB]

It would have been all over the internet over the last 20 years.

could have yes.

The question has to be asked why the prosecution wouldn't use that as the main point of case at trial in 1986 though. As that piece of evidence would literally seal the case shut. No phone call from Nevill no case for Bamber junior. Slam dunk case

But no telecoms evidence was put forward

I will hesitate to say suspicious.

[Adam]

could have yes.

The question has to be asked why the prosecution wouldn't use that as the main point of case at trial in 1986 though. As that piece of evidence would literally seal the case shut. No phone call from Nevill no case for Bamber junior. Slam dunk case

But no telecoms evidence was put forward

I will hesitate to say suspicious.

If there was evidence of a call, the defence would have brought it up at trial.

The prosecution would just say it was Bamber calling his AM.

So no side benefits.

What would have been interesting is the time Bamber called his AM.

[Adam]

If there was evidence of a call, the defence would have brought it up at trial.

The prosecution would just say it was Bamber calling his AM.

So no side benefits.

What would have been interesting is the time Bamber called his AM.

This would benefit the prosecution.

Highlighting he had time to cycle back & call Julie & the police at the stated times.

[Rob_]

If there was evidence of a call, the defence would have brought it up at trial.

The prosecution would just say it was Bamber calling his AM.

So no side benefits.

What would have been interesting is the time Bamber called his AM.

"The prosecution would just say it was Bamber calling his AM"

It would depend on the time Adam as we have been discussing, if the logs happened to show the call was 3.10 JB is innocent.

[Munksa]

In 1978 the BTK killer claimed his eighth victim. He made an anaoymous phonecall from a public phone box. The police never knew the killer at that time. His identity not confirmed till 2005 but They could trace the call to that payphone. On a residential street. And the timing of that call

I find it unfeasable that the technology did not exist across the Atlantic in 1985. In fact I believe that in the 1983 case of brinks mat phonecall tracing and times were used

If this is the same chap  BTK strangler than it's an American case so different country and telephone system. I remember this case from CBS reality channel.

[Adam]

"The prosecution would just say it was Bamber calling his AM"

It would depend on the time Adam as we have been discussing, if the logs happened to show the call was 3.10 JB is innocent.

'If'. Regarding a non existent log.

[Adam]

'If'. Regarding a non existent log.

On a call that may not have happened.

[Adam]

Fair play to QC. He was in like a shot.

I just posted a straight forward way Bamber could fake a call from WHF. If he so chose.

QC instantly tried to tie me down to 3.10am & Susan Battersby.

Although Bamber said himself 'about 3.10am' & SB's time estimation is one of several.

[Munksa]

could have yes.

The question has to be asked why the prosecution wouldn't use that as the main point of case at trial in 1986 though. As that piece of evidence would literally seal the case shut. No phone call from Nevill no case for Bamber junior. Slam dunk case

But no telecoms evidence was put forward

I will hesitate to say suspicious.

They can't  forward an evidence if  it does not exist, I asked you this before so repeating again. If it existed the Defence would have dug it out thenselves

[ILB]

They can't  forward an evidence if  it does not exist, I asked you this before so repeating again. If it existed the Defence would have dug it out thenselves

and I stand fast it was available

[Adam]

The evidence is Bamber did not need to phone his AM from WHF. As no record of such a call could be obtained.

The stage managed phone off the hook is the only evidence suggesting Nevill used a phone.

[Munksa]

and I stand fast it was available

Evidence please ILB if you are so sure.

I thought your whole post was based on the uncertainty of its existence?

[ILB]

You know full well it was available. Maybe the prosecution felt it was watertight with mugford etc

The fact is it was not provided on by both arlidge or rivlin or Bamber. And it's strange

[Rob_]

Fair play to QC. He was in like a shot.

I just posted a straight forward way Bamber could fake a call from WHF. If he so chose.

QC instantly tried to tie me down to 3.10am & Susan Battersby.

Although Bamber said himself 'about 3.10am' & SB's time estimation is one of several.

Quite rightly to Adam, if you post something expect people to examine it, you guilters want it all ways that's the trouble. If someone says JB faked the call then there has to be a logical reason why he would. Likewise if he delays the phone call after receiving the call from Nevil there has to be a reason why this would benefit him other than cast huge suspicion on himself.

[Munksa]

You know full well it was available. Maybe the prosecution felt it was watertight with mugford etc

The fact is it was not provided on by both arlidge or rivlin or Bamber. And it's strange

If I knew I wouldn't be asking you! If you knew you should be able to provide evidence. I will ask you again please point me to the source.

It didn't exist so they weren't able to provide. Nothing strange about it.