Author Topic: Telecoms in 1985  (Read 15691 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #210 on: January 09, 2022, 08:57:PM »
Your stating this as a fact - in your own words, Source please

It's as much of a fact as now & when 1471 became an option.  AM's have always been on 24/7. Common sense.

This rules out Nevill calling Bamber as Nevill would have left a message. Or not bothered.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Kestrel19

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #211 on: January 09, 2022, 09:00:PM »
One of the other aspects that confuses the whole scenario, if you look at Ann Eaton’s “notes” elsewhere on the forum she lays out a timeline of what happened as she has been told it.
On one of the pages she mentions “Jeremy Phones Chelmsford Police who didn’t react at all quickly - 11 minutes”
This is on the same page as she mentions that Sheila was found on the bed with the gun next to her.

11 minutes is virtually the entire time between the 3.26 and end of the 3.36 calls - i.e if she is right then only one call occurred.
However - where did she get this information from as it seems very exact but given that it appears in her notes at the same time as Sheila on the bed this wouldn’t fit with the presented evidence and if the call really was 11 minutes then why did West push so hard at the trial that the call was 2-3 minutes at most? It was put to him that the call would have been longer but he insisted that it wasn’t.

Offline Kestrel19

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #212 on: January 09, 2022, 09:02:PM »
It's as much of a fact as now & when 1471 became an option.  AM's have always been on 24/7. Common sense.

This rules out Nevill calling Bamber as Nevill would have left a message. Or not bothered.

So not a fact then - just your opinion

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #213 on: January 09, 2022, 09:31:PM »
So not a fact then - just your opinion

Do you disagree? In your opinion.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Munksa

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #214 on: January 10, 2022, 12:08:AM »
Do you disagree? In your opinion.

Adam, since you like talking about AM this is for you. Looks like he had one post murders, that's for sure as per Roger Wilkes.

And some info about  Eaton which will make some here "orgasmic" with joy as relatives and Mugford are always  hot topics for those concerned 😁

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #215 on: January 10, 2022, 04:48:AM »
Adam, since you like talking about AM this is for you. Looks like he had one post murders, that's for sure as per Roger Wilkes.

And some info about  Eaton which will make some here "orgasmic" with joy as relatives and Mugford are always  hot topics for those concerned 😁

Obviously the AM would have switched on before Bamber woke.

He was upstairs, probably behind a closed door, sleeping 'like a log'.

Nevill would have left a message - proof for Bamber. Or not left a message - someone discovers the bodies.

However Bamber rounded the alive suspects down to one by calling the police & confirmed he committed the massacre.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2022, 04:49:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Munksa

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #216 on: January 10, 2022, 11:56:AM »
Obviously the AM would have switched on before Bamber woke.

He was upstairs, probably behind a closed door, sleeping 'like a log'.

Nevill would have left a message - proof for Bamber. Or not left a message - someone discovers the bodies.

However Bamber rounded the alive suspects down to one by calling the police & confirmed he committed the massacre.

Slept like a log but flung out of bed within seconds of the ringing, that too downstairs. Shame didn't rush to his terrified father in the same manner 🤣
« Last Edit: January 10, 2022, 11:57:AM by Munksa »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #217 on: January 10, 2022, 12:59:PM »
It seems the technology did exist to determine whether Nevill called from WHF.

It's called an answering machine.

The result - he didn't.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Munksa

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #218 on: January 10, 2022, 01:08:PM »
It seems the technology did exist to determine whether Nevill called from WHF.

It's called an answering machine.

The result - he didn't.

I don't even like to participate in such debate because it's simply going round in circles.  it's obvious there was no such details available then.  If it was the information will benefit BOTH Prosecution and Defence, both will argue their point, a nice court battle! BT can't miraculously produce when it does not exist. Period! But hang on..... BT conspired with EP 🤦

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #219 on: January 10, 2022, 01:30:PM »
One option would be to call his AM from WHF & leave a message. Pretending to be Nevill.

He can then ring the police a few hours later when awake & create the siege situation in daylight.

He probably felt his impression of Nevill would not be good enough & just saying Nevill called him was enough.

However the AM not having a message from Nevill confirms his guilt. Again.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2022, 01:31:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #220 on: January 10, 2022, 01:32:PM »
One option would be to call his AM from WHF & leave a message. Pretending to be Nevill.

He can then ring the police a few hours later when awake & create the siege situation in daylight.

He probably felt his impression of Nevill would not be good enough & just saying Nevill called him was enough.

However the AM not having a message from Nevill confirms his guilt. Again.

Of course he could not slip up & ring Julie at 3am if he did this.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #221 on: January 10, 2022, 02:05:PM »
More brainwashed rubbish  ::)

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #222 on: January 10, 2022, 02:24:PM »
More brainwashed rubbish  ::)

Lookout you need to accept Bamber's answering machine would have switched on within 5 - 15 seconds. Meaning Bamber would not have woken.

You are entitled to support Bamber because he sends you Christmas cards. Or change stance.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #223 on: January 10, 2022, 02:27:PM »
Lookout you need to accept Bamber's answering machine would have switched on within 5 - 15 seconds. Meaning Bamber would not have woken.

You are entitled to support Bamber because he sends you Christmas cards. Or change stance.





I don't believe anything you say. Someone took his answering machine and nobody's heard of anything since, so there couldn't have been anything of interest could there ?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44576
Re: Telecoms in 1985
« Reply #224 on: January 10, 2022, 02:30:PM »




I don't believe anything you say. Someone took his answering machine and nobody's heard of anything since, so there couldn't have been anything of interest could there ?

There was nothing on his AM as no one rang from WHF.

If Nevill had rang from WHF the AM would have switched on before Bamber woke.

This once again confirms his guilt.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2022, 02:32:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.