Author Topic: 'U were Sheila's accomplice' - (his response) - 'You fucking Clever Bastard'...  (Read 3942 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
'Sheila' did not shoot herself, once downstairs in the kitchen, or on the second occasion upstairs on the floor of the main bedroom after her body was transferred from on top of the bed, onto the bedroom floor..
I will watch your videos on youtube again Mike,and refresh my memory of what you said about this.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
'Sheila' did not shoot herself, once downstairs in the kitchen, or on the second occasion upstairs on the floor of the main bedroom after her body was transferred from on top of the bed, onto the bedroom floor..
Hi Mike.Have watched your videos in the archive again,you just say Sheila used the spiral staircase to get upstairs and shoot herself around 8.15 or after.You do not elaborate too much.Do you mean she shot herself on the bed,and was later placed on the floor for some reason.I am sure you have explained all this before,and i have probably forgot.But i have read that many different scenarios now,i am forgetting who said what.But basically the cover up came about because the police should have saved Sheilas life,

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Hi Mike.Have watched your videos in the archive again,you just say Sheila used the spiral staircase to get upstairs and shoot herself around 8.15 or after.You do not elaborate too much.Do you mean she shot herself on the bed,and was later placed on the floor for some reason.I am sure you have explained all this before,and i have probably forgot.But i have read that many different scenarios now,i am forgetting who said what.But basically the cover up came about because the police should have saved Sheilas life,

Thank you ['snow66'] for taking the time and trouble to review and revise these or this particular case in question. I am not here to deliberately mislead anybody. 'I SAY IT', as it is, how 'I perceive things' from 'moment to moment', and 'sometimes' it may be the case, that I appear to contradict myself regarding what I believe to be true based on the evidence that I see, hear, or stumble upon in any given matter, or issue..

My view, or opinion may change from time to time, depending upon evidence that has come to light, which previously I was not aware of, which if I had known about or been made aware of, it might have altered my opinion or view, of the matter, or issue in question. There is nothing sinister in adopting such an approach, Jurors behave and act accordingly depending upon any evidence which comes to light, as the case presented to them, unfolds..

« Last Edit: February 18, 2022, 06:32:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Ralph

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
Mike,

If Jeremy Bamber confessed to you, why are you campaigning for his release?

If the tape was passed to the Home Office, why didn't they pass it to the CPS and why haven't we heard about it from Essex Police?

If what you claim is true, then why does this forum even exist?

Ralph R.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2022, 11:07:AM by Ralph »

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
Thank you ['snow66'] for taking the time and trouble to review and revise these or this particulaf e case in question. I am not here to deliberately mislead anybody. 'I SAY IT', as it is, how 'I perceive things' from 'moment to moment', and 'sometimes' it may be the case, that I appear to contradict myself regarding what I believe to be true based on the evidence that I see, hear, or stumble upon in any given matter, or issue..

My view, or opinion may change from time to time, depending upon evidence that has come to light, which previously I was not aware of, which if I had known about or been made aware of, it might have altered my opinion or view, of the matter, or issue in question. There is nothing sinister in adopting such an approach, Jurors behave and act accordingly depending upon any evidence which comes to light, as the case presented to them, unfolds..
Hi mike,yes that makes perfect sense.Of course your opinion is going to change slightly when new evidence turns up.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Mike,

If Jeremy Bamber confessed to you, why are you campaigning for his release?

If the tape was passed to the Home Office, why didn't they pass it to the CPS and why haven't we heard about it from Essex Police?

If what you claim is true, then why does this forum even exist?

Ralph R.

Hi, 'Ralph R.'

At the time that 'Jeremy' said what he said' in the context of what I said to him in response to the question he put to me on 'Christmas Day' after noon, during an extraordinary arrangement, whereby inmates were given permission to share the Christmas Dinner lock down which lasted three hours or so, was a concession that the prison governor ('Mr Staples') offered to us inmates because of a prison officers Christmas party held outside the prison inside the prison officers mess. There were conditions, however, which included the fact that inmates who were classified as 'category B status' , could share the company of other' Category B' inmates, either in their own single cells, or the other inmates cell. However, 'Category B' inmates could not invite a 'Category A, AA, or AAA, inmate to spend that particular lock down in their cells. Any such arrangement between different classification of categorisation, could only be allowed, if such a category B inmate agreed to spend that period inside the other inmates cell who were considered to be a greater security risk. The reason for this, is/ was because the single cells in which category A, AA, and AAA inmates lived, had more intense surveillance equipment which included pin hole cameras, and audio recording facilities (which category B inmates were not monitored by use of). Furthermore, if you were a category A, AA, or AAA inmate at 'HMP Full Sutton' back in the day [1989 /1990] you would be under the watchful eyes of prison officers and prison security, and this involved the need for constant supervision, (every 15 minutes or so) prison officers had to make handwritten notes in a book which related to such a higher category of prisoner.

Anyway, I knew that it was safe to spend that christ. As day period of lock down with 'Jeremy' in his single cell on 'B Wing' because of the security measures in place..

At that time, I worked as a redband for the prison governor (making tea and coffee for himself, his staff, and official prison visitors. I also took and brought back documents that needed to be transferred from one part of the prison and another. I was told when I agreed to take up that position that almost everywhere inside the prison was being monitored by camera and audio (other inmates believed this to be true, and when some of them asked me about it, I told them that there was some truth in it, adding that there was added security measures in category A, AA, AAA inmates cells, not fitted in any category B classified inmates cells..

When 'Jeremy' called me, 'Fucking Clever Bastard' he had a smirk on his face, which at the time he made those comments to me, I misinterpreted the meaning of them. A fact which became clearer to me much later, when 'Jeremy' gave me access to the judges summing up at his trial in October 1986 - in a nutshell, 'Judge Drake' told the jury in as many words, that the person responsible for the  five deaths, could only be either 'Sheila' or 'Jeremy' and that there was no other evidence to suggest that anyone else could have been involved, or held accountable for...

Once I saw and read the summing up, I realised why 'Jeremy' may have said to me what he had said. Also, why he had smirked when he had done...
« Last Edit: February 19, 2022, 01:08:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Ralph

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
Hi, 'Ralph R.'

At the time that 'Jeremy' said what he said' in the context of what I said to him in response to the question he put to me on 'Christmas Day' after noon, during an extraordinary arrangement, whereby inmates were given permission to share the Christmas Dinner lock down which lasted three hours or so, was a concession that the prison governor ('Mr Staples') offered to us inmates because of a prison officers Christmas party held outside the prison inside the prison officers mess. There were conditions, however, which included the fact that inmates who were classified as 'category B status' , could share the company of other' Category B' inmates, either in their own single cells, or the other inmates cell. However, 'Category B' inmates could not invite a 'Category A, AA, or AAA, inmate to spend that particular lock down in their cells. Any such arrangement between different classification of categorisation, could only be allowed, if such a category B inmate agreed to spend that period inside the other inmates cell who were considered to be a greater security risk. The reason for this, is/ was because the single cells in which category A, AA, and AAA inmates lived, had more intense surveillance equipment which included pin hole cameras, and audio recording facilities (which category B inmates were not monitored by use of). Furthermore, if you were a category A, AA, or AAA inmate at 'HMP Full Sutton' back in the day [1989 /1990] you would be under the watchful eyes of prison officers and prison security, and this involved the need for constant supervision, (every 15 minutes or so) prison officers had to make handwritten notes in a book which related to such a higher category of prisoner.

Anyway, I knew that it was safe to spend that christ. As day period of lock down with 'Jeremy' in his single cell on 'B Wing' because of the security measures in place..

At that time, I worked as a redband for the prison governor (making tea and coffee for himself, his staff, and official prison visitors. I also took and brought back documents that needed to be transferred from one part of the prison and another. I was told when I agreed to take up that position that almost everywhere inside the prison was being monitored by camera and audio (other inmates believed this to be true, and when some of them asked me about it, I told them that there was some truth in it, adding that there was added security measures in category A, AA, AAA inmates cells, not fitted in any category B classified inmates cells..

When 'Jeremy' called me, 'Fucking Clever Bastard' he had a smirk on his face, which at the time he made those comments to me, I misinterpreted the meaning of them. A fact which became clearer to me much later, when 'Jeremy' gave me access to the judges summing up at his trial in October 1986 - in a nutshell, 'Judge Drake' told the jury in as many words, that the person responsible for the  five deaths, could only be either 'Sheila' or 'Jeremy' and that there was no other evidence to suggest that anyone else could have been involved, or held accountable for...

Once I saw and read the summing up, I realised why 'Jeremy' may have said to me what he had said. Also, why he had smirked when he had done...

Thank you Mr Mike Tesko.  I am really not sure about all this, but I hope you can finish your answers when you have time.

It's just a relief that you have answered me and not gone into a massive huff like somebody else on here.  I'm starting to get paranoid. 

I was half-expecting you to demand that I search the forum for threads in which you've already explained it all and if I refuse I'm just a lazy so and so who doesn't know how to use the forum etc.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2022, 01:08:PM by mike tesko »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Thank you Mr Mike Tesko.  I am really not sure about all this, but I hope you can finish your answers when you have time.

It's just a relief that you have answered me and not gone into a massive huff like somebody else on here.  I'm starting to get paranoid. 

I was half-expecting you to demand that I search the forum for threads in which you've already explained it all and if I refuse I'm just a lazy so and so who doesn't know how to use the forum etc.

How is QC?
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline killingeve

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
Hi, 'Ralph R.'

At the time that 'Jeremy' said what he said' in the context of what I said to him in response to the question he put to me on 'Christmas Day' after noon, during an extraordinary arrangement, whereby inmates were given permission to share the Christmas Dinner lock down which lasted three hours or so, was a concession that the prison governor ('Mr Staples') offered to us inmates because of a prison officers Christmas party held outside the prison inside the prison officers mess. There were conditions, however, which included the fact that inmates who were classified as 'category B status' , could share the company of other' Category B' inmates, either in their own single cells, or the other inmates cell. However, 'Category B' inmates could not invite a 'Category A, AA, or AAA, inmate to spend that particular lock down in their cells. Any such arrangement between different classification of categorisation, could only be allowed, if such a category B inmate agreed to spend that period inside the other inmates cell who were considered to be a greater security risk. The reason for this, is/ was because the single cells in which category A, AA, and AAA inmates lived, had more intense surveillance equipment which included pin hole cameras, and audio recording facilities (which category B inmates were not monitored by use of). Furthermore, if you were a category A, AA, or AAA inmate at 'HMP Full Sutton' back in the day [1989 /1990] you would be under the watchful eyes of prison officers and prison security, and this involved the need for constant supervision, (every 15 minutes or so) prison officers had to make handwritten notes in a book which related to such a higher category of prisoner.

Anyway, I knew that it was safe to spend that christ. As day period of lock down with 'Jeremy' in his single cell on 'B Wing' because of the security measures in place..



At that time, I worked as a redband for the prison governor (making tea and coffee for himself, his staff, and official prison visitors. I also took and brought back documents that needed to be transferred from one part of the prison and another. I was told when I agreed to take up that position that almost everywhere inside the prison was being monitored by camera and audio (other inmates believed this to be true, and when some of them asked me about it, I told them that there was some truth in it, adding that there was added security measures in category A, AA, AAA inmates cells, not fitted in any category B classified inmates cells..

When 'Jeremy' called me, 'Fucking Clever Bastard' he had a smirk on his face, which at the time he made those comments to me, I misinterpreted the meaning of them. A fact which became clearer to me much later, when 'Jeremy' gave me access to the judges summing up at his trial in October 1986 - in a nutshell, 'Judge Drake' told the jury in as many words, that the person responsible for the  five deaths, could only be either 'Sheila' or 'Jeremy' and that there was no other evidence to suggest that anyone else could have been involved, or held accountable for...

Once I saw and read the summing up, I realised why 'Jeremy' may have said to me what he had said. Also, why he had smirked when he had done...

Re category A, AA and AAA are you referring to battery cells or prsion cells?

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
Re category A, AA and AAA are you referring to battery cells or prsion cells?
Ha ha ,thats quite funny Cutie,you sarcastic Devil.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Thank you Mr Mike Tesko.  I am really not sure about all this, but I hope you can finish your answers when you have time.

It's just a relief that you have answered me and not gone into a massive huff like somebody else on here.  I'm starting to get paranoid. 

I was half-expecting you to demand that I search the forum for threads in which you've already explained it all and if I refuse I'm just a lazy so and so who doesn't know how to use the forum etc.
Hi, 'Ralph'..

'Things what any person thinks', 'does', or 'maybe invites you' to 'believe', often 'may not prove to be the [actual] overall, factual, absolute, [unchallengeable] truth! This, believe it or not, is the way `someone may` (can) ' say something', or 'do something', which could be 'the absolute truth', but 'with the benefit of hindsight', in general, people 'do', and 'say things based upon their own version of the truth'. Now, I'm not saying, that in such an instance as described, is that (any) person has, or may 'not have given a dishonest account' (far from it) - all I wish to say on this particular occasion, is [unfortunately] that in unique circumstances, there cannot be (and is no such thing, as the absolute truth), upon which any court in this land of ours, will reach a judgement that is fair!

« Last Edit: February 20, 2022, 08:15:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re category A, AA and AAA are you referring to battery cells or prsion cells?

It's shocking, isn't it...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5955
It's shocking, isn't it...
Ha ha,brilliant Mike,well done

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Thank you Mr Mike Tesko.  I am really not sure about all this, but I hope you can finish your answers when you have time.
Once that 'I received access' to a copy [transcripted] of 'the judges summing up' of 'the evidence in the case to the jury', I immediately understood and realised the meaning and significance, of 'Jeremys' comments and behaviour, surrounding his demeanour, when I had come to the conclusion, that 'Sheila had an accomplice' [where 'he enquired of me', who could 'that accomplice' possibly 'have been']? Of course, at that time when I was not in possession of the overall facts, 'I genuinely believed' that both' Sheila' and 'himself' had 'hatched the script together'. I now 'know', and 'truly believe', that 'I was wrong' in 'my judgement' and 'belief' in 'what I told him' on 'that/this occasion' because of 'significant information' withheld by 'Essex police' and the 'CPS', concerning 'information that at 3.45am' a 'police officer' had seen 'a scruffy looking hunched up man' [bearing in mind, that 'the first police patrol car containing police officers' responding to 'a couple of phone calls' did 'not arrive at the incident', until '3.48am' involving 'PS Bews' and 'PS Saxby'. Evidence `exists, to `confirm that some 3 minutes prior to the response alerted to` [3.45am] that 'one of the alleged occupants of police vehicle [`CA07'] included, 'the very same police officer' (PC Myall) who had not [apparently] arrived at the scene, until 'AFTER' the sighting of a suspect that the records show or indicate, that 'a scruffy looking, hunched up man, was seen by' Pc Myall' [at 3.45am] to be 'walking away from the scene of the crime'....
« Last Edit: February 21, 2022, 04:41:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21102
Once that 'I received access' to a copy [transcripted] of 'the judges summing up' of 'the evidence in the case to the jury', I immediately understood and realised the meaning and significance, of 'Jeremys' comments and behaviour, surrounding his demeanour, when I had come to the conclusion, that 'Sheila had an accomplice' [where 'he enquired of me', who could 'that accomplice' possibly 'have been']? Of course, at that time when I was not in possession of the overall facts, 'I genuinely believed' that both' Sheila' and 'himself' had 'hatched the script together'. I now 'know', and 'truly believe', that 'I was wrong' in 'my judgement' and 'belief' in 'what I told him' on 'that/this occasion' because of 'significant information' withheld by 'Essex police' and the 'CPS', concerning 'information that at 3.45am' a 'police officer' had seen 'a scruffy looking hunched up man' [bearing in mind, that 'the first police patrol car containing police officers' responding to 'a couple of phone calls' did 'not arrive at the incident', until '3.48am' involving 'PS Bews' and 'PS Saxby'. Evidence `exists, to `confirm that some 3 minutes prior to the response alerted to` [3.45am] that 'one of the alleged occupants of police vehicle [`CA07'] included, 'the very same police officer' (PC Myall) who had not [apparently] arrived at the scene, until 'AFTER' the sighting of a suspect that the records show or indicate, that 'a scruffy looking, hunched up man, was seen by' Pc Myall' [at 3.45am] to be 'walking away from the scene of the crime'....
What is the connection between Jeremy and the hunched-up man?