'DOCUMENTS IN MY POSSESSION' will appear on this thread, in no particular order!

[mike tesko]

Are you saying that they found the Pargeter silencer on the 7th.?

If so, how does that change the evidence?

I know with 100% certainty, that 'DS Jones returned to the farmhouse  and took possession of' Anthony Pargeters 17 baffled Parker hale silence which he found in the downstairs bathroom toilet [where 'Pargeter' always stored his weapons, gun accessories, and various type of calibre. 22 rim fire ammunition! 'DS Jones' returned to the farmhouse after he was told about his rifle had a silencer which could be fitted to his. 22 rifle. Upon learning about the 'Bamber silencer', 'DS Jones' left Jeremy's cottage and left 'DC Clark' to continue taking 'Jeremy Bamber witness statement [`7th August 1985']. Upon arriving back at the scene, 'DS Jones' went looking for the silencer belonging to the 'Bamber owned. 22 rifle. He searched in the kitchen, the hallway, and the downstairs bathroom/toilet, where he saw a collection of guns, rifles and a shotgun. He saw a silencer fitted to the end of a. 22 calibre rifle and he took possession of the rifle and the silencer which was attached to it. He did this after taking a photograph showing the silencer and rifle positioned inside the downstairs bathroom, he assigned the exhibit reference 'SBJ/1' to the silencer, and 'SBJ/2' to  the photograph that he had just taken there' He then returned to the kitchen and took possession of a further two exhibits, one of which was a calender that had been hanging on the front fascia of the kitchen aga in the region of the surrounds left hand leg, he also took another photograph in the kitchen, which were assigned exhibit references, 'SBJ/3' and 'SBJ/4' respectively. He then left the crime scene and returned to 'Jeremy Bamber' cottage at 9 head Street, where 'DC Clark' was still busy taking 'Jeremys' first witness statement. Soon after he returned there, 'Ann Eaton and other relatives, and' Julie Mugford' arrived too.

'Ann Eaton' overheard 'DS Jones', 'Jeremy' and 'DC Clark discussing where' Jeremy' had left his rifle during the previous evening. This is all true - 'Ann Eaton' was aware on the 7th August 1985, that there was talk of a silencer belonging to a. 22 rifle, that belonged to the 'Bamber Family!' DS Jones' wrongly believed that he himself had returned to the farmhouse and the he had seized the silencer belonging to the 'Bamber Owned' silencer [`SBJ/1'] when he hadn't, because of ignorance he had taken possession of the 'Anthony Pargeters' silencer ' [`SBJ/1'] from the downstairs bathroom location. By that stage, 'DS Jones' was not aware that two different silencers were kept at the farmhouse [`the Bamber owned' silencer [`which subsequently became exhibit 'DB/1'] was stored in a cupboard of the downstairs office.The mix up was not realized until the 12th August 1985, when 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour' contacted Essex police by phone to inform them that his son,' David Boutflour' had recovered a silencer which belonged to the 'Bamber owned' rifle which had been found in the gun cupboard of the downstairs office!

This is what has caused the police, relatives and lab' experts, to introduce a false narrative, in which both silencers were eventually merged into the same one. It took until September 1986, for prosecution witnesses to end up singing from the same hymn sheet where they all maintained that there had only ever been one silencer found, and that silencer had been found by 'David Boutflour' at the scene, on 'Saturday the 10th August 1985, that it was taken to' Huntingdon forensic Lab' by 'Di Cook' to be examined by expert 'Glyniss Howard' on the '13th August 1985', handed back to 'DI Cook' on the same date, and that this silencer was subsequently fingerprint by the technique of 'oblique light test method, on the '15th August 1985', then fingerprinted again by 'the technique' of 'cynoacrylate fume method', [again by 'DI Cook'] carried out by him on the '23rd of August 1985', and that 'on' or 'around' the '29th August 1985' that 'DI Cook' [himself] had taken it upon himself `to dismantle that silencer' and in particular, to 'do a check on the internal baffle plates', 'within it'. 'DI Cook' took 'a series of photographs', at 'every stage of the dismantling exercise' for 'the purpose of confirming if any blood group type evidence' ['I]' was present therein'. On the following day (30th August 1985) 'DI Cook' submitted the reconstructed the dismantled silencer, to 'Huntingdon forensic Science Services' for oexamination'. 'Cook' did this, without him confirming that there was neither 'a small dried flake of blood' trapped between the '1st' and '2nd' internal 'baffle plates' paving the way for some unknown forensic service expert to be the first independent witness to notice blood on baffle plates. Please, understand, that 'if' there had been a small loose dried flake' of 'blood', anywhere 'between all combinations of all the collective baffle plates' which 'first raises' and which 'falls neatly' into such 'a loose type of a small flake of blood, that somewhat miraculously, never did get treated seriously, and ended up without being allocated an exhibit reference to it [in its small flake format] or even once the said flake was transformed into a solution'.

[guest29835]

I know with 100% certainty, that 'DS Jones returned to the farmhouse  and took possession of' Anthony Pargeters 17 baffled Parker hale silence which he found in the downstairs bathroom toilet [where 'Pargeter' always stored his weapons, gun accessories, and various type of calibre. 22 rim fire ammunition! 'DS Jones' returned to the farmhouse after he was told about his rifle had a silencer which could be fitted to his. 22 rifle. Upon learning about the 'Bamber silencer', 'DS Jones' left Jeremy's cottage and left 'DC Clark' to continue taking 'Jeremy Bamber witness statement [`7th August 1985']. Upon arriving back at the scene, 'DS Jones' went looking for the silencer belonging to the 'Bamber owned. 22 rifle. He searched in the kitchen, the hallway, and the downstairs bathroom/toilet, where he saw a collection of guns, rifles and a shotgun. He saw a silencer fitted to the end of a. 22 calibre rifle and he took possession of the rifle and the silencer which was attached to it. He did this after taking a photograph showing the silencer and rifle positioned inside the downstairs bathroom, he assigned the exhibit reference 'SBJ/1' to the silencer, and 'SBJ/2' to  the photograph that he had just taken there' He then returned to the kitchen and took possession of a further two exhibits, one of which was a calender that had been hanging on the front fascia of the kitchen aga in the region of the surrounds left hand leg, he also took another photograph in the kitchen, which were assigned exhibit references, 'SBJ/3' and 'SBJ/4' respectively. He then left the crime scene and returned to 'Jeremy Bamber' cottage at 9 head Street, where 'DC Clark' was still busy taking 'Jeremys' first witness statement. Soon after he returned there, 'Ann Eaton and other relatives, and' Julie Mugford' arrived too.

'Ann Eaton' overheard 'DS Jones', 'Jeremy' and 'DC Clark discussing where' Jeremy' had left his rifle during the previous evening. This is all true - 'Ann Eaton' was aware on the 7th August 1985, that there was talk of a silencer belonging to a. 22 rifle, that belonged to the 'Bamber Family!' DS Jones' wrongly believed that he himself had returned to the farmhouse and the he had seized the silencer belonging to the 'Bamber Owned' silencer [`SBJ/1'] when he hadn't, because of ignorance he had taken possession of the 'Anthony Pargeters' silencer ' [`SBJ/1'] from the downstairs bathroom location. By that stage, 'DS Jones' was not aware that two different silencers were kept at the farmhouse [`the Bamber owned' silencer](which subsequently became exhibit 'DB/1') was stored in a cupboard of the downstairs office.This 'mix up' was 'not realized until the 12th August 1985', when 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour' contacted Essex police [`Di Miller'] by phone to inform him, that his son,' David Boutflour' had 'recovered a silencer' which 'belonged' to the 'Bamber owned' rifle which 'had been found in the gun cupboard' in 'the downstairs office'!

This is what 'has caused the police', 'relatives' and lab' experts, to 'introduce a false narrative', in which 'both silencers were eventually merged into the same one'!

But this doesn't change the evidence, does it. [`Yes' - of course 'it would have', and 'does'..

Although she was being flippant, in a sense what the CPS counsel Darlow said at the 2020 judicial review has a kernel of truth to it: there could have been 40 silencers found, it doesn't necessarily change things evidential [`Yes' it would 'have' and 'it does make a huge difference'.. because 'the silencer they found in the gun cupboard' is the 'incriminating article'. Only one of the two silencers was recovered from the gun cupboard on '10th August 1985', the other silencer was recovered from inside the downstairs Bathroom, on the '7th August 1985', seized by 'DS Jones']

Are you actually saying that the forensic evidence officially found on and in the silencer - paint, grey hair, scratch and blood - was commingled between at least two silencers?  ['Yes']Thus, for instance, you could have paint found on one [`Yes'] and blood found on another [`No', 'Human' and 'animal blood' in 'one', but 'just animal blood' in 'the other' thus since they could not explain this or fit it into a coherent case theory, they just merged the two exhibits.[`Yes']

If that is what you are saying, or something along those lines, who do you think knew about this?  I assume Stan Jones? [`of course, he was'] The family? [`Yes`] Glynis Howard?[`She was compliant'] Malcolm Fletcher?[`Yes, most definately'] Bob Miller?[`yes, with certainty']   Ron Cook?[`He' and 'Di Miller'/'DS Jones'/and all the others involved in restaging various crime scenes within the farmhouse Aiiiiinnnnnsley [say it with a Lancashire accent]?  John Hayward?[`YES']   I assume Taff Jones was not party to this? [`DCI Jones' knew 'what had occurred'. 'He' knew 'the true circumstances', surrounding the 'various places inside the farmhouse', that 'Sheila Caffells body was found at different times during the police operation at the scene (7.35am until 10.00am'] but 'He was against framing an innocent person' who had `no longer` any `close family left']

Was it just the two silencers,[`two prime exhibits', used 'during the 1986 trial'],will or might a silencer belonging to the relatives have come into play? 'At least two sound moderators' were 'collected from relatives' by 'a police motor cycle outrider', on 'the first morning of the trial', 'one of which was one silencer returned to them in' September 1986' in particular, exhibit reference 'DB/1' (lab' item no. 23) this being 'the silencer', which 'David Boutflour' took possession of [`it'] from inside a cupboard in the downstairs office, on 'Saturday' the '10th August 1985']...

Is it possible the relatives swopped Nevill's Parker-Hale silencer for one of their own, [`what actually took place' was that the relatives (the 'Boutflours', 'Eatons' and 'Anthony Pargeter'] knew that 'DS Jones' had 'returned to the scene' and `took possession of the 17 baffled Parker hale silencer`, in the belief that 'it' was the silencer to which 'Jeremy Bamber' had already `alluded to owning`, beforehand]. BUT, the silencer [`SBJ1'] that 'DS Jones' had taken possession of at the scene on the '7th August 1985' actually belonged to one of 'Anthony Pargeters'. 22 'rifles'] - [`of an identical model], (but perhaps with a slightly varied specification)? [`the silencer' belonging to 'Anthony Pargeter' was 'a Parker Hale product'! Which 'he had purchased' in '1980'. At that/this time, ' these /those silencers', of 'the type owned' and 'belonging' to 'Pargeter' was '7 inches in length' , with an 'internal design feature', totalling of '17 internalised metal baffle plates'. For your 'information', there were 'significant differences' between 'certain specifications' of 'a Parker hale silencer', that was 'manufactured during the 1980 production run' and which differed, 'one from the other' and 'vice versa', by 'virtue of the facts', which are that `in the manufacture' of 'a newer version of their silencers' the 'external' and 'internal features' and 'specification' [`November 1984'] 'had been drastically reduced' were at odds to one another!

A pet theory of mine, from a pro-guilt point-of-view, is that Jeremy took the silencer with him and disposed of it and the silencer 'found' in the gun cupboard is one of the relatives.  [`No'] They counted on the real silencer not turning up.[`On the contrary' the 'real silencer, that was attached to one of the. 22 type rifles used during and throughout the shooting, episodes..   Any thoughts on that? [`relatives', 'cops', and 'Lab' experts' did not fully appreciate the differences in specifications between one or the other of both silencers until the 30th August 1985, when cops took the decision to forward the silencer [`DB/1'] to the Lab' at Huntingdon inside which blood group activity would later surface establishing that 'Sheila' had been shot and killed by a. 22 type rifle fitted with a silencer belonging to, the 'Bamber owned. 22 semi-automatic rifle..

Another thing.  Assuming you are right about all this factually, is it possible that an innocent interpretation could be put on it?  For instance, might it be possible that this was in fact a two-gun massacre, with two silencers, and whoat you are actually describing is the recovery of both silencers? I have previously made it known that I think that there was more than one firearm and silencer used in the incident I say this is an innocent interpretation, but it can't be entirely because it would mean the police and FSS have merged two exhibits into one [`Along these/those lines', correct] and thus misled the court and perverted the course of justice in a very serious way. [`YES']

[Steve_uk]

But this doesn't change the evidence, does it.

Although she was being flippant, in a sense what the CPS counsel Darlow said at the 2020 judicial review has a kernel of truth to it: there could have been 40 silencers found, it doesn't necessarily change things evidentially because the silencer they found in the gun cupboard is the incriminating article.

Are you actually saying that the forensic evidence officially found on and in the silencer - paint, grey hair, scratch and blood - was commingled between at least two silencers?  Thus, for instance, you could have paint found on one and blood found on another, and thus since they could not explain this or fit it into a coherent case theory, they just merged the two exhibits. 

If that is what you are saying, or something along those lines, who do you think knew about this?  I assume Stan Jones?  The family?  Glynis Howard?  Malcolm Fletcher?  Bob Miller?  Ron Cook?  Aiiiiinnnnnsley [say it with a Lancashire accent]?  John Hayward?  I assume Taff Jones was not party to this?

Was it just the two silencers, or might a silencer belonging to the relatives have come into play?

Is it possible the relatives swopped Nevill's Parker-Hale silencer for one of their own, of an identical model (but perhaps with a slightly varied specification)?

A pet theory of mine, from a pro-guilt point-of-view, is that Jeremy took the silencer with him and disposed of it and the silencer 'found' in the gun cupboard is one of the relatives.  They counted on the real silencer not turning up.  Any thoughts on that?   

Another thing.  Assuming you are right about all this factually, is it possible that an innocent interpretation could be put on it?  For instance, might it be possible that this was in fact a two-gun massacre, with two silencers, and what you are actually describing is the recovery of both silencers?  I say this is an innocent interpretation, but it can't be entirely because it would mean the police and FSS have merged two exhibits into one, and thus misled the court and perverted the course of justice in a very serious way.

What a shame you ruined an otherwise intelligent post. You just can't help yourself, can you?

[guest29835]

What a shame you ruined an otherwise intelligent post. You just can't help yourself, can you?

Oh goodness me, just get a life, you sad man.  Honestly, just find something constructive to do with your time and leave people alone.