Author Topic: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985  (Read 14302 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #45 on: July 27, 2011, 09:29:PM »
I believe Mike has seen Sheila on the bed what reason would he have to lie about that point?
-----------------

Sheila was photographed on the bed, and Ann Eaton was told by a police officer that June was found on the bed, along with Sheila, and the gun laying between them...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #46 on: July 27, 2011, 09:31:PM »
june was in the doorway wasnt she, but laid to one side of it.

Sort of, to the side a bit, she wasn't blocking the doorway though.
-----------------

Depending upon which evidence you choose to rely upon, Junes legs and feet were closest to the bedroom door, (firearms officer), or pointing away from the door (crime scene pictures) - now which are we to believe?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

andrea

  • Guest
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #47 on: July 27, 2011, 09:33:PM »
watch your manners dave, youre outstaying your welcome

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #48 on: July 27, 2011, 09:35:PM »
I believe Mike has seen Sheila on the bed what reason would he have to lie about that point?
-----------------

Sheila was photographed on the bed, and Ann Eaton was told by a police officer that June was found on the bed, along with Sheila, and the gun laying between them...

So what?   They moved her, get over it.
----------------

They stage managed her body, just like they stage managed the other bodies, the photographs shown to the jury were very misleading since they were led to believe that the position of the bodies as shown in the crime scene pictures was exactly as they had been found by the firearms team when they got into the farmhouse - the truth is police moved the bodies and stage managed them, it was not any as yet unidentified killer, or Jeremy, it was the police, so you get over it...

Stop blaming Jeremy for doing the things which Essex police did...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

andrea

  • Guest
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #49 on: July 27, 2011, 09:36:PM »
watch your manners dave, youre outstaying your welcome

Can't argue with the facts can you. You are so vain.


im vain? why is that then?

Offline Enigma

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 506
  • Fiat justitia ruat caelum
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #50 on: July 27, 2011, 09:36:PM »
Sometimes we all get a bit heated and irritated with folk and calling people lyers is wrong whoever says it. Perhaps we can all take a bit more care and moderate our language and respect one another? ;D
that sounds like fighting talk to me. Stick 'em up!

andrea

  • Guest
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #51 on: July 27, 2011, 09:38:PM »
jeremy bamber could be innocent, get over it DAVE.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #52 on: July 27, 2011, 09:42:PM »
And also to add I do not think he was mistaken, to describe it as such would not convey my opinion, I believe he is actively lying in order to bolster his argument.

Just as he did when he informed us that Ann Eaton took blood soaked clothes home for whf, he cropped a page of Ann's statement, if he hadn't cropped it then we would have seen the next line which shows Mike to be actively lying in an attempt to deceive people.

So yes that's it. You have irritated the hell out of me though, but I'll calm down in thirty seconds.  ::)
-------------------

Yes, Ann Eaton took home the bloodstained panties of Sheila, and other bloodstained garments from the bucket in the kitchen, why would someone want to do this?

And whilst on the subject of bloodstained panties, wasn't it her who conspired with DCS "Mick" Ainsley (head of the second investigation) to make sure that she mentioned when testifying that you can tell the difference between menstrual blood and ordinary blood by way of the smell (if she was asked about the possibility that the silencer had been deliberately contaminated with blood from Sheila's panties)?

It amounts to something when the head of the second investigation is telling witnesses what to say when they testify, don't you think?

« Last Edit: July 27, 2011, 09:49:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline shonapugs

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2669
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #53 on: July 27, 2011, 09:45:PM »
Oh, FFS. Why does every new anti-JBer have to come across like Hitler annexing Poland? I'm sure you're a decent bloke, Dave, but you're not really helping.

IMO.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #54 on: July 27, 2011, 09:46:PM »
So if they stage managed them why photograph her on the bed or is that yet more false facts?
--------------

Use your brain, if you've got one, why do you think PC Bird falsified the photographic record by declaring that there was only 223 pictures taken as part of the investigation when all along there were 358?

Of course they stage managed the scene and tampered with the exhibits, that's why the relatives originally got suspicious...

358
223 -
-----
135 withheld photographs, which would have exposed the cover up and stage managing iof they had been disclosed by the time of the trial...

Work it out for yourself, do you not agree that the withholding of over 135 photographs was very serious?
-----
« Last Edit: July 27, 2011, 09:51:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline shonapugs

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2669
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #55 on: July 27, 2011, 09:50:PM »
Oh, FFS. Why does every new anti-JBer have to come across like Hitler annexing Poland? I'm sure you're a decent bloke, Dave, but you're not really helping.

IMO.

Helping what lovey?

Lovey? Jesus. You and PB must have been seperated at birth. Unless.....................

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #56 on: July 27, 2011, 09:53:PM »
So if they stage managed them why photograph her on the bed or is that yet more false facts?
--------------------

The photograph of Sheila on the bed, was obviously one of the 135 missing and deliberately withheld and concealed photographs that Essex police did not want the defense or the court to see...

Work it out...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline shonapugs

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2669
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #57 on: July 27, 2011, 09:57:PM »
Mike, that photo is so obviously key - is there no way it can be traced?

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #58 on: July 27, 2011, 10:00:PM »
Smiffy your posts are as effective as a chihuahua chewing a tank.
I am going to ask the DPP to gag you with a PII; now that would
be in the public interest.  ;D
He actually makes a pretty good point. The have already admitted moving Sheila's arm so they could photograph the boodstain on her night dress (It baffles me as to why they wanted a good picture of blood?) Mike also claims thay he has seen a picture of Sheila on the bed instead of on the floor. And I believe him. So why would it not be reasonable to suppose that June's body had also been "manipulated" into that position?

That is simple. Sheila's manipulation is documented and photographed, I don't believe Mike has seen a photograph of Sheila on the bed, I think he is lying.
There is no documentation that June has been manipulated, if there are drag marks then it's just as likely that she dragged her own injured body to that position before being shot between the eyes.
....

I think you are lying about thinking that I am lying, I don't need to lie like you do, you are doing it because you can't find any proper explanation, you are running scared...

Sheila's body was moved and staged long before SOC arrived at the scene - they did not even take control of the farmhouse until 10am, so stop trying to blame poor old Cooksey boy for moving Sheila's body, he only moved her hand...

The stage managing took place before then, and you and everyone else knows it...

Stop kidding yourself...
« Last Edit: July 27, 2011, 10:03:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Enigma

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 506
  • Fiat justitia ruat caelum
Re: PC John Manners statement - 23/09/1985
« Reply #59 on: July 27, 2011, 10:05:PM »
Oh, FFS. Why does every new anti-JBer have to come across like Hitler annexing Poland? I'm sure you're a decent bloke, Dave, but you're not really helping.

IMO.

In my opinion Hitler didn't annex Poland he invaded it! He annexed Austria.
No I don't have proof.
I don't think Essex Police were involved either.
And Jeremy Bamber could have done it; he was involved in my opinion. Can You prove he wasn't. (Dates of birth can be altered!)