Look what I found

[Zoso]

I believe it has been edited and can see both sides. The weight of the evidence I have presented suggests it is more likely an addition rather than deletion. People can make their own decisions/judgments.

You do realise that Mike Tesko added the read lines?

[Bubo bubo]

You do realise that Mike Tesko added the read lines?

How do you know this? In which case the first post shows no wound and how did he manage that? What base was he working from? It still does not distract from the statement evidence of 'one shot', Why did he add the red lines and  for what purpose? How come you have only just posted this information when you could have stated this in the first instance? He is now deceased and you could have taken him to task when he first posted. He is not able to defend himself.

[Bubo bubo]

How do you know this? In which case the first post shows no wound and how did he manage that? What base was he working from? It still does not distract from the statement evidence of 'one shot', Why did he add the red lines and  for what purpose? How come you have only just posted this information when you could have stated this in the first instance? He is now deceased and you could have taken him to task when he first posted. He is not able to defend himself.

How would I know this if I got them from another source and not this forum. Why were they archived? I could accuse you of archiving material which is supportive of JB's case using your privileged position and now a guilt supporter unless you have a valid reason.

[Zoso]

How would I know this if I got them from another source and not this forum. Why were they archived? I could accuse you of archiving material which is supportive of JB's case using your privileged position and now a guilt supporter unless you have a valid reason.

You said you had been on this forum for YEARS, you should then surely know that the pictures being distributed on the internet ALL originated from here. The police have NEVER released these pictures, Mike has stated on many occasions that he was once left alone with the CS photographs in Bambers solicitors office and he took pictures of them. That's why the CS pictures are picture of pictures. Wherever you got them from, they originated here and have been passed around for years.

Mike put the red lines on the picture to demonstrate one of his ideas. I have no idea what that was now, you'll have to go through the posts to find out why.

I really wish you would STOP and think before you start typing then you would look so much like a supercilious arse. I didn't archive the pictures, I only joined around 2012, they were achieved long before I arrived. I haven't always been an admin on this forum!! So, why don't you 'literally accuse me of archiving material which is supportive of Bambers case'? 

[Bubo bubo]

You said you had been on this forum for YEARS, you should then surely know that the pictures being distributed on the internet ALL originated from here. The police have NEVER released these pictures, Mike has stated on many occasions that he was once left alone with the CS photographs in Bambers solicitors office and he took pictures of them. That's why the CS pictures are picture of pictures. Wherever you got them from, they originated here and have been passed around for years.

Mike put the red lines on the picture to demonstrate one of his ideas. I have no idea what that was now, you'll have to go through the posts to find out why.

I really wish you would STOP and think before you start typing then you would look so much like a supercilious arse. I didn't archive the pictures, I only joined around 2012, they were achieved long before I arrived. I haven't always been an admin on this forum!! So, why don't you 'literally accuse me of archiving material which is supportive of Bambers case'?

Why should I have to troll through MT's posts to prove your claims. Prove them yourself if you are going to make them.

It is possible that others have released images. Who for example sent the Xray pics to the CT. It was not MT. It is possible that some of the pictures are not from MT. We cannot know the source and it seems a bit strange that MT Just happened to have a camera when he went to a meeting at a solicitors and he was left alone with the pictures. The site was only created at the very end of 2010 so who would archive them after one year. When they would be some of the more interesting pictures available. I joined in 2019 so the pictures were archived before I joined.

If they were archived early on how come they were available on other websites after 2012 and why have they been deleted from the internet.

[Zoso]

Why should I have to troll through MT's posts to prove your claims. Prove them yourself if you are going to make them.

It is possible that others have released images. Who for example sent the Xray pics to the CT. It was not MT. It is possible that some of the pictures are not from MT. We cannot know the source and it seems a bit strange that MT Just happened to have a camera when he went to a meeting at a solicitors and he was left alone with the pictures. The site was only created at the very end of 2010 so who would archive them after one year. When they would be some of the more interesting pictures available. I joined in 2019 so the pictures were archived before I joined.

If they were archived early on how come they were available on other websites after 2012 and why have they been deleted from the internet.

The picture with the red lines is one of MIKES. I have posted what I know, if you don't believe me .... how can I put this? ..... I DON'T CARE. I'm not looking for the post for you, absolutely not. You can SEE the post in the archives with the red lines, it's been there for YEARS. Someone obviously took that pic, edited it, posted it where YOU found it and were gullible enough to think it was genuine. Ask NGB where the CS pics originated if you don't believe me. That's pretty much all I can tell you and to be honest, I should have left you to think you'd uncovered some great find!!

[Bubo bubo]

The picture with the red lines is one of MIKES. I have posted what I know, if you don't believe me .... how can I put this? ..... I DON'T CARE. I'm not looking for the post for you, absolutely not. You can SEE the post in the archives with the red lines, it's been there for YEARS. Someone obviously took that pic, edited it, posted it where YOU found it and were gullible enough to think it was genuine. Ask NGB where the CS pics originated if you don't believe me. That's pretty much all I can tell you and to be honest, I should have left you to think you'd uncovered some great find!!

We only have MT's word for how he obtained the photos. It seems a bit strange that he would have a camera on hand just for a moment when he was left alone with CS photos in a solicitors office.
I remember him telling this story in some of his posts. I often wondered why the solicitor never used this to help JB.

There are two possible answers. Firstly the photo was manipulated by MT. But this would easily be disproved by the solicitor if it became a major issue and why would MT risk his reputation. He would face extreme ridicule and more.

The second possibility is that the photo is genuine and he made up the taking of photos at the solicitors to protect the 'grass' / whistle-blower who gave/sent it to him..

We know there was a whistle-blower because of the Xray that was sent to the CT. That is also linked to the PV20 shot to the neck and could relate to an accident.

Only time will tell which is the truth about this photo.

If he was given the photos, questions would be asked as to how they were obtained and if leaked who leaked them. It would be just like MT to protect his source. The story involving the solicitors office could be untrue. I grant you that they could have been captured from the forum and used on other sites.

One of MT's prime answers for JB's innocence  which he promulgated on the forum was the accidental shooting of SC during Informatives. It was a subject he would return to time and again. It is one of his most posted subjects and he went into great detail of how it happened and how the single shot to SC figured. He must have believed to have obtained a photo with one shot to spread this story.

[Adam]

Mike also said he had a photo of Sheila on Nevill's/June's bed. Something he never posted on here or passed to the CT.

[Bubo bubo]

Mike also said he had a photo of Sheila on Nevill's/June's bed. Something he never posted on here or passed to the CT.

Maybe he saw that picture but could not show it because it was not a photo that the grass was prepared to release because it showed crime scene manipulation. Whereas the other only involved the covering up of an accident. The other of the bodies on the bed strongly pointed/hinted at something a lot more serious having occurred.

[David1819]

Maybe he saw that picture but could not show it because it was not a photo that the grass was prepared to release because it showed crime scene manipulation. Whereas the other only involved the covering up of an accident. The other of the bodies on the bed strongly pointed/hinted at something a lot more serious having occurred.

It's a fabrication. Mikes story surrounding the alleged photo has changed several times. It also contradicts claims he had made in the past. If I remember correctly he once claimed he no longer had the photo because he tried to send it to Jeremy but the prison staff intercepted the letter and took it away.

[Bubo bubo]

It's a fabrication. Mikes story surrounding the alleged photo has changed several times. It also contradicts claims he had made in the past. If I remember correctly he once claimed he no longer had the photo because he tried to send it to Jeremy but the prison staff intercepted the letter and took it away.

Thanks David. I think that his story around this photo is not as strong as the other one. It is possible he could have only seen it and made up several stories as to why he could not post it.

His initial mistake if true, is that he should have said he had only seen it and was looking for other evidence as to what may have happened or not mentioned it at all. Trouble was when pressed that he was making up a story he said he had it and when pressed further to post it, made up reasons why that was not possible.

[Jane]

We only have MT's word for how he obtained the photos. It seems a bit strange that he would have a camera on hand just for a moment when he was left alone with CS photos in a solicitors office.
I remember him telling this story in some of his posts. I often wondered why the solicitor never used this to help JB.

There are two possible answers. Firstly the photo was manipulated by MT. But this would easily be disproved by the solicitor if it became a major issue and why would MT risk his reputation. He would face extreme ridicule and more.

The second possibility is that the photo is genuine and he made up the taking of photos at the solicitors to protect the 'grass' / whistle-blower who gave/sent it to him..

We know there was a whistle-blower because of the Xray that was sent to the CT. That is also linked to the PV20 shot to the neck and could relate to an accident.

Only time will tell which is the truth about this photo.

If he was given the photos, questions would be asked as to how they were obtained and if leaked who leaked them. It would be just like MT to protect his source. The story involving the solicitors office could be untrue. I grant you that they could have been captured from the forum and used on other sites.

One of MT's prime answers for JB's innocence  which he promulgated on the forum was the accidental shooting of SC during Informatives. It was a subject he would return to time and again. It is one of his most posted subjects and he went into great detail of how it happened and how the single shot to SC figured. He must have believed to have obtained a photo with one shot to spread this story.

"Strange" is something which can be levied at much of what Mike said. When challenged, as he often was, he became rude and aggressive -Okay, latterly he may have been ill, but it's likely that much was fuelled by alcohol- and refused to give direct answers.

Much of what he posted had the appearance of being third hand, ie, he had it on good authority that................. but such can't be proved. It always amazed me that 'police', many of whom would have known him in a professional capacity! would trust him enough to share with him, all those alleged secrets they held, regarding the Bamber case.

His, one time, devotion to JB, can't be denied, but I suspect he had his eye on being part of the money-pit JB would undoubtedly fall into after he'd helped his release, to which end they probably concocted numerous fantastic scenarios, many involving Sheila in unspeakably vulgar ways. It's possible that in the end, JB may have thought he'd gone too far?

[Bubo bubo]

"Strange" is something which can be levied at much of what Mike said. When challenged, as he often was, he became rude and aggressive -Okay, latterly he may have been ill, but it's likely that much was fuelled by alcohol- and refused to give direct answers.

Much of what he posted had the appearance of being third hand, ie, he had it on good authority that................. but such can't be proved. It always amazed me that 'police', many of whom would have known him in a professional capacity! would trust him enough to share with him, all those alleged secrets they held, regarding the Bamber case.

His, one time, devotion to JB, can't be denied, but I suspect he had his eye on being part of the money-pit JB would undoubtedly fall into after he'd helped his release, to which end they probably concocted numerous fantastic scenarios, many involving Sheila in unspeakably vulgar ways. It's possible that in the end, JB may have thought he'd gone too far?

Some of the contacts could have been backroom civilian staff who did not agree with what was being done to JB who had access to information.

[Jane]

Some of the contacts could have been backroom civilian staff who did not agree with what was being done to JB who had access to information.

Leaving aside that such may not even have been born at the time of WHF, and begging the question how did they get to know Mike!, you have previously claimed to be a long time member here so must have read Mike's posts. Are you saying that you believe everything he said to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

[Bubo bubo]

Leaving aside that such may not even have been born at the time of WHF, and begging the question how did they get to know Mike!, you have previously claimed to be a long time member here so must have read Mike's posts. Are you saying that you believe everything he said to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I find your remarks insulting. I was a guest for a long time. This meant I could read people's arguments without seeing the documentation or use some of the other facilities. I joined in 2019 but have been researching since 2009 using a variety of information sources.

There is no way I would take anything posted here as the truth. I make up my own mind on all issues based on the evidence available and develop theories that COULD be true. I believe I have shown this modus operandi works, since it was me who first suggested that the marks/burns on NB's back were made by the Aga and have proved that MF swapped PV20 to name just two critical points in this case. Members are free to make up their own minds about my suggestions.