Mail on Sunday article

[Bill Robertson]

Sounds to me the whistelblower might be the forum's 'Bill' who claims to have been a serving police officer with Essex constabulary.

Not me, I didn't blow any whistles.
The article is pretty much nonsense; Unfortunately, they lead off with a huge error; "Jeremy Bamber's 40-year bid to prove he is innocent of the White House Farm murders has received a significant boost after bombshell claims by a police whistleblower that officers tampered with the crime scene to place Bamber in the frame for the killings". No, they didn't.

Jeremy was not suspected of any involvement in the murders until weeks after the 'tampering' with the crime scene so anything that was done on 7/8th August can only come into the category of (a) larking about (b) the clean-up operation or (c) souvenir hunting and perhaps (d) training exercises.

Moving Nevill's body and positioning his head in the coal shuttle seems likely to have been some kind of macabre stunt of extremely poor taste, I saw similar stuff during my time involving dead bodies. It's a kind of survival mechanism I guess.
Best wishes to all.

[Cambridgecutie]

Not me, I didn't blow any whistles.
The article is pretty much nonsense; Unfortunately, they lead off with a huge error; "Jeremy Bamber's 40-year bid to prove he is innocent of the White House Farm murders has received a significant boost after bombshell claims by a police whistleblower that officers tampered with the crime scene to place Bamber in the frame for the killings". No, they didn't.

Jeremy was not suspected of any involvement in the murders until weeks after the 'tampering' with the crime scene so anything that was done on 7/8th August can only come into the category of (a) larking about (b) the clean-up operation or (c) souvenir hunting and perhaps (d) training exercises.

Moving Nevill's body and positioning his head in the coal shuttle seems likely to have been some kind of macabre stunt of extremely poor taste, I saw similar stuff during my time involving dead bodies. It's a kind of survival mechanism I guess.
Best wishes to all.

Best wishes to you too!

There's no evidence any police officer interfered with soc downstairs and/or NB's body.  On the contrary all the evidence supports the soc and NB remained in tact from when officers first entered. 

Even if your wishful thinking was true, which it isn't, how would this exonerate JB based on the most compelling aspects of the case namely blood evidence, JM's testimony and lack of debris on SC as presented at trial?

Like Adam you're not thinking it through!

[Roch]

The article needs to be read in conjunction with the doc-maker article about the same person. It's a pity they went with the wording regarding the scene being used to frame JB. I also think the main issue here is video tape. Why did Mike Tesko post that the CCRC had it and JB would never be allowed to see it? Was he just making this up?

[David1819]

The article needs to be read in conjunction with the doc-maker article about the same person. It's a pity they went with the wording regarding the scene being used to frame JB. I also think the main issue here is video tape. Why did Mike Tesko post that the CCRC had it and JB would never be allowed to see it? Was he just making this up?

From a legal standpoint, it would be giving a murderer footage of what he committed. And would be deemed hindering to rehabilitation and stability.

From a factual standpoint, its even worse. Footage strikes a lot harder than photos.

[Roch]

From a legal standpoint, it would be giving a murderer footage of what he committed. And would be deemed hindering to rehabilitation and stability.

From a factual standpoint, its even worse. Footage strikes a lot harder than photos.

Yes I realised the first point. But why did he make up that the CCRC had been given the footage? Was it an attempt to back up his claims that the footage existed?

[Bill Robertson]

Like Adam you're not thinking it through!

I have thought it through at great length and I agree, none of it can be used as evidence to overturn the conviction. That's why I said the article is nonsense.

[Adam]

CC/Curiosity thinks I am not thinking it through as I don't believe Bamber met the police in his massacre clothes.

[ILB]

CC/Curiosity thinks I am not thinking it through as I don't believe Bamber met the police in his massacre clothes.

If he had wore overalls over the murder clothes he may have felt safe.

Purely speculative from all angles.

[Cambridgecutie]

CC/Curiosity thinks I am not thinking it through as I don't believe Bamber met the police in his massacre clothes.

He didn't commit a 'massacre'.  SC killed everyone and then herself.  And whatever one believes neither would sustain any obvious debris on their person or clothing:

- .22 and subsonic ammo would not generate backspatter (blood)
-  the beating NB sustained from the perp wielding the rifle did not contain sufficient blood for blood grouping analysis ie minimal and not enough to transfer to perps person/clothing

[Cambridgecutie]

If he had wore overalls over the murder clothes he may have felt safe.

Purely speculative from all angles.

He was a regular user of firearms and ammo.  He would know a .22 and subsonic ammo incapable of causing backspatter. 

[David1819]

Yes I realised the first point. But why did he make up that the CCRC had been given the footage? Was it an attempt to back up his claims that the footage existed?

I have no idea. With Mike who knows. The video is first documented in the COLP enquiry. 

The video is like the quality below. 

[Curiosity]

He was a regular user of firearms and ammo.  He would know a .22 and subsonic ammo incapable of causing backspatter.

Unlike Sheila C, a girly-girl, insecure about her looks and who wouldn't have known the difference between the barrel of an Anschutz and its butt.

[Cambridgecutie]

Unlike Sheila C, a girly-girl, insecure about her looks and who wouldn't have known the difference between the barrel of an Anschutz and its butt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyKIdCV0Pxg

[Curiosity]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyKIdCV0Pxg

If Sheila had even the remotest desire to kill anyone, she was more likely to use a sharp cook's knife from the kitchen drawer as women are wont to do in this country. Like Virginia McCullough and Penelope Jackson -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFUKY6ee9ow&ab_channel=TheTelegraph

[ILB]

He was a regular user of firearms and ammo.  He would know a .22 and subsonic ammo incapable of causing backspatter.

Not true, he disliked shooting. He was proficient but didn't have an overriding interest.