Author Topic: CCRC decision  (Read 24046 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13152
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #180 on: July 06, 2025, 11:37:PM »
In 1985 Live Aid had two revolving  stages and 16 statelites 

But it wasn't possible to bang a window so the top latch moves a few inches.

Not an interior handle no.

If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13152
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #181 on: July 06, 2025, 11:47:PM »
The excerpt from the New Yorker:

Scouring thousands of pages of memorandums from the Scotland Yard review in 2002, Hanover’s team thought they might have found it. After Bamber reported his father’s distress call, the phone in the Whitehouse kitchen was left off the hook, and an operator at the phone company was charged with listening in to the open line. She reported indistinct noises—a dog barking and a “slight moving sound”—before transferring the line to the police station. The police said that they took over monitoring the line at 6:09 A.M. But the Scotland Yard records appeared to indicate that something different happened at that time: a “999 call made from White House Farm,” which suggested that someone had picked up the phone and dialed while Bamber was outside with the police.

Detectives assigned to investigate the call produced a short statement in the name of an Essex Police officer named Nicholas Milbank. The statement made no mention of anyone calling 999. Instead, it said that Milbank had been asked to monitor the open line into the Whitehouse, and had heard nothing until officers entered. Unusually, the statement had not been signed; Milbank’s name had been typed on the signature line.

I found Milbank, still working for the Essex Police, and he said that a call had come in at 6:09. “From what I can remember, someone phoned 999,” from “inside the farmhouse,” he told me. The caller had not spoken to him, but he recalled hearing what might have been muffled speech—perhaps a “voice or a radio”—and noises that could have been “a door opening and closing, or a chair being moved.” I asked if this suggested that someone had been alive in the house. “Well, obviously,” Milbank replied. When I mentioned the statement issued in his name, he was taken aback. He had given no such statement, he told me, and no one inquiring into the crime had ever contacted him. “No one’s spoken to me about it since the nineteen-eighties,” he said. “Other than you.”

Scotland Yard declined to comment, and when I called Mark Oliver, the detective who oversaw the inquiry into the call, he cut me off angrily. “I really wouldn’t waste any of your time on that case,” he said. “Bamber will continue to make spurious allegations until the day he dies.” Then he hung up the phone.


There was no 999 call from WHF.  It was simply the GPO operator connecting the open line in WHF to the police with PC Millbank listening in.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4949.msg209640.html#msg209640

Most of the statements we have here are typed and unsigned.

I had a healthy amount of skepticism over it.

If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44402
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #182 on: July 07, 2025, 05:34:AM »
Not an interior handle no.

So how did he exit WHF leaving WHF 'secure from the inside'?

You must have a different narrative to the police and prosevution.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13152
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #183 on: July 07, 2025, 08:08:AM »
So how did he exit WHF leaving WHF 'secure from the inside'?

You must have a different narrative to the police and prosevution.

Realistically not via that window as he couldn't secure it when he was outside unless he punched a pane of window glass and got 24 7 emergency safestyle UK at that hour.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2025, 08:13:AM by ILB »
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me


Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44402
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #185 on: July 07, 2025, 11:20:AM »
Realistically not via that window as he couldn't secure it when he was outside unless he punched a pane of window glass and got 24 7 emergency safestyle UK at that hour.

So how did he exit WHF leaving WHF 'secure from the inside'?

You must have a different narrative to the police and prosevution.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5945
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #186 on: July 07, 2025, 01:20:PM »
https://open.substack.com/pub/thedocmaker/p/nothing-to-ccrc-here?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4tvp4h
Bamber is right about one thing, the CCRC aren't doing their job failing to interview the likes of Glynis Howard about the silencer, Roch.
Same could be said regarding the TFG about Nevills body being moved.
Seems the CCRC are a waste of time anyway just looking at documents at their desks, instead of interviewing anyone, or have they??
What is needed in Bambers case is an independent review, its the only way to resolve things.
Why haven't the CT started a petition for a review as well as one for disclosure? Or have they?

Offline Hardy Boy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3925
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #187 on: July 07, 2025, 02:11:PM »
Bamber is right about one thing, the CCRC aren't doing their job failing to interview the likes of Glynis Howard about the silencer, Roch.
Same could be said regarding the TFG about Nevills body being moved.
Seems the CCRC are a waste of time anyway just looking at documents at their desks, instead of interviewing anyone, or have they??
What is needed in Bambers case is an independent review, its the only way to resolve things.
Why haven't the CT started a petition for a review as well as one for disclosure? Or have they?
I thought you said you don’t believe the Police moved Neville’s body, you say Sheila knocked him out for three hours aside the Aga, and he recovered from this knock out and was eventually shot?  What do you think the TFG team would say if they were asked about moving Neville’s body, “oh yes we forgot about that, we needed to use the Aga to burn some evidence and he was in the way?”

Offline Hardy Boy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3925
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #188 on: July 07, 2025, 02:17:PM »
Bamber is right about one thing, the CCRC aren't doing their job failing to interview the likes of Glynis Howard about the silencer, Roch.
Same could be said regarding the TFG about Nevills body being moved.
Seems the CCRC are a waste of time anyway just looking at documents at their desks, instead of interviewing anyone, or have they??
What is needed in Bambers case is an independent review, its the only way to resolve things.
Why haven't the CT started a petition for a review as well as one for disclosure? Or have they?
What do you want the CCRC to ask Glynis Howard Snow? She was asked a lot under oath?  There’s 13 Pages  on her trial testimony and cross examining.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5945
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #189 on: July 07, 2025, 02:29:PM »
What do you want the CCRC to ask Glynis Howard Snow? She was asked a lot under oath?  There’s 13 Pages  on her trial testimony and cross examining.
Well as you can see, Bamber wants to ask her if she inspected two different silencers, HB.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5945
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #190 on: July 07, 2025, 02:31:PM »
I thought you said you don’t believe the Police moved Neville’s body, you say Sheila knocked him out for three hours aside the Aga, and he recovered from this knock out and was eventually shot?  What do you think the TFG team would say if they were asked about moving Neville’s body, “oh yes we forgot about that, we needed to use the Aga to burn some evidence and he was in the way?”
Yes, but Bamber and the CT believe the police moved Nevill, HB!

Offline Hardy Boy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3925
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #191 on: July 07, 2025, 03:16:PM »
Yes, but Bamber and the CT believe the police moved Nevill, HB!
I know what the CT and Bamber claim Snow, but the TFG in their statements say Neville was in the position they found him when they entered WHF, what do you expect them to say if the CCRC had them in for questioning?

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5945
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #192 on: July 07, 2025, 04:25:PM »
I know what the CT and Bamber claim Snow, but the TFG in their statements say Neville was in the position they found him when they entered WHF, what do you expect them to say if the CCRC had them in for questioning?
I am hoping the TFG members will swear on their mothers life that they did not move Nevill after entry, then Bamber and the CT will have to accept that the Aga burned Nevills back around 12.00-3.00 which should prove JBs innocence.
Infact,all JB/CT have to do really is prove that the Aga burned Nevills back and that it took several hours to do so, that should be enough really as no jury would believe that JB took 2-3 hours or more to kill his family.
The police scenario sent to the DPP had Nevill chased to the kitchen and killed within minutes, no time for Aga burns, HB!
No,in all fairness, all the CT should need to do is prove that the Aga burned Nevills back, thats all, they should forget about the police moving him in my opinion, as it doesn't even prove JBs innocence anyway as he could have shot Nevill to death as soon as he ran down stairs and left him lying by the Aga.
I just dont get the CT plan, they are over complicating things by claiming the police moved Nevill.
But!!! Thats just my opinion! What do I know! Who knows what advice lawyers and other experts have given them?

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3357
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #193 on: July 07, 2025, 05:22:PM »
I am hoping the TFG members will swear on their mothers life that they did not move Nevill after entry, then Bamber and the CT will have to accept that the Aga burned Nevills back around 12.00-3.00 which should prove JBs innocence.
Infact,all JB/CT have to do really is prove that the Aga burned Nevills back and that it took several hours to do so, that should be enough really as no jury would believe that JB took 2-3 hours or more to kill his family.
The police scenario sent to the DPP had Nevill chased to the kitchen and killed within minutes, no time for Aga burns, HB!
No,in all fairness, all the CT should need to do is prove that the Aga burned Nevills back, thats all, they should forget about the police moving him in my opinion, as it doesn't even prove JBs innocence anyway as he could have shot Nevill to death as soon as he ran down stairs and left him lying by the Aga.
I just dont get the CT plan, they are over complicating things by claiming the police moved Nevill.
But!!! Thats just my opinion! What do I know! Who knows what advice lawyers and other experts have given them?

It seems they are working on the basis that JB was framed without stating this. Rather than addressing this straight on, they are referencing a series of different issues as being false. The Aga is an example. If the crime scene has been altered in relation to NB's position what else might have been fabricated. In deed can we trust any of the Crowns case if some degree of staging has been undertaken. That's my take.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5945
Re: CCRC decision
« Reply #194 on: July 07, 2025, 05:46:PM »
It seems they are working on the basis that JB was framed without stating this. Rather than addressing this straight on, they are referencing a series of different issues as being false. The Aga is an example. If the crime scene has been altered in relation to NB's position what else might have been fabricated. In deed can we trust any of the Crowns case if some degree of staging has been undertaken. That's my take.
But aren't they better to take the simplest route meantime to get a referral, Bubo? just use the Aga evidence in its simplest form to get there, then hopefully the whole truth of what happened shall we say, will follow?
Surely those involved would be more willing to talk after JB is acqitted, but the CT have to get him to that stage first.