Author Topic: New Yorker podcast  (Read 27446 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5950
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #60 on: November 18, 2025, 08:39:PM »
Yes the log is on the forum Snow, if you read West's and or Bonnett's you will find it.
Thanks, Rob, will do!

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5950
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #61 on: November 18, 2025, 08:51:PM »
Yes the log is on the forum Snow, if you read West's and or Bonnett's you will find it.
Ah yes, 5.47 PHONE ENGAGED  @ SCENE!
Then the link up at 6.09, looks like the Milbank call doesn't add up? Not without some clarification anyway!
Could it have been the 5.47 call that Milbank answered? Not according to Burrell!

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44408
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #62 on: November 18, 2025, 08:58:PM »
Ah yes, 5.47 PHONE ENGAGED  @ SCENE!
Then the link up at 6.09, looks like the Milbank call doesn't add up? Not without some clarification anyway!
Could it have been the 5.47 call that Milbank answered? Not according to Burrell!

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

Reply 2 has Jean Rowe's WS.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5950
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #63 on: November 18, 2025, 09:02:PM »

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5950
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #64 on: November 18, 2025, 09:43:PM »
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4949.msg209640.html#msg209640

Reply 2 has Jean Rowe's WS.
Yes, Jean Rowe's wording in her statement is interesting!
     ' I am not allowed to engage the Direct Emergency Police line so I again checked into the Malden number and then phoned the police headquarters and connected the two thus enabling the police to listen to the line.'
 
What is the Direct Emergency Police line? Is that simply 999, or some other 'special line?
 Anyway, Jean Rowe checked into Maldon number and then phoned the police headquarters, so no mention of making any'999' call to the police station in order to make the link-up to WHF then?
And this is what Milbank keeps talking about, or at least did, a 999 call from inside WHF!
Milbank answered a 999 call, yet it appears that Jean Rowe didn't make any 999 call, she  'checked into the Maldon number and then phoned the police headquarters', 
So why did Milbank maintain that he answered a 999 call? 
Did Jean Rowe actually make the link between the police station and WHF at 6.09, or was this simply achieved by Sheila making a 999 call that Milbank picked up, thus making the connection?
I suppose this is where the value of the original signed statements would come in handy?
« Last Edit: November 18, 2025, 10:50:PM by snow66! »

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3357
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #65 on: November 18, 2025, 11:03:PM »
Yes, Jean Rowe's wording in her statement is interesting!
     ' I am not allowed to engage the Direct Emergency Police line so I again checked into the Malden number and then phoned the police headquarters and connected the two thus enabling the police to listen to the line.'
 
What is the Direct Emergency Police line? Is that simply 999, or some other 'special line?
 Anyway, Jean Rowe checked into Maldon number and then phoned the police headquarters, so no mention of making any'999' call to the police station in order to make the link-up to WHF then?
And this is what Milbank keeps talking about, or at least did, a 999 call from inside WHF!
Milbank answered a 999 call, yet it appears that Jean Rowe didn't make any 999 call, she  'checked into the Maldon number and then phoned the police headquarters', 
So why did Milbank maintain that he answered a 999 call?

A lot depends on how operators were allotted tasks. Did all operators handle 999 calls if they were 'free'? In this case the 999 call could have been routed by someone other than JR.

There is also the question of who West spoke to when he had the line checked at 03.42am. This means that if JR was responsible for this task she received 3 calls to check, where as  her statement says she was asked twice as per the Burrell statement with the first check at around 04.00am. There is no reference to being tasked with monitoring the line.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5950
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #66 on: November 18, 2025, 11:53:PM »
A lot depends on how operators were allotted tasks. Did all operators handle 999 calls if they were 'free'? In this case the 999 call could have been routed by someone other than JR.

There is also the question of who West spoke to when he had the line checked at 03.42am. This means that if JR was responsible for this task she received 3 calls to check, where as  her statement says she was asked twice as per the Burrell statement with the first check at around 04.00am. There is no reference to being tasked with monitoring the line.
I think Heidi Blake will certainly have to supply a lot more detail about the Milbank call if its going to be of any use to JB, Bubo!

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44408
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #67 on: November 18, 2025, 11:58:PM »
I think Heidi Blake will certainly have to supply a lot more detail about the Milbank call if its going to be of any use to JB, Bubo!

As with Nevill calling Chelmsford Police, it will still be discussed 15 years later. With Jeremy still in prison. If still alive.

However unlike Nevill's call, it can't be submitted to the CCRC in 15 years. It has already been rejected by them. Jeremy's lawyers need to decide whether to pass the audio to the CCRC. Although they have probably heard the podcast.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5950
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #68 on: November 19, 2025, 12:14:AM »
As with Nevill calling Chelmsford Police, it will still be discussed 15 years later. With Jeremy still in prison. If still alive.

However unlike Nevill's call, it can't be submitted to the CCRC in 15 years. It has already been rejected by them. Jeremy's lawyers need to decide whether to pass the audio to the CCRC. Although they have probably heard the podcast.
I think the Aga evidence should have gained Bamber an appeal if handled right, Adam!

Offline Hardy Boy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3925
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #69 on: November 19, 2025, 07:45:AM »
I think the Aga evidence should have gained Bamber an appeal if handled right, Adam!
The only way the Aga evidence would have got Bamber an appeal, the Police would have to confess that they moved Neville’s body from the Aga to stage him seated on the Chair.  Your  idea is totally useless and wouldn’t even come close (PERIOD) in other words totally Irrelevant and doesn’t carry any weight whatsoever!

I genuinely thought the Millbank Audio might have some bearing,  but I’m now thinking the opposite,  I think it’s questionable to say the least and it leaves us all with Suspicion on why the New Yorker never released the Tapes when asked to do so by the CCRC?

I wonder what Jeremy Bamber really thinks, was he told beforehand that the New Yorker would not release the Millbank interview to the CCRC, he seems to have built his hopes up about them, yet he blames the CCRC for none referral,  any Court or Lawyer would want to see or hear any confession in its entirety before making a Judgement and not some edited script, edited Scripts would be thrown out and be inadmissible.

Offline Hardy Boy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3925
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #70 on: November 19, 2025, 07:59:AM »
I think Heidi Blake will certainly have to supply a lot more detail about the Milbank call if its going to be of any use to JB, Bubo!
Heidi  (the New Yorker) was asked to supply the Millbank Audio to the CCRC Snow and they refused, if they did I’m sure the CCRC would look at it again, but how much time will this have cost the CCRC and Jeremy Bamber if they did Snow?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44408
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #71 on: November 19, 2025, 05:44:PM »
The defence case is Sheila wanted to commit murder/suicide. Bamber said she wanted to go to heaven.

So not sure why -

She would keep herself alive for another 3 hours.

Ring 999.

Not say anything.

Not communicate with the police outside instead.

Milbank not say anything for 40 years.

----------

But appreciate this will follow the same trajectory as Nevill's call to the police & always be supported. However it was dismissed by the CCRC within 12 months. Nevill's call was dismissed by the CCRC 15 years later.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44408
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #72 on: November 19, 2025, 05:49:PM »
Sheila's call was physically possible if she was alive inside WHF. .

Nevill calling Bamber and then the police after he had been shot 4 times would have taken too long. The defence case that he called Bamber is bad enough.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13783
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #73 on: November 19, 2025, 06:04:PM »
Can someone provide a link to listen to the episodes (apologies if already done so)

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21102
Re: New Yorker podcast
« Reply #74 on: November 19, 2025, 06:53:PM »
Can someone provide a link to listen to the episodes (apologies if already done so)
Please see #40, if it's not too much trouble..

Nick Milbank obituary: https://www.essex.police.uk/police-forces/essex-police/areas/essex-police/au/about-us/obituaries/
« Last Edit: November 19, 2025, 07:43:PM by Steve_uk »