Milbank statement

[Hardy Boy]

Milbank's hand written statement is not signed or dated.

He's not going to give an audio interview to the NY, then deny doing so straight afterwards!

Once he has given the interview, it is too late for EP to pressurise him into writing down that he didn't. Which the CT are saying.

Suspect Milbank did give an audio interview. The CT are trying to bring in EP & Millbank denying it to enhance the corruption angle. Maybe they think what Milbank said is not enough on it's own.

Most of the witness statements on here are not signed, it just has their name on?  Copied witness statements are not signed because the signature on the original document is the witness's personal verification of the truth and accuracy of their evidence. The signature is what makes the statement an authentic, admissible legal document.

I thought we had discussed this before somewhere, everyone used to say it’s not signed ETC?   If you look at Bamber’s statements they’re not signed, the originals will have to be.  Heidi would not have hold of the original statement?

[Adam]

A pity the whole page is not available. Of Milbank's apparent denial. After giving an audio interview.

We just have a few lines.

[Bubo bubo]

You will have to ask them.

I believe I have posted before that irrespective of Milbank/HeidiB et al, The logs show someone was alive at 05.47am when the line status changed and the police were informed which triggered the establishing of the link.

The police knew there was no need for a link because they were getting reports over time from the operator who was continually responding to requests to perform a line check and were told it was off the hook until 05.47am and it was this that led to the creation of the link.

[Hardy Boy]

Heidi said the CCRC had made a decision not to refer the case to the Court of Appeal,  in a document that ran to more than 200 pages on the reasons why it had decided not to refer his case.  The CCRC Complained that the NEW YORKER DECLINED to hand over the Source material of the Millbank interview in which they had requested, the CCRC had written to the New Yorker asking for the Tapes of Heidi’s interviews and the Magazine had told then NO, the reason they gave….  TO PRESERVE EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE!

I wonder what in THE Dark has to hide,  there’s a guy in prison who by all accounts they are supposed to be helping, yet they refuse to hand over evidence that could free him,  by all accounts TO PRESERVE EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE….. I’m sorry but, THE CCRC need to hear the Interview in Full and not with the editorial cuts in my opinion. 

So it looks like American principle across many American News organisations not to release evidence on the Grounds…….. TO PRESERVE EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE Trumps Jeremy Bambers Freedom OR AT LEAST A REFERAL.


So why doesn’t Philip and Bamber and the CT start petitioning the New Yorker now to release the tapes to the CCRC,  let the Campaign team get on their backs now, let’s see the CT criticism of the NEW YORKER.