Nick Milbank confirms that Jeremy Bamber is innocent

[Steve_uk]

The voices would be the challenges to the house, Adam’s makes a note that GPR could hear dog barking and challenges to the house.  The challenges carried on so it’s probably what Millbank heard?

Yes, that's possible Hardy Boy. Maybe a boom from the loudhailer.

[snow66!]

No Snow, engaged means the line is busy.

In those days resources were limited so a off the hook telephone set a alarm on at the exchange to warn the operator.

So to go from off the hook to engaged someone had to replace the handset and dial out. Unless the operator made a mistake and recorded engaged when they meant off the hook.

Thanks, Rob! As I told Bubo, I am hopeless with anything technical, even the workings of a phone!

[snow66!]

Correct. Sheila did not make umpteen phone calls.

Ha ha! Well she didn't make 'any' calls at all if JB is guilty, Dan!

[BarefootDanC]

Ha ha! Well she didn't make 'any' calls at all if JB is guilty, Dan!

Exactly. Had any phone call genuinely been made, it would have been Nevill to 999.

[snow66!]

OK, so I have just listened to the latest Sonia Poulson podcast with Philip Walker and it answers some of our questions about the Milbank call!
In fact it is us who forgot about one very important point, or at least I did anyway.
That is, the fact that when you dial 999 the operator asks you what service you require, ie., police, fire or ambulance! At least thats what it was in those days, remember?
So Sheila must have phoned the operator who then put the 999 call through to Milbank, which makes sense!
In fact I think thats what Bill was suggesting earlier on.
Anyway, that answers why Milbank knew where the call came from!

[Adam]

OK, so I have just listened to the latest Sonia Poulson podcast with Philip Walker and it answers some of our questions about the Milbank call!
In fact it is us who forgot about one very important point, or at least I did anyway.
That is, the fact that when you dial 999 the operator asks you what service you require, ie., police, fire or ambulance! At least thats what it was in those days, remember?
So Sheila must have phoned the operator who then put the 999 call through to Milbank, which makes sense!
In fact I think thats what Bill was suggesting earlier on.
Anyway, that answers why Milbank knew where the call came from!

That is a good point. Would a 999 call go straight to Milbank.

If not, good luck in finding the operator.

[Adam]

Bamber left the phone off the hook. As the crime scene photos show.

Burrell tried twice and found the line to be engaged.

The line was cleared at 6.09am and monitored by Milbank. Until officers entered WHF.

But appreciate supporters will be fully on board that Sheila dialled 999.

[Hardy Boy]

OK, so I have just listened to the latest Sonia Poulson podcast with Philip Walker and it answers some of our questions about the Milbank call!
In fact it is us who forgot about one very important point, or at least I did anyway.
That is, the fact that when you dial 999 the operator asks you what service you require, ie., police, fire or ambulance! At least thats what it was in those days, remember?
So Sheila must have phoned the operator who then put the 999 call through to Milbank, which makes sense!
In fact I think thats what Bill was suggesting earlier on.
Anyway, that answers why Milbank knew where the call came from!

On Wednesday 7 August 1985 I was the Duty Sergeant in the Force
Information Roon at Police Headquarters, Chelmsford. At about 03.45 hours I became aware of the an incident in the
Tolleshunt D'Arcy area. At 03.56 I caused the Telecom Operator to check the line on a Maldon number 860209. This was done and I was told that the
telephone receiver was off its rest. At 05.55 I caused a second check to be made with the same result
accompanied by a report of a dog barking. At 06.09 hours this open line was linked up with our "999" call line
and was thereafter constantly monitored by Pc Millbank. 

Inspector D Burrell.


Jean Rowe was asked to listen in ABOUT 5.50am, she did so and was asked to connect the two lines which she eventually did,  the police could THEN monitor it from police HQ,  Jean Rowe the OPERATOR  played no further part AFTER SHE CONNECTED THE TWO LINES.

[Hardy Boy]

OK, so I have just listened to the latest Sonia Poulson podcast with Philip Walker and it answers some of our questions about the Milbank call!
In fact it is us who forgot about one very important point, or at least I did anyway.
That is, the fact that when you dial 999 the operator asks you what service you require, ie., police, fire or ambulance! At least thats what it was in those days, remember?
So Sheila must have phoned the operator who then put the 999 call through to Milbank, which makes sense!
In fact I think thats what Bill was suggesting earlier on.
Anyway, that answers why Milbank knew where the call came from!

The Operator States, she Played no further part once she had connected the two lines which enabled POLICE HQ to monitor it through the 999 system. How does Millbank receive a 999 call when the line he’s listening to is already connected to WHF and the operator played no further part?


You don’t think that this has something to do with Millbank and the supposed 999 call then do you or was Coincidental"…… telephone receiver was off its rest. At 05.55 I caused a second check to be made with the same result
accompanied by a report of a dog Barking.  At 06.09 hours this open line was linked up with our "999" call line

[Hardy Boy]

Yes, Burrell says that the link was made at 6.09 'and then' Milbank monitored it!
No mention of Milbank answering any call.
So according to Burrell the link was established and then Milbank was instructed to monitor it!
But how on earth could Milbank have forgot this and imagined he answered a call??
Indeed, Milband told Heidi,  'from what I can remember it was a case of someone ringing 999 and me answering it'  or words to that effect! No mention of being told to monitor the line!

That someone could have been Jean Rowe connecting the two lines up, she might have thought Millbank knew what was going to happen and just rang through and Connected it to Millbank’s 999.  All she did was what she was asked to do, Connect the two lines up so Millbank could monitor WHF.  That’s why he said NO ONE SPOKE,  she didn’t even listen in to WHF this time, she was very busy making other Alarm calls for British Telecom and played no further part.    She makes no reference to ever receiving a 999 call from WHF.  Don’t forget, this happened 40 years ago for Millbank.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3356.0;attach=23347;image

[Adam]

Jean Rowe's 1985 WS says the WHF phone was off the hook at 4.00am and 5.40am. As the crime scene photos show. 

She was then asked to connect the line to the police HQ. Once done the line was continually monitored by Milbank from 6.09am.  As Burrell's 1985 WS says.

Not sure how that is going to be turned around to 'Sheila dialled 999' to persuade the CCRC.

[Adam]

It also needs to be determined if a 999 call from inside WHF would go straight to Milbank.

If it went to an operator first, it needs to be determined if the operator would have passed it to Milbank.

Sheila would have had to speak to the operator. She then didn't speak to Milbank.

The CCRC would have investigated this.

[Bubo bubo]

The Operator States, she Played no further part once she had connected the two lines which enabled POLICE HQ to monitor it through the 999 system. How does Millbank receive a 999 call when the line he’s listening to is already connected to WHF and the operator played no further part?


You don’t think that this has something to do with Millbank and the supposed 999 call then do you or was Coincidental"…… telephone receiver was off its rest. At 05.55 I caused a second check to be made with the same result
accompanied by a report of a dog Barking.  At 06.09 hours this open line was linked up with our "999" call line

I have serious concerns over the Burrell statement which was made after the event and does not agree with the CD log, a contemporaneous document.

Why was he asking for a line check at 05.55am when the log says that the phone was engaged at 05.47am. Eight minutes earlier. There is another entry at 05.50 which says the GPO will monitor the line and let them know if they hear anything and that he (HQ Burrell) had been informed.

There was no good reason to recheck the line at 05.55am according to the log and information which he had been given before 05.55am

This suggests that the Burrell statement may be faked.

[Hardy Boy]

It also needs to be determined if a 999 call from inside WHF would go straight to Milbank.

If it went to an operator first, it needs to be determined if the operator would have passed it to Milbank.

Sheila would have had to speak to the operator. She then didn't speak to Milbank.

The CCRC would have investigated this.

Because the two lines was connected, if Sheila dialled 999 it would have to go to the Operator I would have thought,  Millbank was already connected to WHF,  for Sheila to ring out she would have to break the connection between the two lines, was it possible for Sheila to break this connection if it was made via the operator and Police?  Also Jean Rowe say’s she had no further involvement once the connection was made.

[Hardy Boy]

I have serious concerns over the Burrell statement which was made after the event and does not agree with the CD log, a contemporaneous document.

Why was he asking for a line check at 05.55am when the log says that the phone was engaged at 05.47am. Eight minutes earlier. There is another entry at 05.50 which says the GPO will monitor the line and let them know if they hear anything and that he (HQ Burrell) had been informed.

There was no good reason to recheck the line at 05.55am according to the log and information which he had been given before 05.55am

This suggests that the Burrell statement may be faked.

Without Checking, I think it was Adam’s who put in a request for the Lines to be monitored directly by the police?  I will try to find this.