Lets suppose A/PS Woodcock (assuming he is still alive) goes to the BBC and makes a statement:
I would like to make a statement about the White House Farm murders which took place on 7th August 1985. Myself and my officers made statements to the effect that we did not intefere with the scene of crime in the kitchen. I regret to inform everyone that this is false. Several items of furniture were moved, a bowl of sugar was knocked off the table and spilled all over the floor and perhaps more importantly Mr Bamber was moved. Mr Bamber was not found perched on a chair with his head in the coal scuttle he was found on the floor with his back against the Aga.
I have signed below to confirm this is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Futhermore several officers who were also in attendance have signed below confirming the above statement.
How would any of this in any way, shape or form assist JB with the CCRC/CoA?
How would it exonerate JB?
How would it implicate SC?
How would it overcome the most compelling aspects of the case against JB eg a flake of blood supposedly found inside the silencer matching SC's blood groups?
How would it overcome 'evidence' presented at trial by Malcolm Fletcher from FSS that had SC been the killer he would have expected to have found gun oil on her nightdress when there was none?
How would it overcome 'evidence' presented at trial by Malcolm Fletcher from FSS that had SC been the killer he would have expected to have found black marks on her hands when there were none?
How would it overcome 'evidence' presented at trial by Brian Elliott from FSS that had SC been the killer he would have expected her hand swabs to present with higher levels of lead than they did?