In her COLP interview Ann describes going to whf and arriving at 9.30 am on the 10th august 1985 and later on locking up and leaving at dinner time. There is no mention of anyone else turning up that morining.
Ann describes cleaning floors and the clothes in the buckets etc.
She also bizarrely mentions (she may be making this up) seeing a piece of screwed up paper in the keyhole (backdoor is not mentioned but it is implied)....and she claims to remove it and unfurl it in case it is a clue of some sort. She offers opinion it may have been fitted to prevent a draught.
The puzzle is why she is bothering to mention this at all.
Is she making this claim to play ignorant to distance herself from the crime or trying to use it to implicate JB in a manner which seems unfathomable. A boast maybe of how good an investigator she may think herself to be.
Which brings us to the door in question and how stupid this is. The door in question was a new door fitted to replace the one the police had forced entry though. Thus any claimed piece of paper would be unusual to be stuffed in a lock..if there ever was...and certainly not done in August to prevent a draught.
Obviously later on she should have found out the door had been replaced by the police and its probable she knew it on the 10th if not before. So here she is making a comment that appears to be one that implies ignorance of the door being changed. It seems she wants us to think she didnt know the door had been changed when she must have knew it had been or would have known that later anyway before making any statement about it.
The back door that had been there, which the police forced entry through, had only recently been fitted at whf. This it would seem is supposed to be something Ann would not have seen prior to the murders.
It is as though she wants people to believe she was unable to recognise the difference between the 2 doors as she wants people to think the replacement door was the one fitted at the time of the murder as though she could not tell the difference from lack of viewing. The paper in the lock being there prior to the murder being the train of though.
It as though she knew all to well the backdoor had been changed prior to the murder but was saying things to the contrary to give the impression she did not know.
The paper in the keyhole line also brings in the subject of keys and locks and a previous claimed belief of some relatives that a spare key was kept in the garage. The police reported that a key was in the lock of the lock of the backdoor (from the inside) when they gained entry.
However Ann's comment about paper stuffed in the keyhole (which seems dodgy) and her impression that she is giving out by her claim is one that "her being fooled " into believing paper was stuffed in the keyhole meant she was ignorant of a key being in the keyhole inserted from the inside.
It could be viewed that she is playing ignorant here to distance herself from having proper accurate knowledge about the back door and key/lock status that was relevant at the time of the crime.
