you should all know this?

[jackiepreece]

Shona you seem obsessed with me having a boyfriend

If only you knew just because you messed up on the romance front not everyone has

I couldn't be happier I have plenty of love in my life don't worry about me

[mike tesko]

There is a simple test that can be applied, according to `Z`, which will resolve many issues in this case?

Which silencer was the crucIal flake of blood found inside, (a) the one sent to lab` on 30th August 1985 (DB/1) lab` item 23,, or (b) the one sent to lab' on 26th September 1985(SBJ/1) lab` item 22?

[mike tesko]

`Z` has pointed out that because the silencer sent to the lab` on 30th August 1986, was the one the crucial blood evidence was found inside, it must follow that the same blood could not have been found in the second silencer sent to the lab` 27 days later...

How could Essex police still have possession of a silencer on 26th September, to enable them to send it to the lab, when if there was only one silencer, it was already at the lab', had already been checked for blood, blood which to all intents and purposes belonged exclusively to Sheila?

Why were Essex police submitting a silencer (SBJ/1) to the lab` to be checked for blood, on 26th September, if it was already there?

[mike tesko]

Why is it, that no official `General Examination Record` which relates solely to the submission of the silencer to the lab` on 30th August 1985, exists?

'Z` claims to know why...

[shonapugs]

Why is it, that no official `General Examination Record` which relates solely to the submission of the silencer to the lab` on 30th August 1985, exists?

'Z` claims to know why...

I'm sorry, Mike. I can't do this anymore. You're treating us like a bunch of prats. If you have info that furthers your case, then use it. If not, then come clean and admit that this is just another scam to grab everyone's attention. You are losing credibility.

[smiffy]

`Z` has pointed out that because the silencer sent to the lab` on 30th August 1986, was the one the crucial blood evidence was found inside, it must follow that the same blood could not have been found in the second silencer sent to the lab` 27 days later...

How could Essex police still have possession of a silencer on 26th September, to enable them to send it to the lab, when if there was only one silencer, it was already at the lab', had already been checked for blood, blood which to all intents and purposes belonged exclusively to Sheila?

Why were Essex police submitting a silencer (SBJ/1) to the lab` to be checked for blood, on 26th September, if it was already there?


common sense says they have misrepresented the facts...it is a cover up.
the silencer evidence as presented is a pack of lies...

[grahameb]

Why is it, that no official `General Examination Record` which relates solely to the submission of the silencer to the lab` on 30th August 1985, exists?

'Z` claims to know why...

I'm sorry, Mike. I can't do this anymore. You're treating us like a bunch of prats. If you have info that furthers your case, then use it. If not, then come clean and admit that this is just another scam to grab everyone's attention. You are losing credibility.

Well all I can say is that only Mike and Smiffy have stuck to the thread. All everyone else has done is criticise Mike for trying to dupe us. I wonder if that is just an attempt to derail the argument because they have nothing to contribute themselves. I don't think with your argument Shona that you can progress much further. Because you will not compromise but remain stuck in your belief that there was a hitman. Someone who was perhaps as strong as two people, because it was not possible for Sheila to overpower Ralph. Or that Jeremy couldn't do his own killing. That is as far as your argument goes. But just consider for a moment if Mikes contact is real? For and I've said it before. He was dead on tract concerning the two silencers. Because Jeremy's team are considering the same thing and it seems to be generally accepted that there were in fact two silencers. So I urge everyone to reconcider Mike's claim about his informant. Who knows we could be very surprised one day?

[shonapugs]

Why is it, that no official `General Examination Record` which relates solely to the submission of the silencer to the lab` on 30th August 1985, exists?

'Z` claims to know why...

I'm sorry, Mike. I can't do this anymore. You're treating us like a bunch of prats. If you have info that furthers your case, then use it. If not, then come clean and admit that this is just another scam to grab everyone's attention. You are losing credibility.

Well all I can say is that only Mike and Smiffy have stuck to the thread. All everyone else has done is criticise Mike for trying to dupe us. I wonder if that is just an attempt to derail the argument because they have nothing to contribute themselves. I don't think with your argument Shona that you can progress much further. Because you will not compromise but remain stuck in your belief that there was a hitman. Someone who was perhaps as strong as two people, because it was not possible for Sheila to overpower Ralph. Or that Jeremy couldn't do his own killing. That is as far as your argument goes. But just consider for a moment if Mikes contact is real? For and I've said it before. He was dead on tract concerning the two silencers. Because Jeremy's team are considering the same thing and it seems to be generally accepted that there were in fact two silencers. So I urge everyone to reconcider Mike's claim about his informant. Who knows we could be very surprised one day?

Or one silencer with two different reports. I would compromise, Grahame, if I could. Probably more so than most on here. But, yes, I genuinely believe that JB paid to have his adopted family murdered. And I'm afraid that Mike has form. Ali Bongo. June in the kitchen. Sheila's arm. And now, Z.

[mike tesko]

'Z` told me the significance of details contained on a submission of articles form, to the lab`, dated, 26th September 1985, which bears one of the SOCO signatures, dated, 13th September, `Z` says this as the date SOC finger printed this particular silencer. Key point being other silencer had already been finger printed the month before, by oblique light test and super glue treatment, so why were police wanting to fingerprint the silencer in their possess, again?

How could police still have possession of the same silencer, on 13th September 1985, and want to fingerprint it, if the same silencer had been at the lab` from as long ago, as two weeks previously? How come that on 26th September when silencer was submitted to lab` it was being requested for it to be checked for blood and fibres, when according to other evidence, blood had already been found in the silencer sent to the lab` on 30th August, blood which had already been identified, as being unique and exclusive to Sheila (in tests carried out between 12th and 18th September 1985), which fell before the date when the second silencer was submitted to the lab` on 26th September...

[grahameb]

'Z` told me the significance of details contained on a submission of articles form, to the lab`, dated, 26th September 1985, which bears one of the SOCO signatures, dated, 13th September, `Z` says this as the date SOC finger printed this particular silencer. Key point being other silencer had already been finger printed the month before, by oblique light test and super glue treatment, so why were police wanting to fingerprint the silencer in their possess, again?

How could police still have possession of the same silencer, on 13th September 1985, and want to fingerprint it, if the same silencer had been at the lab` from as long ago, as two weeks previously? How come that on 26th September when silencer was submitted to lab` it was being requested for it to be checked for blood and fibres, when according to other evidence, blood had already been found in the silencer sent to the lab` on 30th August, blood which had already been identified, as being unique and exclusive to Sheila (in tests carried out between 12th and 18th September 1985), which fell before the date when the second silencer was submitted to the lab` on 26th September...

Mike. This "Z" seems to have told you a great deal in a very short time during this meeting? How could your memory cope with all this information?

[bob]

'Z` told me the significance of details contained on a submission of articles form, to the lab`, dated, 26th September 1985, which bears one of the SOCO signatures, dated, 13th September, `Z` says this as the date SOC finger printed this particular silencer. Key point being other silencer had already been finger printed the month before, by oblique light test and super glue treatment, so why were police wanting to fingerprint the silencer in their possess, again?

How could police still have possession of the same silencer, on 13th September 1985, and want to fingerprint it, if the same silencer had been at the lab` from as long ago, as two weeks previously? How come that on 26th September when silencer was submitted to lab` it was being requested for it to be checked for blood and fibres, when according to other evidence, blood had already been found in the silencer sent to the lab` on 30th August, blood which had already been identified, as being unique and exclusive to Sheila (in tests carried out between 12th and 18th September 1985), which fell before the date when the second silencer was submitted to the lab` on 26th September...

Mike. This "Z" seems to have told you a great deal in a very short time during this meeting? How could your memory cope with all this information?

And how does Zorro's memory recall such detail 26 years on?

[mike tesko]

I do not know anybody who goes by the names of, `Ali bongo`, or `Zoro`, these are names invented by others, who wouldn`t recognise the truth, if it hit them full on in the face...

[smiffy]

'Z` told me the significance of details contained on a submission of articles form, to the lab`, dated, 26th September 1985, which bears one of the SOCO signatures, dated, 13th September, `Z` says this as the date SOC finger printed this particular silencer. Key point being other silencer had already been finger printed the month before, by oblique light test and super glue treatment, so why were police wanting to fingerprint the silencer in their possess, again?

How could police still have possession of the same silencer, on 13th September 1985, and want to fingerprint it, if the same silencer had been at the lab` from as long ago, as two weeks previously? How come that on 26th September when silencer was submitted to lab` it was being requested for it to be checked for blood and fibres, when according to other evidence, blood had already been found in the silencer sent to the lab` on 30th August, blood which had already been identified, as being unique and exclusive to Sheila (in tests carried out between 12th and 18th September 1985), which fell before the date when the second silencer was submitted to the lab` on 26th September...

And if the firearms expert was conducting firing tests with a silencer on the 20th september how would that affect the location of the silencer and any evidence found on it or within it!!
Let alone the other secret (not admitted to test firing that appears to have taken place on the 13th september)  ...just has to be 2 or more silencers does it not....and not just one as the prosecution and police claimed.

[OnceSaid]

I don't know if the person Z exists, given the details about him/her on here, nor do I care.

I do think that Mike has got the info from someone/somewhere.

I think he will have good enough reason not to provide his source, that doesnt mean that the information that is being posted is untrue.

With respect, JB's legal team will not have the time to put all their efforts into scrutinizing all documents/evidence available to them, regardless of how good and supportive they are.

Someone has to get information into the public domain.  Only someone with access to paperwork and contacts can do this. 

There is not many people who would put their neck on the line under the circumstances.  As long as Mike makes the distinction of what he has been told/or uncovered, and what is his own opinion, I don't see the problem.

I also noticed a comment on another thread that JB was not happy that pictures of his family had been posted on the internet.  He cant have it both ways, in my opinion.  If the public  are to see/hear/read the details of what happened at WHF then everything that can possibly be shared, must be, no matter how disturbing and upsetting it is as long as it is relevent to discussion,and also in the hope that it raises awareness of his fight for freedom and get to the awful truth of what happened that day.
 

[Blodwynflower]

Good afternoon all

Mike, is your informant aiding you in re-examining documentation in your possession? What I mean by this is, where you have presented a theory of your own, is your informant correcting that theory by way of their own account of events?

Thankyou.