Are items found at a crime scene given their exhibit numbers at the scene, or are they collected up and then given their numbers sometime later?
Exhibit references for individual witnesses are automatically allocated to items seized, found or retained by individual officers, so that all the items to which a witness refers in his/her evidence is listed in sequential order, and by this process continuity is established. For example, if I were a witness in a case, and I found, retained, seized or took possession of say four items, the first one would bear my initials (MVT) 1, then 2, followed by 3 and 4, marked like this:-
MVT/1
MVT/2
MVT/3
MVT/4
The allocating of exhibits by use of this system, ensures that the evidence is given and that continuity is established beyond doubt. You can use or rely on this system to check out the truthfulness or otherwise of dodgy or suspect evidence which has been introduced at a later time to help bolster up a case against a suspect or defendant. In the example above, item MVT/3 cannot have been found before either MVT/1 or MVT/2, but it could have been found before MVT/4...
When you apply this to the four exhibits which DS 'Stan' Jiones took possession of at the scene on 7th August 1985, it must follow that if he took possession of items SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4 on 7th August 1985, that he must also have taken possession of one of the silencers at the scene on the same day. Lets take the matter a step further - three exhibits which wer5e seized by DS Jones on 7th August 1985, are logged in one of the property books which ,lists items taken, seized or found or whatever from the scene on 7th August 1985, yet this was a document which relates to the first part of the investigation (SC/688/85), and none of these items (SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4) were carried over into the new investigation (SC/786/85), they were omitted for some reason?
For some reason the police did not want Jeremy Bambers legal team or the court to know that DS 'Stan' Jones had found, seized or taken possession of four exhibits from the scene on 7th August 1985...
I will remind you what exhibit references were given to three of those items on that occasion:-
SBJ/2
SBJ/3
SBJ/4
Now, you do not have to be a scientists from Huntingdon Lab' (1985 era) to see or to know, or to work out, or to use a little bit of that grey matter that some of us are blessed with, that is located somewhere between both of our lug holes, that DS Jones, "must also have taken possession of item SBJ/1 from the scene", on or before the other three items to which I am alluding to, and to which the evidence confirms existed, as of and on 7th August 1985...
the number 4 is greater than 3, and the number 3 is greater than 2, and I think if I am correct, but correct me if I am wrong, the number 2 is greater than 1, so by my reckoning, item SBJ/4 was found at the scene by DS Jones, after item SBJ/3, and item SBJ/3 was found at the scene by DS Jones, after item SBJ/2, and it must follow by a reliance of simple logic and reasoning that item SBJ/1 which DS Jones took possession of at the scene on 7th August 1985, was found or taken into the possession of DS Jones, before either SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4...
You have to ask yourself then...
What piece of evidence was given the original exhibit reference of SBJ/1?
Oh look - the silencer bearing the reference (SBJ/1)was sent to the lab' on 26th September 1985, by Essex police, to be checked for blood and fibres, and the 'Genera Examination Record, for the examination of that silencer, which was originally dated, 27th September 1985, (but which has had the date altered to 25th September 1985) happens to have that very same exhibit reference? Funny how there was no blood found at all on this silencer bearing the mark of SBJ/1?
Hang on a minute, wasn't there only one silencer, which had three different exhibit references attributed to it at different stages of the investigation, SBJ/1, DB/1 and DRB/1? Then how could silencer bearing the mark DB/1 be at the lab' from 30th August 1985, and blood be found inside it that was linked exclusively to Sheila, and yet the police still be in possession of it between 13th and 26th September 1985, to enable them to submit it to the same lab' to be checked for blood and fibres? Lets just hit the nail on the head to bring this point home to everybody who is remotely interested, blood found inside silencer bearing the mark DB/1, lab' item 23, was analysed and confirmed by tests carried out by blood expert, John Hayward, and his assistants, between 12th and 18th September 1985, at Huntingdon Lab', and so Essex police still had another silencer in their possession whilst silencer (DB/1) was already at the lab' from 30th August 1985, onward. Now, either I am thick or something has been going here with two or more silencers which the police, and the lab', and the relatives, have presented evidence to the court and in this case, as though these different silencers were one and the same? But they could not have been. Now what appears to be the case, is that the police eventually got possession of both Parker hale silencers from the scene, one belonging to Anthony Pargeter, and the other belonging to Ralph Bamber. I will remind you where these were normally kept at the scene so that it becomes a clearer picture - Pargeters silencer was normally kept with his .22 bolt action rifle in the toilet downstairs at whf, and despite some 26 years or more having elapsed since the timing of these terrible shootings, he stuill has not accounted for where his silencer was at the material time, and further more, Essex police, nor the COLP investigation, has been bothered to ask him officially where his silencer was on the night of the shootings? Lets go a step further - the relatives do not seem particularly interested what happened to Anthony Pargeters, Parker Hale silencer, at the material time?
But me...
I am interested in it, and I have been interested in its whereabouts, for a very long time now...
And it seems to me, that one of these two principle silencers, (Lets for arguments sake, call them or refer to them by the different exhibit marks of DB/1 and SBJ/1) the one belonging to Pargeter, and the other belonging to Ralph Bamber, are the two silencers at the heart of this problem, where one was sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985, inside which was found the crucial blood of Sheila, and another silencer which police still had in their possession (marked SBJ/1) until 26th September 1985, which the police did not send to the lab' to be checked until a date (26th September 1985) after the blood from the other one had already been found and identified...
I cannot put it any clearer than that, or this...
Two different silencers, both identical Parker hale silencers, one with blood from Sheila inside it and paint attributed to it, and another with only paint upon it...
Both merged into one and the same silencer, by the alteration of lab' documents, and entries in witness statements, made by police officers, lab' experts and relatives...
I will post all the relevant documentation along with this post,
(later on today) so that members of the forum, and guests, can see for themselves what has been going on here. You can all make up your own minds about what took place regarding these silencers. For my part, I am more than satisfied that I have had the truth explained to me by my informant ('Z')...
Once you work it out that there were two principle silencers, both identical Parker hale types, and you realize that they had different exhibit marks (SBJ/1 and DB/1) it becomes easy to see how this major deception was pulled off to help convict Jeremy Bamber for thee awful murders. This is not a case where the silencers themselves have been swapped over physically, but rather one where the exhibit marks attributed or given to either have been swapped around, and where police, relatives and scientists have been referring to these different silencers by both identifying marks, at different times, as though it was the same silencer all along, when it was most definitely not...
Silencer DB/1, lab' item number 23, was not and is not the same silencer as the one marked SBJ/1, Lab' item number 22, although the silencer referred to as per the submission to the lab' on 13th August and 30th August 1985, may be a reference to the same actual silencer, being sent to the lab' on both of these occasions. Once the relatives took possession of the Bamber silencer from the scene on 11th September 1985 (DRB/1), someone responsible for putting together a case which could be used to help convict Jeremy for these murders, merged them into the same silencer. In other words, information about the actual date when the relatives found the silencer (DRB/1) and handed it over to the police, who retained it, and kept it for 25 days before sending it to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres, on 26th September 1985, was information swept under the carpet, in the hope and belief that what had been done would never be found out, but they didn't reckon on somebody coming along at a later date who set about reconstructing the sequence of events, regarding the same...
Dodgy silencer evidence, containing dodgy blood evidence and dodgy paint evidence, is what was relied upon to convict Jeremy Bamber for these awful murders. Two principle silencers, DB/1 and SBJ/1, and a pack of lies about how and when and by whom each of these two silencers were found at the scene...
