you should all know this?

[mike tesko]

Police knew about silencer (SBJ/1) before alleged find by relatives of silencer, as confirmed by what DS "Stan" Jones, told COLP in his 1991 interviews:-

If you are a police officer and you are visiting Jeremy Bamber on 9th August 1985, and are speaking to him at that stage, about the silencer for the gun being on the rifle or not, then you obviously do know about a silencer by that stage. This took place one day before the alleged find of the silencer at the scene by the relatives, and three days before relatives allegedly handed over a silencer to the police on the evening of 12th August: four days before same silencer was allegedly sent to the lab' on 13th August 1985: six days before same silencer was allegedly fingerprinted by oblique light test on 15th August 1985: thirteen days before alleged same silencer was fingerprinted by super glue treatment on 23rd August 1985: seventeen days before DI Cook (SOC) dismantled the alleged same silencer on 29th August 1985: eighteen days before same alleged silencer was sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985, inside which the ballistic expert allegedly found the crucial flake of Sheila's blood...

Of course, this is all false because there was not only one silencer, and that silencer was not the one found at the scene by the relatives, this silencer (the one referred to in all these events) was the one found at the scene by DS "Stan" Jones, SBJ/1, a silencer the police had possession of before the opening of the inquest, a silencer which had been sent to the lab' twice, once on 13th and secondly on 30th August 1985, a silencer which had been fingerprinted twice, once on 15th August 1985, and secondly on 23rd August 1985, a silencer which had been dismantled and rebuilt by DI Cook (SOC) on 29th August 1985, and upon being received at the lab' on 30th August 1985, a silencer which had been dismantled yet again by the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, to enable him to find the oh so crucial flake of blood that contained the blood group activity which made it unique to Sheila; a silencer which was in the words of Fletcher, handed over to the blood expert, John Hayward on 11th September 1985, along with the flake, to allow him to carry out an analysis between 12th and 19th September 1985...

All these events took place long before the second silencer (DRB/1) found by the relatives on 11th September 1985, eventually found its way to the lab' on 20th September 1985, a silencer which had become contaminated with red paint from deliberately having been scratched against the aga surround, with no blood found upon or inside it at all...

Police and relatives changed the date of the find of the second silencer, and falsely attributed the blood evidence to it, which together with the paint from the aga became a compelling argument to help persuade the court that the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the gun at the time of the shootings...

Two silencers, not one...

(1) The PARGETER SILENCER
(2) The BAMBER SILENCER

Amen...

[mike tesko]

Correct Interpretation?

Does DS "Stan" Jones, tell COLP (1991) that "HE FOUND ONE" (silencer) or that "HE FOUND THE" (silencer)?

[mike tesko]

OTHER "SBJ" EXHIBITS, TAKEN FROM SCENE, by DS "Stan" JONES:-

(1) SBJ/4
(2) SBJ/3
(3) SBJ/2
(4) SBJ/1

[DCrump]

Correct Interpretation?

Does DS "Stan" Jones, tell COLP (1991) that "HE FOUND ONE" (silencer) or that "HE FOUND THE" (silencer)?

Neither, he says "he [RB) related that the family had found the silencer" and that blown up bit you posted says "I had not drawn any significance in relation to the silencer as I knew the" ("as I knew the" is crossed out).

Or is that not the bit you meant?

[mike tesko]

Correct Interpretation?

Does DS "Stan" Jones, tell COLP (1991) that "HE FOUND ONE" (silencer) or that "HE FOUND THE" (silencer)?

Neither, he says "he [RB) related that the family had found the silencer" and that blown up bit you posted says "I had not drawn any significance in relation to the silencer as I knew the" ("as I knew the" is crossed out).

Or is that not the bit you meant?

What was it that DS "Stan" Jones, "knew" about the silencer on 9th August 1985?

According to these notes, DCI Jones,and DS Jones, went to 9 head street, Goldhanger, to see Jeremy at 7:30pm, and questioned Jeremy about the silencer, now how could the police know about the silencer the day before the relatives supposedly found it in the gun cupboard?

On the other hand...

If you pay particular notice to the actual date these notes refer to, you will see that DS Jones, gets the actual date of these events wrong by a year...

Her refers to the date being 09/08/86, when the actual date was 09/08/85. The mistake is compounded in relation to the other supposed dates when he carried out actions in connection with the investigation of this case...

Perhaps that has got something to do with why he had to alter the commencement date recorded on the front of his pocketbook twice, and why the first entries in it are some "five months" or so out of synchronisation?

[DCrump]

The original date on the front of the pocketbook is not in his handwriting and is the same date as the stamp. The two dates in his handwriting are only a day apart.

And speaking of 'his' handwriting, the notes you've posted appear to mention both DCI Jones and DS Jones in the third person, but refer to themselves in the first person so I'm confused as to whose notes they are supposed to be.

[mike tesko]

The original date on the front of the pocketbook is not in his handwriting and is the same date as the stamp. The two dates in his handwriting are only a day apart.

And speaking of 'his' handwriting, the notes you've posted appear to mention both DCI Jones and DS Jones in the third person, but refer to themselves in the first person so I'm confused as to whose notes they are supposed to be.

for the purpose of being specific, although the first date, and the last date are only one day apart, there is a difference of some five months between either of these dates, and the original one sandwiched in-between either, which also corresponds with the date of the official Essex police stamp upon the same front cover. It was inside the cover of this pocketbook that the evidence of DS Jones was recorded in connection with this case, so how was it possible for DS Jones to cram all the detail's relating to his involvement in this investigation between 7th August 1985 and October 1986 (the start of the trial), into this book?

Why would anyone other than DS "Stan" Jones, alter the dates on the front cover of his own pocketbook? Why would DS Jones allow anyone else to alter those dates on his pocketbook? Senior officers involved in this cover up, knew what DS Jones had done, they knew he found the original silencer, they knew that in order to pull off the deception involving the second silencer being referred to as the only silencer involved the co-operation of DS Jones, and that is why they allowed him to tamper with the notes that he wrote in this pocketbook. Jones had to re-write his notes later, to remove all the damning evidence which he had originally recorded in his original pocketbook entries...

Police had access to spare pocketbooks, in which they often recorded details and evidence upon which they could rely on whilst testifying at court, by claiming these notes were recorded contemporaneously but which in fact were not. However, when a police officer claimed he made such notes up contemporaneously, a judge usually grants permission for that officer to read verbatim from the notebook in question - this was one of those cases which DS Jones had prepared for...

[mike tesko]

If you look very closely at the original date, 5th November 1984, and the finish date of 7th May 1986, it would suggest that details relating to duties performed by DS Jones, between 5th November 1984 and 7th May 1986, were recorded inside the covers of this pocketbook - that covers a period of over 17 months...

Lets be honest with each other, there is no way that a police officer could keep the same pocketbook and record details inside it for a period as long as that? He has definitely tampered with the details recorded within the cover of this particular pocketbook,and the evidence of his invovlement in this case, is recorded within its pages...

This is the same chap who took possession of exhibits SBJ/4, SBJ/3 and SBJ/2, from the scene on 7th August 1985, and of course the original silencer bearing the corresponding identifying mark of SBJ/1...
So work it out for yourself, his evidence is dodgy, to say the least...

[DCrump]

I'm probably being thick but I appear to be missing your point. Those pages of notes you posted clearly didn't come from that pocketbook.

[mike tesko]

I'm probably being thick but I appear to be missing your point. Those pages of notes you posted clearly didn't come from that pocketbook.

No, they are the notes written by COLP of what DS Jones told them when they were interviewing him in 1991...

[mike tesko]

By a stroke of luck, Anthony Pargeters silencer was normally kept in the downstairs toilet at the scene along with his .22 bolt action rifle, and lo and behold, DS Jones took a photograph of the toilet, a photograph which never found its way into PC Birds MASTER COPY ALBUM, (223) or his court album (50)...

Now...

Did it formed part and parcel of THE SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ALBUM (581)?


I wonder why that should be so?

[mike tesko]

I'm probably being thick but I appear to be missing your point. Those pages of notes you posted clearly didn't come from that pocketbook.

No, they are the notes written by COLP of what DS Jones told them when they were interviewing him in 1991...

I have copies of the entries written into DS "Stan" Jones, pocketbook...

[mike tesko]

Why would DS "Stan" Jones be taking a photograph (SBJ/3) of the downstairs toilet?

[mike tesko]

Why would DS "Stan" Jones be taking a photograph (SBJ/3) of the downstairs toilet, on 7th August 1985?

Where is the exhibit he took possession of from the scene that same day, bearing the identifying mark of SBJ/1?

[mike tesko]

Why would DS "Stan" Jones be taking a photograph (SBJ/3) of the downstairs toilet, on 7th August 1985?

Where is the exhibit he took possession of from the scene that same day, bearing the identifying mark of SBJ/1?

Why are these negatives (taken of the downstairs toilet by DS Jones) missing?