Author Topic: you should all know this?  (Read 284466 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1530 on: December 04, 2011, 09:22:AM »
'Z', exists, and he is real, just as real as the retired police officer (named, DAVID) who arranged to meet Ewen Smith (now a CCRC Commissioner) in London, to speak to him about the "second silencer", and the involvement of PC Whiddon with it, and two other police officers who David named as having knowledge of such a second silencer...

I took a photograph of 'Z', after we met in Edinburgh, he is not immediately recognisable from viewing it, but those who know him, will readily know his identity...

I may post a copy of the image, later...
Mike, did z agree to you taking a picture of him?

no, he was furious when I told him later that I had...
I hope it will not affect his confidence in you? Mind you, I can't even make out any features on him?

He was not very pleased to say the least, but I assured him that only those who knew him, would be able to pick him out in the photograph I took of him in Edinburgh, it was not a close up shot, and I took it for the purpose of showing his former colleagues who visit the forum from time to time, that I am in contact with the right person. As I say, those who know him will be able to recognise him from the photograph I took of him, but others won't. He wanted me to delete the image but I was reluctant to do that, because I told him that I needed to prove to his former colleagues, and employers, that I was in contact with the right person. I am still waiting to hear his response after I posted the photograph?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1531 on: December 04, 2011, 09:43:AM »
To all those who doubted the existence of 'Z', I would like to point out that he is as real as the retired police officer who contacted EWEN SMITH, and who had a meeting with him in London, to discuss the existence of the second silencer. That person had the Christian name of DAVID, and he provided to Ewen the names of two other police officers who would bear witness to the fact that DCI "Taff" Jones, kept that silencer on his desk at Witham police station, and was using it as a paper weight for a long time before that silencer was eventually sent to the lab' to be examined...

Also provided for the attention of Ewen Smith (now a CCRC Commissioner), was the fact that PC Christopher WHIDDON, had at some stage taken possession of the second silencer from atop DCI Jones' desk, and gone along with it to the force amory to see if it fitted onto the barrel of the rifle. And, when he found that it did, it was at this stage that this second silencer was sent to the lab' (20th September 1985) to be checked for blood and fibres, but upon which was only found paint from the aga when it was eventually examined on 25th September 1985...

Therefore, Ewen Smith knows the identity of his informant but to date he has never officially disclosed it, nor has he disclosed the identity of the other two police officers who can confirm that the second silencer was kept on DCI Jones desk at Witham police station...

As far as I know, Ewen did not make contact with the other two police officers, because Jeremy disposed of his services, and Ewen was no longer representing him...

I do not think Ewen contacted PC Whiddon about his involvement with the second silencer, but I know that PC Whiddon was photographed with the second silencer holding it alongside the rifle, and another shot of him with it being fitted to the end of the rifles barrel. The rifle in the photographs had a label on it, but the second silencer did not in those particular photographS...

If DCI Jones had not died, the prosecution would not have been allowed to get away with producing the silencer, blood and paint evidence, as though there had been, and was only one of them...

I have been given the names of the other two police officers who "David spoke to Ewen about", I have been told this information by my informant, who has identified them as:-

(1) DS Eastwood
(2) DS Davidson

It is therefore now possible to reconstruct and identify some of the police officers who had direct involvement with the second silencer:-

(1) DS Eastwood
(2) DS Davidson
(3) David
(4) PC Whiddon
(5) DCI "Taff" Jones (deceased)

Documentary evidence and photographs exist to confirm that these particular officers, knew about and had dealings with the second silencer, at a time when the other silencer was already at the lab' (from 30th August 1985)...

« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 09:46:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1532 on: December 04, 2011, 10:20:AM »
These witnesses need to be interviewed by the (current)  police, and made to tell the truth, about the existence of the second silencer, who found it, who handed it over to the police, what happened to it, who fingerprinted it, who took it along to the lab' on 20th September 1985, who received it at the lab' on the same day, who examined it, and what happened to the other silencer which had been involved in all the other stuff, between 13th and 20th September 1985?

By that date (20th September 1985) there were of course two identical looking Parker hale silencers at the lab', a fact which those at the lab' must have known about, or been aware of...

By the same token...

Essex police knew there was more than one silencer in their possession, and under their control in respect of this case, because they eventually handed back two silencers to the relatives after Jeremy was convicted, and they retained a third silencer which they displayed in the police museum...

What exhibit references did all these three identical looking Parker hale silencers have which the police had in their possession as part of this investigation?

Surely, they all did not have the same exhibit reference or identifying mark?

Why are Essex police, and the DPP/CPS, keeping tight lipped about these three silencers and the exhibit references they must have had? Who handed all these silencers into the police, or when were they found or seized by the police?

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1533 on: December 04, 2011, 10:24:AM »
It don't add up, or make sense:-

I there was only one silencer found, or handed over by the relatives to the police, how come police handed back two silencers to the relatives after Jeremy was convicted, and how could a third silencer be retained by Essex police for display purposes in the police black museum?

(1) Silencer handed back to relatives against signature after Jeremy Bamber was convicted?
(2) Silencer handed back to relatives against signature after Jeremy Bamber was convicted?
(3) Silencer retained by Essex police for display purposes in police (black) museum?

Why has the truth about these three identical looking Parker hale silencers been suppressed by police and the DPP/CPS?
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 10:27:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1534 on: December 04, 2011, 10:29:AM »
It don't add up, or make sense:-

I there was only one silencer found, or handed over by the relatives to the police, how come police handed back two silencers to the relatives after Jeremy was convicted, and how could a third silencer be retained by Essex police for display purposes in the police black museum?

(1) Silencer handed back to relatives against signature after Jeremy Bamber was convicted?
(2) Silencer handed back to relatives against signature after Jeremy Bamber was convicted?
(3) Silencer retained by Essex police for display purposes in police (black) museum?

Why has the truth about these three identical looking Parker hale silencers been suppressed by police and the DPP/CPS?

According to David Boutflour, one of the two silencers handed back to the relatives by police after Jeremy was convicted, still had the "yellow sticky label attached it" which police had placed over it...

Was one of the silencers which was handed back to the relatives, the original silencer found at the scene by DS "Stan" Jones, which was fingerprinted by super glue treatment on 23rd August 1985, that was dismantled by DI Cook (SOC) on 29th August 1985, and subsequently sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985?

If true...

Silencer on display at police museum, could not possibly have been coated in super glue residue...

Furthermore...

Silencer obtained from police as part of DNA examination (2002) was not coated in super glue residue...
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 10:37:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1535 on: December 04, 2011, 10:39:AM »
Current police in Essex should be made to re-seize the two silencers which David Boutflour told COLP about in 1991, for the purpose of evidence, and with a view to them being extensively examined forensically?

'Z' told me that if this was/is done, it will blow the case wide open, "heads will roll", so to speak...

According to my informant, the silencer inside which has been attributed the find of the crucial flake of blood evidence, was not coated in super glue residue, nor did that silencer have any paint ingrained into the knurled end of its end cap, although as I understand it, the evidence has been presented in this way so as to deliberately mislead and deceive...
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 10:46:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6671
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1536 on: December 04, 2011, 10:40:AM »
To all those who doubted the existence of 'Z', I would like to point out that he is as real as the retired police officer who contacted EWEN SMITH, and who had a meeting with him in London, to discuss the existence of the second silencer. That person had the Christian name of DAVID, and he provided to Ewen the names of two other police officers who would bear witness to the fact that DCI "Taff" Jones, kept that silencer on his desk at Witham police station, and was using it as a paper weight for a long time before that silencer was eventually sent to the lab' to be examined...Also provided for the attention of Ewen Smith (now a CCRC Commissioner), was the fact that PC Christopher WHIDDON, had at some stage taken possession of the second silencer from atop DCI Jones' desk, and gone along with it to the force amory to see if it fitted onto the barrel of the rifle. And, when he found that it did, it was at this stage that this second silencer was sent to the lab' (20th September 1985) to be checked for blood and fibres, but upon which was only found paint from the aga when it was eventually examined on 25th September 1985...

Therefore, Ewen Smith knows the identity of his informant but to date he has never officially disclosed it, nor has he disclosed the identity of the other two police officers who can confirm that the second silencer was kept on DCI Jones desk at Witham police station...

As far as I know, Ewen did not make contact with the other two police officers, because Jeremy disposed of his services, and Ewen was no longer representing him...

I do not think Ewen contacted PC Whiddon about his involvement with the second silencer, but I know that PC Whiddon was photographed with the second silencer holding it alongside the rifle, and another shot of him with it being fitted to the end of the rifles barrel. The rifle in the photographs had a label on it, but the second silencer did not in those particular photographS...

If DCI Jones had not died, the prosecution would not have been allowed to get away with producing the silencer, blood and paint evidence, as though there had been, and was only one of them...

I have been given the names of the other two police officers who "David spoke to Ewen about", I have been told this information by my informant, who has identified them as:-

(1) DS Eastwood
(2) DS Davidson

It is therefore now possible to reconstruct and identify some of the police officers who had direct involvement with the second silencer:-

(1) DS Eastwood
(2) DS Davidson
(3) David
(4) PC Whiddon
(5) DCI "Taff" Jones (deceased)

Documentary evidence and photographs exist to confirm that these particular officers, knew about and had dealings with the second silencer, at a time when the other silencer was already at the lab' (from 30th August 1985)...

I can confirm that what Mike says about the retired police officer Dave or David is correct.  He did come forward voluntarily and give an account of the silencer exactly as Mike has described.  He named other police officers. He had nothing to gain by giving this account and it had the ring of truth.


Offline smiffy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1537 on: December 04, 2011, 10:51:AM »
Why is it none of the lab/forensic reports make mention of an elongated scratch on the body of the silencer...for at least one of the relatives claims to have seen an elongated scratch on the body of the silencer......conclusions.... it cannot be the silencer the relatives claim to have found at the scene...or the relatives claims about the silencer are all ficticious.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1538 on: December 04, 2011, 10:53:AM »
To all those who doubted the existence of 'Z', I would like to point out that he is as real as the retired police officer who contacted EWEN SMITH, and who had a meeting with him in London, to discuss the existence of the second silencer. That person had the Christian name of DAVID, and he provided to Ewen the names of two other police officers who would bear witness to the fact that DCI "Taff" Jones, kept that silencer on his desk at Witham police station, and was using it as a paper weight for a long time before that silencer was eventually sent to the lab' to be examined...Also provided for the attention of Ewen Smith (now a CCRC Commissioner), was the fact that PC Christopher WHIDDON, had at some stage taken possession of the second silencer from atop DCI Jones' desk, and gone along with it to the force amory to see if it fitted onto the barrel of the rifle. And, when he found that it did, it was at this stage that this second silencer was sent to the lab' (20th September 1985) to be checked for blood and fibres, but upon which was only found paint from the aga when it was eventually examined on 25th September 1985...

Therefore, Ewen Smith knows the identity of his informant but to date he has never officially disclosed it, nor has he disclosed the identity of the other two police officers who can confirm that the second silencer was kept on DCI Jones desk at Witham police station...

As far as I know, Ewen did not make contact with the other two police officers, because Jeremy disposed of his services, and Ewen was no longer representing him...

I do not think Ewen contacted PC Whiddon about his involvement with the second silencer, but I know that PC Whiddon was photographed with the second silencer holding it alongside the rifle, and another shot of him with it being fitted to the end of the rifles barrel. The rifle in the photographs had a label on it, but the second silencer did not in those particular photographS...

If DCI Jones had not died, the prosecution would not have been allowed to get away with producing the silencer, blood and paint evidence, as though there had been, and was only one of them...

I have been given the names of the other two police officers who "David spoke to Ewen about", I have been told this information by my informant, who has identified them as:-

(1) DS Eastwood
(2) DS Davidson

It is therefore now possible to reconstruct and identify some of the police officers who had direct involvement with the second silencer:-

(1) DS Eastwood
(2) DS Davidson
(3) David
(4) PC Whiddon
(5) DCI "Taff" Jones (deceased)

Documentary evidence and photographs exist to confirm that these particular officers, knew about and had dealings with the second silencer, at a time when the other silencer was already at the lab' (from 30th August 1985)...

I can confirm that what Mike says about the retired police officer Dave or David is correct.  He did come forward voluntarily and give an account of the silencer exactly as Mike has described.  He named other police officers. He had nothing to gain by giving this account and it had the ring of truth.

Ewen Smith never divulged to me, the names of the "other two police officers" who "David" said had got the "knowledge of the second silencer", that was kept on DCI Jones desk at Witham police station, although he did tell me about PC Whiddon taking it from there whilst DCI Jones was absent from his office (for whatever reason) and that he took the second silencer along to the force amory to see if it would fit onto the barrel of the gun, and that when it did, Ewen told me that PC Whiddon (who is now a DCI) arranged for that silencer to be sent to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres? It may well be, that the "names of the two police officers" I have been given by my informant, is the same as those told to Ewen Smith, by "David", I have no reason to suspect that the names are different, but as I say Ewen never divulged that information to me, I think he wanted to speak to those officers himself first of all, but as I say Jeremy disposed of his services before Ewen could do anything about it (I think)?
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 11:21:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1539 on: December 04, 2011, 11:23:AM »
It should be possible to enlarge the image of the silencers end cap (shown in PC Whiddons possession in this photograph) to see if the stain which was present when the first silencer went to the lab', on 13th and 30th August 1985, is present upon it, or not?
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 11:24:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1540 on: December 04, 2011, 11:26:AM »
Silencer in PC Whiddons possession, and the one shown on the barrel iof the rifle inside the gun cupboard, have both got something in common - neither has an exhibit label attached to it, yet the rifle does (in both photographs)
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 11:28:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1541 on: December 04, 2011, 11:33:AM »
It is also possible now, to understand how some of Sheila Caffells DNA could have got into the inverted thread of the silencer, since, DI Cook (SOC), 29th August 1985, and PC Whiddon (prior to 20th September 1985) both screwed two different silencers directly onto the barrel of the rifle which had been resting and positioned against Sheila Caffells neck/throat at the scene as depicted in at least one of the crime scene photographs?

If you screw a silencer, or two, onto the barrel of the rifle, as did DI Cook, and PC Whiddon, after it was photographed in this position at the scene, there is going to be a very good chance that some of Sheila's DNA which must have got onto and into the external thread on on the end of the rifles barrel - when you screw any silencer directly onto this thread, some of Sheila's DNA which must have been on the rifles barrel, is bound to have become transferred into the inverted thread of both silencers by a process of contamination...

If some of Sheila's DNA got transferred into the inverted thread of the silencer by this process, it is also possible or likely that any blood (however small and seemingly insignificant) present on the external thread of the rifles barrel, could have been forced into the silencer, particularly on 29th August 1985, when DI Cook (SOC) dismantled the silencer, rebuilt it, and then he screwed the rebuilt silencer directly onto the external thread on the rifles barrel. What is apparent to me, is that at no stage was the external thread on the end of the rifles barrel examined for the presence of blood, prior to the alleged find of the flake by the ballistic expert, on 11th September 1985? Since, all we have been told is that the inside of the barrel was checked by use of a cloth pull-through, but no-one checked the external thread of the rifles barrel...

however...

when DI Cook dismantled the silencer on 29th August 1985,he separated (1) the end cap, (2) top washer, (3) first baffle, (4) second baffle, (5) third baffle, (6) fourth baffle, (7) Fifth Baffle, and there was a gap between these, and the remaining baffle plates of that silencer, and that stage there was no flake of blood present there, otherwise, COOK would have found the crucial flake of blood that was supposedly found inside the rebuilt silencer, once Cook (SOC) had submitted to the lab', on 30th August 1985. Since, there was no flake of blood, visibly present between any of the dismantled baffle plates, when Cook dismantled it, but we are being expected to believe that such a flake was present there, once the silencer was received at the lab' on and after 30th August 1985, and Fletcher dismantled the same silencer. Therefore, that flake must had been deposited inside that silencer, after Cook rebuilt it...
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 11:59:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1542 on: December 04, 2011, 12:01:PM »
Blackberry phone icon

This is displayed against some of my posts, because I have been making posts with it, rather than from my computer (you will note a different IP Address, when I am out and about roaming, as it were)....
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1543 on: December 04, 2011, 12:17:PM »
Putting the cat amongst the pigeons:-

DI COOK (SOC) needs to be asked why he didn't find any loose flakes of blood inside the silencer that he dismantled on 29th August 1985?

He needs to be arrested by the current police, and asked where he thinks the crucial flake of blood that the ballistic expert found inside the same silencer after it had been submitted to the lab' on 30th August 1985, originated from, or asked to explain where such a crucial flake of blood could have originated from, in order to be found inside the silencer, where previously it was not present?

« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 12:20:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: you should all know this?
« Reply #1544 on: December 04, 2011, 12:33:PM »
Why is it none of the lab/forensic reports make mention of an elongated scratch on the body of the silencer...for at least one of the relatives claims to have seen an elongated scratch on the body of the silencer......conclusions.... it cannot be the silencer the relatives claim to have found at the scene...or the relatives claims about the silencer are all ficticious.

It would be interesting to see if the "elongated scratch mark" is absent beneath the layers of super glue on one of the silencers, which got coated with super glue, on 23rd August 1985? This would be interesting, because relatives talk about this scratch mark being on the silencer they handed over to the police, and since they handed the one they found to the police on 11th September 1985, this was on an occasion after one of the silencers was exposed to super glue treatment, on 23rd August 1985...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...