you should all know this?

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

Ok now I don't anything about guns but the bottom picture looks like a rifle with a silencer attached. Am I wrong in thinking that?

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

Actually forget that last post. I can now see that it was a photo taken for trial purposes just to prove that the rifle with both silencer and scope attached would fit in the gun cupboard. The exhibit label can be seen attached, so this picture was not taken on the morning of the murders. So what is its significance here Mike?

[jon]

Could someone put a photograph up of a ' nikkon scope ' and a ' parker hale silencer ' ?

So we have the scope on the rifle and the silencer , now everybody as to ask , is it possible for a  man experienced with gun's to mistake the two ? 

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

Of course not! Like I said I know nothing about guns but from general knowledge I know what a silencer looks like and I know what a scope looks like.

[jon]

I have also been told that Oakey collected the scope from Ann on the 11th September, not the silencer.

There is a police log showing DB ringing the police to pick up a silencer on the 11 Sept , Hartley then claimed it was not a silencer but a scope , as you can see above !! Now draw your own conclusion !

[mike tesko]

Actually forget that last post. I can now see that it was a photo taken for trial purposes just to prove that the rifle with both silencer and scope attached would fit in the gun cupboard. The exhibit label can be seen attached, so this picture was not taken on the morning of the murders. So what is its significance here Mike?

There is no exhibit label attached to the silencer fitted to the gun, whereas if this was the only silencer it should have a signed exhibit label attached to it - none exists in this image and so we must assume that there there existed a second silencer...

[Hartley]

I have also been told that Oakey collected the scope from Ann on the 11th September, not the silencer.

There is a police log showing DB ringing the police to pick up a silencer on the 11 Sept , Hartley then claimed it was not a silencer but a scope , as you can see above !! Now draw your own conclusion !

Can you please stop making stories up. I've been very clear with my posts lately and I have made no such claims, I have recited what I have been told and pointed you towards a police statement which certainly appears to confirm it.

Yes you can come to your own conclusions, perhaps you should allow others to do the same!

[mike tesko]

I have also been told that Oakey collected the scope from Ann on the 11th September, not the silencer.

There is a police log showing DB ringing the police to pick up a silencer on the 11 Sept , Hartley then claimed it was not a silencer but a scope , as you can see above !! Now draw your own conclusion !

Can you please stop making stories up. I've been very clear with my posts lately and I have made no such claims, I have recited what I have been told and pointed you towards a police statement which certainly appears to confirm it.

Yes you can come to your own conclusions, perhaps you should allow others to do the same!

Here is Ann Eatons original witness statement, dated, 14th August 1985:-

[jon]

I have also been told that Oakey collected the scope from Ann on the 11th September, not the silencer.

There is a police log showing DB ringing the police to pick up a silencer on the 11 Sept , Hartley then claimed it was not a silencer but a scope , as you can see above !! Now draw your own conclusion !

Can you please stop making stories up. I've been very clear with my posts lately and I have made no such claims, I have recited what I have been told and pointed you towards a police statement which certainly appears to confirm it.

Yes you can come to your own conclusions, perhaps you should allow others to do the same!

I accept what you stated was what you was told , but do you believe somebody experienced with gun's , could mistake a scope with a silencer ?

[smiffy]

I have also been told that Oakey collected the scope from Ann on the 11th September, not the silencer.

There is a police log showing DB ringing the police to pick up a silencer on the 11 Sept , Hartley then claimed it was not a silencer but a scope , as you can see above !! Now draw your own conclusion !

Can you please stop making stories up. I've been very clear with my posts lately and I have made no such claims, I have recited what I have been told and pointed you towards a police statement which certainly appears to confirm it.

Yes you can come to your own conclusions, perhaps you should allow others to do the same!

I accept what you stated was what you was told , but do you believe somebody experienced with gun's , could mistake a scope with a silencer ?

A police officer went to DB's home to collect something from him. The item supposedly being just the box for the scope. Which all sounds rather odd and not very credible. In my view it is likely the officer collected the scope in the scope box from DB and the silencer was collected from Ann. She signed a silencer exhibit label....and years later she cannot say why.....from which I conclude Ann Eaton lied and did sign a label when she handed a silencer to the police.

[jon]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1415.0.html 64-68

[tyler]

I have also been told that Oakey collected the scope from Ann on the 11th September, not the silencer.

There is a police log showing DB ringing the police to pick up a silencer on the 11 Sept , Hartley then claimed it was not a silencer but a scope , as you can see above !! Now draw your own conclusion !

Can you please stop making stories up. I've been very clear with my posts lately and I have made no such claims, I have recited what I have been told and pointed you towards a police statement which certainly appears to confirm it.

Yes you can come to your own conclusions, perhaps you should allow others to do the same!

I accept what you stated was what you was told , but do you believe somebody experienced with gun's , could mistake a scope with a silencer ?

No comment to that question then Jon? 

[Hartley]

There's no comment because it's a daft question and Jon isn't actually interested in an answer.

Perhaps more thought should be given to why there are no statements from Simpson posted on the forum, bearing in mind he is allegedly one of the chief conspirators.

[ngb1066]

There's no comment because it's a daft question and Jon isn't actually interested in an answer.

Perhaps more thought should be given to why there are no statements from Simpson posted on the forum, bearing in mind he is allegedly one of the chief conspirators.

Did ACC Simpson ever make a witness statement?  I doubt if he did.

[jon]

There's no comment because it's a daft question and Jon isn't actually interested in an answer.

Perhaps more thought should be given to why there are no statements from Simpson posted on the forum, bearing in mind he is allegedly one of the chief conspirators.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1415.0.html I am more than interested please explain , whilst on the subject of ACC Simpson , do you have any idea why he retracted his comment's at 28 -29 ?