PS Adams speaks to COLP, 1991...

[smiffy]

Statement Analysis shows up some concerns in Adams handwritten statement.

The claim about looking through the window should be in sequence and appear in the statement before any mention of forcing entry. This out of sequence part could be a sign of deception.

THE PART THAT CONCERNS ME;

Just prior to the forced entry PC COLLINS had looked into the window and reported seeing the body of a woman in the kitchen.This later found to be Neville Bamber.

"just"..is a common word used when people are trying to deceive...it is an indicator ...which should be noted in the overall view of what is being said.

Adams uses "looked into the window" ..not through the window...again ...poor phrasing may indicate deception ..it is expected when the mind is trying to convince in a false story instead of recall from memory...  IN LATER TYPED STATEMENTS  ..IT CHANGES to "looked through the window"  so why use such an odd term originally? 

Missing information can be a sign of deception...there is no information of where the body of a woman is positioned..such as floor ..chair..over table etc or on the condition of the kitchen prior to entry...missing key information that would have been useful to people forcing entry into the house.

This later found to be Neville Bamber.

We appear to have a missing word  ..the word being "was" it seems...  this shows a lack of committment to this part of the  statement.

There are so many signs of deception in these two sentences that I conclude that Adams is being deceptive .

[smiffy]

In his typed 20th september 1985 statement Adams refers to 4 bodies as lying down in the rooms they are in... they are Sheila, June, and the two twin boys.
The missing information is that regarding Ralph.  Adams does not describe his positioning.
This indicates a lack of committment in regards to Ralph.
Adams at some time went round the house ...but does not say what position he saw Ralph in.

In this typed statement Adams is less clear on some details than in the written report.
In the written report ...he has some other officers entering the house prior to himself. These included Terry Gibbons who mentions that Ralph was seated.

[smiffy]

in later typed Adams statement;20th sept 1985.

About 7.30a.m. as the team prepared to enter the house , I received a radio message that a womans body could be seen through the kitchen window. On receipt of this message I ensured that Mr Bamber was taken away out of earshot of our radios.


A forced entry was made into the kitchen door and shortly afterwards I was informed that the aforementioned body was in fact that of a man.

I was then regularly updated by the team in the house about their progress and the finding of the remaining bodies.

Again no mention of the position of the womans body!!!!!

statement analyis wise  the most worrying part is this;

I was informed that the aforementioned body was in fact that of a man.

The use of "in fact" appears deceptive and is intended to add weight to a claim that may well be false. Liars will tend to try to bolster key weak statements by adding in words that are not needed. As far as the truth is concerned ...the shorter the better.

he could easily have said   "I was informed that the body was that of a man"

earlier in the statement is another sign of  possible deception....

I received a radio message that a womans body could be seen through the kitchen window
here the  use of "could be" is a weak claim. We dont want to know what could or could not be seen...we want to know what "was" seen......the use of was being strong and clear.  The writer is not commited to what he is writing.. he is trying to weaken the claims made about was what viewed through the kitchen window.


Adams finishes off with the rest of the so called "search" in a very brief manner which is suggestive of sensitive issues and holding back pertinent information. This is something he does not seem keen to talk of.

[smiffy]

20th sept 1985  Adams typed statement extract;


At the conclusion of the search of the house I went to the front door of the premises and there saw Inspector MONTGOMERY. The two of us then entered the house and went to the kitchen where I saw the body of Mr. Neville BAMBER. We went upstairs and immediately saw the body of Mrs. June BAMBER lying in the doorway of a  bedroom. In the same room lying beside the bed was the body of Mrs. Sheila CAFFELL.

We then walked down the landing and saw in another bedroom the bodies of two children lying in single beds, these were Nicholas and Daniel CAFFELL.

I did not touch or remove anything from the house.

FOR NOW    ..I would like to bring attention to what Adams says he "saw" using the pronouns I and we.

Read through the extract with care and you will see he does not mention using "I" or "we"  that he actually saw Sheila's body. He clearly uses "saw" for everybody else.
He describes some movements but does not actually state he went in the bedroom that June and Sheila were in.

over  a few posts I have made in regards to Adams statements it is clear there are difficulties in regards to what he says or does not say in regards to Ralph and Sheila.

By the 20th september Adams is aware of issues with these 2 bodies and things said about them that are not right...hence why he does not committ...in case what he states may go against the party line or reveal a cover up.

His last line of this extract is telling;

I did not touch or remove anything from the house.

We do not want to know what he did not do...we want to know what he did do....this line indicates trouble ...
His denial looks very good and appears credible and I believe it.
However his making the claim carries the strong implication that by the 20th sept 1985 he knew that something very wrong was going on in regards to Sheila and Ralph and that things had been touched and removed.

[smiffy]

Lets now look at a MAJOR SLIP UP as ADAMS gets it wrong.. already looked at this bit before!!!!

About 7.30a.m. as the team prepared to enter the house , I received a radio message that a womans body could be seen through the kitchen window. On receipt of this message I ensured that Mr Bamber was taken away out of earshot of our radios.


A forced entry was made into the kitchen door and shortly afterwards I was informed that the aforementioned body was in fact that of a man.

I was then regularly updated by the team in the house about their progress and the finding of the remaining bodies.


LOOK AT THE LAST LINE.....Adams slips up... his story collapses...because he says REMAINING BODIES.
Why on earth should he say "remaining bodies"......?
 If from all information received at the time by Adams ...ie that Sheila was the mentally ill person with the gun and was responsible for killing the others ....he has somewhat jumped the gun....for were the firearms team being careful that she didnt pop out and surprise them.
If Ralph was the ONLY one found in the kitchen then the madwoman could still be on the loose and that should be reflected in his statement even after the event.
However if the expected madwoman was already dead in the kitchen the assumption would be to find the others dead and describe it as remaining bodies.

Adams slip betrays that indeed it was true that a "womans body" was in the kitchen and that it was a woman and not Ralph.

[smiffy]

Another bit of statement analysis on Adams statement to COLP.

"I note mentally the messages relayed from my raid team"


When people are telling the truth they recall from memory and will speak in the past tense correctly.
When lying the process of fabrication can often lead to the liar making tense errors as they contrstuct the lie.

Adams uses the present tense  "I note" and not the past tense "I noted"...this is a good strong indicator that what he is claiming is fabricated.
This indicates there were problems with the actual messages that were received that he is not happy to talk about...information is being witheld. He can chop and change what he says he remembers mentally so it is not fixed. by saying he noted stuff mentally suggests no longs were made...but we know they were and they tell a different story.

[smiffy]

So PS Adams states that PC Collins looked through the kitchen window and saw Ralphs body which he mistook to be a female body.

Never mind hartleys comment..

What is of interest is when Adams claims he was eventually told that 5 bodies had been located ...and he then informs the others.
How can Adams be told about this?  By radio ...the special radios....hence he then needs to tell Harris and Gibbons as they and others present with him do not have the special radios so do not know.
But at time of when Adams is told of the 5 bodies being located the whole house  has still not been systematically searched and made safe so he does not want the Harris and Gibbons and co to enter the house.
This means even after the 5 bodies are declared found there is a further delay for others to see what the firearms team claimed to have seen.

[bob]

Another bit of statement analysis on Adams statement to COLP.

"I note mentally the messages relayed from my raid team"


When people are telling the truth they recall from memory and will speak in the past tense correctly.
When lying the process of fabrication can often lead to the liar making tense errors as they contrstuct the lie.

Adams uses the present tense  "I note" and not the past tense "I noted"...this is a good strong indicator that what he is claiming is fabricated.

Or it's a good strong indicator that somebody forgot to transcribe the "d".

[smiffy]

Another bit of statement analysis on Adams statement to COLP.

"I note mentally the messages relayed from my raid team"


When people are telling the truth they recall from memory and will speak in the past tense correctly.
When lying the process of fabrication can often lead to the liar making tense errors as they contrstuct the lie.

Adams uses the present tense  "I note" and not the past tense "I noted"...this is a good strong indicator that what he is claiming is fabricated.

Or it's a good strong indicator that somebody forgot to transcribe the "d".

So if your take is that its a transcription error can we in futute ban all transcipts from use in court in case of admin errors...oh  and all typed reports as well etc etc.

rather a silly approach...

Its an issue in which the general radio logs do clarify there were issues involved with the firearms team entry than make Adams claims of it all going ok as being a load of hogwash...so logically he has reason to lie and does lie which corresponds with why he is deceptive on this issue.
He fails to mention he was using a special radio...why hide that information..why not be open about it unless there was something to hide.

[smiffy]

BOB 
you never did provide proof that I was a BOB WOOF WOOF supporter now did you...it was because it was not true and it was a false claim by you BOB.

Now Bob... you have never apologised...for making this false claim despite ....was it a mistaken belief of your or was it a downright malicous lie.
That you failed to give an answer seems to suggest to me the latter and that you have no real interest in justice and getting to the bottom of this case and that you seem to be here to be disruptive.

[bob]

Another bit of statement analysis on Adams statement to COLP.

"I note mentally the messages relayed from my raid team"


When people are telling the truth they recall from memory and will speak in the past tense correctly.
When lying the process of fabrication can often lead to the liar making tense errors as they contrstuct the lie.

Adams uses the present tense  "I note" and not the past tense "I noted"...this is a good strong indicator that what he is claiming is fabricated.

Or it's a good strong indicator that somebody forgot to transcribe the "d".

So if your take is that its a transcription error can we in futute ban all transcipts from use in court in case of admin errors...oh  and all typed reports as well etc etc.

rather a silly approach...

What? How on Earth do you make the jump to that being my position?!

[H]

Actually this is starting to make a little more sense regarding the chain of communications.

PC West was being updated by the Information Room (I/R). The information Room (Ivor Norman) was being updated by the occupants of CA07 (Saxby, Myall & Bews) up until 08:39 when CG32 became the Control Vehicle, CA07 must have been updated by Adams up until that time.

Who is in CG32?

The earliest timed mention of 5 dead bodies is in the I/R log at 08:09, so that must have been communicated from the firearms team (who?) to Adams, to the occupants of CA07, to the I/R and finally to West.

Adam states that the firearms team reported to him that the scene was safe at approx 08:15, so from the first mention of five bodies until the scene reported as being made safe is approx. six minutes, give or take.

I don't buy into any theories based on the use of the English language, so whether somebody uses a past tense or a present tense or a phrase like "no not at all", is not in any way (in my opinion) an indication of telling the truth or telling a lie.

Again in my opinion. Just making it absolutely clear to absolutely everyone who might suggest otherwise, that this is just my opinion. Okay? All understood?

[smiffy]

Actually this is starting to make a little more sense regarding the chain of communications.

PC West was being updated by the Information Room (I/R). The information Room (Ivor Norman) was being updated by the occupants of CA07 (Saxby, Myall & Bews) up until 08:39 when CG32 became the Control Vehicle, CA07 must have been updated by Adams up until that time.

Who is in CG32?

The earliest timed mention of 5 dead bodies is in the I/R log at 08:09, so that must have been communicated from the firearms team (who?) to Adams, to the occupants of CA07, to the I/R and finally to West.

Adam states that the firearms team reported to him that the scene was safe at approx 08:15, so from the first mention of five bodies until the scene reported as being made safe is approx. six minutes, give or take.

I don't buy into any theories based on the use of the English language, so whether somebody uses a past tense or a present tense or a phrase like "no not at all", is not in any way (in my opinion) an indication of telling the truth or telling a lie.

Again in my opinion. Just making it absolutely clear to absolutely everyone who might suggest otherwise, that this is just my opinion. Okay? All understood?

Adams was not in direct communication with CA 7 as the car was a long way from the farm building Adams was in with a few other senior officers.
2 lots of radios...firearms team with Adams and Montgomery and the other general set between firearms team and others it seems.


Why rubbish statement analysis as its proven to be a very useful investigative tool...why rubbish it...In my view its because Hartley fears it and fears the truth being exposed by its use.

[H]

Adams was not in direct communication with CA 7 as the car was a long way from the farm building Adams was in with a few other senior officers.
2 lots of radios...firearms team with Adams and Montgomery and the other general set between firearms team and others it seems.

I'm completely aware of the two different radio frequencies. I'm also completely aware of the location of both CA07 and Adams.
However I do not believe they used a runner to leg it back and forth between Adams and CA07, so I would interpret that CA07 were made aware of events (as they then passed the information on to the I/R) via radio. If not Adams then someone who Adams told. I actually think that Adams had two Radio's, one for communicating with the firearms team and one for communicating with CA07.

Why rubbish statement analysis as its proven to be a very useful investigative tool...why rubbish it...In my view its because Hartley fears it and fears the truth being exposed by its use.

I'm not rubbishing statement analysis, I'm simply stating that in my opinion, your statement analysis and conclusions drawn, is not something that I believe in.
In fact, in my opinion, even if I squint my eyes really tightly and pray to the big pink pixie in the sky, whilst standing on my head pretending to be mad and thinking about a cunning plan, I still would be unable to come to the same conclusion that you have offered in this instance. No offence intended, that's just where I am at the moment.

[smiffy]

Adams was not in direct communication with CA 7 as the car was a long way from the farm building Adams was in with a few other senior officers.
2 lots of radios...firearms team with Adams and Montgomery and the other general set between firearms team and others it seems.

I'm completely aware of the two different radio frequencies. I'm also completely aware of the location of both CA07 and Adams.
However I do not believe they used a runner to leg it back and forth between Adams and CA07, so I would interpret that CA07 were made aware of events (as they then passed the information on to the I/R) via radio. If not Adams then someone who Adams told. I actually think that Adams had two Radio's, one for communicating with the firearms team and one for communicating with CA07.

Why rubbish statement analysis as its proven to be a very useful investigative tool...why rubbish it...In my view its because Hartley fears it and fears the truth being exposed by its use.

I'm not rubbishing statement analysis, I'm simply stating that in my opinion, your statement analysis and conclusions drawn, is not something that I believe in.
In fact, in my opinion, even if I squint my eyes really tightly and pray to the big pink pixie in the sky, whilst standing on my head pretending to be mad and thinking about a cunning plan, I still would be unable to come to the same conclusion that you have offered in this instance. No offence intended, that's just where I am at the moment.

You may be inventing things here in some rather odd speculation Hartley. It is as though you are suggesting the only person the firearms team communicated with was Adams and that he alone then passed messages to CA 7.  Be very careful here as it has big BIG implications..TRY READING UP and working out exactly what they are.