Author Topic: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings  (Read 12265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
I cannot see how anyone could have snook into the farmhouse in the middle of the night without alerting the two dogs belonging to the family. One dog in nearby outbuildings, and the other which had the freedom of the farmhouse...

When the operator checked the telephone at the farmhouse to try and ascertain why callers were getting a constant engaged tone, she reported that she could hear a dog barking...

Later, when PS Bews, PC Myall and jeremy snook into the grounds of whf, they were greeted with angry barking from the dog in an outbuilding, which caused Jeremy to pass the comment, “that's odd, why my father is not responding to the dog barking”, or words to that effect...

Seems to me, it would have been nigh on impossible for anyone to even contemplate approaching the house let alone enter it in the dead of night...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2012, 07:26:AM »
Why would dog inside farmhouse still be barking when operator checked the telephone line, if there was no one still alive who was distressing the dog?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2012, 07:57:AM »
Once dog or dogs started barking, I would expect some sort of reaction in keeping with what Jeremy said to police when they first went towards the farmhouse and dogs were barking hysterically with Jeremy posing the question, “that's odd”, when his father did not come out to investigate the commotion made by the dogs?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Hartley

  • Guest
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2012, 08:05:AM »
Strange how the house is so big one minute that rifle shots allegedly couldn't be heard from one end to the other, yet the next it's so small that a barking dog would ruin any element of surprise?

The labrador kept in the coal shed is very remote from the downstairs bathroom window, where according to the prosecution, Jeremy entered, it is also even more remote from the bedrooms. It's entirely plausable the this dog may have been unaware of an intruders presence upon entry and/or too remote to wake up those asleep upstairs

Next we have Crispy the shitzu, I'd be very surprised if it was given free run of the house, usual practice was tokeep it in the kitchen area with the door between kitchen and hall being shut on an evening. In any event there are no reports of Crispy barking.

Following the horrific murders, which judging from the desciption of the scene would not have been silent, the crashing and banging in the kitchen, people taking time to die due to the weapon used and numer of shots required screaming and ehouting in fear of their lives, it's not strange that the labrador in the coal shed became spooked and started barking. Crispy inside the farmhouse did not appear to be barking.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #4 on: January 10, 2012, 08:33:AM »
According to what Jeremy told police, Ralph always kept a loaded shotgun under the bed for shooting foxes, yet on the morning of the shootings, this was found in the gun cupboard downstairs by police and when it was examined later on for fingerprints, Sheila`s and Ralph`s fingerprints were found on the barrel of the shotgun, and barrel of a .22 air rifle...

Police removed shotgun bearing these fingerprints from the cupboard and rested it against the office room wall, where PC Bird later took a picture of it in situ...

Police also took possession of a spent Raker cartridge from the scene which police suspected had been discharged from the shotgun the previous evening in some sort of altercation between Sheila and her father...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Hartley

  • Guest
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2012, 09:43:AM »
According to what Jeremy told police, Ralph always kept a loaded shotgun under the bed for shooting foxes, yet on the morning of the shootings, this was found in the gun cupboard downstairs by police and when it was examined later on for fingerprints, Sheila`s and Ralph`s fingerprints were found on the barrel of the shotgun, and barrel of a .22 air rifle...

Police removed shotgun bearing these fingerprints from the cupboard and rested it against the office room wall, where PC Bird later took a picture of it in situ...

Police also took possession of a spent Raker cartridge from the scene which police suspected had been discharged from the shotgun the previous evening in some sort of altercation between Sheila and her father...

Can we get one thing clear here because this has come up before several times.

Firstly there is no evidence that you are able to present which indicates that Ralph kept a loaded shot gun under his bed, we only have Jeremys word for that, in fact we don't even have that, we only have Mikes word. Keeping a loaded shotgun under his bed to shoot foxes is an absolutely preposterous fabrication.

If you can show anybody any evidence that this was the case then I invite you to do so.

Secondly, another repeat offender is that Sheilas fingerprints were found on the above mentioned shotgun, and yet again there is no evidence of this. I have asked this before on countless occasions, the attachement below is all that Mike is relying on to prove that Sheilas fingerprints were on this shotgun, to say it's inconclusive is being very generous indeed, to suggest that there is any hint that this diagram indicates such information is well and truly beyond beyond my comprehension.

And again, if there is anything else that Mike is relying on to show that Sheilas fingerprints were found on this shotgun, or any other shotgun, then I invite him to show us.

« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 09:44:AM by Hartley »

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2012, 09:50:AM »
According to what Jeremy told police, Ralph always kept a loaded shotgun under the bed for shooting foxes, yet on the morning of the shootings, this was found in the gun cupboard downstairs by police and when it was examined later on for fingerprints, Sheila`s and Ralph`s fingerprints were found on the barrel of the shotgun, and barrel of a .22 air rifle...

Police removed shotgun bearing these fingerprints from the cupboard and rested it against the office room wall, where PC Bird later took a picture of it in situ...

Police also took possession of a spent Raker cartridge from the scene which police suspected had been discharged from the shotgun the previous evening in some sort of altercation between Sheila and her father...
Mike could we see the statement/s regarding this information please? That is the point concerning the Raker cartridge and the words of Jeremy regarding the lack of response of his father to the barking dogs. I can't seem to find any reference to them?

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2012, 11:12:AM »
Police retuned to whf on 9th August 1985, with a metal detector, looking for shotgun pellets, from empty Raker cartridge...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Hartley

  • Guest
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2012, 11:23:AM »
Police retuned to whf on 9th August 1985, with a metal detector, looking for shotgun pellets, from empty Raker cartridge...

That's a bit weird don't you think? You said the Raker spent shell was found in the breach of the shotgun, which was later found by the relatives on the 10th of August 1985 leaning against the wall in the den (as photographed below).

When I say it's a bit weird, I mean that you say the police found a shotgun cartridge in the breach of this shotgun and were very interested in it, making reports and bringing in metal detectors, yet they seemed to be completely uninterested in the shotgun itself, not even giving it an exhibit reference and taking it from the scene.

When was this shotgun supposedly tested for fingerprints by the way?



« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 11:25:AM by Hartley »

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2012, 11:30:AM »
Why did police take an interest in the shotgun found inside the gun cupboard, and an empty Raker cartridge, and the fingerprints found upon its barrel?
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 11:36:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Hartley

  • Guest
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2012, 11:31:AM »
This is where you said it was in the breach of the shotgun. Well you said beach but I'm assuming that's just a typo.

My understanding is that the spent "RAKER" cartridge case was found in the beach of the shotgun...

Hope this helps...
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 11:32:AM by Hartley »

Hartley

  • Guest
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2012, 11:42:AM »
This is where you said it was in the breach of the shotgun. Well you said beach but I'm assuming that's just a typo.

Unsurprisingly, there's no evidence of that either.  :-\ Or at least none which has been presented as such on this forum.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2012, 11:59:AM »
Nobody snook into whf in the middle of the night to shoot anybody, especially anybody who knew the family had dogs, and that Ralph kept a loaded shotgun under the bed. This is a good enough reason to persuade most people that Jeremy would have even contemplated doing what some have alleged he did?

Shotgun found at scene, containing one empty Raker cartridge became of interest to police, after local resident, reported hearing a shotgun blast come from the direction of whf on evening before shootings, between 9.30 and 10.15pm...
 
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Hartley

  • Guest
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #13 on: January 10, 2012, 12:28:PM »
Why would dog inside farmhouse still be barking when operator checked the telephone line, if there was no one still alive who was distressing the dog?

Can I also just draw peoples attention to the misleading nature of this particular comment.

The GPO was listening into the phone from 5:50am and heard dogs barking. Unfortunately what is failed to be reported is that at 5:25am onwards, the police are making challenges using a loud hailer to anybody who might be in the house (which was met with no response by the way).

You can check this out by looking at the logs which are included in this thread:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,732.0.html

Having now been furnished with that information, why do you think that a dog would be barking?  ::)
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 12:29:PM by Hartley »

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: element of suprise eliminated by dogs in house and outbuilldings
« Reply #14 on: January 10, 2012, 12:51:PM »
Can I also just draw peoples attention to the misleading nature of this particular comment.

The GPO was listening into the phone from 5:50am and heard dogs barking. Unfortunately what is failed to be reported is that at 5:25am onwards, the police are making challenges using a loud hailer to anybody who might be in the house (which was met with no response by the way).

You can check this out by looking at the logs which are included in this thread:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,732.0.html

Having now been furnished with that information, why do you think that a dog would be barking?  ::)
I'm just wondering that if dogs were barking that night at the time of the murders (at which we can only guess of course) if the neighbours heard them? There was one outside, probably used as a guard dog which if there was anyone around must have barked? Did anyone report barking dogs that night I wonder?