Has your position changed?

[mertol22]

This is the thing Mertol.Jeremy pushes for every scientific test that is possible.Any one of these tests could backfire and prove his guilt and he must know this.He knows damn well that he was not there that night and did not pull that trigger!

He is tyler he is on the edge on the north face if you want my gut view, he is rather like Taylor played by charlton heston in the 1st planet of the apes film on the beach on horseback he is about to face his destiny.

[haughton]

There was never any conclusive proof that JB was guilty. There was so much doubt and assumption that he was convicted on GUESS WORK

[vidvic]

Such as?

Because he was there, he would know if the police or the case against him had errors. He can then attack the errors.

[Roch]

Or, he knows something we don't?

Vic, do you agree the scratchmarks issue is very interesting?  If Jeremy Bamber was involved in a struggle in the kitchen with Ralph, during which a silencer sratched the Aga mantle, why would Jeremy focus upon the scratches as being a fabricated piece of evidence? 

Now it could be argued that a guilty Jeremy knows that the scratchmarks were not the result of what took place on the night of the murders.  And that this is the reason why he has persued the issue.  But where does that leave the scratchmarks themselves, as a piece of convicting evidence?  Not in a good place.

We come full circle if we accept that the scratchmarks are not undone in terms of credibility, i.e. because of the provisonal decision and the rejection of Suthersts methodology.  As we have to ask again, why has Jeremy focussed upon them?

[vidvic]

Yes, I see your argument. There is a pattern though of the defence seeing something that on closer inspection doesn't add up as any kind of defence.

[Roch]

Yes, I see your argument. There is a pattern though of the defence seeing something that on closer inspection doesn't add up as any kind of defence.

Do you have any sympathy for the view that some of their efforts have been thwarted by obstruction? For example, the sene and event logs, which I believe begins with the phone logs.  'Message passed from son' could be construed as inconclusive upon closer inspection.  Yet the FSS has written two letters to the defence (2007) and (2011) expressing that the log has been tampered with.  (I am unsure of the details of this alleged tampering / editing).

However, despite having the power to obtain originals via S17 of the Criminal Appeals Act, the CCRC refuse to do so, despite several requests. 

[ngb1066]

Its very unlikely the public will ever see the pictures of the deceased in full, that i can understand quite well, but i have based on what i have seen and im quite certain June recieved the worst of the shots that night, was there a struggle downstairs with Ralph,  why could he have not been beated after he died, if June recieved the worst of the shots then why ? was forcing the twins to kneel and pray with her anything to do with it.

I think Nevill received the worst of the shots that night (horrible though it is to have to assess the relative suffering between the victims). 

[tonyb]

Okay, let's run with that.

You're the killer. You climb out of WHF's kitchen window, heart going like the clappers, run to the estuary and grab you mother's sit up beg bicycle that you left by the - crumbling, twisting, pot holed, well rained on and muddy - sea wall, strewn with clumps of grass the size of sleeping policemen.

Then you cycle like a bat out of hell...right over the edge of the sea wall onto the rocks below. When you come round the bike's had it, so you run the rest of the way home.

No..?

Okay, you walk home. Forget the fact that the police's own timing of how long this would take showed it would leave you impossibly short of time to call the police when you need to.

Unsurprisingly, it's not until the next day that you notice you left the silencer in the pocket of the trousers that you changed out of the previous night. Gawd, the police'll know she was murdered because the silencer's missing. So you wait until nightfall and return the silencer to WHF. You hide it well back in the gun cupboard.

But later, at home, you ask yourself, "Why did I do that? The police have already searched the place, they'll know Sheila was murdered, I have to get it back!"
So, off you again.

Or do you? Because part way there you're conflicted again. Should you take it, or should you leave it?

You seem to think JB would therefore be responsible? not another member of the family that would profit,so to speak from the discovery of a contaminated silencer. I would imagine a Gun Expert may of come up with the "too long with a silencer fitted" theory ? I don't think you should discount any possibility, don't you agree Choc?

[tonyb]

You seem to think JB would therefore be responsible? not another member of the family that would profit,so to speak from the discovery of a contaminated silencer. I would imagine a Gun Expert may of come up with the "too long with a silencer fitted" theory ? I don't think you should discount any possibility, don't you agree Choc?

I mean, was the silencer ever in WHF ? Was it ever found at the Farm. Why not say it was found at the farm and bought home for safe keeping Dad ?......
You see Choc,if you read and absorb my post I never refer to JB. You just assumed. I would assume that's why you introduced "mothers bike" to reinforce the JB guilty theory. But then,assumption is the mother of all cock ups......

[grahameb]

I mean, was the silencer ever in WHF ? Was it ever found at the Farm. Why not say it was found at the farm and bought home for safe keeping Dad ?......
You see Choc,if you read and absorb my post I never refer to JB. You just assumed. I would assume that's why you introduced "mothers bike" to reinforce the JB guilty theory. But then,assumption is the mother of all cock ups......

Has it been mentioned that JB was seen actually shooting this gun with the silencer attached? Or did he prefer to shoot it without the silencer? I haven't ever seen this question explored ay any time?

[vidvic]

Do you have any sympathy for the view that some of their efforts have been thwarted by obstruction? For example, the sene and event logs, which I believe begins with the phone logs.  'Message passed from son' could be construed as inconclusive upon closer inspection.  Yet the FSS has written two letters to the defence (2007) and (2011) expressing that the log has been tampered with.  (I am unsure of the details of this alleged tampering / editing).

However, despite having the power to obtain originals via S17 of the Criminal Appeals Act, the CCRC refuse to do so, despite several requests.

Where are the letters? Are they posted on here?

We were led to believe that the alleged phone call from Nevill to the police was from witheld documents, yet on some versions we see a chelmsford court stamp, on others it's photoshopped out.

The police witheld photographs which the defence now claim to show police offers acting the fool at WHF on the day of the murders.....so far, none of the released pictures does anything to help the defence.

Mike says there is a photo of sheila on the bed with one wound. This is not one of the released pictures.

How many of the witheld photos were from the autopsy and mortuary?

There is a pattern of big headlines, then minimal effect......

[tonyb]

Has it been mentioned that JB was seen actually shooting this gun with the silencer attached? Or did he prefer to shoot it without the silencer? I haven't ever seen this question explored ay any time?

Yes but with at least 2 silencers not found at WHF,so to speak, we're any silencers there,to be not found. If there not found by the police I would think it is sound to believe there wasn't any silencers on site.I mean,they would of logged it into evidence,surely? Or is it logged at scene the day of the murders?

[grahameb]

Yes but with at least 2 silencers not found at WHF,so to speak, we're any silencers there,to be not found. If there not found by the police I would think it is sound to believe there wasn't any silencers on site.I mean,they would of logged it into evidence,surely? Or is it logged at scene the day of the murders?

I thought Mike said that the police found a silencer at the farm? But I can't remember where he wrote it or if there were any records of that?

[tonyb]

I thought Mike said that the police found a silencer at the farm? But I can't remember where he wrote it or if there were any records of that?

Well,if there's one silencer logged at scene that's 3 silencers. 1 at scene. 2 with relatives. 3 paperweight on Taffs desk. ?  Or are 2 & 3 the same silencer.

[grahameb]

Well,if there's one silencer logged at scene that's 3 silencers. 1 at scene. 2 with relatives. 3 paperweight on Taffs desk. ?  Or are 2 & 3 the same silencer.

Unless the original silencer, which was not then seen as a piece of damning evidence was substituted with the one the relatives allegedly found at the scene.
As for myself I think the finding of and the importance of the silencer is a myth deliberately concocted by the relatives.
Why do I suggest that? Quite simply that they had absolutely no independent witnesses to verify that they had found it in the first place. Therefore this item should never have been registered or labelled as any kind of evidence. And if what I say is true, then this logically means that the whole trial was a gross miscarriage of justice?