Has your position changed?

[mertol22]

Then and now police officers employed at huge cost to the taxpayer seem then unable to look thourough on that day nothing has changed really as it ? same problem everywhere.

[Roch]

Whatever the conclusion of the appeal I will never accept or believe that Ann Eaton has ever, nor would she, tell lies or fabricate evidence. The continued attack on members of the family that simply thought they were doing the right thing, by challenging Jeremy's story, is the reason why I became interested in the forum and the ones before this one.

I believe that the exhibit label issue was addressed in 2002, but is not an area of the case where I am sufficiently knowledgable to comment.

Vic, there is no appeal and there may not be an appeal.  But many from both sides do seem to accept that the discovery, provenance, handling and labelling of the silencer is dubious.  What stands out above all else to me is that this was THE major exhibit that sent a man to prison, possibly unto death.  There are posters from your side of the fence who have no link to the family.  They wouldn't touch the silencer with a dirty stick.  But the two posters who are linked to the family, cannot countenance any foul play from them.

[vidvic]

Vic, there is no appeal and there may not be an appeal.  But many from both sides do seem to accept that the discovery, provenance, handling and labelling of the silencer is dubious.  What stands out above all else to me is that this was THE major exhibit that sent a man to prison, possibly unto death.  There are posters from your side of the fence who have no link to the family.  They wouldn't touch the silencer with a dirty stick.  But the two posters who are linked to the family, cannot countenance any foul play from them.

I agree totally in that the case was handled appallingly. This is what some members of this forum refuse to accept is that the 'family' were and are as pissed off about the police as the pro-bambers. Obviously though, they believe that if the police had done a better job and had not destroyed evidence then the science is there now to convict Bamber beyond any doubt. I do believe that the labeling was covered in 2002? Maybe I'm wrong?

[nugnug]

the couldent have been that pissed off with the police they went to dinner with them and gave them presents not something you really do to someone you are pissed off with.

[mertol22]

the couldent have been that pissed off with the police they went to dinner with them and gave them presents not something you really do to someone you are pissed off with.

dont forget the scotch, the world looks better after a drop,presents not quite i was thinking something altogether different

[gringo]

Why not? The relatives were. We should perhaps ask them why they were looking for it in the first place? Also I recall the comment made by David Boutflour (in Ann Eaton's statement) who when he allegedly found it in the gun cupboard said immediately, This must be the silencer.

   Exactly . What  were the reasons . What made the relatives believe the silencer was so important . It does not add up unless they were aware of CSI techniques of the time ( ere take this silencer and scratch the aga surround ).

[Roch]

I agree totally in that the case was handled appallingly. This is what some members of this forum refuse to accept is that the 'family' were and are as pissed off about the police as the pro-bambers. Obviously though, they believe that if the police had done a better job and had not destroyed evidence then the science is there now to convict Bamber beyond any doubt. I do believe that the labeling was covered in 2002? Maybe I'm wrong?

Vic there is enough information on this forum to undermine the exhibit's credibility in the minds of some guilty camp posters.  As far as I am aware, these forum members both past and present, are not linked to JB's relatives.  But by definition they have come to suspect that a guilty or somehow culpable Jeremy Bamber was framed with fabricated evidence.

[vidvic]

I believe they were suspicious of why the sight had been removed. The rifle was usually used with the sights and couldn't understand why jeremy had removed it to shoot rabbits as it took quite a bit of setting up.

[grahameb]

Jon,

If a policeman were to have taken a quick look into the cupboard I do not believe he would have seen the silencer, no. I myself have been into the cupboard, it is quite deep, with many supporting struts of wood, similar to a mini loft and I was shown where the box was and I had to put my shoulders right into the cupboard to reach it.

Whatever the conclusion of the appeal I will never accept or believe that Ann Eaton has ever, nor would she, tell lies or fabricate evidence. The continued attack on members of the family that simply thought they were doing the right thing, by challenging Jeremy's story, is the reason why I became interested in the forum and the ones before this one.

I believe that the exhibit label issue was addressed in 2002, but is not an area of the case where I am sufficiently knowledgable to comment.

Vic, What I said of the family about allegedly finding the silencer was not a personal opinion as to whether they were lying or not. It was that there were no independent witnesses to corroborate their story. The way the court should have looked at the so called evidence. It was not a judgment of character, because I have never met the family or JB. But a court should look at cold hard evidence, not judge if people are being honest. Unfortunately this case seemed to judge Jeremy in that way and not by cold hard evidence?

[grahameb]

I believe they were suspicious of why the sight had been removed. The rifle was usually used with the sights and couldn't understand why jeremy had removed it to shoot rabbits as it took quite a bit of setting up.

So what difference would the presence of the sights make if he was guilty?

[mike tesko]

So what difference would the presence of the sights make if he was guilty?

None...