Interesting Pic

[vidvic]

As the silencer(s) played a big role in the false case then of course they are far more important .
being nit picky at Mike for no big reason...

try a balanced approach and address vidvic's opening post in which he makes false claims and portrays them as fact.
as well as that deal with vidvics failure to address this when it is brought to his attention and his bad attitude response.

lets debate fairly using sound claims and not false ones created by vidvic.

Smiffy, I stand by my first post and am saddened that you choose to believe everything that is placed in front of you by mike.

[mike tesko]

I invite everyone to believe what Vidvic is saying, and what the relatives and the police are and have been saying about the use of the silencer, and ignore anything I have to say because I am supposed to be nothing but a scumbag liar...

I think I'll stay on my side of the fence, thank you - I'd rather be called a scumbag liar than promote the silencer, blood and paint evidence as though it in some way proves Jeremy was/is the killer...

[grahameb]

If you have copies of the itemised bill, put it up on here?

Unfortunately the thread is not about the itemised billing. I suspect that this is just something that Vic has thrown into the pot in order not to answer Mike? Let's try and keep to the subject on this one. For instance what is the origin of this picture? Is it an official picture released by the police? Or a picture privately taken in order to try and prove a point?

[jon]

Let's say, for arguments sake, the police purchased a silencer for publicity shots and testing.

An all time classic post !!

[vidvic]

Unfortunately the thread is not about the itemised billing. I suspect that this is just something that Vic has thrown into the pot in order not to answer Mike? Let's try and keep to the subject on this one. For instance what is the origin of this picture? Is it an official picture released by the police? Or a picture privately taken in order to try and prove a point?

You tell me. It's taken from this site. And I did answer the question! I am saying, is it not possible, that the silencer in the picture (and the sights) are nothing whatsoever to do with the case? As for the itemised billing, it does not exist for local calls, it is not being held under Pii, in z's pyjama trousers, no where, zilch, a fantasy.

[vidvic]

An all time classic post !!

I might well remind you of that post.

[jon]

I might well remind you of that post.

You may well do , but what you may or may not say in future , was not told to the court trying JB , therefore the trial was flawed , Drake said JB could be found guilty over the silencer alone , do you accept if the silencer was not fitted , as said to the court , JB was not given a fair trial ? Or are you now saying the silencer issue is irrelevant ?

[JackiePreece]

 

[vidvic]

Ok, I'll try to explain a different way.

When you see a picture of the .22 with a silencer and sight fitted, why do you automatically assume it is the silencer containing the blood/DNA?

If the police used a silencer which they purchased themselves, it is a common product, I think Neil might have one, how does this damage the case against bamber?

Time and time again we see pictures and mike screams 'look' no exhibit label, look at how cross contamination happened, but how do you know it's the crucial silencer?

[mertol22]

How many ways are you going to explain it, you do not sound sure yourself.

[jon]

Ok, I'll try to explain a different way.

When you see a picture of the .22 with a silencer and sight fitted, why do you automatically assume it is the silencer containing the blood/DNA?

If the police used a silencer which they purchased themselves, it is a common product, I think Neil might have one, how does this damage the case against bamber?

Time and time again we see pictures and mike screams 'look' no exhibit label, look at how cross contamination happened, but how do you know it's the crucial silencer?

What as this got to do with the claims the court was told , the silencer was attached to the gun and scratched the AGA , when it looks like it was not , does JB deserve a retrial at least over this point Vidvic ?

[vidvic]

How many ways are you going to explain it, you do not sound sure yourself.

Lol. I'm sure..... I think

[grahameb]

I'm rather intrigued by this gun "case" which Mike/Jeremy say the gun with sights and silencer would not fit into? Would this be a soft case? I would have thought that this was the purpose of a gun case, to fit a fully equipped gun into it for travelling purposes as to dismantle the gun would mean setting up the sights every time you go out shooting? Could anyone please enlighten me?

[ngb1066]

I'm rather intrigued by this gun "case" which Mike/Jeremy say the gun with sights and silencer would not fit into? Would this be a soft case? I would have thought that this was the purpose of a gun case, to fit a fully equipped gun into it for travelling purposes as to dismantle the gun would mean setting up the sights every time you go out shooting? Could anyone please enlighten me?

The gun case is likely to be a solid carrying case one supplied by the manufacturer and would require the telescopic sights and sound moderator to be removed before the rifle could be placed in it.  If the rifle was to be taken somewhere for shooting  the normal practice would be to place the rifle into a gun slip, which is usually canvass or leather or plastic with a strap so that it can be carried easily.  If using a slip it would normally be necessary to remove the sound moderator but the telescopic sights could be left attached. I understand Jeremy was referring to the original rifle case. 

 

[grahameb]

The gun case is likely to be a solid carrying case one supplied by the manufacturer and would require the telescopic sights and sound moderator to be removed before the rifle could be placed in it.  If the rifle was to be taken somewhere for shooting  the normal practice would be to place the rifle into a gun slip, which is usually canvass or leather or plastic with a strap so that it can be carried easily.  If using a slip it would normally be necessary to remove the sound moderator but the telescopic sights could be left attached. I understand Jeremy was referring to the original rifle case.

Ah! right. So it is a hard case and not a soft case (or slip as you put it) that we are talking about? Well then what did Jeremy actually say to the police in any statement that he made? Did he actually mention the gun "case" or the gun "cupboard" when he said it would not fit into? In other words has there actually been a written statement to this effect, or are we to rely upon what Jeremy allegedly told Mike whist he was in prison?