The (Andrew Hunter) Book draft, that never got published from seven years ago...

[grahameb]

thank you for link.

Apologies for making you weary. that's the problems with us newbies - trying to find our way round a lot of information. I will try and read and not ask questions.

Go on. Make him weary.

[Alias]

thank you for link.

Apologies for making you weary. that's the problems with us newbies - trying to find our way round a lot of information. I will try and read and not ask questions.

It is fine to ask questions - we all do it!

[maggie]

It is fine to ask questions - we all do it!

I agree with Alias don't worry about asking Jansus we are always happy to help newbies .

[gringo]

Some questions about the draft book

It states that there was a fire in the grounds of WHF within a few days of items ( which obviously later would have been of forensic interest) not taking into account whether the family requested this - would this have been a normal action even in a murder suicide situation? Surely it would still be a standard procedure to piece together what had happened taking all available evidence into account?

Also is it true that the original paper file went missing in a burglary?

In the reports on the deaths were there any estimated times of deaths?

There is a time line in the draft book that mentions the police going in and confirmation of deaths then SOCO - but where does the "training exercise " come into it and who would have authorised that and at one time? Is that something that would have happened normally in such a sensitive situation , especially with children involved?

Hi jansus . Regarding the fire I am sure you are correct that it would not be standard procedure . The interpretation of this depends on your stance or application of reason .
    As far as the guilters are concerned the fire was at Jeremy's request and this is supposed evidence of his cunning.
   Those of the innocent camp see it as EP covering up the evidence of their bungling .
   It is quite unbelievable that EP would burn evidence at the request of a possible suspect . If it is true that some officers already suspected Jeremy then surely this request would have set off alarm bells . It also would not qualify as very cunning if, in order to cover up your crime, you need the police to destroy evidence at your request .
    The original file was according to EP stolen from a loft with nothing else taken , a highly implausible tale .
   No times of death were recorded for any of the victims although possibly there were in the original "implausibly stolen file" .
   I do not recall who authorised the training exercise but I am sure you will dig it out .

[campion]

Morning gringo,  Off the top of his head, with the dilemma caused by the shooting, during the Entry Assault on one of the occupants of WHF, the O/C of the Operation (none other than DCSUPER G Harris of EP 'Operations'), would have seen it as to his benefit, to 'saturate the Crime Scene' with unsubstantiated, indeed unnecessary Personnel.
This would have been ratified by the Chief Constable.
The only time, as far as I am aware, that the CC has come into the equation in this sad saga, is when he has luncheon with RWB(& his two Offspring), in his private dining suite at EP HQ, on the Monday immediately following successful prosecution of JB.

[lookout]

Didn't stop them from scoffing a slap-up meal then ? Jeremy made do with a bacon butty and a bit of cheese off the trap ( on the morning of the tragedy ),,as he mainly dined with his parents at WHF. Even that detail was twisted.

[campion]

In reality, Lookout, it's more a question of what wasn't twisted (i.e. STITCHED UP,to use the phrase as I remember you coined).
When Essex Police called the 'Training Exercise' for Informatives, could it be said that it was for DIS-Informatives, or MIS-Informatives?
Here's hoping that they will be 'hoist by there own petard'.

[lookout]

In reality, Lookout, it's more a question of what wasn't twisted (i.e. STITCHED UP,to use the phrase as I remember you coined).
When Essex Police called the 'Training Exercise' for Informatives, could it be said that it was for DIS-Informatives, or MIS-Informatives?
Here's hoping that they will be 'hoist by there own petard'.

They'll be that alright,Campion. One of these days they'll meet themselves coming back. I think they're all in for a rude awakening at some point.

[Jan]

Thank you all for taking the time to reply. Just very difficult to get my head round someone authorising a training session with those poor children still in the house. And the burning of evidence . The whole way it was handled seems so disrespectful. And yet some of those police that entered the house must have been extremely traumatised themselves by what had happened.

[gringo]

Morning gringo,  Off the top of his head, with the dilemma caused by the shooting, during the Entry Assault on one of the occupants of WHF, the O/C of the Operation (none other than DCSUPER G Harris of EP 'Operations'), would have seen it as to his benefit, to 'saturate the Crime Scene' with unsubstantiated, indeed unnecessary Personnel.
This would have been ratified by the Chief Constable.
The only time, as far as I am aware, that the CC has come into the equation in this sad saga, is when he has luncheon with RWB(& his two Offspring), in his private dining suite at EP HQ, on the Monday immediately following successful prosecution of JB.

Evening Campion , thanks for that . I concur that something unexpected occurred during the entry to WHF .
   Whilst it is a commonly held perception that the investigation by EP was poor , I am not convinced that this was an oversight . As you observe , it would be beneficial to EP to "muddy the waters"  if something had gone wrong with the raid which must never be found out .
    It is known that the relatives were suspicious because of inconsistencies in the findings of EP . It does not require the largest leap of faith to realise that it would be in the interests of EP to use these inconsistencies against Jeremy rather than admit to a truth which would be extremely damaging to them, not only as an organisation but also to certain police officers .
    Admitting bungling would be less damaging than the alternative .
    This also helps to explain why no-one has ever come forward and "come clean" . There is no way that anyone can come forward without admitting serious offences themselves (perjury, perverting the course of justice to name two ) .
   

[Alias]

Evening Campion , thanks for that . I concur that something unexpected occurred during the entry to WHF .
   Whilst it is a commonly held perception that the investigation by EP was poor , I am not convinced that this was an oversight . As you observe , it would be beneficial to EP to "muddy the waters"  if something had gone wrong with the raid which must never be found out .
    It is known that the relatives were suspicious because of inconsistencies in the findings of EP . It does not require the largest leap of faith to realise that it would be in the interests of EP to use these inconsistencies against Jeremy rather than admit to a truth which would be extremely damaging to them not only as an organisation but also to certain police officers .
    Admitting bungling would be less damaging than the alternative .
    This also helps to explain why no-one has ever come forward and "come clean" . There is no way that anyone can come forward without admitting serious offences themselves (perjury, perverting the course of justice to name two ) .
   

Ann Eaton was taking notes of Jeremy´s actions already on the morning of the murders, so at least she was suspicious from get go - or whatever it was she was...

[gringo]

Ann Eaton was taking notes of Jeremy´s actions already on the morning of the murders, so at least she was suspicious from get go - or whatever it was she was...

Hi Alias , this is true but her suspicions were quite likely informed by what she was being told by EP officers at the scene . EP were already quite possibly having to give a false picture to cover their own part in events that morning .
   With the relatives suspicions raised because of the inconsistencies it is possible that the best course of action was judged to be pinning it on Jeremy . The alternative being admitting what happened in their bungled raid .

[mike tesko]

DS 'Stan' Jones had already found and taken possession of a sound moderator (SBJ/1) on the morning of 7th August 1985, along with three other exhibits, SBJ/2, SBJ/3, and SBJ/4. The police and the prosecuting authorities have gone out of their way to conceal evidence of the seizure of these four exhibits that morning by DS Jones. This included the silencer (SBJ/1) which was later examined at the lab' by Glenis Howard, on the 13th August 1985, a silencer (SBJ/1) which had blood upon it...

This (SBJ/1) silencer cannot be the same silencer found in the gun cupboard in the downstairs office by David Boutflour (DRB/1) on 10th August 1985, or the 11th September 1985, because DS Jones already had possession of it (SBJ/1) from the morning of 7th August 1985. So, if Boutflour did find a silencer (DRB/1) in the gun cupboard, on either 10th August, or 11th September 1985, and it had blood upon it, and inside uit, that got there during the incident under investigation, it means there were two different silencers with blood on them, or inside them, and at least only one (DRB/1) with red paint from the aga surround upon it...

Bear this in mind...

How could two different sound moderators (SBJ/1 and DRB/1) both have blood upon them that got there during the shootings of the family, if this was only a one gun crime?

The same silencer cannot have been found for the first time, on the 7th August 1985 (SBJ/1), the 10th August 1985, or the 11th September 1985 (DRB/1). Moreover, what happened to the signed exhibit label bearing the identifying mark SBJ/1, which was signed by DI Cook and Glenis Howard, at the lab' on 13th August 1985, when Cook took silencer SBJ/1 for her to examine?

Key to unlocking this case, is gathering all the information regarding the seizure of the four exhibits, SBJ/1, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4, by DS 'Stan' Jones from the scene on 7th August 1985, tracking the movement of all these exhibits, and pondering over the possible reasons why no other police officer in the entire investigation (SC/786/85) refers to the seizure, find or retention of the silencer (SBJ/1) by DS Jones at the scene on the morning of the shootings, and why the exhibits officers do not list this particular silencer by its reference (SBJ/1) in any exhibits register, despite mentioning the other three (SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4)?

Someone has clearly gone out of their way to try to hide and conceal the fact that DS Jones took possession of a bloodied silencer (SBJ/1) on the morning of the shootings, and that this silencer (could not have been the same silencer  (DRB/1)allegedly found later by David Boutflour...

[Steve_uk]

The Andrew Hunter Book Draft resuscitated.

[lookout]

Before the man himself needs resuscitating------saying that, I hope he's okay.