Bamber guilty, surely!

[Nuala]

Hi Chochok

I don't doubt Mike has seen the photographs at all.

What does bother me is why these photo's have not
been brought forward and used in defence?

And, why aren't people giving statements that they exist?

Hi Patti,

I wonder if these photographs have not been brought forward and statements have not been made about them for the very same reason that thousands of documents, including photographs, have not been brought forward or statemen made in respect of them: because they are held under PII secrecy orders and anyone producing them or detailing the information contained in them commits an offence.

[Patti]

Hi Patti,

I wonder if these photographs have not been brought forward and statements have not been made about them for the very same reason that thousands of documents, including photographs, have not been brought forward or statemen made in respect of them: because they are held under PII secrecy orders and anyone producing them or detailing the information contained in them commits an offence.

Hi There Chockok

One wonders then. If they are protected under PII, how these documents were to be viewed at all?  I could understand that if they were viewed and spoken about that someone would be in breech of the law.......Does that mean that photographs of Shelia on the bed should not be mentioned on a public forum?

Is that the same under the DPA?  On the 30 year rule? Or in some cases 100 year rule.

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

June Bamber being one of the shooters, not the only shooter, can be unravelled by taking into account many things, such as the condition of her bloodstained nightdress, early newspaper reports that she was in fact was responsible for shooting the others, and the fact (amongst many other things) that when Ralph spoke to Jeremy he told him either, "Sheila has got the gun", or "She has got the gun", which could have been a reference to June Bamber having possession of one of the guns, whereas, when Ralph spoke to the police, he told them "My daughter has got one of my guns"...

I think the fact that in one phone message log, where reference to "My daughter has got possession of one of my guns", as opposed to what is recorded in the other "Your sister has got the gun”, compared with what Jeremy said to the police during interview that his father could have actually said, "she has got the gun”, as opposed to, and rather than him saying "Sheila has got the gun", which throws a different light on matters, since if Ralph actually said, ”She has" as opposed to ”Sheila has”, it leaves the door wide open for June to have got possession of "THE GUN", at the point when Ralph made the call to Jeremy, whereas the matter of who had got possession of guns appeared to have escalated dramatically by the time got around to Ralph phoning the police at around 3:26am, by which stage Ralph tells police that ”My daughter has got one of my guns"?

Clearly, within the space of a few minutes, the situation at whf worsened, and Ralph may have had to deal with, his wife June having possession of "THE GUN", as well as his daughter, also having got possession of "ONE OF MY GUNS”?

If Ralph Bamber phoned JB to tell him his mother had got "THE GUN" he would never had said SHE HAS GOT THE GUN" for two reasons. There were two females in the house, which they both knew, saying "she" would not identify who had the gun. Secondly, no way would Ralph Bamber say "SHE" when speaking to his son about his mother!

[Nuala]

If Ralph Bamber phoned JB to tell him his mother had got "THE GUN" he would never had said SHE HAS GOT THE GUN" for two reasons. There were two females in the house, which they both knew, saying "she" would not identify who had the gun. Secondly, no way would Ralph Bamber say "SHE" when speaking to his son about his mother!

Excellent points, Janet.

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

Excellent points, Janet.

thank you. i haven't been on for a week so i am sure there will be more to follow! lol