How I Iost the photo` of Sheila on the Bed...

[Patti]

Personally, revealing everything to the public, might not be a good idea. I would hold back to see how the Judicial Review goes, because if Jeremy's case goes back to the court of appeal....All these photographs etc could be used then and will go in Jeremy's favour. To expose them now, to me would be a bit daft....

[elphick]

I think you will find it is Mike who is stopping anything happening with the alleged photograph of Sheila on the bed with a single gun shot wound to the neck.

This is the alleged photograph that was apparenlty being withheld under PII which it has now transpired was stolen from the office of Ewen Smith. Jeremy subsequently sacked Ewen after Mike told Jeremy about the alleged photograph which resulted in Jeremy writing to Ewen to request a copy of the alleged photograph.

Given the latest revelations Mike has apparently had a copy of the alleged photograph since 2004 (circa 8 years). Mike did nothing with the alleged photograph even after learning the original was 'intercepted and disappeared' when the prison authorities abused special priviledge communications.

What has changed since 2004............ Jeremy is still in prison serving a whole life sentence.

This is an excellent post. Thanks.

[elphick]

To expose them now, to me would be a bit daft....

How do you feel about not exposing them for 8 years?

[Patti]

How do you feel about not exposing them for 8 years?

Hi elphick

From what I gather these photograph's are not for public information under the 30 year rule.  I also understand that they were stolen or have been received by mistake.  I was reading a letter by Jeremy which is on another forum last night and he says in that letter that he had come across photo's and documents that are under the PII and that the Essex police had asked for them back....but he refuses to give them back.  I am under the impression that if these were exposed it could mean someone could be arrested, because they were obtained unlawfully.

If there is such a photo and Jeremy gets his appeal then would it not be better that these were exposed during that appeal and not before?  It could be too his advantage and could change public opinion?

[Bridget]

Hi elphick

From what I gather these photograph's are not for public information under the 30 year rule.  I also understand that they were stolen or have been received by mistake.  I was reading a letter by Jeremy which is on another forum last night and he says in that letter that he had come across photo's and documents that are under the PII and that the Essex police had asked for them back....but he refuses to give them back.  I am under the impression that if these were exposed it could mean someone could be arrested, because they were obtained unlawfully.

If there is such a photo and Jeremy gets his appeal then would it not be better that these were exposed during that appeal and not before?   It could be too his advantage and could change public opinion?

No, for two reasons. Firstly, without such a photo he's unlikely to get an appeal, and secondly because you can't just spring new evidence on the other side during the course of proceedings. You have to disclose it and give the other side a chance to consider how they will respond to it, otherwise it is unlikely to be admitted as evidence.

[lookout]

I'm assuming that these photo's are part of the 200+ that should have been produced at Jeremy's first trial back in 1986/7.?
If so,I don't think it matters who sees them at this juncture,because had there been a fairer trial at the onset,they,along with the thousands of unseen
documents would have paved the way for a more in-depth investigation rather than the shambolic and totally biased opinions of
the jury being swayed by the media and public alike.

[curiousessex]

Hi elphick

From what I gather these photograph's are not for public information under the 30 year rule.  I also understand that they were stolen or have been received by mistake.  I was reading a letter by Jeremy which is on another forum last night and he says in that letter that he had come across photo's and documents that are under the PII and that the Essex police had asked for them back....but he refuses to give them back.  I am under the impression that if these were exposed it could mean someone could be arrested, because they were obtained unlawfully.

If there is such a photo and Jeremy gets his appeal then would it not be better that these were exposed during that appeal and not before?  It could be too his advantage and could change public opinion?

If the alleged photograph exists and has been withheld under PII and such an alleged photograph later enters the public domain then by definition the alleged photgraph will be new evidence.

If the alleged photgraph exist and it subsequently exposes a major miscarriage of justice then no one will be arrested and no one will be prosecuted. As a consequence the alleged photograph would also be evidence in itself for a significant misuse of PII. This would then potentially have very serious consequences for those who have be involved in surpressing the alleged photograph.

However, whilst the alleged photograph remains alleged all this remains immaterial.

If the alleged photgraph exists it is potentially DYNAMITE as stated previously.

If the alleged photograph does not exist then the credibility of those involved becomes zero in my opinion.

[Patti]

I'm assuming that these photo's are part of the 200+ that should have been produced at Jeremy's first trial back in 1986/7.?
If so,I don't think it matters who sees them at this juncture,because had there been a fairer trial at the onset,they,along with the thousands of unseen
documents would have paved the way for a more in-depth investigation rather than the shambolic and totally biased opinions of
the jury being swayed by the media and public alike.

Hi lookout

The photo Mike is talking about is one of Sheila laying on the bed.  Mike stole this photo form Jeremy's from one of Jeremy's old solicitors in 2004.  The photo is protected under the public information (PII)

Mike claims he sent this photo to Jeremy and the photo was intercepted and Jeremy never got the photo.  But, Mike says he has a copy of it on his hard drive....

If there is a photo of Sheila on the bed, then it would prove her body had been moved at some stage, whilst scenes of crime officers took photo's of the crime scene. 

Have you looked in the archives at the photo's lookout?

[lookout]

Hi Patti....again I was under the assumption that,from the start of the investigation,that any evidence that might have been,was corrupt
and that Sheila's body had been moved anyway,as  " stage-managed, according to the Essex police,or someone attached to them.
My thoughts on that subject will remain unspoken for the time being.
I haven't looked at the photo's,but I've got a feeling I won't be surprised when I do see them.

[Patti]

If the alleged photograph exists and has been withheld under PII and such an alleged photograph later enters the public domain then by definition the alleged photgraph will be new evidence.

If the alleged photgraph exist and it subsequently exposes a major miscarriage of justice then no one will be arrested and no one will be prosecuted. As a consequence the alleged photograph would also be evidence in itself for a significant misuse of PII. This would then potentially have very serious consequences for those who have be involved in surpressing the alleged photograph.

However, whilst the alleged photograph remains alleged all this remains immaterial.

If the alleged photgraph exists it is potentially DYNAMITE as stated previously.

If the alleged photograph does not exist then the credibility of those involved becomes zero in my opinion.

I agree with what you are saying.  If Mike has the alleged photograph they why after 10 days is that alleged photograph still on his hard drive? And, why say at first he never took a copy....then go onto say it was on an old hard drive?

I would have thought that Mike would have pulled all stops he could, to have exposed it....and if this forum is monitored from outside media etc then they already know that such an alleged photograph might exist..... The mind boggles.

[Patti]

Hi Patti....again I was under the assumption that,from the start of the investigation,that any evidence that might have been,was corrupt
and that Sheila's body had been moved anyway,as  " stage-managed, according to the Essex police,or someone attached to them.
My thoughts on that subject will remain unspoken for the time being.
I haven't looked at the photo's,but I've got a feeling I won't be surprised when I do see them.

I think it was staged managed lookout...I will bring the thread up on "Spot the difference" there are at least 6 differences in two shots.....

[lonny]

The photo is pretty pointless anyway, it would just show that the Police tampered with the scene, it doesn't prove what actually happened either way because EVERYONE knows the Police investigation was botched - even people who think he's guilty will admit that. The evidence needed to clear him remains under Pii for the very reason it would clear him.

There is more than enough evidence in the public domain to show that his trial was unfair and if this was any other case the person would have been released years ago...FACT.....can anyone name any other case where so much evidence exists to show an unfair conviction with that person still doing time?

[lookout]

Dead bodies are quite flexible, up to a point of course,and after saying that, if Sheila's body was " moved about ",that in itself proves that she
certainly was the last one to die ( Jeremy was outside the farmhouse at this stage ) before rigor mortis sets in,,,which is approximately 2
hours after death,,,,so the time-scales in this case are a vital part of the investigation.

[Patti]

Dead bodies are quite flexible, up to a point of course,and after saying that, if Sheila's body was " moved about ",that in itself proves that she
certainly was the last one to die ( Jeremy was outside the farmhouse at this stage ) before rigor mortis sets in,,,which is approximately 2
hours after death,,,,so the time-scales in this case are a vital part of the investigation.

lookout, if rigour mortise had set if for 4 to 5 hours, would her arm be so flexible to have moved it?

[lookout]

Hi lonny,,,yes I knew of a recent case which was well and truly botched,,,but because it's not reached its final decision
I don't feel comfortable in mentioning it. I knew the person involved,in a professional capacity at the time of it going to court.
It will prove,at some point,another miscarriage of justice has been carried out.
Another lot of " dragging of feet " has been on display with the Jeremy Bamber case,when it could/should have reached its verdict years
ago.That of not guilty.!