Grounds for not referring Jeremy Bamber’s case back to the appeal court.

[Pete0001]

I think alot of the problem is that no one is trying to prove Neville didn't make the call..... we're questioning the evidence that he did... and it's not very convincing at all.

Because some us question does not mean we think he's guilty... but that if we can pick holes in it surely it'll be small fry for the CCRC etc....

[mb1]

Quote from: tonyb on February 11, 2011, 07:07:PM
9 to 3 and he would of walked. I wonder what the views are of the original jurors are today

This appeared much earlier in this thread.

The judge can direct for a majority - 7 to 5 does convict. In a 'lifer case' 7 to 5 would probably result in a re-trial. 9 to 3 would convict, unless the judge had directed otherwise.

Does anyone know if the judge gave direction?

[Kaldin]

I can't keep up with all the names, but you'll get the drift.

3.26 JB Phones police station. Officer A answers, notes time on pad, takes details - JB, son, informing father phoned him saying daughter has gone berserk with gun. Officer A puts JB on hold.
        Am I mistaken - does officer a despatch car?
Officer A phones Officer B in control room, saying father reports daughter gone berserk with gun.
Officer B records details and time xx
Officer A takes JB off hold - JB complains he's been on hold 11 minutes (Anne Easton mentions JB complaining about the delay).

Could Officer B have written the time it was when he ended the call with Officer A and took action, despatching a car. Is that why it was 3.36am.
Officer A recorded time at start of their call.
Officer B recorded time at end of their call.

?

Other way round I think. Officer A could have recorded the time he ended the call with Jeremy, and Officer B recorded the time that Officer A called him. 

Just to put some names to it:

Officer A who took the call from Jeremy is PC West, AKA 1990. He recorded the time as 3.36.

Officer B is Malcolm Bonnet in the information room, who was actually a civilian rather than a police officer. He recorded the call from PC West as being at 3.26.

-----------------------------------------

But Sheila was not Jeremy's daughter, and the guns at the house belonged to Ralph...

It doesn't matter. You have to remember that Jeremy quoted to PC West what his father said, then PC West had to try and jot it down and then repeat it to Malcolm Bonnet. I can see how all that happened.

-------------------------------------------

So, how did Malcolm Bonnet end up with the log from the scene, written in PC Wests handwriting, with the details of Ralph's call on the reverse side?

The log from the scene was not in PC West's handwriting in my opinion. I think Malcolm Bonnet wrote the log of the events. He said he kept the log until he went off duty at 5.45. The log of the events from the scene looks like his handwriting to me.

[Kaldin]

I think alot of the problem is that no one is trying to prove Neville didn't make the call..... we're questioning the evidence that he did... and it's not very convincing at all.

Because some us question does not mean we think he's guilty... but that if we can pick holes in it surely it'll be small fry for the CCRC etc....

Yes - Neville not calling the police doesn't mean Jeremy is guilty. However, if I can see the problem with the theory that Neville called the police, I'm sure that appeal judges with years of experience can see it too.

[Kaldin]

People have different views regarding the phone calls /logs, and maybe more evidence will surface.
But given the amount of evidence withheld, is it beyond the realms of possibility that other calls were made that evening / night, that haven't been admitted to? If Jeremy didn't know, I guess he wouldn't know what to ask for?

But why would the police withhold that information when they thought it was murder and suicide? When the relatives went to the police with their theories the police would have just told them that Neville had called the police and that Jeremy couldn't have done it. They would have said the same thing to Julie Mugford as well.

[Pete0001]

People have different views regarding the phone calls /logs, and maybe more evidence will surface.
But given the amount of evidence withheld, is it beyond the realms of possibility that other calls were made that evening / night, that haven't been admitted to? If Jeremy didn't know, I guess he wouldn't know what to ask for?

Very true... but also what must be remembered is that at this point in the investigation a cover up or framing wasn't being considered.. so the cover up happened much after the event... by which time its harder to contain the truth if a cover up has taken place and the more people involved in the cover up the harder it becomes to keep it covered up.

Everytime a cover up is declared another Police officer/civilian support is being accused of perverting the course of justice.

I'm interested to see a list of all the officers that are being accused of being party to the cover up and framing either directly or indirectly (i.e. being gagged by superiors).

[mb1]

People have different views regarding the phone calls /logs, and maybe more evidence will surface.
But given the amount of evidence withheld, is it beyond the realms of possibility that other calls were made that evening / night, that haven't been admitted to? If Jeremy didn't know, I guess he wouldn't know what to ask for?

Very true... but also what must be remembered is that at this point in the investigation a cover up or framing wasn't being considered.. so the cover up happened much after the event... by which time its harder to contain the truth if a cover up has taken place and the more people involved in the cover up the harder it becomes to keep it covered up.

Everytime a cover up is declared another Police officer/civilian support is being accused of perverting the course of justice.

I'm interested to see a list of all the officers that are being accused of being party to the cover up and framing either directly or indirectly (i.e. being gagged by superiors).

And none of those officers told their partners, family or friends over the years?

And none of those partners, family or friends had falling outs with those officers over the years and thought - I have a goldmine story?

They all stayed stum for 25 years?

Please! I'm up this late because I'm a grown up!

[Kaldin]

For those of you who think there were two phone calls - one from Neville and one from Jeremy - please consider this.

What you're basically saying is that Neville rang Chelmsford at about 3.26 and told PC West that Sheila had got hold of one of his guns. You're saying that PC West phoned that information through to Malcolm Bonnet, and Malcolm Bonnet sent a car to the scene at 3.35.

You're then saying that Jeremy called PC West at 3.36. If that happened they why didn't PC West tell Jeremy that his father had already phoned?

[Pete0001]

For those of you who think there were two phone calls - one from Neville and one from Jeremy - please consider this.

What you're basically saying is that Neville rang Chelmsford at about 3.26 and told PC West that Sheila had got hold of one of his guns. You're saying that PC West phoned that information through to Malcolm Bonnet, and Malcolm Bonnet sent a car to the scene at 3.35.

You're then saying that Jeremy called PC West at 3.36. If that happened they why didn't PC West tell Jeremy that his father had already phoned?

+1

[mike tesko]

I can't keep up with all the names, but you'll get the drift.

3.26 JB Phones police station. Officer A answers, notes time on pad, takes details - JB, son, informing father phoned him saying daughter has gone berserk with gun. Officer A puts JB on hold.
        Am I mistaken - does officer a despatch car?
Officer A phones Officer B in control room, saying father reports daughter gone berserk with gun.
Officer B records details and time xx
Officer A takes JB off hold - JB complains he's been on hold 11 minutes (Anne Easton mentions JB complaining about the delay).

Could Officer B have written the time it was when he ended the call with Officer A and took action, despatching a car. Is that why it was 3.36am.
Officer A recorded time at start of their call.
Officer B recorded time at end of their call.

?

Other way round I think. Officer A could have recorded the time he ended the call with Jeremy, and Officer B recorded the time that Officer A called him. 

Just to put some names to it:

Officer A who took the call from Jeremy is PC West, AKA 1990. He recorded the time as 3.36.

Officer B is Malcolm Bonnet in the information room, who was actually a civilian rather than a police officer. He recorded the call from PC West as being at 3.26.

-----------------------------------------

But Sheila was not Jeremy's daughter, and the guns at the house belonged to Ralph...

It doesn't matter. You have to remember that Jeremy quoted to PC West what his father said, then PC West had to try and jot it down and then repeat it to Malcolm Bonnet. I can see how all that happened.

-------------------------------------------

So, how did Malcolm Bonnet end up with the log from the scene, written in PC Wests handwriting, with the details of Ralph's call on the reverse side?

The log from the scene was not in PC West's handwriting in my opinion. I think Malcolm Bonnet wrote the log of the events. He said he kept the log until he went off duty at 5.45. The log of the events from the scene looks like his handwriting to me.

... But, details of Ralphs call, timed at 3.26 am, was a photocopy on the reverse of an orignal log, relating to the scene, how could a copy of the phone call timed at 3.26 am, end up on the reverse of an orinal log from the scene? It should be clear to everyone, that somebody has copied the details relating to the 3.26 am, call, onto the reverse of the other log, and that whoever did this, did not want anyone, to get their hands on the original, or to see what was recorded, on the reverse of the original phone log.,

[Kaldin]

... But, details of Ralphs call, timed at 3.26 am, was a photocopy on the reverse of an orignal log, relating to the scene, how could a copy of the phone call timed at 3.26 am, end up on the reverse of an orinal log from the scene? It should be clear to everyone, that somebody has copied the details relating to the 3.26 am, call, onto the reverse of the other log, and that whoever did this, did not want anyone, to get their hands on the original, or to see what was recorded, on the reverse of the original phone log.,

I don't buy that. That would have meant that someone put Malcolm Bonnet's original log of the call into the top of a photocopier to be copied, and then fed the original of the log of the scene through the photocopier. Nobody would have any reason to do that.

If they wanted to hide the log of the call, they would simply hide it, they wouldn't go to the trouble of photocopying it onto the back of the event log.

[Pete0001]

Yes... why introduce something as a photocopy if the intention was to hide it?

Is the suggestion that the photocopying of the document on the reverse was in fact a mistake in their cover up operation?

[Kaldin]

Yes... why introduce something as a photocopy if the intention was to hide it?

Is the suggestion that the photocopying of the document on the reverse was in fact a mistake in their cover up operation?

I don't believe that anyone photocopied any document onto the back of an original one anyone. That makes no sense whatsoever.

[bb2010]

Yes... why introduce something as a photocopy if the intention was to hide it?

Is the suggestion that the photocopying of the document on the reverse was in fact a mistake in their cover up operation?

+1

[mb1]

The document was submitted and court-stamped as evidence.

If submitting a stapled ten page document as evidence, one page would be stamped, not all ten pages or 20 sides. Yet the document in its entirety would still be evidence.

This document was available to the defence, is not new evidence and cannot be used for appeal purposes.

For those of you who think there were two phone calls - one from Neville and one from Jeremy - please consider this.

What you're basically saying is that Neville rang Chelmsford at about 3.26 and told PC West that Sheila had got hold of one of his guns. You're saying that PC West phoned that information through to Malcolm Bonnet, and Malcolm Bonnet sent a car to the scene at 3.35.

You're then saying that Jeremy called PC West at 3.36. If that happened they why didn't PC West tell Jeremy that his father had already phoned?

+1

Precisely. He would have used this information to reassure JB.