But it was, that's the whole point, the details from the 3:26am call are recorded on the back of log details which were recorded at the scene, not by anyone at the police station - you should try to get your facts right before you make any posts about such matters...
I have got my facts straight. I have seen the log - it's clearly written on the front of form "Essex Police Communications" unless you think that heading is fake.
--------------------------------------
You obviously are not as clued up as yopu appear tp be m,aking oput about this matter, yes, the photocopy of the recoprd, shows that the details were recorded upon an official communications log, but this is a photocopy that was redorded on the reverse of the origobnal log that was made up at the scene - in other words, there is an orijgional documnet recorded on one side of theb parer, and a copy onj the other...
Guess what - the copy on the reverse are the details of ralph's call to the police, timed at 3:26am, and the original details on the bother side were recorded at the scene by the log keeper who was there at the scene...
Malcolm Bonnet, nor PC West, were at the scene, so please try to explain how the details of the call timed at 3:26am, could have been recorded at the scene at 3:26am, on the reverse of the original log details made out at the scene, contemporaneousnessly?
I await your theory with interest...
I didn't understand that post. As far as I can see, the log of the call is on the correct form. If the log recording what happened at the scene is on the other side of the original, then it was written on the other side of it. It's not relevant that Malcolm Bonnet was not at the scene. The log of what happened at the scene was written by him from information he received via radio or whatever in the information room.
------------------------------------
Ok, we will start again - details of log recorded at the scene was written by someone other than PC west, or Malcolm Bonnet, and these details on one side of that document were in original handwriting of this other person...
How could PC West, or Malcolm Bonnet record anything on the reverse of such a document that only came into existence, at the scene - when the details of the phone log timed at 3:26am, is only a photocopy?
PC West, nor Malcolm Bonnet, could be at police DHQ, and at the scene, at one, and the same time...
You're suggesting that the log which runs from 4.02 to 5.29 was not written by Malcolm Bonnet?
-----------------------------------
Well, what other interpretation can you offer for the original handwriting of the log keeper at the scene, to be on one side, in the original handwriting of the officer at the scene, and a copy of the phone details timed at 3:26am, on the other?
