telephone logs.

[mike tesko]

View both logs, here:-

(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=541.0;attach=1742;image
(2) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=541.0;attach=1741;image

Note in log 3:26am, there is mention at the back end of messages that "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber after the phone went dead. Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and .410's", and that in log 3:36am, mention is made that "HQIR informed", and "CW informed and unit plus duty PS despatched"...

More significantly (3:26am):-

"Daughter gone berserk" and "Daughter Sheila Bamber aged 26 yrs has got hold of one of my guns"


At no stage did Jeremy use such words when speaking to Malcolm Bonnet, and at no stage did Malcolm Bonnet say such words to PC West - so where did PC West get those words from? In contrast, this is what Jeremy told Malcolm Bonnet, and what Malcolm Bonner wrote down in log 3:36am:-

"Father phoned (aged 62) please come over your sister has gone crazy and has the gun, Phone went dead".

Log 3:26am is an amalgamation of the two messages received by PC West, (1) from Ralph Bamber, and (2) a second message from Malcolm Bonnet, repeating what Jeremy had told him.

[mike tesko]

View both logs, here:-

(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=541.0;attach=1742;image
(2) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=541.0;attach=1741;image

Note in log 3:26am, there is mention at the back end of messages that "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber after the phone went dead. Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and .410's", and that in log 3:36am, mention is made that "HQIR informed", and "CW informed and unit plus duty PS despatched"...

More significantly (3:26am):-

"Daughter gone berserk" and "Daughter Sheila Bamber aged 26 yrs has got hold of one of my guns"


At no stage did Jeremy use such words when speaking to Malcolm Bonnet, and at no stage did Malcolm Bonnet say such words to PC West - so where did PC West get those words from? In contrast, this is what Jeremy told Malcolm Bonnet, and what Malcolm Bonner wrote down in log 3:36am:-

"Father phoned (aged 62) please come over your sister has gone crazy and has the gun, Phone went dead".

Log 3:26am is an amalgamation of the two messages received by PC West, (1) from Ralph Bamber, and (2) a second message from Malcolm Bonnet, repeating what Jeremy had told him.

There is no way that "Daughter gone berserk" and "Daughter Sheila Bamber aged 26 yrs has got hold of one of my guns" and "Father phoned (aged 62) please come over your sister has gone crazy and has the gun, Phone went dead" can be reconciled as having been spoken by the same person to two different people. Similarly, there is no way that PC West could misinterpret what Malcolm Bonnet told him about what Jeremy had said, to force PC West to record things inaccurately to the point of being contradictory, inconsistent and so much ambiguously?

[mike tesko]

In a nutshell...

The contents of log 3:26am, should be sufficient on its own to send the case back to the court of appeal. Anyone who says this has already been argued and rejected by the court of appeal in its 2002 judgement, needs to be reminded that at that time, it was wrongly argued that the contents of log 3:26am related to the call of one person, and that the person had been Ralph Bamber, but because the court were invited to accept that PC West made an error and that he could have got the timing of the call some 10 minutes fast, the court was prepared to accept that Jeremy's call had taken place at 3:26am, rather than 3:36am - but no-one it seems noticed that the contents of log 23:26am, was made up of a series of messages from more than one person (Ralph and Jeremy (who's words were relayed to PC West by Civilian Employee Malcolm Bonnet))? Once this argument is understood and applied to the contents of log 3:26am, it can be treated as proof positive that Jeremy told the truth about receiving a call from his father, because his father had called the police himself, after the father had called Jeremy, and before Jeremy himself had called the police (3:36am)...

[mike tesko]

Contents of phone log (3:26am):-

Ralph Bamber...

"Daughter gone berserk" and "Daughter Sheila Bamber aged 26 yrs has got hold of one of my guns"

Malcom Bonnet, repeating to PC West what Jeremy had told him...

"Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber after the phone went dead. Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and .410's"

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


Contents of phone log (3:36am):-

Jeremy Bamber...

"Father phoned (aged 62) please come over your sister has gone crazy and has the gun, Phone went dead".

[grahameb]

In a nutshell...

The contents of log 3:26am, should be sufficient on its own to send the case back to the court of appeal. Anyone who says this has already been argued and rejected by the court of appeal in its 2002 judgement, needs to be reminded that at that time, it was wrongly argued that the contents of log 3:26am related to the call of one person, and that the person had been Ralph Bamber, but because the court were invited to accept that PC West made an error and that he could have got the timing of the call some 10 minutes fast, the court was prepared to accept that Jeremy's call had taken place at 3:26am, rather than 3:36am - but no-one it seems noticed that the contents of log 23:26am, was made up of a series of messages from more than one person (Ralph and Jeremy (who's words were relayed to PC West by Civilian Employee Malcolm Bonnet))? Once this argument is understood and applied to the contents of log 3:26am, it can be treated as proof positive that Jeremy told the truth about receiving a call from his father, because his father had called the police himself, after the father had called Jeremy, and before Jeremy himself had called the police (3:36am)...

That is strange Mike. Because I was thinking along the same lines just before I read your posts. There are certain details like the ones you have pointed out that just do not fit in however you look at it. It does appear to be an amalgamation of the two messages. For there are just too many differences between the two messages for the second just to be a badly copied message of the first. Too many anomalies for my liking. The officer must have been stone deaf to make so many mistakes. Either that or a terrific guesser.

[Reader]

Are you asking what proof is there that both Bonnett's and West's logs were at the original trial?

No. I know Pc West's was, but Bonnett's log didn't surface until much later.

In Bonnett's log in your post, a court exhibit sticker is highlighted in red, so I'm assuming we accept that it was present and available?

Although Bonnett's log had that sticker, the judge, the prosecution and the defence were all unaware of the log at trial. The defence eventually found it in the papers they had been given.

With regards to West's log, he refers to it whilst giving evidence

Pc West gave evidence about his log, but that evidence was rather limited as the defence didn't know at the time that almost every detail in it was important. He wasn't asked whether Ralph Bamber had already called him. Incidentally, Pc West came across at trial as rather unintelligent and ill-prepared.

. . . the drugs squad had Jeremy under surveillance, and Special branch had took an interest because threats had been made against Ralph Bamber, and his family's, lives...

The extent of that on the date in question has not been made public.

[grahameb]

No. I know Pc West's was, but Bonnett's log didn't surface until much later.
Although Bonnett's log had that sticker, the judge, the prosecution and the defence were all unaware of the log at trial. The defence eventually found it in the papers they had been given.
Pc West gave evidence about his log, but that evidence was rather limited as the defence didn't know at the time that almost every detail in it was important. He wasn't asked whether Ralph Bamber had already called him. Incidentally, Pc West came across at trial as rather unintelligent and ill-prepared.
The extent of that on the date in question has not been made public.

All very goog points Reader.

[mike tesko]

No. I know Pc West's was, but Bonnett's log didn't surface until much later.
Although Bonnett's log had that sticker, the judge, the prosecution and the defence were all unaware of the log at trial. The defence eventually found it in the papers they had been given.
Pc West gave evidence about his log, but that evidence was rather limited as the defence didn't know at the time that almost every detail in it was important. He wasn't asked whether Ralph Bamber had already called him. Incidentally, Pc West came across at trial as rather unintelligent and ill-prepared.
The extent of that on the date in question has not been made public.

If the contents of PC Wests phone log (3:36am) had been available at trial, there is no doubt at all in my mind that the defence would have seized upon the fact that its contents related to two messages received by PC West - (1) first part received from Ralph Bamber, and (2) second part a recording of a message past to West by Malcolm Bonnet regarding the call Jeremy received from his father, and what he relayed in his call to Bonnet. I do not see how the prosecutions case could have avoided being attacked in this manner if the contents of the log had been available, and viewable...

[Roch]

Reader, where you on the jury or present in some other capacity during the trial?  It's a bit brash of me to ask on the open forum but I couldn't help it.

[Reader]

I first heard of the case in the earliest TV documentary about it, but my further interest stemmed from a radio broadcast that mentioned that Jeremy "had a website" (which turned out to be www.jeremybamber.com) and wanted further information to help him appeal.

[Roch]

I first heard of the case in the earliest TV documentary about it, but my further interest stemmed from a radio broadcast that mentioned that Jeremy "had a website" (which turned out to be www.jeremybamber.com) and wanted further information to help him appeal.

Thanks for providing that info.  The reason I asked was because I read your comments about West at trial.

[-Harters-]

Thanks for providing that info.  The reason I asked was because I read your comments about West at trial.

He is just referring to a letter from Ainsley to Harris which refers to Wests court appearance.

To suggest that Wests log was not available at trial, is pure unfounded speculation. The fact that the log has a court exhinit label and that West refers to it at trial, supports the opposite.

[Reader]

It's Bonnett's log that has the court exhibit label but wasn't known to the defence at the time. Pc West referred to his own log, which was produced at the trial.

[-Harters-]

It's Bonnett's log that has the court exhibit label but wasn't known to the defence at the time. Pc West referred to his own log, which was produced at the trial.

Yes my mistake.

But as per my previous posts, there is no evidence which shows that the defence were unaware of the existence of Bonnets log. The timing inconsistancy was brought up at the original trial.

I don't believe this is an argument that the defence can rely upon.

[Reader]

My understanding is that the timing inconsistency was known about, but Bonnett's log was not produced. The defence would obviously have noticed the further inconsistencies had they seen it.