telephone logs.

[grahameb]

Yes, there should be. If there is, it may be amongst the withheld documents.
Surely even you wouldn't assert that you are 100% sure that this imagined explanation is correct. If the two logs refer to a single call from JB to Pc West, how do you explain that the two logs give Sheila's age differently, and why did Pc West stay on the line to Malcolm Bonnett for at least 9 minutes from the receipt of JB's call, enabling him to know about the police car that Bonnett sent to the scene?

Very good points Reader. None of these explanations really clear up all the contradictions between the two logs. There may well be other logs not yet released? Remember all the original evidence was based entirely on the first log with nothing to back it up, so everyone assumed JB was lying. Now they twist the wording of the second log just to make it fit into their own pet theory. Just how prejudiced can you get?

[-Harters-]

Yes, there should be. If there is, it may be amongst the withheld documents.
Surely even you wouldn't assert that you are 100% sure that this imagined explanation is correct. If the two logs refer to a single call from JB to Pc West, how do you explain that the two logs give Sheila's age differently, and why did Pc West stay on the line to Malcolm Bonnett for at least 9 minutes from the receipt of JB's call, enabling him to know about the police car that Bonnett sent to the scene?

The age isn't a concern to me, maybe Jeremy described Sheila as being "26 or 27", West recorded one, Bonnett recorded the other, it's not an important detail, Sheilas age (whether 26 or 27) had no relevance to the required response of the police. Just like the description of 'Berserk' versus 'Crazy'.

Why did West need to have stayed on the phone (although it's quite conceivable that he did)? Did Bonnett tell him a unit had been despatched to the scene, or would be dispatched? When was that information recorded, during the call with Jeremy or afterwards? They were all in constant contact after that anyway, as can be seen from the recorded logs.

[mike tesko]

How can it not exist and not have existed at all, given that it has already been posted on this forum and is referred to in the court transcript?

I meant it (3:36 am) was not exhibited during the trial. Furthermore, it is not clear that the log referred to at court is / was the sane 3:36 am log we are talking about now...

[tonyb]

I just cant see this arguement on time can ever bear fruit.what will it prove.enlighten me please

[-Harters-]

I just cant see this arguement on time can ever bear fruit.what will it prove.enlighten me please

I'm guessing it's a two pronged attack, the first being an attempt to show that a call from Nevill to the police was made. The second trying to suggest that the defences case was hampered by these logs being withheld and therefore Jeremy received an unfair trial.

Unfortunately (for the innocent camp at least), there is nothing which indicates that this is true.

[Reader]

I meant it (3:36 am) was not exhibited during the trial.

I don't understand. You referred to a log. How could you have meant a time? Your precise wording was "The 3:36am log was never given a unique court exhibit reference, and no copy of that log exists, or existed at all." You clearly asserted the non-existence of the log, not just the time recorded in it. Is there any evidence that the log that the transcript shows was handed to Pc West at the trial wasn't the same log that has been posted here?

Is there any direct evidence that Bonnett's log was not seen by the defence (until much later)?

Why did West need to have stayed on the phone (although it's quite conceivable that he did)?

Malcolm Bonnett recorded that CD (PC West) was contacting CW (the control room at Witham presumably) by landline. Evidently, Pc West thought that this was a good idea, and it turned out that it was, as a unit that had just finished a patrol could be sent out again. If Pc West was still on the line to HQ, why didn't he simply ask them to make that call? Pc West logged the two cars sent before logging that he asked Jeremy to go to the farm, so it seems that Jeremy was still on the line.

[mike tesko]

Surely their witness statements and court evidence comprehensively clears this up?

What if the witness statements were not made by themselves, but by somebody like the DPP who typed the contents out in their absence, and or edited them without their consent - do you think that / this practice is al-right, and fair?

[mike tesko]

Here we go again. 

Refer to my previous posts:

Refer to your owns posts, you are talking garbage...

[mike tesko]

The obvious point here is that you are trying to persuade people that the log was not available.

You have not been successful as you have not shown people anything which indicates that as having been the case. Nothing, nada, zip.

Most people realise that.

I disagree with everything you are saying, you are just making things up...

[mike tesko]

It's evident that Malcolm Bonnett recorded that he was called by Pc West, but that's not the current issue. The issue is whether the details recorded about the call Pc West said he had received related to a call from Jeremy to Pc West or a call from Ralph to Pc West or both (if the lower paragraph related to a separate call from Pc West).

This could be easily resolved, all Essex police and the DPP/CPS office have to do is release the audio tapes which recorded all the conversations between PC West and Malcolm Bonnet, after and from 3:26am...

Problem solved....

[-Harters-]

I disagree with everything you are saying, you are just making things up...

There's nothing to disagree with. 

[mike tesko]

It's also worth noting that the first police officers on the scene (Bews, Myall & Saxby) asked Jeremy why his father had not phoned the police himself.
From 2002 Appeal Judgement

It is also worth noting, that upon meeting Jeremy in Pages Lane, near to the farm cottages, Bews, Myall and Saxby, asked Jeremy to recount what had taken place from his point of view? Now, anyone who knows what the police are like, will tell you that they are always trying to catch people out. So, when they asked Jeremy "Why didn't your father call the police"? it was an attempt to trick Jeremy into coming up with some sort of an excuse that could have been his undoing - but because Jeremy did not know his father had called the police, he told them why he thought his father had not called the police, (even though as it turns out his father had made contact with the police). This is a prime example of you trying to twist the truth into something other than what it really was / is...

Allow me to twist it back on you...

Based on what you are saying, it appears that Bews, Myall and Saxby went to the scene not really knowing why they were being deployed there, because they had to ask Jeremy for his account, and they tried to trick him into saying he knew his father had called the police, (Because he had called the police before Jeremy did)? But, because Jeremy was being honest and truthful, he told them that his father was not the kind of person (in his opinion) to involve the authorities. Lets get the facts right, so that there can be no mistake about what is being said, is it your case that although an attack alarm was fitted at the scene, because threats against the lives of Ralph Bamber, and his family (including Jeremy) had been made, that when the attack upon Raph and the other members of his family did occur that Ralph, or June, or Sheila, did not think to activate the alarm?

Is that what you are saying?

If so, what was the point of having the attack alarm fitted at whf in the first place?

If what Bews, Myall and Saxby said to Jeremy, about why his father did not call the police, and this was intended to expose Jeremy as some sort of a liar, how do you work that out then?  All Ralph, or June, or Sheila had to do was to activate the alarm if they were being attacked by anybody currently staying inside whf? If the alarm was not activated then this could be because they were not being attacked by anyone outside the immediate family circle? Well, I a reliably informed that the alarm was activated by Ralph Bamber and that its activation caused the line to and from WHF to produce a constant engaged tone, consistent with what Jeremy has told the police, and everybody else who is prepared to listen to the account he has given?

Fact of the matter is, that Bews, Myall and Saxby were simply deployed to the scene, as a result of Ralph Bambers call to the police at 3:26am, and the subsequent activation of the attack alarm - en route to the scene, the occupants of CA07 were updated about Jeremy's call to the police at 3:36am, whic took place after they had already been deployed...

These are the facts, you can try to twist them as much as you want to, but Ralph Bamber did make contact with the police from the scene at 3:26am, some ten minutes before Jeremy did at 3:36am...

[Steve_uk]

Why does the phone go dead after a short call..why does it say in one of the logs "message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber"? We know that Ralph(Nevill) had been shot in the bedroom,so if he made the phone call in the kitchen there would be blood on the phone there..if he has the strength to make two phone calls,one to Jeremy,one to the Police then surely he could have grabbed one of the many guns in the house for protection knowing what kind of a man he was. If Ralph wanted to keep the incident "in-house" to prevent a scandal why phone the Police at all? And why phone the son whom he had said to Barbara Wilson the secretary "I must never turn my back on that young man"?

[Jane]

Why does the phone go dead after a short call..why does it say in one of the logs "message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber"? We know that Ralph(Nevill) had been shot in the bedroom,so if he made the phone call in the kitchen there would be blood on the phone there..if he has the strength to make two phone calls,one to Jeremy,one to the Police then surely he could have grabbed one of the many guns in the house for protection knowing what kind of a man he was. If Ralph wanted to keep the incident "in-house" to prevent a scandal why phone the Police at all? And why phone the son whom he had said to Barbara Wilson the secretary "I must never turn my back on that young man"?

Hello Steve. That last quote is an interesting one, isn't it? It was first quoted to me by a friend of Neville's and I asked him what he thought was meant by it. Actually, I didn't need to ask, the tone of voice told me. But they were his feelings and not necessarily representative of the original meaning.

Those words could have meant that, in his father's opinion, Jeremy needed guidance. that without it he would get into muddles or they could have meant that whilst Jeremy could be an irrritating, hot headed little toe rag,he was his son and he would always support him.

[mike tesko]

There's nothing to disagree with. 

Exactly, what you are saying amounts to nothing...