Rifle flush with body, gun barrel under chin, clue...

[rhodes]

John, please introduce your self in the foyer.  Thanks.

Are you referring to me??

[rhodes]

Also,  I think I'm right in stating that they don't ordinarily use .22 weapons or ammunition.  So at no point could police state that Sheila was shot by them in the line of duty.  Therefore if Mike Tesko is correct in his assertion that the mishandling of the rifle is what caused the 2nd fatal shot, there is a big problem to be pondered by those at the scene.  And the clock is ticking.  And there's a lot of people outside.

I believe you are ordinarily correct roch.   If they had maybe jeremy would have heard the shot??

[Roch]

I believe you are ordinarily correct roch.   If they had maybe jeremy would have heard the shot??

If fired from a police weapon?  And from a distance of Pages Lane?  Not sure.  But certainly wouldn't hear .22.

[Steve_uk]

Moe Cassini,,,don't think for one minute that I'm " blinkered " about this case,,because I'm not. You see,,I remember this case on television and also the newspapers back in 1985. I had made up my mind then that Jeremy wasn't the killer,,,and thinking how easy it was for the police to blame him because he was the only one left out of that immediate family.
I was of the same belief as " Taff " Jones,,the officer leading the enquiry,,that it was a case of 4 murders and a suicide and that was that.
What followed was a complete conspiracy and a means to justify the fact that this case wasn't going to " slip through their fingers " like the Diane Jones murder,which had happened a couple of years before and which the police bungled.

However,,if Jeremy had pleaded guilty,,he'd have been out of prison now,,,so why do you think,,after all these years,he hasn't wanted to.? He knows himself,,that he could possibly have been free,,,but on principle,,because of his continued pleas of innocence,he's chosen to be honest to the point of risking further sentencing. Does this sound like a murderer.?

I don't see what recalling the case first hand in 1985 as I similarly do has any bearing whatsoever on the merit of the individual in question's comments;one can just as well read the trial transcripts,the books and the internet sources oneself and reach just as valid an opinion 27 years later. The reasons for Jeremy Bamber not admitting his culpability are manifold: firstly he would lose all inheritance rights and any compensation which might accrue to him by taxpayers,secondly the stigma of having to admit to shooting five people dead in cold blood including twin infants would be palpable and send a new shock wave of revulsion among the British public,thirdly he might well be attacked again or murdered by fellow prison inmates,and fourthly he can't confess to unburden his soul to any religious personage frequenting prisons because due to the influence of his mother and sister religion is everything he despises with the concomitant thought that the here and now is the only thing that matters,which was one of the motives for the slayings in the first place.

[rhodes]

If fired from a police weapon?  And from a distance of Pages Lane?  Not sure.  But certainly wouldn't hear .22.

hmm dont know about that mate.   In a still morning with everyone keeping perfectly quiet much can be heard.   Wasn't the telephone line open as well?

[rhodes]

I don't see what recalling the case first hand in 1985 as I similarly do has any bearing whatsoever on the merit of the individual in question's comments;one can just as well read the trial transcripts,the books and the internet sources oneself and reach just as valid an opinion 27 years later. The reasons for Jeremy Bamber not admitting his culpability are manifold: firstly he would lose all inheritance rights and any compensation which might accrue to him by taxpayers,secondly the stigma of having to admit to shooting five people dead in cold blood including twin infants would be palpable and send a new shock wave of revulsion among the British public,thirdly he might well be attacked again or murdered by fellow prison inmates,and fourthly he can't confess to unburden his soul to any religious personage frequenting prisons because due to the influence of his mother and sister religion is everything he despises with the concomitant thought that the here and now is the only thing that matters,which was one of the motives for the slayings in the first place.

I think he has told the same old lie for so long he believes it.   Institutionalisation has a lot to answer for.

[mike tesko]

Well birdbrain...can you point me to such statements??   The statements which I have already read and which are posted on this forum clearly indicate that the rifle was moved to facilitate inspections.

You are the bird brain with little or no knowledge about what took place, or who said what?

So, you are saying police have lied about not moving or touching anything at all until after PC Bird completed taking all his crime scene photographs which he claims he did not start taking until 10am? Why would police lie about such a thing? Why would they say they didn't move or touch anything at all, until after Bird took his pictures, if as you are suggesting they removed the rifle (Y) from Sheila's body and put it back on the body countless times before PC Bird even started to take pictures? So, if you are correct, and I am wrong (which by the way I am not wrong) then when the prosecution produced photographs taken by PC Bird as part of the court album (50 pictures) and suggested that this was how police found the body of Sheila on the bedroom floor, it was a blatantly dishonest and totally falsified account...

If you take a gun / rifle off the body and put it back on the body, and remove the rifle, and put the rifle back on the body, and then along comes your good friend PC David Bird to take pictures showing the rifle (Y) on the body, it does not represent exactly how the police found the body upon entry into the bedroom, do you agree? At this point, the prosecutions case is a dishonest one, comprehende?

[mike tesko]

I believe you are ordinarily correct roch.   If they had maybe jeremy would have heard the shot??

Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, so the sound of the shot from rifle "Y" would not have been recorded, on instruction from someone at the scene directed at the control room to the operator...

[Steve_uk]

Mike could you just remind us of the timeline that morning as to when the doctor arrived,when the photographs were taken,particularly of the gun and when these training exercises took place and any other forensic activity?

[mike tesko]

Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, so the sound of the shot from rifle "Y" would not have been recorded, on instruction from someone at the scene directed at the control room to the operator...

If the police close down the open line (intercept) at about 8:15am, and the police did not shoot and kill Sheila by use of rifle "Y" until after 9am, there is no chance that there could be any recording of the event where the police shot and killed Sheila by firing rifle "Y" under Sheila's chin...

[rhodes]

You are the bird brain with little or no knowledge about what took place, or who said what?

So, you are saying police have lied about not moving or touching anything at all until after PC Bird completed taking all his crime scene photographs which he claims he did not start taking until 10am? Why would police lie about such a thing? Why would they say they didn't move or touch anything at all, until after Bird took his pictures, if as you are suggesting they removed the rifle (Y) from Sheila's body and put it back on the body countless times before PC Bird even started to take pictures? So, if you are correct, and I am wrong (which by the way I am not wrong) then when the prosecution produced photographs taken by PC Bird as part of the court album (50 pictures) and suggested that this was how police found the body of Sheila on the bedroom floor, it was a blatantly dishonest and totally falsified account...

If you take a gun / rifle off the body and put it back on the body, and remove the rifle, and put the rifle back on the body, and then along comes your good friend PC David Bird to take pictures showing the rifle ((Y) on the body, it does not represent exactly how the police found the body upon entry into the bedroom, do you agree? At this point, the prosecutions case is a dishonest one, comprehende?

Neither do you as you weren't there.


Most of the cops would not have touched anything but they may have trod on the odd bullet case.  Some coppers would have been tasked with removing weapons, making them safe, removing ammo etc.    Others would have helped the doctor to examine the bodies.   PC Bird didn't arrive until later on in the morning and the rifle was probably moved at least twice by them and replaced. 


The pictures showed how they found the body but the position of the body and the rifle may have changed slightly.  There is no other way for the police to do their job without moving things.   Do you honestly think the police are going to leave a loaded mag in a rifle on a body?   Just so happened the rifle was empty on that occasion.

Your idea of dishonesty in this situation is frankly absurd.

[rhodes]

If the police close down the open line (intercept) at about 8:15am, and the police did not shoot and kill Sheila by use of rifle "Y" until after 9am, there is no chance that there could be any recording of the event where the police shot and killed Sheila by firing rifle "Y" under Sheila's chin...

Why on earth would a police officer want to shoot Sheila with a .22 rifle??  Do you know how stupid that sounds??

[rhodes]

Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, so the sound of the shot from rifle "Y" would not have been recorded, on instruction from someone at the scene directed at the control room to the operator...

So according to your theory the cops waited until after 8.15 to shoot Sheila......nearly a full hour after they entered the house.  Mindblowing stuff.   

[mike tesko]

Mike could you just remind us of the timeline that morning as to when the doctor arrived,when the photographs were taken,particularly of the gun and when these training exercises took place and any other forensic activity?

Rifle (Y) spotted leaning against bedroom window by WPC Julia Jeapes before raid team force their way into premises (a trained firearms instructor) police in house at just after 7:30am, two bodies found upon entry into kitchen (7:37am) the body of one dead male and the body of one dead female; a murder and a suicide (before 7;45am), a further three bodies found upstairs once the police get up there. Senior officers into house, discover body of dead female is missing. DCI Harris is asked to contact ACC Peter Simpson by land-line to update him of developments (how operation had just gone pear-shaped), police surgeon attends scene at 8:44am and pronounces Sheila as being dead on the far side of the bed, with a solitary wound to her neck. PS Adams enters bedroom at about 9am, there is no rifle on body. Coroners officer, PC Wright, arrives at the scene (about 9:25am), and confirms that he has no recollection of rifle on the body? Fro just after 9am, a training exercise is undertaken inside the farmhouse where new officers carry out at reconstruction of the forced entry into the farmhouse, but by this stage Sheila's body was upstairs in the bedroom. Someone took possession of rifle "Y" from its position of leaning up against the bedroom window, and they use it to gauge the distance between the solitary entry wound on Sheila's neck to see if she could have fired the trigger? The rest is history...

[mike tesko]

Why on earth would a police officer want to shoot Sheila with a .22 rifle??  Do you know how stupid that sounds??

But that is what they did, and that is how absurd your suggestion is?

When they found her she only had a solitary wound, but by the time PC Bird took his pictures of Sheila's body on the floor by the side of the bed she had two, each entry wound inflicted by a different weapon - which caused the police to replace the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) with a substituted whole control bullet which was later fired during unreported test firings of rifle "Y"...

You can choose to live in cloud cuckoo land, and believe what you want to, the facts speak for themselves...

You do not substitute a crime scene bullet (PV/20) which was badly fragmented when the pathologist removed it from her neck with a whole control bullet so that you can say that it was fired via and by use of rifle "Y", unless you are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes to cover up for the fact that two different weapons were used to shoot and kill Sheila? This is exactly what the police have done - why?