Ok it is obvious that my whole intention of beginning this thread was to establish if RWB was in fact a Freemason. Because it has always been accepted unchallenged by not only the innocent camp. But strangely enough by the guilty camp also.
Now my following argument was that if he was a Mason then what kind of influence he had over other Masons who were in the police at that time. Because at that time in the 80s was big noise being made over Freemasons in the police you remember? The concern was (not my idea by the way) was that they could influence not only police investigations. But also in their obligation to support other collegues who were also Masons would take preference over their obligation to the force. Now please take not that this is not my idea. But it was the general concern of the day.
That was to be my next question and it is a legitimate one surely. that if RWB was a Mason would he have had the power to influence the Bamber case regarding various aspects of it.
But, seeing that there is no way of proving that he was a Mason, then my second question has become redundant, unless of course someone can show us otherwise.
Howver in the light of this denial it is interesting to read a section from the handbook of Freemasons:
I, Mr. N——, in the presence of the great Architect of the
Universe, and of this warranted, worthy, and worshipful Lodge
of free and accepted Masons, regularly assembled and properly
dedicated, of my own free will and accord, do, hereby and
hereon, most solemnly and sincerely swear, that I will always
hele, conceal, and never reveal, any part or parts, point or
points, of the secrets and mysteries of, or belonging to, free and
accepted masons in masonry, which have been, shall now, or
hereafter may be, communicated to me, unless it be to a true
and lawful brother or brothers, and not even to him or them,
till after due trial, strict examination, or sure information from
a well-known brother, that he or they are worthy of that confidence,
or in the body of a just, perfect, and regular lodge of
accepted Freemasons. I further solemnly promise, that I will
not write those secrets, print, carve, engrave, or otherwise them
delineate, or cause or suffer them to be done so by others, if in
my power to prevent it, on any thing moveable or immoveable
under the canopy of heaven, whereby or whereon any letter,
character, or figure, or the least trace of a letter, character, or
figure, may become legible or intelligible to myself, or to any
one in the world, so that our secrets, arts, and hidden mysteries,
may improperly become known through my unworthiness.
These several points I solemnly swear to observe, without evasion,
equivocation, or mental reservation of any kind, under no
less a penalty, on the violation of any of them, than to have my
throat cut across, my tongue torn out by the root, and my body
buried in the sand of the sea at low water mark, or a cable’s
length from the shore, where the tide regularly ebbs and flows
twice in twenty-four hours, or the more efficient punishment of
being branded as a wilfully perjured individual, void of all
moral worth, and unfit to be received in this warranted lodge,
or in any other warranted lodge, or society of masons, who
prize honour and virtue above all the external advantages of
rank and fortune : So help me, God, and keep me steadfast in
this my great and solemn obligation of an Entered Apprentice
Free Mason
To make things very clear my question was an open one and if answered in the affirmative would in actual fact have served those in the guilty camp more than it would those in the innocent camp. I still think that anything that purports to be a "secret" society ( and Freemasonry does) must be prepare to be questioned as to WHY it has to be secret?
http://www.rgle.org.uk/Manual%20Freemasonry.pdf
