Example of how Relatives Names are Blackened.

[Roch]

A very interesting point Tyler, because I believe this to be another piece of misinformation. I believe there was a fingerprint examination at WHF in the 48hrs after the murders and this was referred to at the trial. I think they went back in september to get some more, but carpet fibres and fingerprinting was done on the 8th/9th August. It was even referred to in 2002 at the appeal. Again, the source of this misinformation was from Bamber to Mike Tesko in a letter in 2009.

Does any documentary evidence exist, to prove that WHF was fingerprinted earlier than September?  What a coincidence that the telephone message from DB regarding a silencer find logged on 11th September, is just a few days after WHF was fingerprinted, which itself coincides with Basil Cock's statement regarding fingerprint dust.  So we have three things in the documentary records that all correlate to a September finding for the silencer. 

And when was the first mention in prosecution witness statements, regarding the find of the silencer? Might it have been September?

[Patti]

Does any documentary evidence exist, to prove that WHF was fingerprinted earlier than September?  What a coincidence that the telephone message from DB regarding a silencer find logged on 11th September, is just a few days after WHF was fingerprinted, which itself coincides with Basil Cock's statement regarding fingerprint dust.  So we have three things in the documentary records that all correlate to a September finding for the silencer. 

And when was the first mention in prosecution witness statements, regarding the find of the silencer? Might it have been September?

The only documented evidence is from R v Bamber   

267. The second ground of complaint is that whilst the Defence were made fully aware that Scene of Crime officers carried out a thorough examination of the scene on the 8 and 9 September, the terms of reference for the search of the scene were not disclosed to them and in particular they were not told that specific attention was paid to entry and exit marks at White House Farm. The examination had not revealed any scratch marks on the bathroom window. Our attention was drawn to a case diary kept by Mr Ainsley in which was recorded under 8 September:

"Scenes of Crime to visit 9 Head Street under the command of DI Cook and White House Farm under the command of DCI Wright and to carry out a full, thorough Scene of Crime examination, fingerprints and scientific in particular in relation to entry and exit marks at White House Farm".   

268. The examination of the Farm for entry and exit marks became particularly significant. On the 1 October 1985 Brian Elliott a forensic scientist examined the window catch and surrounding area of the downstairs bathroom/toilet sash window. He noticed that the brass catch had been scratched on the inner edge and that there was damage to the white paintwork on the adjacent faces of the top of the bottom sash and the bottom of the top sash. The white paint on the outside of the window including the outer face of the top of the bottom sash appeared clean and fresh.

[Roch]

How about some more specific questions being answered by Bamber? Or do you simply want to continually place the family on trial? Maybe until you get the result you want......

Vic, maybe a deal could be done.  Let the main prosecution witnesses come up with a list of polygraph questions for Bamber to answer.  Let Bamber come up with a list of questions for the main prosecution witnesses to answer.

I can imagine now what would be said if he passed his and they failed theres.  He's a psychopath so what did we expect?  The tests are fallible so it's possible for truthful people to fail them, hey presto - it's back to Bamber again. 

All roads lead to bamber because YOU decide there isn't enough compelling evidence regarding what went wrong with the raid and SC's time of death.  You've got some nerve coming out with that when we consider how much has been withheld and all the dirty tactics to get around its' disclosure, NONE of which you care one jot about. 

You are not a truthseeker in my opinion and neither are they.  When I see yours and their protestations regarding the withheld evidence, I might consider giving a bit more credence.

[susan]

Hi patti  if no scratch marks were found on the window 8th 9th September the ones found on the lst Oct must have been done after the murders.  I seem to think Jeremy did say he entered the house at a later date for documents.

[Patti]

Hi patti  if no scratch marks were found on the window 8th 9th September the ones found on the lst Oct must have been done after the murders.  I seem to think Jeremy did say he entered the house at a later date for documents.

Hi Susan that is clear evidence that I have mentioned in the past....in between those times you have Cook taking the window catch on the 29th of September....exhibit RWC/8  so none of it adds up.

Elliot claims he took the scratched catch.....well he claims to have seen it on the 1st of October.  Simply not true....it was taken by RWC on the 29th September.......was this catch a replacement that Elliot was looking at???

[susan]

Hi Patti I get more confused by the day over this case.

[Patti]

Hi Patti I get more confused by the day over this case.

Lol.............

8th to 9th September forensics did an extensive examination of WHF

16th of September we have JB entering the bathroom/toilet window 1st floor at WHT

29th September RWC takes bathroom/toilet window catch from 1st floor RWC/8

1st October Elliot's forensic team do a further forensic examination and takes same bathroom/window catch as RWC....

How can he?  Sorry to confuse.....

[vidvic]

Vic, maybe a deal could be done.  Let the main prosecution witnesses come up with a list of polygraph questions for Bamber to answer.  Let Bamber come up with a list of questions for the main prosecution witnesses to answer.

I can imagine now what would be said if he passed his and they failed theres.  He's a psychopath so what did we expect?  The tests are fallible so it's possible for truthful people to fail them, hey presto - it's back to Bamber again. 

All roads lead to bamber because YOU decide there isn't enough compelling evidence regarding what went wrong with the raid and SC's time of death.  You've got some nerve coming out with that when we consider how much has been withheld and all the dirty tactics to get around its' disclosure, NONE of which you care one jot about. 

You are not a truthseeker in my opinion and neither are they.  When I see yours and their protestations regarding the withheld evidence, I might consider giving a bit more credence.

Thank you for the insult Roch. I don't deserve that and neither do they. I truly hope that your honesty is never questioned by someone so desperate to be proven right as yourself.

[Roch]

Thank you for the insult Roch. I don't deserve that and neither do they. I truly hope that your honesty is never questioned by someone so desperate to be proven right as yourself.

I don't want to insult anyone Vic.  But I'm not taken in by this whiter than white honesty card being played by you on here, on their part.

It doesn't fit with what is now known and it doesn't fit with the level of controversy in the case.

I accept the point about me being proven right, I can get a bit animated on that score. I do apologise if i have caused offence.  I do see the family as victims but I think the truth is also far more complex.

[Patti]

I don't want to insult anyone either. The next time my lovely window cleaner comes to clean my bedroom room window I must make sure I have some clothes on. I shall be sending him some fruit at the hospital tomorrow hahahahaha   

[Jane]

I don't want to insult anyone either. The next time my lovely window cleaner comes to clean my bedroom room window I must make sure I have some clothes on. I shall be sending him some fruit at the hospital tomorrow hahahahaha   

Mine doesn't have a ladder, Patti. He has a very long pole with a thing on the end

[susan]

Hi april I have a pole with a thing on the end but it aint for cleaning windows

[Jane]

Hi april I have a pole with a thing on the end but it aint for cleaning windows

Funny that, Patti. So have I

[susan]

Patti just ignore april think she is loosing the plot.  Patti has ladders

[guest154]

Jesus. Roch got out of the wrong side of the bed.