Seeking the Truth for Jeremy Bamber

[lookout]

Yes I agree. The attitude of the CCRC seems to be, "You may very well be innocent. But because you're a pain in the neck you can stay in prison for the rest of your natural".

It would seem that way,Grahame.The CCRC isn't fit for purpose and should be disbanded,it's neither use nor ornament,,seeing as they were supposed to be assisting MOJ's. What a load of cobblers.

[Caroline R]

Nickos, I dont think you're that intested in anything that indicates the defence are in the right anway. 

There's a bloodied palm print on the bible, on the wrong page to the corresponding stain on the floor and at a different page position to the one that the bible is separated at in the crime scene pics! Prints on the bible were positively ID'd but this info was not released to defence.... who were by a strange coincidence told by none other than Stan Jones / EP that no photos of the bible existed in isolation (patently untrue) and that the bible had been destroyed.

So EP reckon they destroyed a bible found upon the 'murder' victim with a bloodied palm print upon it? Really?  I'm not sure whether you're ex police but I'd be interested as to what kind of exhibits related good-practice this action represents.

It's obvious the bloodied palm print doesn't belong to Jeremy Bamber otherwise the prosecution would have been screaming from the roof tops about it.  It wont belong to Nicholas or Daniel either.  So that seems to leave June or Sheila?

I know you don't like scenarios but if you want to be more serious than having pointless circular chat on a forum, maybe you could come up with some scenarios that incorporate why EP didn't seem to want the defence to know about the true circs of this exhibit?

This is a FACT and not a scenario or a what if or even a maybe. It is also something that the 2002 appeal got completely WRONG when they stated

"The largest area of blood seems to
have got onto the Bible when it came into contact with a pool of blood
beside the body. As already observed the Bible must have been shut
whilst the blood was wet. It does not seem very likely that it was still
wet hours after the event when the police might have handled it. If this
is so, it was shut by someone and then reopened to lie beside the body
after Sheila Caffell had been shot"

The stain COULD NOT have been from the carpet because it is on the wrong page of the open bible!! It is obviously a hand print.

But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no satin on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid in future submissions!!

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!

(The first picture indicates that sides A and B on the open bible corresponds to sides A and B on the upturned bible)

[lookout]

That's the crocheted cover impression on the page,which meant that the cover would have had blood on it also,thus stopping the " butterfly effect " onto the opposite page.

[maggie]

This is a FACT and not a scenario or a what if or even a maybe. It is also something that the 2002 appeal got completely WRONG when they stated

"The largest area of blood seems to
have got onto the Bible when it came into contact with a pool of blood
beside the body. As already observed the Bible must have been shut
whilst the blood was wet. It does not seem very likely that it was still
wet hours after the event when the police might have handled it. If this
is so, it was shut by someone and then reopened to lie beside the body
after Sheila Caffell had been shot"

The stain COULD NOT have been from the carpet because it is on the wrong page of the open bible!! It is obviously a hand print.

But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no satin on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid future submissions!!

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!

Excellent post Caroline.  Absolutely totally hit the nail on the head there Caroline, that is the point in a nut shell.  Jeremy Bamber could not have arranged the bible after the blood had dried.

[lookout]

N.B. when Jeremy passed the polygraph test,,he was asked if he could punch someone.The answer was no. So he was emphatically telling the truth.
Now if I'd been asked that same question,,the damn thing would have gone off scale.

[maggie]

N.B. when Jeremy passed the polygraph test,,he was asked if he could punch someone.The answer was no. So he was emphatically telling the truth.
Now if I'd been asked that same question,,the damn thing would have gone off scale.

Where did you read the info about his ability to punch, Lookout?

[Roch]

This is a FACT and not a scenario or a what if or even a maybe. It is also something that the 2002 appeal got completely WRONG when they stated

"The largest area of blood seems to
have got onto the Bible when it came into contact with a pool of blood
beside the body. As already observed the Bible must have been shut
whilst the blood was wet. It does not seem very likely that it was still
wet hours after the event when the police might have handled it. If this
is so, it was shut by someone and then reopened to lie beside the body
after Sheila Caffell had been shot"

The stain COULD NOT have been from the carpet because it is on the wrong page of the open bible!! It is obviously a hand print.

But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no satin on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid in future submissions!!

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!

(The first picture indicates that sides A and B on the open bible corresponds to sides A and B on the upturned bible)

Superb posting.  I'd like to see Nickos or any other substantial 'guilter' pick the bones out of that.

[lookout]

Where did you read the info about his ability to punch, Lookout?

One of the many latest videos' Maggie,,about him passing the polygraph test.

[lookout]

This is a FACT and not a scenario or a what if or even a maybe. It is also something that the 2002 appeal got completely WRONG when they stated

"The largest area of blood seems to
have got onto the Bible when it came into contact with a pool of blood
beside the body. As already observed the Bible must have been shut
whilst the blood was wet. It does not seem very likely that it was still
wet hours after the event when the police might have handled it. If this
is so, it was shut by someone and then reopened to lie beside the body
after Sheila Caffell had been shot"

The stain COULD NOT have been from the carpet because it is on the wrong page of the open bible!! It is obviously a hand print.

But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no satin on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid in future submissions!!

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!

(The first picture indicates that sides A and B on the open bible corresponds to sides A and B on the upturned bible)

It was a brilliant post Caroline.You could do with sending it off to EP because someone needs to give them all a good shaking,or a boot up the behind.

[Caroline R]

Superb posting.  I'd like to see Nickos or any other substantial 'guilter' pick the bones out of that.

They can try Roch but it's there  for all to see. COA made a school boy error and neglected to visualise where the stain would be on the open bible when turned over. I am surprised that not even one of them realised!! There OWN words basically prove the rest - what is it Steve always say's 'Hoisted by their own petard' ?

[lookout]

I'm just reading how the police have altered over 200 statements from the Hillsborough fans,,,so anything is possible as regards police corruption. They call it " amended ".Yeah.!

That stain was probably " overlooked " and that's the reason for its disappearance.

[Roch]

They can try Roch but it's there  for all to see. COA made a school boy error and neglected to visualise where the stain would be on the open bible when turned over. I am surprised that not even one of them realised!! Their OWN words basically prove the rest - what is it Steve always say's 'Hoisted by their own petard' ?

Jeremy Bamber quite obviously could not have stage the bible!  Either COLP or Dickinson suggests the bible may have been swept there when one of the raid team opened the other door.  I'm not sure whether that could arguably keep him in the frame in the minds of some people. (I havent mulled the implications over enough to decide my self).

[Caroline R]

Jeremy Bamber quite obviously could not have stage the bible!  Either COLP or Dickinson suggests the bible may have been swept there when one of the raid team opened the other door.  I'm not sure whether that could arguably keep him in the frame in the minds of some people. (I havent mulled the implications over enough to decide my self).

I seriously can't believe anyone would suggest that as a viable option. They obviously know there is something dodgy about the crime scene in relation to the bible.

[susan]

Caroline you are a star. Well done my girl

[maggie]

One of the many latest videos' Maggie,,about him passing the polygraph test.

Thanks Lookout, this is it

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/lie-detector