Beyond reasonable doubt.

[grahameb]

Grahame, maybe marchend is suggesting that whatever the time of death, we can't do ANYTHING about it this far down the line, so perhaps we should start exploring other avenues. If PROOF can never be found, even if it exists, the next best thing HAS to be a technicality.

Why ignore it just because it's a technicality? Legally it's a sound argument. For instance why did not Dr. Craig give the true estimates of death? He was quite capable of doing so.

[Jane]

Why ignore it just because it's a technicality? Legally it's a sound argument. For instance why did not Dr. Craig give the true estimates of death? He was quite capable of doing so.

Grahame, asking that question is absolutely fine, but I don't believe it's one we'll get an answer to EVER although there may be a priest or counsellor somewhere who does have the answer.

[susan]

Grahame I think as it was 4 murders and one suicide the correct procedures were not followed as I said earlier "Shoddy" and lazy IMO

[maggie]

Why ignore it just because it's a technicality? Legally it's a sound argument. For instance why did not Dr. Craig give the true estimates of death? He was quite capable of doing so.

I agree Grahame, it's totally frustrating that there were no times of death. Just adds to the total chaos of the police investigation.

[susan]

Maggie a total shambolic disgrace that times of death were not given.  Sheer incompetence of the investigation

[Jan]

That should have been in the reports when the bodies were examined later I would have thought - not by the doctor confirming death . However I would have thought it his duty to make sure his statements were clear - especially as the bodies were not moved immediately.

[maggie]

Why ignore it just because it's a technicality? Legally it's a sound argument. For instance why did not Dr. Craig give the true estimates of death? He was quite capable of doing so.

Hi Grahame, didn't you say Dr Craig drank and was incompetent? Hard to believe there were so many incompetents in one house.

[susan]

Maggie as I said shoddy and lazy and rushing off probably.

[Caroline]

Slightly off topic    http://4freedoms.com/group/infiltration/forum/topics/uk-barrister-76-leaves-partner-for-25-year-old-oxford-graduate

[maggie]

Slightly off topic    http://4freedoms.com/group/infiltration/forum/topics/uk-barrister-76-leaves-partner-for-25-year-old-oxford-graduate

Oh my goodness!!!

[susan]

Maggie was I right or was I right 

[maggie]

Maggie was I right or was I right 

You were right susie.

[grahameb]

Hi Grahame, didn't you say Dr Craig drank and was incompetent? Hard to believe there were so many incompetents in one house.

He was our doctor. I didn't find him all that great. He was a miserable git at the best of times. It is reported, but I cannot confirm that he was an alcoholic?

[Jan]

What are the actual facts that could prove his innocence without release on a technicality?

1) proof that the call from RNB actually took place - so not just the logs but a witness statement from the two officers who took the calls ? I don't think there is any other proof because we don't think there would have been records or itemised calls at that time?
2) If the silencer evidence is dis-credited then would that prove him innocent? Not necessarily as some people would say he did it without the silencer attached?
3) Evidence from Photos that some of the deaths had taken place only just before the police entered . Well they do seem to have that - but somehow that's not good enough.
4) Evidence that the bodies had been moved / staged ? that does appear to be there in photos and statements - but again even if the police did that, it does not prove his innocence - just incompetence in the way the crime scene was handled.
5) Something that could place Jeremy at home for the whole evening - witness - or confirmation of the call he received from RNB
6) Statements about what actually was the situation in the house whilst the police were outside ? again there is evidence there and proof that the police changed their  stories ( logs and subsequent interviews) but that does not seem to be good enough - but perhaps there are other logs or statements that we have not seen.
7) some more positive  forensics that showed SC at various points in the crime scene etc ( evidence burnt!)
If she was wearing other clothes evidence on those clothes?
9) Proof that the house was so secure that JB could not have committed the crime - escaped and then left the house in the locked state the police found it?


Any others people can think of ?

Adam if you reply with some sarcastic remarks that you have posted before - please be warned I will ignore you . I am looking for genuine comments on what I have posted.

[Caroline]

What are the actual facts that could prove his innocence without release on a technicality?

1) proof that the call from RNB actually took place - so not just the logs but a witness statement from the two officers who took the calls ? I don't think there is any other proof because we don't think there would have been records or itemised calls at that time?
2) If the silencer evidence is dis-credited then would that prove him innocent? Not necessarily as some people would say he did it without the silencer attached?
3) Evidence from Photos that some of the deaths had taken place only just before the police entered . Well they do seem to have that - but somehow that's not good enough.
4) Evidence that the bodies had been moved / staged ? that does appear to be there in photos and statements - but again even if the police did that, it does not prove his innocence - just incompetence in the way the crime scene was handled.
5) Something that could place Jeremy at home for the whole evening - witness - or confirmation of the call he received from RNB
6) Statements about what actually was the situation in the house whilst the police were outside ? again there is evidence there and proof that the police changed their  stories ( logs and subsequent interviews) but that does not seem to be good enough - but perhaps there are other logs or statements that we have not seen.
7) some more positive  forensics that showed SC at various points in the crime scene etc ( evidence burnt!)
If she was wearing other clothes evidence on those clothes?
9) Proof that the house was so secure that JB could not have committed the crime - escaped and then left the house in the locked state the police found it?


Any others people can think of ?

Adam if you reply with some sarcastic remarks that you have posted before - please be warned I will ignore you . I am looking for genuine comments on what I have posted.

If the phone call could be proven, it would be enough for an appeal - however, police were already looking to discredit such evidence when they worked out the shortest route back to Goldhanger - the premise being that Jeremy made the call and had his answerphone pick it up.

If it was proven that the silencer evidence was fabricated, that would also be enough for an appeal. It wouldn't PROVE that Jeremy didn't do it BUT it means Sheila could also have been responsible and it might allow for the evidence gathered during the early investigation (when Sheila was the suspect), to be heard at such an appeal - or at a retrial.