Confidential Information, I can now reveal that destroys credibility of silencer

[mike tesko]

Until now, I have been prevented from identifying all the individuals who if arrested and interviewed under caution, can confirm that key blood and paint evidence associated to the so called Bamber silencer (DRB/1), is fabricated, and that it was a different silencer (DB/1) inside which had been found the key blood evidence. You see, the same silencer (DB/1) could not have been sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985, and Fletcher could not have found the key flake of blood inside that (DB/1) silencer, and it be a reference to the same silencer (DRB/1) which Ann Eaton did not give to police until the 11th September 1985. This is because silencer DRB/1 did not get submitted to the lab' until the 20th September 1985, to be checked for blood and fibers. These simple facts, establish once and for all, that silencers, DB/1 and DRB/1, cannot be the same item...

[grahameb]

...

I get Mike. They're micro dots and we have to magnify them?

[mike tesko]

I get Mike. They're micro dots and we have to magnify them?

Ha ha ha...

[mike tesko]

The same silencer cannot be in two places at the same time - on the 10th September 1985. One (DB/1) was at the lab' being examined by Fletcher, whilst the other (DRB/1) was still in the possession of the relatives. This basic fact destroys the police claim that there was only just the one silencer, with different exhibit references because of some sort of a mix up. Police officers have lied, relatives have lied, and lab' experts have altered exhibit references on official lab' records, acting on advice or instruction from the police, in what was a huge conspiracy where different silencers which became merged into the same one...

[mike tesko]

When the Bamber silencer (DRB/1) was sent by police to the lab' on 20th Septenber 1985, by PC Whiddon, it did not have any exhibit reference attached to it at all...

[grahameb]

There was no reason to change the reference number of the silencer. The idea of a reference number is so that that item can be traced wherever it goes. This should have been told to the jury in court. Thus this is another reason that the silencer should not have been presented as evidence. Oh the legal botch ups in this case are incredible. The case should never have even reached the court. Someone had great influence somewhere?

[mike tesko]

When the Bamber silencer (DRB/1) was sent by police to the lab' on 20th Septenber 1985, by PC Whiddon, it did not have any exhibit reference attached to it at all...

Bambers legal team need therefore to obtain a witness statement from PC Whiddon, regarding the silencer (later marked, DRB1), which he seized from 'Taffs' desk in his office at Witham police station. It is the same silencer which is shown being screwed onto the barrell of the rifle by Whiddon in published images. At that time, there was no exhibit label on the silencer at all. Date photograph was taken, also proves the existence of the Bamber silencer, photograph is evidence of its existence, and the photographer who took the picture is a potential witness at any fresh appeal...

[mike tesko]

The silencer kept on 'Taffs' desk was the one recovered from the gun cupboard at the scene which David Boutflour contacted police about on 10th September, it was the same silencer handed to police by Ann Eaton on 11th September - key blood and paint evidence could not have been found in or on this silencer,  because it wasn't given to police by relatived until after the crucial blood had already been found in the other (DB/1) silencer...

[lookout]

This was the red herring that threw the spanner in the works ! There was NO evidence !

[nugnug]

did the silencer evedence have any credibility in the first place.

[grahameb]

The silencer kept on 'Taffs' desk was the one recovered from the gun cupboard at the scene which David Boutflour contacted police about on 10th September, it was the same silencer handed to police by Ann Eaton on 11th September - key blood and paint evidence could not have been found in or on this silencer,  because it wasn't given to police by relatived until after the crucial blood had already been found in the other (DB/1) silencer...

Mike wasn't that the reason given why Taff Jones was taken off the case?

[lookout]

Mike wasn't that the reason given why Taff Jones was taken off the case?

You can bet your life it was the reason,Grahame. Poor " Taff " had blotted his copy-book by telling the truth !

[mike tesko]

Mike wasn't that the reason given why Taff Jones was taken off the case?

Hi Grahame,

yes, 'Taff' refused flatly to be taken in by the introduction of the silencer handed in a month afterwards by Ann Eaton on 11th September, he figured that with the relatives having retained it for a month, and having access to the crime scene, that the risk of deliberate contamination could not be ignored, hence the reason why he kept the silencer on his desk...

[mike tesko]

Now, I have received some very confidential information, from the horses mouth so to speak, which gives an insight into what was going on, behind DCI Jones back..

I am at liberty to reveal that 'Taff' had no knowlege about a silencer (DB/1) submitted to the lab' on 30th August 1985, he would have blown his top if he'd found out about it - can you begin to imagine how angry it would have made him...

[mike tesko]

You might also be pleased to learn, that no official submission forms exist to confirm that if there had been submission of such a silencer (DB/1) on that date..