The Noble Cause Framing Theory

[scipio_usmc]

Of course you did 

Of course the police had something to gain! A successful conviction and of course it wasn't guaranteed which is why a silencer was produced and a coached star witness. Were the officers involved in the Birmingham Six case convicted? Were the officers involved in the Stephan Kizsco case convicted?

OBVIOUSLY it's never been proved because if it had, he would be a free man!! However, just because it hasn't been proven, doesn't mean they didn't!

The police on their own would have lacked the knowledge and skill to pull it off.

First they would have needed to know that fatal wound would have caused blood to enter the suppressor.  Only the experts knew that it would.

Fletcher and Hayward would have to have been the masterminds of it.

Hayward the one who checked the rifle for blood and found none.  He would have found blood had the suppressor not been used so he would have to have lied about not finding any.

Fletcher would be the only one to know how to spray blood inside to make it resemble spatter.  Why would he bother though if he was the one doing the tests he could just lie about it.  But he didn't lie the defense expert found microscopic drops of blood on the first 8 baffles.   

There is no evidence that any of Sheila's blood was missing from the samples so they would have to have found another source of group A blood.

They would have to have involved enough police to get them to speak to the family and get the family to lie about there being blood in the suppressor when they turned it over and maybe even the police and family lying about how it was turned over. 

Then they get Julie involved in the lying.

The more people involved in a conspiracy the more people who talk and faster it gets caught. They would especially not want to let non-police know about it because they could mess up or rat the out and end their careers.

The grand conspiracy is highly unlikely.       

[maggie]

The police on their own would have lacked the knowledge and skill to pull it off.

First they would have needed to know that fatal wound would have caused blood to enter the suppressor.  Only the experts knew that it would.

Fletcher and Hayward would have to have been the masterminds of it.

Hayward the one who checked the rifle for blood and found none.  He would have found blood had the suppressor not been used so he would have to have lied about not finding any.
Fletcher would be the only one to know how to spray blood inside to make it resemble spatter.  Why would he bother though if he was the one doing the tests he could just lie about it.  But he didn't lie the defense expert found microscopic drops of blood on the first 8 baffles.   
There is no evidence that any of Sheila's blood was missing from the samples so they would
have to have found another source of group A blood.
They would have to have involved enough police to get them to speak to the family and get the family to lie about there being blood in the suppressor when they turned it over and maybe even the police and family lying about how it was turned over. 
Then they get Julie involved in the lying.
The more people involved in a conspiracy the more people who talk and faster it gets caught. They would especially not want to let non-police know about it because they could mess up or rat the out and end their careers.
The grand conspiracy is highly unlikely.     

Hi scipio, you are very trusting of the establishment and in theory your assumptions appear to hold water but in fact you are wrong. There are many instances of police conspiracy and corruption reaching the highest levels, framing of innocent individuals etc. Have you heard of Hillsborough?

[Jane]

The police on their own would have lacked the knowledge and skill to pull it off.

First they would have needed to know that fatal wound would have caused blood to enter the suppressor.  Only the experts knew that it would.

Fletcher and Hayward would have to have been the masterminds of it.

Hayward the one who checked the rifle for blood and found none.  He would have found blood had the suppressor not been used so he would have to have lied about not finding any.

Fletcher would be the only one to know how to spray blood inside to make it resemble spatter.  Why would he bother though if he was the one doing the tests he could just lie about it.  But he didn't lie the defense expert found microscopic drops of blood on the first 8 baffles.   

There is no evidence that any of Sheila's blood was missing from the samples so they would have to have found another source of group A blood.

They would have to have involved enough police to get them to speak to the family and get the family to lie about there being blood in the suppressor when they turned it over and maybe even the police and family lying about how it was turned over. 

Then they get Julie involved in the lying.

The more people involved in a conspiracy the more people who talk and faster it gets caught. They would especially not want to let non-police know about it because they could mess up or rat the out and end their careers.

The grand conspiracy is highly unlikely.     

Yet despite the flamboyance of you assertions, after 39 years, no one has been able to find ONE piece of cast iron evidence that can point to a once and for all proof that Jeremy is guilty. You insist that corruption COULDN'T have occurred because..................... In a perfect world, perhaps so. NEWS FLASH. We live in a very IMperfect world in which people will go to vast lengths, playing on other peoples' fears/guilt/greed to cover their tracks. I agree that the more who know the greater the risk of discovery, but all these years on from Hillsborough nobody had spilled the beans. Maybe America is free of corruption(?), ENGLAND certainly ISN'T.

[scipio_usmc]

Hi scipio, you are very trusting of the establishment and in theory your assumptions appear to hold water but in fact you are wrong. There are many instances of police conspiracy and corruption reaching the highest levels, framing of innocent individuals etc. Have you heard of Hillsborough?

Saying there are instances doesn't establish it likely happened here.  To establish it likely happend you need proof.

What I heard about Hillsborough is that police were told not to record things informally in notebooks to simply give statements and that the brass would review and amend such statements as desired.  The police ratted out their superiors and actually have proof that some were amended.  The amendments were to protect the department.  An internal review was done and found evidence of the wrongdoing.

The investigation of the Bamber case found no evidence of wrongdoing like that.

You can list every example if where police wronging was proven and you will see someone tlaking to rat out what happened and or other evidence that proves it. 

That is totally lacking here.

[scipio_usmc]

Yet despite the flamboyance of you assertions, after 39 years, no one has been able to find ONE piece of cast iron evidence that can point to a once and for all proof that Jeremy is guilty. You insist that corruption COULDN'T have occurred because..................... In a perfect world, perhaps so. NEWS FLASH. We live in a very IMperfect world in which people will go to vast lengths, playing on other peoples' fears/guilt/greed to cover their tracks. I agree that the more who know the greater the risk of discovery, but all these years on from Hillsborough nobody had spilled the beans. Maybe America is free of corruption(?), ENGLAND certainly ISN'T.

The cast Iron evidence is that Sheila can't have killed herself and then her dead body walk downstairs to put the suppressor away; Nevill can't have called Jeremy after he was wounded; Neville would have had no reason to call Jeremy before he was wounded and there is nothing to corroborate jeremy's claim such call went through; there is absolutely no evidence at all that Sheila fired a weapon at all let alone shot anyone or fought with Neville; Jereme's suspicious bevavior of calling Julie at 3AM and 6AM and refusing to go there to check things out until police were already on scene so they could see him arrive after them; Jeremy lies to try to suggest Sheila did it like the lie about her firing all weapons in the house and about his ridiculous rabbit story about the gun being out for her to grab which clearly was fabricated as established by the box of 30 rounds that he claims was never moved and was the source of the ammo used in the murders.  Why would Sheila use 20 rounds from a box and with 30 remaining go to the gun closet to get more instead of continuing to refill the magazine from the same box she loaded the other rounds from? Then there is julies testimony which was very detialed.  In cases lacking DNA evidence this is how they are made and it is a strong case.  That is why all appeal efforts have failed.

Saying you believe the blood evidence was planted doesn't make it so you need evidence to prove it. But I have yet to see anyone deal with the other problems let alone the blood evidence.  The call from Nevill is not credible at all and a giant problem.  Unless someone deals with that in a convincing way there is no hope at all to convince anyone that the police, relative and Julie all got together in a massive conspiracy. 

[Adam]

The cast Iron evidence is that Sheila can't have killed herself and then her dead body walk downstairs to put the suppressor away; Nevill can't have called Jeremy after he was wounded; Neville would have had no reason to call Jeremy before he was wounded and there is nothing to corroborate jeremy's claim such call went through; there is absolutely no evidence at all that Sheila fired a weapon at all let alone shot anyone or fought with Neville; Jereme's suspicious bevavior of calling Julie at 3AM and 6AM and refusing to go there to check things out until police were already on scene so they could see him arrive after them; Jeremy lies to try to suggest Sheila did it like the lie about her firing all weapons in the house and about his ridiculous rabbit story about the gun being out for her to grab which clearly was fabricated as established by the box of 30 rounds that he claims was never moved and was the source of the ammo used in the murders.  Why would Sheila use 20 rounds from a box and with 30 remaining go to the gun closet to get more instead of continuing to refill the magazine from the same box she loaded the other rounds from? Then there is julies testimony which was very detialed.  In cases lacking DNA evidence this is how they are made and it is a strong case.  That is why all appeal efforts have failed.

Saying you believe the blood evidence was planted doesn't make it so you need evidence to prove it. But I have yet to see anyone deal with the other problems let alone the blood evidence.  The call from Nevill is not credible at all and a giant problem.  Unless someone deals with that in a convincing way there is no hope at all to convince anyone that the police, relative and Julie all got together in a massive conspiracy.

The silencer evidence did not help Jeremy either.

[scipio_usmc]

The silencer evidence did not help Jeremy either.

The technical name of a silencer is a sound suppressor, I mentioned it.

[maggie]

Saying there are instances doesn't establish it likely happened here.  To establish it likely happend you need proof.

What I heard about Hillsborough is that police were told not to record things informally in notebooks to simply give statements and that the brass would review and amend such statements as desired.  The police ratted out their superiors and actually have proof that some were amended.  The amendments were to protect the department.  An internal review was done and found evidence of the wrongdoing.
The investigation of the Bamber case found no evidence of wrongdoing like that.
You can list every example if where police wronging was proven and you will see someone
 tlaking to rat out what happened and or other evidence that proves it. 
That is totally lacking here.

I was not comparing like with like because the two cases are very different. But Hillsborough proves how a police cover up can succeed. There were thousands of witnesses at Hillsborough and they knew the truth but the police stuck together and lied for 25 years. It was the fans and relatives of those who died who knew the truth and continued to demand justice for the 96. It was NOT the police who 'ratted out'  Amazingly, the police pretty much didn't speak out however much they knew the truth they kept quiet, watched their backs and their pensions, so don't preach to us that police corruption doesn't or can't happen en masse.
If you believe we should not question police behaviour that is naive, it's not about conspiracy theories or some kind of hero worship of Jeremy Bamber which causes people to question the evidence but a desire for the truth. Of course it's easy to prove guilt if you start from the stance tthat everyone, police and public are telling the truth therefore Jeremy Bamber has to be lying
but to do that you have to make huge assumptions yourself.
It's easy enough for you to swamp us with your theories but with respect that is all you are doing and it's been done many times before. I am sure you do believe we are all stupid, naive people on this forum who need telling where we are going wrong, you seem to enjoy sneering at us because we are incapable of understanding the truth according to scipio but I do wonder why you can be bothered.
As has been said many times before, Jeremy Bamber is in prison, has already served almost thirty years so what is your problem, certainly not proof of Jeremy Bamber's guilt so to my mind your 'amusement' is about polishing your own over inflated ego.

[lookout]

The technical name of a silencer is a sound suppressor, I mentioned it.

Moderator.

[grahameb]

The technical name of a silencer is a sound suppressor, I mentioned it.

Or even moderator. But who cares?

[scipio_usmc]

I was not comparing like with like because the two cases are very different. But Hillsborough proves how a police cover up can succeed. There were thousands of witnesses at Hillsborough and they knew the truth but the police stuck together and lied for 25 years. It was the fans and relatives of those who died who knew the truth and continued to demand justice for the 96. It was NOT the police who 'ratted out'  Amazingly, the police pretty much didn't speak out however much they knew the truth they kept quiet, watched their backs and their pensions, so don't preach to us that police corruption doesn't or can't happen en masse.
If you believe we should not question police behaviour that is naive, it's not about conspiracy theories or some kind of hero worship of Jeremy Bamber which causes people to question the evidence but a desire for the truth. Of course it's easy to prove guilt if you start from the stance tthat everyone, police and public are telling the truth therefore Jeremy Bamber has to be lying
but to do that you have to make huge assumptions yourself.
It's easy enough for you to swamp us with your theories but with respect that is all you are doing and it's been done many times before. I am sure you do believe we are all stupid, naive people on this forum who need telling where we are going wrong, you seem to enjoy sneering at us because we are incapable of understanding the truth according to scipio but I do wonder why you can be bothered.
As has been said many times before, Jeremy Bamber is in prison, has already served almost thirty years so what is your problem, certainly not proof of Jeremy Bamber's guilt so to my mind your 'amusement' is about polishing your own over inflated ego.

How did it succeed?  It got exposed, that is the whole point.  In cases where wrongdoing is known to exist it is known to exist because it had been proven.

You have been swamped with the prosecution theories of the case that were proven at trial and that the appeal court judges even believe.

[ngb1066]

The technical name of a silencer is a sound suppressor, I mentioned it.

I posted a long time ago about this.  Suppressor is the normal American description.  Silencer or sound moderator are the terms normally used in the UK.  The police here always use the description sound moderator when approving the ownership of the item under a Firearm Certificate. 

 

[scipio_usmc]

I posted a long time ago about this.  Suppressor is the normal American description.  Silencer or sound moderator are the terms normally used in the UK.  The police here always use the description sound moderator when approving the ownership of the item under a Firearm Certificate.

Sound moderator is a term used by European firearm manufacturers hence what the government uses.

Sound suppressor is what US industry and thus scientific experts use.

Silencer is a slang term popularized by books and movies that is universal but not a technical term.  But since the military uses sound suppressor, (there are flash suppressors among other types) that is the term I use because that is what was instilled in me just like I frequently resort to weapon instead of firearm because that is what was instilled though a weapon can be anything from a fork to a cannon so is imprecise.

[maggie]

How did it succeed?  It got exposed, that is the whole point.  In cases where wrongdoing is known to exist it is known to exist because it had been proven.

You have been swamped with the prosecution theories of the case that were proven at trial and that the appeal court judges even believe.

What does that answer mean ...... zilch as far as I can see.
You obviously don't know anything about Hillsborough which is fair enough but please admit it.  A little more sensitivity would be appreciatedl

[ngb1066]

Sound moderator is a term used by European firearm manufacturers hence what the government uses.

Sound suppressor is what US industry and thus scientific experts use.

Silencer is a slang term popularized by books and movies that is universal but not a technical term.  But since the military uses sound suppressor, (there are flash suppressors among other types) that is the term I use because that is what was instilled in me just like I frequently resort to weapon instead of firearm because that is what was instilled though a weapon can be anything from a fork to a cannon so is imprecise.

I agree with you overall, but silencer is not just a lang term, it was in fact the term used by Sir Hiram Maxim,  who was the first to develop and market the device.  I only know this because it is referred to in the information leaflet provided by Parker Hale, the manufacturer of the silencer owned by Nevill Bamber.