You can't have it both ways, the phone calls timed at 3.36 or 3.26am?

[scipio_usmc]

When we talk about Sheila sleeping through shots and commotion INSIDE the house, she wouldn´t have heard anything because the walls were so thick.
On the other hand, when we talk abuot the police OUSIDE the house, they WOULD have heard shots.

Bending and twisting.

No you hear about the suppressor being used so that others would not hear and did not wake up.  The suppressor that is the big giant thorn in your side at all turns.

[scipio_usmc]

I cannot see how any jury would automatically buy into the suggestion that both of these timed logs relate to the same solitary phone call message passed to police by Jeremy Bamber. If both phone logs had been disclosed during the trial, I feel confident that a jury would reject such a claim, by comparing the contents of each of these two logs, and be satisfied that Ralph Bamber must have called the police himself, before Jeremy had done so himself. Particularly so, because during Jeremys call to police timed at 3.36am, Jeremy has spoken of a lengthy delay whilst he was put on hold, to which he complained about to the officer, and there is no mention of any corresponding delay in the 3.26am log message...

There is clearly too much doubt regarding the existence of these two different phone message log contents for any jury to come to the conclusion that both are a record of the same call made to police by the same person, that person being non other than Jeremy Bamber, himself...

The trial judge always takes it upon himself to warn the jury about being absolutely sure about facts and the law when it comes to retiring to reach a verdict, and had both logs been disclosed together I feel sure that there would have been a huge cloud of doubt linked to the origin of both of these calls, sufficient doubt I would say to persuade any jury that one of the calls had indeed been made by Ralph Bamber to the police...

There is no way that Ralph would phone Jeremy and say to him that "my daughter has got hold of one of my guns", he would have said something like, "Sheila has got the gun", or "She has got the gun", or whatever, and indeed in Jeremys own words when he himself spoke to police, that is precisely what Jeremy did tell police, he did not tell the police that "my daughter has got hold of one of my guns", he would not say such a thing simply because Sheila was not, is not Jeremys daughter...

Scenario:

The jury is shown the logs and both men testify about same.

The log from Bonnet says that PC West used an internal radio line to contac thim to dispatch a car.  It clearly states that the son claims he received a call from the father and that the son relayed the father's message to West. 

Bonnet would then testify about how West contacted him and relayed a message he received from a son.

West's form shows he spoke to Jeremy and what Jeremy claims his father told him.  West would testify he spoke to Jeremy not Nevill and how he then relayed this message via internal radio link to Bonnet so Bonnet.

The jury would have to basis at all to doubt their account.

The defense would need testimony from a telephone company representative that a call was made from WHF to the police on the night of the murders but the telephone company said they had no record of any such call being made. 

I don't understand how you think Rivlin could have done anything under these circumstances to undermine the offical police account.

No appeal court is going to find under these circumstances that a jury could have concluded Nevill claled the police himself.  Both police officers denied such and their written records both clearly state Jeremy was the source of the message.

There is no hope on getting an appeal court to do anything unless the defense can get a cop to change his claims and say Nevill called him.   

 

[mike tesko]

You would not necessarily hear the sound of a .22 rifle being discharged inside a building, if you were in another room of the house, particularly if .22 subsonic ammunition is used - tests could be carried out at the scene to confirm what I am saying if needs be, and nobody outside the farmhouse would have a cat in hells chance of hearing shots from such a rifle with this type of ammunition being used. The idea that the sound of this type of rifle would clearly have been overheard by all and sundry within the farmhouse and outside it is somewhat laughable. There is no big booming bang when this type of rifle is discharged using this type of ammunition, whether or not a sound moderator is used...

[maggie]

No you hear about the suppressor being used so that others would not hear and did not wake up.  The suppressor that is the big giant thorn in your side at all turns.

The moderator would have made very little difference to the human ear, I have been told on good authority.  The moderator is specifically designed for use while shooting animals.  It's true the walls of the old farmhouse would have been feet thick and solid stone, the sound from the rifle is only like a handclap so highly unlikely to be heard from outside the farmhouse and very possibly from one room to another.  Should think the moderator would be more of a hindrance than any sort of help in that situation.

[grahameb]

What a .22 unsuppressed rifle sounds like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7pnVkuldR4

[Jan]

The moderator would have made very little difference to the human ear, I have been told on good authority.  The moderator is specifically designed for use while shooting animals.  It's true the walls of the old farmhouse would have been feet thick and solid stone, the sound from the rifle is only like a handclap so highly unlikely to be heard from outside the farmhouse and very possibly from one room to another.  Should think the moderator would be more of a hindrance than any sort of help in that situation.

I don't think that Scipio appreciates that most of us think it was not even used anyway. Don't think he gets the British sense of irony

[grahameb]

No you hear about the suppressor being used so that others would not hear and did not wake up.  The suppressor that is the big giant thorn in your side at all turns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7pnVkuldR4

[Jan]

What a .22 unsuppressed rifle sounds like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7pnVkuldR4

Thanks for that Grahame

[grahameb]

Thanks for that Grahame

He's exagerating. ngb shoots a .22 rifle and he says the exact opposite of NCIS man.

[scipio_usmc]

He's exagerating. ngb shoots a .22 rifle and he says the exact opposite of NCIS man.

Note how he is wearing hearing protection in the video.  in person it is louder than in the video and it is not by any means silent in the video.

If it wasn't loud he would not need the hearing protection and they would not evne bother selling the rifle with a suppressor.  The suppressor exists are are purchased for a reason.

Note the loud echo of the round as it was fired.  That would surely be heard by vermin and guess what they do when they hear noise like that- they take off.

[mike tesko]

There was / is evidence that a call was made from the scene to Jeremys cottage, and moreover such evidence was touched upon during the trial when phone experts testified to the effect that the phone in the kitchen had been found with its handset off its cradle, and that the operator was able to confirm the phone in question was off the hook. Unfortunately, by the time the operator got involved in the matter (3.56am) it was not possible to establish whether or not the line had timed out, or whether or not the handset had merely been left off its cradle. Some tests were carried out to see how long it would take for the line to clear itself via the exchange mechanism, before the person receiving such a call from the scene could dial a different telephone number. There was some conflict as to how long that period would be, where one of the crowns experts said it might take up to 8 minutes for this to happen, but this was contradicted by technicians who carried out that very same exercise using the exchange through which calls from and to the scene were made at the material time, they finding out that the line would reset itself within a couple of minutes or so...

Jeremy himself has said that once the line went dead, he tried to ring his father back but he kept getting an engaged tone, which led him to believe that his father was talking to someone else on the phone - this is consistent with someone at the scene holding down the plunger on the cradle thus creating the silent "dead" sound reported by jeremy. Once the connection had been cut off by someone at the scene it produced a dialing tone to allow someone at the scene to make another call, which would produce an engaged tone in keeping with what Jeremy has said took place. By 3.56am when the operator got involved the handset had clearly been left off the hook, it not resting upon its cradle, and allowing the operator to listen in to sounds or noises coming from wherever the phone was situated at the scene...

This is consistent with someone using the telephone at the scene when Jeremy tried to call his father back but kept getting the engaged tone...

When the police checked the line at whf, they also got the engaged tone...

How could the line from the scene be engaged to the line at Jeremys cottage, after the time Jeremy used  his own phone to ring the police at 3.36am?

When the operator originality checked the phone at the scene she reported that the line was engaged, but when she checked later she reported it was off its hook...

[grahameb]

Note how he is wearing hearing protection in the video.  in person it is louder than in the video and it is not by any means silent in the video.

If it wasn't loud he would not need the hearing protection and they would not evne bother selling the rifle with a suppressor.  The suppressor exists are are purchased for a reason.

Note the loud echo of the round as it was fired.  That would surely be heard by vermin and guess what they do when they hear noise like that- they take off.

ngb contradicts what you are saying and agrees with me. You know as well as I that if anyone joins a gun club it is in the rules and I believe a legal requirement to wear ear defenders. Not only that, but you are not the only one shooting there. There are other members using other weapons. I can confirm and so should you if you're being honest that the video is a fair representation of the actual sound of a .22 rifle. I have heard these in an enclosed space and they are actually quieter than when they are used outside.

[mike tesko]

How did Jeremy manage to make the call to Julie Mugford at 3.30am, or earlier if the line from the scene was linked up inexplicably to the phone at Jeremys cottage? If Jeremy called Mugford before he called the police, why did the police still keep getting an engaged tone?

The prosecution arguments and evidence simply do not make sense, or ring true...

[mike tesko]

A careful study of the known and established facts, reveals that after Jeremy made his own call to police (3.36am, log refers), that police checked the line at the scene and it was engaged at that stage, yet when the operator checks the line after 3.56am that same morning, the phone is then off the hook? How did the phone which police checked after 3.36am be engaged, yet by 3.56am, it is no longer engaged, but confirmed as being off the hook...

Consider the following:-

Phone in use at scene when police check the line after Jeremy contacts police (3.36 / 3.26am), produces an "engaged tone", then after a few minutes or so, user at scene either puts the handset down on the kitchen work top without depressing the plungers on the cradle, or alternatively that person does depress the cradle but leaves the handset off the cradle - this signifies in the clearest possible scenario that there must have been someone still very much alive at the scene whilst Jeremy was at his cottage talking to police using his own phone. The time out of the line as activated by the exchange mechanism being the key factor to help establish that someone had still been alive using the telephone at the scene when police checked the line after receiving Jeremys call...

[Adam]

The call that Bonnet received came from an internal police line not a public line.  PC West contacted Bonnet to dispatch a police car.  The form clearly notes the caller was PC West.  Bonnet himself stated when questioned he fileded a call on the internal police line form West.

Furthermore, the telephone company agent who testified at trial noted only one call was made from WHF the night of the murders, it was to Jeremy's house and the call was never hung up at WHF. The call was ended at Jeremy's end by hanging up. 


There is no hope of trying to get a court to believe that Bonnet fielded a call from Nevill.

I do not know why Jeremy has claimed (decades later) that Neville called the police. The BT operator said only one call was made - WHF to Jeremys cottage.

It is as bad as Jeremy claiming there were conversations with someone inside WHF on the night. And as bad as claiming the police saw Sheila in the kitchen.