The last ultimate test of gun, to prove sound moderator was not used in shooting

[mike tesko]

"THIS STATEMENT CONSISTING OF - PAGES, EACH SIGNED BY ME, IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF AND I MAKE IT KNOWING THAT IF IT IS TENDED INTO EVIDENCE I SHALL BE LIABLE TO PROSECUTION IF I HAVE WILFULLY STATED IN IT ANYTHING WHICH I KNOW TO BE FALSE, OR DO NOT BELIEVE TO BE TRUE"...

These versions of police witness statements made by another, do not always get tended into evidence because the contents are false, and the witnesses in whose name the contents have been made by another, are not true to that particular witnesses knowledge and belief, and these witnesses refuse to sign these witness statements because of the strong possibility that they may face prosecution should they sign the contents which are false, on the basis that the same contents are true...

[mike tesko]

This is why you can never believe or trust what is said in all witness statements, because in almost every instance the contents are not what the witness said, or says, but the wording and phrases that another would wish them to say at court...

[mike tesko]

This is why you can never believe or trust what is said in all witness statements, because in almost every instance the contents are not what the witness said, or says, but the wording and phrases that another would wish them to say at court...

This is why the Criminal justice system is unreliable, the police and prosecuting authorities get up to all sorts of tricks to try and fool the jury into convicting a defendant...

[scipio_usmc]

Don't try and pin the blame on me for the non existence of such signed witness statements, and say that because I cannot produce them that I am a liar, how the fuck do you or anybody work that out?

No signed versions of the witness statements I posted exist, how can anyone produce something which does not exist? How can anyone then suggest that because I cannot produce evidence that does not exist, I must be a liar...

I AM NOT A LIAR, only a truth seeker...

If you are not a liar then produce evidence to prove your claim that each of the raid cops in question signed a statement which asserted that there were 2 bodies in the kitchen when they entered. 

If you can't produce the statements, can't produce an official COLP document stating very clearly that the police signed statements asserting such or at the very least can't provide an independent source for the charge then it means you made up the claim out of thin air.

You made a charge that the statements posted on this site are not the real statements signed by various raid officer and that in fact they signed statements asserting they found 2 bodies upon entering the kitchen.

Either you came up with this claim yourself or you are repating a claim made by someone else.  WHich is it?

1) did you come up with it yourself

or

2) are you repeating a claim made up by someone else and if so who and where did such person publish such charges and what if any evidence did they provide to estbalish such to be true

If you came up with it yourself then post the evidence that provides you with a basis to make this claim.  If you don't have any then you made up a baseless claim.

[mike tesko]

"THIS STATEMENT / AND I MAKE IT KNOWING THAT / IF I HAVE WILFULLY STATED IN IT ANYTHING WHICH I KNOW TO BE FALSE, OR DO NOT BELIEVE TO BE TRUE"...

If another prepares the witness statement, how the hell can anyone say that the person in who's name the contents are being drafted, made the statement of their own free will?

[mike tesko]

If you are not a liar then produce evidence to prove your claim that each of the raid cops in question signed a statement which asserted that there were 2 bodies in the kitchen when they entered. 

I am not a liar...

Contents of police radio logs is the evidence which is now in the public domain, which confirms police discovered two bodies upon entry, not one. This came about as a result of evidence relayed to senior officers situated at the forward control point by the very same officers in whose name another prepared witness statements claiming that only one body was found...

Contents of police logs were not disclosed in time for the trial, so the jury never considered that evidence...

[mike tesko]

Why did Essex police and the prosecuting authorities deliberately withhold the contents of the police radio message logs from the jury?

What they did was / is despicable...

[mike tesko]

OK, let's approach the matter from a different approach - why was there two different operation Commanders in charge of the firearms operation at the scene that morning?

(1) - PS ADAMS (Commander between 5 and 8.15am)
(2) - PI MONTGOMERY (Commander between 8.15 and 11 15am)

[mike tesko]

OK, let's approach the matter from a different approach - why was there two different operation Commanders in charge of the firearms operation at the scene that morning?

(1) - PS ADAMS (Commander between 5 and 8.15am)
(2) - PI MONTGOMERY (Commander between 8.15 and 11 15am)

The change in "Commander ship" at a crucial stage of the firearms operation (8.15am) needs to be looked into, and needed to be explained to the jury, if they were to look at the prosecution claim that Jeremy killed everyone including his sister (Sheila), then stage managed her body to fool police into thinking that Sheila had taken her own life, after killing the others...

If Sheila was one of the two bodies reportedly found upon entry to the premises (as per the contents of the police radio logs) how could Jeremy have killed her, and stage managed her body in order to fool police into thinking that she was the killer, and that she had taken her own life?

This was information that should have been disclosed and argued in the presence of the jury,it was arguably the most significant feature of evidence in the entire case that was brought against Jeremy, but which was deliberately kept from the knowledge of the defence team, and the jury...

WHY?

[mike tesko]

It is unheard of for "COMMANDER SHIP" of a police firearms operation to change hands in the middle of the same operation, so why was leadership changed just after three further bodies had been reportedly found upstairs (8.10am), where two bodies (7.37 - 7.41am) had previously been reportedly discovered upon entry to the premises?

Something went dramatically wrong soon after 8.10am, which led to a separate type of operation being mounted inside the premises, which PS Adams could not command from his position outside the premises, and explains why PI MONTGOMERY took Command from 8.15am, because he was inside the premises once the operation went pear-shaped...

The original scenario of two bodies downstairs / three bodies upstairs (by (8.10 am), altered into a different scenario of "0ne body downstairs / four bodies upstairs", from that point onwards, which is why MONTGOMERY became the Commander, from 8.15an, onwards...

[scipio_usmc]

I am not a liar...

Contents of police radio logs is the evidence which is now in the public domain, which confirms police discovered two bodies upon entry, not one. This came about as a result of evidence relayed to senior officers situated at the forward control point by the very same officers in whose name another prepared witness statements claiming that only one body was found...

Contents of police logs were not disclosed in time for the trial, so the jury never considered that evidence...

If you can't produce evidence of the documents then you made them up and ergo are a liar. 

In the meantime the log was recorded by someone off scene not the raid team.  That logs not only fail to establish there were 2 bodies in the kitchen, they provide zero basis for you to have asserted that the raid team signed statements stating 2 bodies were found in the kitchen but these were replaced by unsigned ones that mention only 1.

You are trying to change the subject because you have no evidence to back up your claims about the raid team signing statements indicating 2 bodies were found in the kitchen.

Sheila's body left a pool of blood where she died the claim she was moved is not supported by any physical evidence not merely the police.

If you did not lie then provide evidence to back up your claims about the raid team statements being replaced.  If you have no source for the claim then you invented it yourself.  If you invented yourself unless you can produce evidence to establish your claim to be true then it is obvious you simply made it up and lied.

[No-Bits]

Also, just a passing observation. Are the undisclosed logs the one by Bonnett with the Crown Court stamp on it? 





Or the one made by West which was handed to him in court? 





Or are you just making it all up? 

[Patti]

Also, just a passing observation. Are the undisclosed logs the one by Bonnett with the Crown Court stamp on it? 





Or the one made by West which was handed to him in court? 





Or are you just making it all up? 

Hi Hartley I had a long conversation with Vic about this.  I shall ask you the same question I asked him.

Do all documents by the CPS or defence have to stamped?  I would say they do. The other question is.
Are all stamped documents shown to the court and discussed in the court room?  :D

[Patti]

That's it then the documents were shown in court....Next! 

[No-Bits]

Hi Hartley I had a long conversation with Vic about this.  I shall ask you the same question I asked him.

Do all documents by the CPS or defence have to stamped?  I would say they do. The other question is.
Are all stamped documents shown to the court and discussed in the court room?  :D

All documents entered as exhibits, in this case exhibit No. 29 are logged and provided to all, they can be put forward as exhibits by either defence or prosecution.

Clearly as the log was put forward as an exhibit, the claims of it being withheld are entirely fictitious. There is no argument to be had.