0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Because of Jeremy:"Having walked to the house from the lane there was further conversation. The appellant told the police that Sheila Caffell could use a gun. He said they had gone target shooting together and she had used all the guns in the house before. In the light of what they were told the uniformed officers requested armed assistance before any attempt to search the house was made. The appellant dictated a list of the firearms kept at the house. He told the police that he had loaded the .22 automatic rifle the previous night because he thought he had heard rabbits outside. He said he had left the gun on the kitchen table with a full magazine and a box of ammunition nearby. Those who saw the appellant at the scene at that time described him as remarkably calm. At some stage during their conversations that morning PC Myall and the appellant spoke about motor cars. The appellant said that the Osea Road Caravan Site company, "would be able to stand him a Porsche" car at some point during the year."Jeremy intentionally scared them with lies about her weapon proficiency and how well armed she was.Some armed police arrived at 5 but the majority did not arrive until 7AMThey used a megaphone around 5:20 to try to negotiate assuming it could be a hostage situation but received no response. They periodically continued with calls to the house from the megaphone but never got a response.They didn't want to put officers or potentially hostages in danger so wanted to wait to enter until it was totally light so they could see inside the rooms as they went room to room. They also wanted enough officers to be able to cover all sides of the house so a potential gunman could not escape. In the US all officers are armed so every cop on the scene could have protected the outside perimeter but not so with the UK police present.
You have cloth ears haven't you dear boy. I SAID that it was and is police practice in all hostage situations. Jeremy was just repeating what his father had told him over the phone. Your theory is just bullshit. You can write anything you like to your own satisfaction. But apparently not everyone agrees with you. Why don't they agree with you, you might ask. "because in my own mind these things are quite logical and factual". Well surprise surprise only your own sheep follow you and agree with you. But most here just see through all your bullshit as just another fairy tale.
he how could he scare a unit of heavly armed policeman with a tale thats ridiclus.
Gawd,,you're one nasty piece of work !! There's no need whatsoever for the way you speak to us !
I agree with you nugnug. All but Bewes that is, who pissed his pants when he saw the figure in the window. Went straight to the radio car and called for the armed response team. According to Jeremy he became the laughing stock of the station.
You are becoming like a child again.You should read your own claims, BS is all you spew because you irraitionaly want to pretend Jeremy is innocent.My post is fully accurate not BS.
It's about cause and effect. YOU seem to be causing a certain effect in others which they are reacting to it. Whether or not your post is accurate as opposed to BS is down to how others see it.
That is because Jeremy supporters hate to have it pointed out how Jeremy lied. Anytime his lies about Sheila having used all the guns in the house is brought up or other lies or evidence that proves his guilt is brought his supporters fall apart because they don't want to admit he is guilty.There are no rational reasons ever put forth by his supporters for insisting he is innocent. It always boils down to wild tales about police framing him or the like- at the end of the day people want to believe he is innocent and will try any excuse in the world to try to pretend it.They don't want me reminding them of all the evidence they are ignoring, they are trying to forget it and pretend that he is innocent. Ignorance is bliss.
