Silencer found by relatives arrives at lab' too late to be one with key blood...

[No-Bits]

I could be wrong, but I don't think Basil Cock mentions it?

Not that I've seen it, but it appears Mr T is saying otherwise. 

There is something very odd about Basil Cocks witness statement in which he describes him being present at whf when the silemcer was found. Yey

[No-Bits]

There is something very odd about Basil Cocks witness statement in which he describes him being present at whf when the silemcer was found. Yet, he says he can specifically rwmember the occasion when the silencer was discovered because there was white fingerprint dust on everything at the scene...

How very remarkable...

Go on then, why odd and remarkable? 

[No-Bits]

Go on then, why odd and remarkable? 

Bearing in mind that a mere 199 days ago you posted this:

it is my understanding that police did fingerprint the various scenes within the premises during the first three days of the investigation, and in fact at least two scenes of crime officers who took part in the search and retention of exhibits from the scene at that time, were fingerprint expert's, namely, DI 'Ron' Cook, and DS 'Neil' Davidson...

[No-Bits]

I think you were about to tell everybody that Basil Cock couldn't have seen the silencer at the time the relatives state that it was found, because fingerprinting hadn't been done yet, like you stated here:

The presence of this fingerprint dust would provide key information about the actual date when the Bamber silencer was found in the gun cupboard, since the executor of the Bamber parents estate, would recall that he was present at whf when the silencer was found by David Boutflour, and that he remembered the incident well, because there was fingerprint dust all over the place and upon everything - well, police did not carry out a fingerprint examination at the scene, until the nature of the investigation changed from being four murders and a suicide, into a full scale murder investigation, under SC/7856/85, which came into force on 6th September 1985...

All I can say is, oops. 

[mike tesko]

Fingerprint dust during the first days of the new investigation (SC/786/85) - OOPS...

BY THE WAY, THOUGHT YOU WERE PROMOTING THE CASE FOR EVERYONE TO IGNORE ME - OOPS (again)...

[mike tesko]

Bear in mind everyone, whether the original silencer exhibit was SJ/1 (true), or SBJ/1, FACT IS, that none of the relatives signed an exhibit label with either of these exhibit refences written upon an attached CJA LABEL to it...

[scipio_usmc]

Fingerprint dust during the first days of the new investigation (SC/786/85) - OOPS...

BY THE WAY, THOUGHT YOU WERE PROMOTING THE CASE FOR EVERYONE TO IGNORE ME - OOPS (again)...

The police said they fingerprinted the house early on.  Your claim they didn't do so until September is absurd but also you can't produce any evidence to prove it.

At any rate here is what was related to the 10th of August:

[mike tesko]

Basil Cocks version of events differs considerably, he recalls that there was white fingerprint dust all over everything - take it from me that Basil Cock was referring to a visit to the scene in September 1985, at the same time that David Boutflour attended the scene to show police where he found the silencer. This was the same occasion when David Boutflour told police that the same silencer had been found in two different positions inside the gun cupboard - Basil Cock was present at the scene at this time, as were police officers fingerprinting the various rooms at the farmhouse...

I estimate that the date which Basil Cock referred to, was 11th September 1985, not 10th August 1985...

[mike tesko]

I have an abundance of material relating to the silencer conspiracy not yet touched upon, or posted by me, which in the following days I shall be making available to everyone, thus disproving what those from the dark side have been saying about me...

The main thing to remember is that key blood group evidence was not found inside the same silencer (SJ/1) found at the scene by David Boutflour...

[No-Bits]

I have an abundance of material relating to the silencer conspiracy not yet touched upon, or posted by me, which in the following days I shall be making available to everyone, thus disproving what those from the dark side have been saying about me...

The main thing to remember is that key blood group evidence was not found inside the same silencer (SJ/1) found at the scene by David Boutflour...

Is that because everybody has been ignoring you? So your going to post some case documents to get their attention?

I'm sure people will look forward to that, but I bet you can't post information without your own leading commentary,  now there's a challenge for you!!!

[mike tesko]

Order silencer exjibit references came into force:-

(1) - SBJ/1 - 7th August 1985 (SC/688/85)

(2) - SJ/1 - 13th August 1885 (SC/688/85)

(3) - DB/1 - 30th August 1985 (SC/688/85)

(4) - DRB/1 - 20th September. 1985 (SC/786/85)

Any prosecution witness who mentions his or her involvement with a silencer by the exhibit reference DRB/1, IN ANY WITNESS STATEMENT, POLICE or LAB' DOCUMENT, prior to the 20th September 1985, IS A CONSPiRATOR...

[mike tesko]

I pose the following question to each and everyone of these Conspirators:-

"How could you know the exhibit reference (DRB/1) of the silencer when at the time you are referring to, such an exhibit refence was not in existence, and in fact was being referred to by a different exhibit reference of either, SBJ/1, SJ/1 and or DB/1?

[mike tesko]

Each prosecution witness responsible for deliberately misquoting the exhibit reference to the silencer, is a conspirator...

[mike tesko]

Each prosecution witness responsible for deliberately misquoting the exhibit reference to the silencer, is a conspirator...

Anyone who deliberately falsifies evidence of this nature should be prosecuted for perverting the course of justice...

[mike tesko]

Lets get the facts right, the silencer seized at the scene by Stan Jones on 7th August 1985, was not exhibit SJ/1, it was not exhibit DB/1, and it was not exhibit DRB/1 - it was exhibit SBJ/1...

The silencer Stan Jones received from Peter Eaton on evening of 12th August 1985, did not have an exhibit label of any sort, not SBJ/1, not SJ/1, not DB/1, and not DRB/1 - it didn't have an exhibit reference at all by that stage...

The silencer shown to PI Bob Miller on the morning of 13th August 1985, did not have an exhibit reference by this stage...

The silencer handed to Ron Cook to enable him to take it along to the lab for examination by Glynis Howard on 13th August 1985, did not have any exhibit reference attached or associated with it...

This silencer had no exhibit reference at all, until Ron Cook attached a brown CJA exhibit label to the aforementioned silencer, marking it by the reference SJ/1...