Menstrual Blood

[Jane]

The house was no longer a crime scene, it's not as if Ann broke in and took something away. She was asked to go in and clean up the house. What would you expect her to have done differently?

In which case there must be a reasonable possibility that until Ann told them about it, the police didn't notice the  pails with the soiled items.

[Alias]

The house was no longer a crime scene, it's not as if Ann broke in and took something away. She was asked to go in and clean up the house. What would you expect her to have done differently?

I wasn´t blaming AE for anything at all - I am blaming the Essex Police. It seems that Ann may even have thought along the lines I do: that the police should have forensically tested the material and therefore brought it home.
Otherwise she would just have emptied the trash at whf, wouldn´t she?

[No-Bits]

In which case there must be a reasonable possibility that until Ann told them about it, the police didn't notice the  pails with the soiled items.

The police handed over the house, she doesn't know police procedures,  they were asked to clean it up. They as u med the police were thorough. It's not as if the buckets were hidden.

So what anyway? Is it really being suggested that blood on soaking clothes was somehow added to the silencer?

Is that the play here? 

[nugnug]

The house was no longer a crime scene, it's not as if Ann broke in and took something away. She was asked to go in and clean up the house. What would you expect her to have done differently?

yes clean the house when most people are asked they dont genral asume that involves washing the underwear of dead people.

[No-Bits]

I wasn´t blaming AE for anything at all - I am blaming the Essex Police. It seems that Ann may even have thought along the lines I do: that the police should have forensically tested the material and therefore brought it home.
Otherwise she would just have emptied the trash at whf, wouldn´t she?

Sorry Alias, if you have misinterpreted me, I didn't mean to suggest that you were casting blame on Ann.

[No-Bits]

yes clean the house when most people are asked they dont genral asume that involves washing the underwear of dead people.

A bucket of water with some items of clothes in them? What would you do with them instead? 

[Alias]

The police handed over the house, she doesn't know police procedures,  they were asked to clean it up. They as u med the police were thorough. It's not as if the buckets were hidden.

So what anyway? Is it really being suggested that blood on soaking clothes was somehow added to the silencer?

Is that the play here? 

It has been suggested several times, hasn´t it?
ANYWAY, and I am not saying that ANYBODY did ANYTHING to the silencer (apart from scraping off blood with a razor blade), the mere fact that the silencer was handled by people who stood to gain from a guilty verdict is problematic. That there were items from WHF in the house where the silencer was handled is additionally problematic.
I don´t think that silencer would be allowed into evidence in this day and age.

[nugnug]

well the knickers i would of binned the rest of the clothes i would of left where they were,

[Jane]

The police handed over the house, she doesn't know police procedures,  they were asked to clean it up. They as u med the police were thorough. It's not as if the buckets were hidden.

So what anyway? Is it really being suggested that blood on soaking clothes was somehow added to the silencer?

Is that the play here? 

Noooooooo!! I'm suggesting that the pails COULD have contained ANY items of clothing. If the police didn't examine them there is only Ann's word for what was in  them. So let's suppose that there was an item that had been part of a teeny weeny menstrual accident PLUS an item/items whic h MAY have been used to stem a different blood flow and MAYBE Ann thought it MAY have pointed to Sheila and would have preferred the police didn't know. Before you say it for me, yes, I know it's pure speculation but no worse than other which has been put forward.

[No-Bits]

It has been suggested several times, hasn´t it?
ANYWAY, and I am not saying that ANYBODY did ANYTHING to the silencer (apart from scraping off blood with a razor blade), the mere fact that the silencer was handled by people who stood to gain from a guilty verdict is problematic. That there were items from WHF in the house where the silencer was handled is additionally problematic.
I don´t think that silencer would be allowed into evidence in this day and age.

They didn't stand to gain though, that is one of the myths,  the only reason anybody other than Pamela benefitted, is because Pamela refused to accept her portion of the Bamber estate and it filtered down.

[No-Bits]

Noooooooo!! I'm suggesting that the pails COULD have contained ANY items of clothing. If the police didn't examine them there is only Ann's word for what was in  them. So let's suppose that there was an item that had been part of a teeny weeny menstrual accident PLUS an item/items whic h MAY have been used to stem a different blood flow and MAYBE Ann thought it MAY have pointed to Sheila and would have preferred the police didn't know. Before you say it for me, yes, I know it's pure speculation but no worse than other which has been put forward.

I just think the criticism towards Ann is ridiculous on this point.

And I think those who are honest would say the same.

[Jane]

They didn't stand to gain though, that is one of the myths,  the only reason anybody other than Pamela benefitted, is because Pamela refused to accept her portion of the Bamber estate and it filtered down.

It occurs to me that there may be a tiny bit of hair splitting here because if Pam had accepted the inheritance, save the very remote possibility of her leaving it all to charity, in all liklihood, it would have ended up with her children/grandchildren.

[Alias]

They didn't stand to gain though, that is one of the myths,  the only reason anybody other than Pamela benefitted, is because Pamela refused to accept her portion of the Bamber estate and it filtered down.

They would eventually`in any case, wouldn´t they?
I am a bit uncomfortable with this discussion, to be honest; but even Bewes admitted in his interview that this fact WAS a bit problematic.

[Jane]

I just think the criticism towards Ann is ridiculous on this point.

And I think those who are honest would say the same.

OK Let's leave Ann out of it. It sounds as if the police allowed POTENTIAL evidence to leave the SOC without doing a thorough check.

[No-Bits]

It occurs to me that there may be a tiny bit of hair splitting here because if Pam had accepted the inheritance, save the very remote possibility of her leaving it all to charity, in all liklihood, it would have ended up with her children/grandchildren.

In 25-30 years time.

Really? They frame Jeremy so they might get an inheritance nearly three decades later?

If that is your opinion, then I'm astonished.