Surely The Timings Are Incorrect?

[scipio_usmc]

They give Sheila's age differently and Bonnett's log gives Nevill's information as though it had been passed directly to Pc West rather than via Jeremy - apart from the note about the other weapons at WHF, it makes no mention of Jeremy, thereby raising the possibility that Nevill had called Pc West.
As explained above, the logs do suggest a call from Nevill to Pc West.
The defence team evidently hadn't read Bonnett's log. They weren't thorough enough. They should also have found out who the officer at Witham was that Pc West said he contacted, but they didn't. They just accepted what Pc West said and did very little to verify it.

All you are doing is digging your hole deeper by straining to pretend there is a way to suggest that Bonnett's log suggests West received a call directly from Nevill.

As plain as day the log states, "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber after the phone went dead."

Far from the log asserting that Jeremy simply passed a message about shotguns it makes clear that the entire message was passed from Jeremy to CD 1990 which is PC West.

Trying to hang your hat on the age dispcrepancy doesn't help at all because your own admisison is that eveyrthing Bonnett wrote was fed to him by  West which means the discrepacy cna only be attributed to one of the following:

1) West told Bonnett a different age than he wrote down

or

2) Bonnett wrote down a different age than West told him

Neither of these help you in any way, shape or form.  The discrepancy only helps those who allege Bonnett's log reflects a call from Nevill to Bonnett and not much because she was actually 28 according to the 2002 Appeal decision.

Your entire argument can be summed up as this:

You choose to believe that it was later altered with the following addition to pretend the log was referring to a call from Nevill:

"Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber after the phone went dead."

Furthermore that means there must be a log West had from Nevill with was altered or destroyed but you have no evidence of such.

In addition, it means both Bonnett and West lied by concealing the call from Nevill very early on in th einvestigaiton when the police still thought it was a murde rsuicide.

Last, it means they chose not to tell Jeremy that they had already received a call form nevill and had already dispatched police ot the scene to meet nevill and instea dfeatured them placing him on hold and pretending they were getting the information form him for the first time, pretending they were dispatching police because of his call and asked him to meet the police there though the police had been dispatched to meet Nevill.

We are also expected to believe that Nevill chose to call Jeremy before police and then immediately called police and chose not to diall 999 but instead had the Chelmsford Police station number memorized, even though it was not his local station.

If you can't see the desperation and ridiculousness of your arguments then there is little hope of trying to debate this issue further with you.  All the issues have been fully explored and the choice of each person is whether to face relaity and logic or ignore same.

 

[Reader]

But they both refer to Sheila as 'Bamber' are you trying to say that BOTH Neville and Jeremy made the same mistake?

No. Jeremy didn't make a mistake. He said "Bamber" deliberately as he couldn't recall "Caffell".

Bonnett either heard the age incorrectly or West made a mistake - Bonnett wrote the log (or West passed it on) as if it was Neville who called because it was ONLY his details that were required

That's your theory, an alternative explanation is that Pc West received two calls, one from Nevill and then one from Jeremy. It wasn't only the logged details that were relevant. It was also relevant that Nevill asked Jeremy to come over to WHF. I would expect that the police were trained to pass on facts without rephrasing them into what would have been said by a fourth party.

As explained above, they don't.

In your opinion, which you justify with unsupported assertions about how the police communicate. However, there is certainly reasonable doubt.

Bonnett's log was shown to the jury, you're just in denial on that point.

No documents were shown to the jury. A large number of documents were made available to them, but nobody else knows how many were read by them.

[Reader]

. . . the log states, "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber after the phone went dead."

It then states "Mr. Bamber has a collection of shotguns and ·410's." It doesn't specifically assert that the preceding information about Sheila came from the same source. I'm not suggesting that the first sentence was written for the purposes of deception or pretence, but that it was written to clarify the source for the second sentence.

. . . it makes clear that the entire message was passed from Jeremy to CD 1990.

That's your interpretation, not what the log specifically states.

West told Bonnett a different age than he wrote down

I'm suggesting EP have withheld (or destroyed) Pc West's log of Nevill's call, where 26 was stated as Sheila's age.

Furthermore that means there must be a log West had from Nevill with was altered or destroyed but you have no evidence of such.

That concedes the possibility, merely pointing out the lack of evidence. Direct evidence isn't yet available, as Pc West's first log has been withheld or destroyed.

In addition, it means both Bonnett and West lied by concealing the call from Nevill very early on in the investigaiton when the police still thought it was a murder suicide.

Whereas you confidently believe the police never withheld anything? Do you believe the police never make totally false claims?

Last, it means they chose not to tell Jeremy that they had already received a call from Nevill . . . and asked him to meet the police there though the police had been dispatched to meet Nevill.

There's nothing to suggest the police were despatched to meet Nevill. There was no need to tell Jeremy that Nevill had called the police already. Jeremy was providing new information, that Nevill had called him, asking him to come over as his sister had gone crazy and had the gun, and giving Sheila's age as 27, whereas Nevill had apparently told Pc West just his details and that his daughter had gone berserk and had got hold of a gun, without mentioning that he had called Jeremy.

We are also expected to believe that Nevill chose to call Jeremy before police and then immediately called police and chose not to dial 999 but instead had the Chelmsford Police station number memorized, even though it was not his local station.

No, you needn't believe it, but I'm suggesting it's not beyond reasonable doubt. The telephone number for Chelmsford police station seems to have been changed since 1985, but police stations often have easily remembered telephone numbers.

[scipio_usmc]

No. Jeremy didn't make a mistake. He said "Bamber" deliberately as he couldn't recall "Caffell".

I know, I posted snippets of the documents that recounted such.  You are avoiding the substantive points I raised by diverting attention from such substance. 

That doesn't work with me I will just keep returning to it.  You are suggesting that Nevill and Jeremy both could not remember her last name and both provided her name as Sheila Bamber.  Also that both provided the wrong age for her.   

You don't have any way to know whether West told Bonnet Sheila was age 26 or 27.  West could have told Bonnett age 26 and yet Bonnet misheard him or misrecorded the number.  West could have mispoke and said 27 though he meant to say 26.

Instead of facing this as the universe of logical possibilities you:

Suggest that before Jeremy called West Nevill called West and Nevill erroneously provided Sheila's age as 27, plus for whatever reason erroneously provided her last name as Bamber and that he then provided all this information to Bonnett.  Then when Jeremy called he took down eveyrthing without ever telling Jeremy about the call from nevill eve nthough it would comfort Jeremy to know his father was still alive to call police after Jeremy was disconnected from him.  That diconnection and busy signal was so worrysome they even did a line check though they could have simply told Jeremy it wa sbusy because he was on the phone with police and was still alive.

Your vast conspiracy of hiding a call from Nevill all based around West either providing Bonnet age 27 by accident or Bonnett accidentally writing 27 despite being told 26  is baseless and so fanciful that one has to wonder how you can allege any of this with a straight face.

That's your theory, an alternative explanation is that Pc West received two calls, one from Nevill and then one from Jeremy. It wasn't only the logged details that were relevant. It was also relevant that Nevill asked Jeremy to come over to WHF. I would expect that the police were trained to pass on facts without rephrasing them into what would have been said by a fourth party.
In your opinion, which you justify with unsupported assertions about how the police communicate. However, there is certainly reasonable doubt.
No documents were shown to the jury. A large number of documents were made available to them, but nobody else knows how many were read by them.

It doens't matter what the jury read we are debating the soundness of the claims you are making and they are totally ridiculous claims. Police don't write down what they hear verbatim nor do they pass to other everything verbaitm.  Bonnett made an effort to try to write down what Jeremy was supposedly told by his father while West put it from Jeremy's perspective.  Both mean the same thing.  You are straining severely but just spinning in cuircles not getting anywhere. 

[Reader]

You are suggesting that Nevill and Jeremy both could not remember her last name and both provided her name as Sheila Bamber.

Correct for Jeremy. I think Nevill probably knew "Caffell", but chose to give "Bamber" anyway.

Also that both provided the wrong age for her.

Yes, but it's possible that neither knew her correct age anyway.

You don't have any way to know whether West told Bonnet Sheila was age 26 or 27.

I haven't claimed to know that. As Pc West wrote "26yrs", whereas Pc West wrote "27", it suggests either a mistake of some kind, or that the ultimate source for "26yrs" was a different person - Nevill.

Then when Jeremy called he took down everything without ever telling Jeremy about the call from Nevill even though it would comfort Jeremy to know his father was still alive to call police after Jeremy was disconnected from him.

Huh? Pc West would have known Nevill was alive at about 03:26, but not at 03:36 when Jeremy called. Telling Jeremy "well your father was alive 10 minutes ago" could well have upset him rather than comfort him. Jeremy didn't seem upset, just concerned, so Pc West wrote down what Jeremy had told him as quickly as he could, then called HQIR again.

Police don't write down what they hear verbatim.

It was appropriate for Pc West to write down verbatim what Jeremy said his father had told him, especially as it was just a short sentence that could be written quickly. It wasn't appropriate for Pc West to reword it completely to give Nevill's perspective when talking to Bonnett because he'd already told Bonnett about Nevill's similar call to him. Bonnett wrote "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber, after the phone went dead. Mr. Bamber has a collection of shotguns and 410's." because that was significant new information. We don't know what else Pc West told Bonnett as a consequence of Jeremy's call.[/quote]

[scipio_usmc]

Correct for Jeremy. I think Nevill probably knew "Caffell", but chose to give "Bamber" anyway.
Yes, but it's possible that neither knew her correct age anyway.
I haven't claimed to know that. As Pc West wrote "26yrs", whereas Pc West wrote "27", it suggests either a mistake of some kind, or that the ultimate source for "26yrs" was a different person - Nevill.

It is not logical at all to assume that West was given 2 different ages by 2 different people, that there were 2 different logs with 2 different ages, that he provided the age from Nevill's log to Bonnett then destroyed the log from Nevill, did not mention it in his pocketbook and dishonestly neve rreavealed the clal in any of his statements.  The suggesiton that could be a realistic inference to draw from the age being different on Bonnett's log is simply ridiculous.   The only realistic possibilities are that either:

West messed up and provided a different age than he had written on his log or Bonnett misunderstood the age West provided or miswrote the age.

Huh? Pc West would have known Nevill was alive at about 03:26, but not at 03:36 when Jeremy called. Telling Jeremy "well your father was alive 10 minutes ago" could well have upset him rather than comfort him. Jeremy didn't seem upset, just concerned, so Pc West wrote down what Jeremy had told him as quickly as he could, then called HQIR again.

Again hiding from reality.  It would have taken 10 minutes or so to record everything form Nevill just liek it did from Jeremy. So Nevill woudl have just gotten off the phone with West right before Jeremy called had Jeremy actually called at 3:36.  Since CA7 had already been dispatched at 3:35 that would mean it would have been already dispatched prior to Jeremy's call. So Jeremy would have been told not to worry his father called already and a car was already dispatched.  West would not have any need to ask Jeremy for Nevill's address and phone number, or to ask who was staying at WHF or SHeila's name and age or the rest because he woudl already have had it.  Nor any need to put him on hold because the car would already have been dispatched. 

You seem confused by the timline you are alleging. Here is the timline you are presenting:

Nevill calls Jeremy, is disconnected
Nevill calls police
Jeremy calls police saying he was on the phone with his father but the call was disconnecte dna dthe line was busy when he tried to call back.

Surely you can see that this would mean the phone had been used AFTER the call was disconnected and would account for why it was busy.  Jeremy would be very happy to know that his father didn't die when the phone was disconnected but still alive after that to call police.

They checked the line specifically because of Jeremy's claim the line went dead and then he coudl nto get through anymore so tha tis the last time anyone was in contact with the peopel inside th ehouse.  If Nevill had called police this check woudl not have been necessary.  So there were 2 different reasons to tell Jeremy his father called had that been the case.  So they coudl tell him they already sent a car and so he would know that the line was busy because his father had called the police.     

Trying to pretend they would nto have told him is a waste of time.  Trying to pretend they would not have sent a car in response to Nevill's call and waited till jeremy's call is a waste of time.  Trying to pretend they would have asked Jeremy for all the information that they alreayd would have gotten from Nevill is a waste of time.     

Your arguments fail miserably.

It was appropriate for Pc West to write down verbatim what Jeremy said his father had told him, especially as it was just a short sentence that could be written quickly. It wasn't appropriate for Pc West to reword it completely to give Nevill's perspective when talking to Bonnett because he'd already told Bonnett about Nevill's similar call to him. Bonnett wrote "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber, after the phone went dead. Mr. Bamber has a collection of shotguns and 410's." because that was significant new information. We don't know what else Pc West told Bonnett as a consequence of Jeremy's call.

Taking down information fast doesn't allow one to write verbatim you would have to keep making the person repeat it over and over. What matters is the content not the exact language.

[Caroline]

Correct for Jeremy. I think Nevill probably knew "Caffell", but chose to give "Bamber" anyway.
Yes, but it's possible that neither knew her correct age anyway.

A little convenient for you argument.

I haven't claimed to know that. As Pc West wrote "26yrs", whereas Pc West wrote "27", it suggests either a mistake of some kind, or that the ultimate source for "26yrs" was a different person - Nevill.

And yet that age is incorrect - so more likely a mistake.

Huh? Pc West would have known Nevill was alive at about 03:26, but not at 03:36 when Jeremy called. Telling Jeremy "well your father was alive 10 minutes ago" could well have upset him rather than comfort him. Jeremy didn't seem upset, just concerned, so Pc West wrote down what Jeremy had told him as quickly as he could, then called HQIR again.

Police officers aren't social workers if the call had already been logged, it wouldn't need to be logged again and West WOULD have explain to Jeremy that he father had already called. It's simple common sense and there was no reason not to mention it THEN or later down the line when the relatives insisted Jeremy was guilty.

It was appropriate for Pc West to write down verbatim what Jeremy said his father had told him, especially as it was just a short sentence that could be written quickly. It wasn't appropriate for Pc West to reword it completely to give Nevill's perspective when talking to Bonnett because he'd already told Bonnett about Nevill's similar call to him. Bonnett wrote "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber, after the phone went dead. Mr. Bamber has a collection of shotguns and 410's." because that was significant new information. We don't know what else Pc West told Bonnett as a consequence of Jeremy's call.

Appropriate or not - that's what happened and this is clear from the sentence "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr. Bamber, after the phone went dead.

[Reader]

It is not logical at all to assume that West was given 2 different ages by 2 different people, that there were 2 different logs with 2 different ages, that he provided the age from Nevill's log to Bonnett then destroyed the log from Nevill, did not mention it in his pocketbook and dishonestly never revealed the call in any of his statements.

I haven't assumed any of that. In particular, I'm not saying any log must have been destroyed, as we know that EP have mislaid, refused to release, or denied the existence of certain logs, statements and other evidence. Why did it take a court order in 2004 for them to release 24 pages of logging that nobody at the trial had seen? I haven't seen Pc West's pocketbook - have you? I'm saying that the differences between the logs suggest the possibility that Nevill called the police. If your timeline is correct, what was Pc West doing in the 6 minutes prior to the line check that he logged at 3:42, and why did he contradict another officer regarding the accuracy of the clock he used?

It would have taken 10 minutes or so to record everything form Nevill just like it did from Jeremy.

You haven't shown that it took 10 minutes or so for Jeremy. Pc West insisted he took down the key facts in less than a minute. He would have had no trouble in writing well within that time Jeremy's name, address and telephone number, and then the short message (verbatim) that Jeremy said he received from Nevill. He testified that he then put Jeremy on hold for about 3 minutes. You have cited no evidence to show that is insufficient time. That accounts for about 4 minutes, and he then spoke to Jeremy again for an unknown time. If that final discussion with Jeremy lasted 2 minutes, the entire call took 6 minutes, not 10. If Nevill called, we can't assume that he was put on hold. If he wasn't, his call could have been very short.

Since CA7 had already been dispatched at 3:35 that would mean it would have been already dispatched prior to Jeremy's call.

So Nevill had apparently called earlier unless the time of 3:36 was incorrect, yet the police investigated that discrepancy and never worked out just why it was incorrect. EP officers contradicted each other on that issue.

So Jeremy would have been told not to worry his father called already and a car was already dispatched.

Not necessarily. Although Jeremy seemed straightforward, West couldn't know that he wouldn't later be accused of having hired someone to go to WHF and kill his family. There was no pressing need to tell him anything about Nevill's call, and doing so would have wasted time and gained nothing.

You seem confused by the timeline you are alleging.

Surely you can see that this would mean the phone had been used AFTER the call was disconnected and would account for why it was busy.

That's what I suggested originally, but Nevill needn't have called the police immediately. The handset could simply have been off-hook for a brief period before Nevill called the police.

Jeremy would be very happy to know that his father didn't die when the phone was disconnected but still alive after that to call police.

That's absurd. Jeremy wasn't assuming that his father was dead just because the call had been ended abruptly. There was no reason for Pc West to start talking about whether Nevill was alive or dead ten minutes earlier. That couldn't reassure Jeremy about anyone else in the house, so Jeremy would still have been very concerned. Pc West was quite correct to just follow standard procedure.

[scipio_usmc]

I haven't assumed any of that. In particular, I'm not saying any log must have been destroyed, as we know that EP have mislaid, refused to release, or denied the existence of certain logs, statements and other evidence. Why did it take a court order in 2004 for them to release 24 pages of logging that nobody at the trial had seen? I haven't seen Pc West's pocketbook - have you? I'm saying that the differences between the logs suggest the possibility that Nevill called the police. If your timeline is correct, what was Pc West doing in the 6 minutes prior to the line check that he logged at 3:42, and why did he contradict another officer regarding the accuracy of the clock he used?
You haven't shown that it took 10 minutes or so for Jeremy. Pc West insisted he took down the key facts in less than a minute. He would have had no trouble in writing well within that time Jeremy's name, address and telephone number, and then the short message (verbatim) that Jeremy said he received from Nevill. He testified that he then put Jeremy on hold for about 3 minutes. You have cited no evidence to show that is insufficient time. That accounts for about 4 minutes, and he then spoke to Jeremy again for an unknown time. If that final discussion with Jeremy lasted 2 minutes, the entire call took 6 minutes, not 10. If Nevill called, we can't assume that he was put on hold. If he wasn't, his call could have been very short.

Your claim that the age difference in both logs suggests a call from Nevill is patently ridiculous.  You failed miserable at establishing how it suggests such.  Your explanation required a whole lot more including there being another log from West where he wrote 27 instead of 26 that listed the caller as Nevill.  The difference between the 2 logs simply suggests either West messed up and said 27 by accident or Bonnett made a mistake and recorded 27 though told 26.  That is all it suggests by looking at the 2 logs.  Your giant leap that it suggests another log out there reflecting a call from Nevill where 27 was recorded is outlandish, not a natural suggestion from the age difference recorded in the 2 logs.   

No the defense has not publicly released his pocketbook but had been provided with a copy of his pocketbook before trial and still have a copy today.  Obviously if it mentioned a call from Nevill then his trial lawyers would have seized upon it as well as his appellate lawyers.  So we know it was not in his pocketbook. 

It doesn't matter if a call from Nevill would have last 5 minutes or 10 minutes.  It would have ended shortly before Jeremy's call not 10 minutes before as you suggest.  In any event not even Jeremy's lawyers believed that it took West only a minute to record all the information from Jeremy and neither do I.  You have to repeat things multiple times and talk slowly to enable someone to record them when reciting over the phone.  You tell part of your story, a cop says ok this is major so let me write this down and has it repeated as it is taken down then asks the important details not yet broached.

The only way Jeremy's call would have been short would have been if West told Jeremy he already had obtained all the information from Nevill so didn't need it again which is what would have happened had Nevill called as you claim but clearly that didn't happen.  Jeremy was asked all the details of who was at WHF, the address, phone number, name and age of his sister etc proving that Nevill had no called previously or such would not have been asked of him. 

So Nevill had apparently called earlier unless the time of 3:36 was incorrect, yet the police investigated that discrepancy and never worked out just why it was incorrect. EP officers contradicted each other on that issue.

The contradiction is largely contrived.  There was a gap in time between Jeremy's call to West and West's call to Bonnett so by definition the times should not match. IF West recorded the time he received Jeremy's call right away it should be several minutes earlier than what Bonnett recorded.   If he did it at the end of the call which is quite possible by his own admission then naturally it would be later than what Bonnett recorded.

West got a call about a crazy girl running around with a gun.  it is quite natural for him to neglect looking at the clock immediately an dinstead delving into the substnace and at the end realizing he didn't include the time and putting the time at the end of the call.         

All the desperation from jeremy supporters of trying to make something out of the difference just shows how there is nothing valid for Jeremy supporters to raise.  The difference is extremely insignificant.

Not necessarily. Although Jeremy seemed straightforward, West couldn't know that he wouldn't later be accused of having hired someone to go to WHF and kill his family. There was no pressing need to tell him anything about Nevill's call, and doing so would have wasted time and gained nothing.
That's what I suggested originally, but Nevill needn't have called the police immediately. The handset could simply have been off-hook for a brief period before Nevill called the police.
That's absurd. Jeremy wasn't assuming that his father was dead just because the call had been ended abruptly. There was no reason for Pc West to start talking about whether Nevill was alive or dead ten minutes earlier. That couldn't reassure Jeremy about anyone else in the house, so Jeremy would still have been very concerned. Pc West was quite correct to just follow standard procedure.

This is your most pathetic argument yet.  West foresaw that Jeremy might be accused of the crime so he refused to disclose to Jeremy that Nevill had just phoned and decided to create a great deal of extra work for himself by taking down all the information he had just obtained from Nevill all over again?  that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.  If he just fielded a call from Nevill that was blaming Sheila why would he suspect Jeremy? 

You are presenting the picture that he foresaw maybe police would want to frame Jeremy and not reveal a call from Nevill had been made so he didn't tell Jeremy and took the information all down again.  That is simply absurd.

 

[Caroline]

Your claim the athe age difference in both logs suggests a call from Nevill is patently ridiculous.  You failed miserable at establishing how it suggests such.  Your explanation required a whole lot more including ther ebeing another log from West where he wrote 27 istead of 26 that listed the caller as Nevill.  The difference between the 2 logs simply suggests either West messed up and said 27 by accident or Bonnett mad e amsitake and recorded 27 though told 26.  Thatt is all it suggests by looking at the 2 logs.  Your giant leap that it suggests another log out there of a call from Nevill where 27 was recorded it outlandish not a natural suggestion from the difference.   

No the defense has not publicly released his pocketbook but had been provided with a copy of his pocketbook before tiral and still have a copy today.  Obviously if it mentioned a call from Nevill then his trial lawyers would have seized upon it as well as his appellate lawyers.  So we know it wa snot in his pocketbook. 

It doesn't matter if a call form Nevill would have last 5 minutes or 10 minutes.  It owuld jhave ended shortly before Jeremy's call not 10 minutes before as you suggest.  In any evdent not even Jeremy's lawyers believed him that it took him only a minute to record all the information from Jeremy and neither do I.  You have to repeated things multiple times and talk slowly to enable someone to record them.  You tell part of your story a cop says ok let me wrte this down and takes it down again then asks the important details not yet broached.

The only way Jeremy's call would have been short would have been if West told jeremy he already had obtianed all th einformation from Nevill so didn't need it again which is what woudl have happened had nevill called as you claim but clearly that didn't happen.  Jeremy was asked all the details of who was at WHF, the address, phone number, name and age of his siter etc proving that Nevill had no called previously or such would not have been asked of him. 

The contradiction is largely contrived.  There was a gap in time between Jeremy's call to West and West's call to Bonnett so by definition the times should not match. IF West recorded the time he received Jeremy's call right away it should be several minutes earlier than what Bonnett recorded.   If he did it at the end of the call which is quite possible by his own admission then naturally it would be later than what Bonnett recorded.

West got a call about a crazy girl running around with a gun.  it is quite natural for him to neglect looking at the clock immediately an dinstead delving into the substnace and at the end realizing he didn't include the time and putting the time at the end of the call.         

All the desperation from jeremy supporters of trying to make something out of the difference just shows how there is nothing valid for Jeremy supporters to raise.  The difference is extremely insignificant.

This is your most pathetic argument yet.  West foresaw that Jeremy might be accused of the crime so he refused to disclose to Jeremy that Nevill had just phoned and decided to create a great deal of extra work for himself by taking down all the information he had just obtained from Nevill all over again?  that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.  If he just fielded a call from Nevill that was blaming Sheila why would he suspect Jeremy? 

You are presenting the picture that he foresaw maybe police would want to frame Jeremy and not reveal a call from Nevill had been made so he didn't tell Jeremy and took the information all down again.  That is simply absurd.

 

I agree, I can't believe that the issue has been dragged out this long - rationally there is only one answer and no matter how much twisting and turning is applied - there was no call from Neville.

[scipio_usmc]

I agree, I can't believe that the issue has been dragged out this long - rationally there is only one answer and no matter how much twisting and turning is applied - there was no call from Neville.

The whole line is ridiculous but I found Reader's latest claim particularly astonishing:

"Although Jeremy seemed straightforward, West couldn't know that he wouldn't later be accused of having hired someone to go to WHF and kill his family. There was no pressing need to tell him anything about Nevill's call, and doing so would have wasted time and gained nothing."

This is basically saying West anticipated the need to conceal Nevill's call in case police wanted to frame Jeremy. There is no other way to read it.  I was floored by this one.

[guest154]

I've always respected Reader and his posts, but I've found the recent posts of his/hers on the timings a little shocking as if they are attempting to bend something so much to suit their opinion that it's snapped.

[lookout]

Behave yourself,Mat,you're being taken in by a con. Reader's been here a long time remember.

[Caroline]

The whole line is ridiculous but I found Reader's latest claim particularly astonishing:

"Although Jeremy seemed straightforward, West couldn't know that he wouldn't later be accused of having hired someone to go to WHF and kill his family. There was no pressing need to tell him anything about Nevill's call, and doing so would have wasted time and gained nothing."

This is basically saying West anticipated the need to conceal Nevill's call in case police wanted to frame Jeremy. There is no other way to read it.  I was floored by this one.

It would be interesting to see who (if anyone) is willing to agree with him on this. It's more than grasping at straws. The thought process that would have had to go on in West's mind to come anywhere near that is quite complex.

[Caroline]

Behave yourself,Mat,you're being taken in by a con. Reader's been here a long time remember.

A con? What con? The only con being promoted is that Neville rang the police and no matter how long Reader has been here, it doesn't mean his posts can't be challenged.