A Call To Essex Police From Neville? - The poll

[scipio_usmc]

As we haven't seen the photo of Neil in the kitchen it is surely interesting to hear from someone who has.  If Ngb tells us there is far more visible than in the photocopy and for that reason he apparently has doubts why there was a mistake about the sex if the body then surely that is interesting and should be taken on board. 
As far as I can see the photocopy of the photo is so dark it's almost impossible to make out any features at all of the deceased.  I wonder if the photograph was posted on the forum and showed without doubt the person n the photo was male if guilters would at east hesitate for a moment,.  Surely ngb is trustworthy enough to deserve some consideration of his judgement. Surely it should at least be food for thought. imo

Whether someone's hair enables them to be mistaken as a female is in the eye of the beholder.  It's quite subjective.  Just because one person thinks someone looks like a man doesn't think everyone will.

Nevill's hair looks pretty wild and I can see why someone might think it was a woman.  Someone else might have a different view though. 

Whether one is a male or female is an objective standard but which gender someone appears to be is subjective.

The only thing that would be able to cobat the testimony of so many cops saying 1 body was in the kitchen is if there were physicla evidence to establish otherwise.

Quite clearly though the physical evidence establishes both women were killed in the master bedroom and didn't leave there.  The boys were clearly killed in their beds and didn't leave their room.

There is thus no possiblity of an additional body having been in the kitchen let alone a reason to move said body to a upstairs.

[Caroline]

Yes I can see that now. Obviously not new evidence.

No, not new evidence - glad you can see it now.

[scipio_usmc]

But as the document Caroline copied from the OS stated that one of the logs was not shown to the jury, is that correct?

Bonnett's log was admitted into evidence which means an exhibit tha tis part of the record and the jury is free to look at and reveiw.

West's log was only in West's hands and he simply read from it to answer questions.  So the jury can't have seen it, they just heard what was contained on it.  Unless they were asleep they heard what was on it.  Whether they bothered to actually read Bonnett's who knows.  They had the opportunity but might not have.  So it is possible they heard about West's because they paid attention to the testimony but paid no mind to Bonnett's log.

 

[scipio_usmc]

Yes I can see that now. Obviously not new evidence.

No not new evidence just a new argument.  You can't raise new arguments on appeal though unless they are based on new evidence.

But even if Bonnett's log had been new evidence it still doesn't support the claim that it relates to a call from Nevill to Bonnett anyway because it clearly states the caller was West and that the message was relayed to West by Jeremy.

So they are barred from raising the argument on appeal and even if permitted it would be rejected as erroneous anyway. 

 
 

[Adam]

The supposedly new log is Bonnett's log that was a trial exhibit:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-bamber-missing-police-phone-239793

Bonnett did not testify at trial instead they just had his log admitted into evidence.  West actually spoke to Jeremy so they had him testify.  Thus his log was not admitted into evidence to be used in lieu of testimony but rather he testified as to the contents of his log instead.

Jeremy had the option of claiming Neville phoned the police at the 2012 CCRC application.

That was if he thought it was worthy new evidence. Or whether it is just media bravado. He certainly did not submit this at the 2002 COA application.

If he did submit it two years ago, it was out of desperation due to his overall claim being so weak.  I suspect he did not include this in his submission. Either way the CCRC rejected the appeal.

Case closed.

[No-Bits]

Whether someone's hair enables them to be mistaken as a female is in the eye of the beholder.  It's quite subjective.  Just because one person thinks someone looks like a man doesn't think everyone will.

Nevill's hair looks pretty wild and I can see why someone might think it was a woman.  Someone else might have a different view though. 

Whether one is a male or female is an objective standard but which gender someone appears to be is subjective.

The only thing that would be able to cobat the testimony of so many cops saying 1 body was in the kitchen is if there were physicla evidence to establish otherwise.

Quite clearly though the physical evidence establishes both women were killed in the master bedroom and didn't leave there.  The boys were clearly killed in their beds and didn't leave their room.

There is thus no possiblity of an additional body having been in the kitchen let alone a reason to move said body to a upstairs.

Which is why I said the alternative was preposterous.

I don't believe that this is an aspect of the case which troubles NGB, I think he was playing around when he posted that just to be annoying. 

[No-Bits]

Nope,sorry but there is no explanation amongst your post as to how the lone body of Bevill Bamber in the kitchen could possibly have been described as a murder AND a suicide.

They didn't identify and describe Nevill's body as a murder and suicide. I think you are taking the information too literally. They are describing the incident as possible murder and suicide based on the information that they gained from Jeremy (which turned out to be largely erroneous).

This is why Davidson, when informed and requested to attend the scene, was told it was murder and suicide. He took this to mean that there was ONE or TWO bodies involved.

[maggie]

Whether someone's hair enables them to be mistaken as a female is in the eye of the beholder.  It's quite subjective.  Just because one person thinks someone looks like a man doesn't think everyone will.
Nevill's hair looks pretty wild and I can see why someone might think it was a woman.  Someone else might have a different view though. 
Whether one is a male or female is an objective standard but which gender someone appears to be is subjective.
The only thing that would be able to cobat the testimony of so many cops saying 1 body was in the kitchen is if there were physicla evidence to establish otherwise.
Quite clearly though the physical evidence establishes both women were killed in the master bedroom and didn't leave there.  The boys were clearly killed in their beds and didn't leave their room.
There is thus no possiblity of an additional body having been in the kitchen let alone a reason to move said body to a upstairs.

You have no idea like the rest of us where Sheila had been before she apparently died in the bedroom.
AS ngb has seen the photo and you haven't surely his opinion should carry some credence? Much of your post is unconvincing bluster imo. .... no offence.

[No-Bits]

You have no idea like the rest of us where Sheila had been before she apparently died in the bedroom.
AS ngb has seen the photo and you haven't surely his opinion should carry some credence? Much of your post is unconvincing bluster imo. .... no offence.

NGB's opinion doesn't carry any credence whatsoever in this instance.

He is having you on. 

[Mr. Gee]

You have no idea like the rest of us where Sheila had been before she apparently died in the bedroom.
AS ngb has seen the photo and you haven't surely his opinion should carry some credence? Much of your post is unconvincing bluster imo. .... no offence.

In fact the only persons to be killed in their beds were the two little boys. All others were were they should not be other than June who was found out of bed in her own and her husband's room.

[Mr. Gee]

NGB's opinion doesn't carry any credence whatsoever in this instance.

He is having you on. 

I think that ngb's word carries a lot of credence in this instance. For he has actually seen the original photograph and you haven't. So his word in this instance is more valuable than any of our opinions.
There is also a hint in your post that ngb is lying ie "having us on". Please be careful in your insinuations.

[lookout]

Excellent post scipio.  Like so many arguments raised in this case over the last 29 years there is usually a sensible and measured response available for most of them, for the rest it is a case of grasping at straws.

As time goes by however the desperation is beginning to wane in favour of pained acceptance that Bamber is indeed guilty.

The same can be said for those of you who think he's guilty,too. Grasping at straws ? It couldn't have been any clearer when bicycle,wetsuit,file,dyed hair, flour on face,expensive suit,lobsters,champagne,crocodile tears,MONEY,selling valuables, Porsche, ( the list is endless ) came into play.

It's not a case of acceptance. Like Jeremy,I prefer the truth and not to follow those who think they're in the majority so MUST be right !! It doesn't always follow as has been proved in the past.
Give a dog a bad name and all that. Mud sticks------------except that it doesn't always,as it can be WIPED.!

[Mr. Gee]

The same can be said for those of you who think he's guilty,too. Grasping at straws ? It couldn't have been any clearer when bicycle,wetsuit,file,dyed hair, flour on face,expensive suit,lobsters,champagne,crocodile tears,MONEY,selling valuables, Porsche, ( the list is endless ) came into play.

It's not a case of acceptance. Like Jeremy,I prefer the truth and not to follow those who think they're in the majority so MUST be right !! It doesn't always follow as has been proved in the past.
Give a dog a bad name and all that. Mud sticks------------except that it doesn't always,as it can be WIPED.!

Morning lookout. All those comments about Bamber remember were to discredit him and were meant to make him look as bad as they could in the eyes of the readers. If they were relying on facts alone then they wouldn't need to use such underhanded tactics. But unfortunately that is the way of the red forum and I fear they are loath to change, as it is indelibly tattood into their corrupt Pharisaical natures.

[lookout]

Morning lookout. All those comments about Bamber remember were to discredit him and were meant to make him look as bad as they could in the eyes of the readers. If they were relying on facts alone then they wouldn't need to use such underhanded tactics. But unfortunately that is the way of the red forum and I fear they are loath to change, as it is indelibly tattood into their corrupt Pharisaical natures.

I know,Mr Gee.It bothers me not I'm afraid. You have to feel a certain amount of pity that they've ran out of steam. so revert back to the only way they know.

[ngb1066]

Which is why I said the alternative was preposterous.

I don't believe that this is an aspect of the case which troubles NGB, I think he was playing around when he posted that just to be annoying. 

It does trouble me and I was not "playing around".  I do not post for the purpose of being annoying, although I accept that some may be annoyed by my posts!

I have a hunch that something went wrong after the raid team entered and this has been covered up.  There is no doubt that bodies were moved by the police before the crime scene photographs were taken.  This was even referred to by at least two members of the raid team when they were shown a video a couple of days later as part of a debriefing.  Against that background I am concerned about the initial sighting of what was believed to be a female in the kitchen.  I accept that it could simply be a mistake although having looked at the photograph itself I personally find it a surprising mistake.  It also troubles me that there was no immediate correction of this "mistake" on the radio following entry to the house.

I hope that helps.