Author Topic: Jeremy's court testimony:  (Read 24980 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #330 on: October 10, 2014, 01:52:PM »
He drove slowly to WHF so he would arrive after the police.
There's no proof that he drove slowly. When he was overtaken, one police officer estimated his speed as 30 mph and another as "up to 30 mph". His earlier speed may well have been 35 mph, say, where the road was suitable for that speed.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #331 on: October 10, 2014, 04:36:PM »
Jeremy drove slowly behind because he was requested to by the police.The reason being that they'd said they didn't want him arriving before them.

I'll leave it to you,Adam,to fathom that one out. ::)

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #332 on: October 11, 2014, 04:58:AM »
Jeremy drove slowly behind because he was requested to by the police.The reason being that they'd said they didn't want him arriving before them.

I'll leave it to you,Adam,to fathom that one out. ::)

They told him no such thing. West told him police were already en route get moving so they can meet you. Beating him there would result in police standing around with thei rthumbsup their butt which is what happened.
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #333 on: October 11, 2014, 04:59:AM »
There's no proof that he drove slowly. When he was overtaken, one police officer estimated his speed as 30 mph and another as "up to 30 mph". His earlier speed may well have been 35 mph, say, where the road was suitable for that speed.

No more than 20MPH was the estimate

/quote]
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #334 on: October 11, 2014, 05:44:AM »
This has devolved into a who's on First routine.

If you don't know the reference it means the Abbott & Constello Routine. 

I haven't denied Jeremy was asked anything. You claimed he wouldn't have been asked for Nevill's details if Nevill had already called. Jeremy also gave information (such as his address in Goldhanger and the fact that Nevill had called him) that Nevill didn't.

The point is WHY would West ask Jeremy for information if he had already obtained it from Nevill?  It makes no sense to ask Jeremy for informaiton that was already obtained from Nevill. 

You claimed it would save time.  How woudl it save time to ask Jeremy for not only his name, adress and phone number but also for all the infromation previously obtained form nevill?  It would result in extra time not save time.

To save time West would announce that Nevill already called, that police were already dispatched and it was being all taken care of so not to worry.

The fact that didn't happen proves Nevill had not called West prior to Jeremy.


That's in statements by Ps Bews and Pc Myall, but Pc Saxby overheard enough to give a different version of what Jeremy said at the scene (which didn't say Sheila had fired all the weapons).  I tend to distrust Ps Bews and Pc Myall because their statements made no mention of the "trick of the light" incident.
I have never deleted a post of that type (or anything you posted). Whenever I've deleted a post of my own, I've reposted it (with minor alteration) almost immediately.

Someone deleted your accusation and my post proving my claims.  They included Adams and Mercer not just Myall, Saxby and Bews.  Jeremy reiterated the claims to Adams and Mercer he didn't just tell the first cops he saw.

Since you trust Saxby I will repost his which you obviously forgot included the same charge so now I expect you to change course and say you don't trust Saxby either or Mercer and Adams for that matter:





Here is an account of the Briefing Adams gave to the raid team:



That one is a double whammy because it stresses how police repsonded because of Jeremy's call and not a call from Nevill and how Jeremy taught Sheila to use the murder weapon and she could use all weapons in the house. 

No, that's your deduction from a couple of mistakes that Jeremy made. Making mistakes isn't the same as lying. If he'd wanted to say he called her after calling the police, he could have done so explicitly.
Caroline didn't post the exchange, but I'd guess she didn't point out the significance of the order of the calls.

You are just palying worthless games.  He said he got the call from Nevill at 3:10Am, he immediatley tried to call Nevill back, immediately called police then finally at 3:25AM called Julie.  He did explicitly state he called her after police.  He stood by that in his interrogation after he accidentally admitted the truth about calling Julie first.  he said he made  amsitake and stood by his earlier statement.  He reiterated it at trial and even to Caroline when she asked.

Syaing that police should have asked what immediately meant is absurd.  Ther eis no way at all to pretend Jeremy claimed he called Julie first he lied and said he didn't call her till 3:25 which he though was after he was done talking to police.

Let's just look at your pathetic games:

Jeremy:                                                                   Reader
3:10 Nevill calls,                                                     Nevill called Jeremy around 3:20
then I immediately tried to call Nevill back,            Jeremy got dressed
then I immediately called police                             Jeremy called Julie
3:25 I called Julie                                                   3:36 Jeremy called police
I got dressed and went to meet police                  3:41 Jeremy was out the door and no the road

If he got dressed and called Julie before calling West then he can't have immediately called police.  They are mutually exclusive.  Your games don't have any traction at all we all see you are distorting it is a waste of time.

Pc West was clearly saying that if 3:26 was the correct time, that would mean he had made a mistake. However, if you read the entire exchange on this matter, it's quite clear that Pc West didn't think that 3:26 was the correct time.

West doesn't make it clear he thinks he was right and Bonnett was wrong.  He admitted he likely made a mistake.  At any rate if he did what you claim it is just as bad for your claims.

For West to say tha either the 3:26 time or 3:36 time is wrong is fatal to your claim that he didn't deny there was only one call he received from the public and only one call he reported to Bonnett.

If your claims were true then West woudl have denied there was an error in the times and would have said that 3:26 corresponds to the time he reported to Bonnett a call from Nevill while 3:26 is the time of a call from Jeremy. West did not do this he said there was a mistake!  That effectively shoots down your claims and they are ended more with him asserting he dispatched police as a result of Jeremy's call.  that closes the door to the possibility of him saying he dispatched them as a result of a call from Nevill. 

Your nonsense would be equivalent to:

The Center For Disease Control announcing it was going to close off travel from Africa because of the Ebola Epidemic and you asserting that it was because of racism and that the CDC was never asked if the reason was for racism and thus didn't deny it was because of racism and if asked might admit it was because of racism.

Gunshot residue is primarily from the muzzle of the weapon. Thus there would have been some on her neck and the nearby area of her clothing. Was GSR detected anywhere on anything?

Gunshot residue doesn't come form the muzzle it is expelled in a could to the side and rear of the weapon.  It is expelled through the holes where the vapors travel out of near the ejection port and the opposing side of the weapon.  There are small circular holes specifically for such purpose.

The bolt is open in this photo so you can actually see the 3 small holes on the opposite side

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #335 on: October 11, 2014, 06:08:AM »
West told him police were already en route get moving so they can meet you.
You've invented the words "get moving". You frequently distort what the police said like that.

No more than 20MPH was the estimate
That estimate was made later, but based on erroneous arithmetic. The estimates made either when Jeremy was overtaken or shortly afterwards didn't mention 20 mph at all. In any case, the estimates tell us nothing about Jeremy's average speed prior to being overtaken.

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #336 on: October 11, 2014, 06:28:AM »
They included Adams and Mercer not just Myall, Saxby and Bews.  Jeremy reiterated the claims to Adams and Mercer he didn't just tell the first cops he saw.
Adams and Mercer didn't clarify when the police were informed that Jeremy would also go to WHF.

I commented on Pc Saxby's post - it doesn't say that Jeremy told Ps Bews or Pc Myall that Sheila used all of the guns. Nor does the briefing by Ps Adams that you posted.

Jeremy: I got dressed and went to meet police
Jeremy didn't say that. His use of the word "immediately" was a mistake, not a lie.

. . . it is expelled in a could to the side and rear of the weapon.
What's a "could"? If you mean "cloud", the GSR should have been found somewhere on Sheila's nightie as she received two shots from close range.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #337 on: October 11, 2014, 07:48:AM »
You've invented the words "get moving". You frequently distort what the police said like that.
That estimate was made later, but based on erroneous arithmetic. The estimates made either when Jeremy was overtaken or shortly afterwards didn't mention 20 mph at all. In any case, the estimates tell us nothing about Jeremy's average speed prior to being overtaken.
Adams and Mercer didn't clarify when the police were informed that Jeremy would also go to WHF.

I commented on Pc Saxby's post - it doesn't say that Jeremy told Ps Bews or Pc Myall that Sheila used all of the guns. Nor does the briefing by Ps Adams that you posted.
Jeremy didn't say that. His use of the word "immediately" was a mistake, not a lie.
What's a "could"? If you mean "cloud", the GSR should have been found somewhere on Sheila's nightie as she received two shots from close range.


Oh Dear, Reader :( Time was when I thought your defence of Jeremy was admirable, albeit, misguided. Now however, it's little more than a -IMO-  vain attempt to upstage Scipio and,m again, IMO, renders your hard work -and it obviously IS that- pathetic.

You score no points for playing a game of semantics. It makes absolutely NO difference to Jeremy's status if Scipio uses terms like "get moving" as opposed to, perhaps, "leave now" NOR does the argument over what may amount to a differential driving speed of 5 miles per hour.

Is it REALLY of such importance for us to know that Sheila MAY only have used SOME of the guns, as opposed to what? ALL of the guns? It's LAUGHABLE that you insist that Jeremy's use of the word "immediately" was a mistake!!!!! Presumably because it doesn't fit with the calculations you've allowed for him. As for the pettiness of pulling him up on the use of "could" instead of "cloud".....................

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #338 on: October 11, 2014, 07:54:AM »
I wonder why Myall went to all that trouble to prove Bamber travelled no more than 20 mph? Sounds to me like the start of a plan to set him up for some reason? No normal person would do that kind of thing unless he had something sinister in mind?

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #339 on: October 11, 2014, 08:25:AM »
I wonder why Myall went to all that trouble to prove Bamber travelled no more than 20 mph? Sounds to me like the start of a plan to set him up for some reason? No normal person would do that kind of thing unless he had something sinister in mind?



Grahame, I HAVE to ask this question because it was THIS which gave me pause for thought. It's looking more and more as if EVERY faction/unit that had involvement in the case decided to set Jeremy up. WHY? SURELY they can't ALL have decided-individually- he was a class A sh-one-t and deserved to be fitted up even if he was innocent and isn't it just TOO much of a coincidence.

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #340 on: October 11, 2014, 09:01:AM »


Grahame, I HAVE to ask this question because it was THIS which gave me pause for thought. It's looking more and more as if EVERY faction/unit that had involvement in the case decided to set Jeremy up. WHY? SURELY they can't ALL have decided-individually- he was a class A sh-one-t and deserved to be fitted up even if he was innocent and isn't it just TOO much of a coincidence.
Well look at the facts April. Although I do not believe that there was a massive plan to set Jeremy up. Perhaps one or even two high ranking officers may have done so.
But doesn't it seen a bit weird to you that this man Myall would go to so much trouble to prove that Jeremy was going 20mph on the way to the scene? For what purpose unless he had something in mind to implicate Jeremy? It is as if he had something bigger in mind concerning Jeremy at the time. Otherwise why do it, it was such a small matter?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2014, 10:30:AM by Mr. Gee »

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #341 on: October 11, 2014, 10:15:AM »


Grahame, I HAVE to ask this question because it was THIS which gave me pause for thought. It's looking more and more as if EVERY faction/unit that had involvement in the case decided to set Jeremy up. WHY? SURELY they can't ALL have decided-individually- he was a class A sh-one-t and deserved to be fitted up even if he was innocent and isn't it just TOO much of a coincidence.

April this is a question I have asked as well. To me , and I don't know why, it seems to extend to the timings and errors in timings of the call, as you say Jeremys drive to the scene , the specific attempt to change the original times of Jeremys call to Julie and getting her flat mates involved and even making note of a clock there not telling the correct time either?

I also (IMO) still get the impression that there were words attributed to Jeremy that do not appear in the original logs or statements ( not that we have seen all of them) in order to " justify" their actions.

As we know from the Dickinson report there were certainly meetings that were not minuted  which gave them plenty of opportunity to form a plan.

 

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #342 on: October 11, 2014, 10:24:AM »
April this is a question I have asked as well. To me , and I don't know why, it seems to extend to the timings and errors in timings of the call, as you say Jeremys drive to the scene , the specific attempt to change the original times of Jeremys call to Julie and getting her flat mates involved and even making note of a clock there not telling the correct time either?

I also (IMO) still get the impression that there were words attributed to Jeremy that do not appear in the original logs or statements ( not that we have seen all of them) in order to " justify" their actions.

As we know from the Dickinson report there were certainly meetings that were not minuted  which gave them plenty of opportunity to form a plan.


I entirely see your point, Jansus. The whole exercise lacked cohesion and discipline which, of itself doesn't make Jeremy innocent or guilty. It just highlights, IMO, that they cocked up.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #343 on: October 11, 2014, 10:43:AM »
Why did EP tell Jeremy not to arrive at WHF before them ? This was HIS family and it was only natural he'd have wanted to belt along. Wouldn't anyone else ? Sod what anyone else says.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Jeremy's court testimony:
« Reply #344 on: October 11, 2014, 01:55:PM »
Why did EP tell Jeremy not to arrive at WHF before them ? This was HIS family and it was only natural he'd have wanted to belt along. Wouldn't anyone else ? Sod what anyone else says.



Lookout, why do YOU think EP told Jeremy "Don't get there before we do"?