Did Jeremy phone Witham police station ?

[susan]

Jan I am quite confused over the timings of the phone calls

[Adam]

well this is supposed to have come from a book - blood relations and is the judges summing up and does not agree with what you have said
- Before he had a chance to say a word to his father the line went dead.
2 - He tried ‘two or three times’ to phone his father back but the line was engaged.
3 - Instead of dialling 999, he looked up the number of the police at Chelmsford, and called them. The incoming call was logged as having been made at 3.36, although ‘giving the defence the benefit of the doubt’, the true timing seems to have been 3.26. Jeremy claimed he was kept hanging on the line for eleven minutes. A police car was dispatched from Witham, and Jeremy told to meet it at the farm.
4 - He telephoned Julie at Lewisham, feeling he needed ‘a friendly ear’ and telling her there was ‘trouble’ at the farm. Julie told him to go back to bed. Jeremy’s call seems to have woken most of the occupants at Julie’s lodgings, who testified that they heard the phone ringing at ‘about 3.a.m.,’ ‘3.12 a.m.,’ and ‘two-something”


So now as this source is supposed to be the same Judges summing up where have we got to?


Which book/ summing up do we believe?

All this seems in order. Strange that he wanted to 'hear a friendly voice' after Neville's call. But everyone is different.

On the phone to Chelmsford he told West he had phoned Witham. Upon meeting Bews he told him he had phoned Witham. Jeremy no doubt volunteering this information to both officers

However under oath a year later he said he did not phone Witham.

So which is it ? 

[Mr. Gee]

All this seems in order. Strange that he wanted to 'hear a friendly voice' after Neville's call. But everyone is different.

On the phone to Chelmsford he told West he had phoned Witham. Upon meeting Bews he told him he had phoned Witham. Jeremy no doubt volunteering this information to both officers

However under oath a year later he said he did not phone Witham.

So which is it ?

So do you have a source where these officers said this? Is it in their witness statements?

[Adam]

So do you have a source where these officers said this? Is it in their witness statements?

Post 25 and 27.

[Jan]

All this seems in order. Strange that he wanted to 'hear a friendly voice' after Neville's call. But everyone is different.

On the phone to Chelmsford he told West he had phoned Witham. Upon meeting Bews he told him he had phoned Witham. Jeremy no doubt volunteering this information to both officers

However under oath a year later he said he did not phone Witham.

So which is it ?

can you find his testimony where he had to deny that fact? I Have never seen that

[Adam]

can you find his testimony where he had to deny that fact? I Have never seen that

Wilkes's book goes over the judges summing up in detail. I posted details of it on here on another thread.

It says it in the book. I cannot see how an investigation author would make this up. Or if he did why it has not been challenged by Bamber, the judge or the two officers who Wilkes said testified.

Wilkes interviewed everyone connected to the case. Including Bamber, excluding Julie.

[lookout]

So did Lomax. 

[Mr. Gee]

Post 25 and 27.

Ok thanks. So we only have Bewes' memory of the conversation then?

[Adam]

Ok thanks. So we only have Bewes' memory of the conversation then?

And West's.

[Mr. Gee]

And West's.

Ok Adam, you have given me the source of your information so credit where credits due. Thank you.

[Jan]

And West's.

Actually you may have bought up an important point that could be looked at both ways.

in Wests testimony it was pointed out that WEST had NOT in his original statement recorded that JB had phoned Witham - it was not in his notes.

Bews - well we know from his video how he makes "mistakes"

So either JB made a mistake - or the officers wanted to add this call - Now why would that be ?

So at the moment unless we find more documents - JB never said in his statements he phoned Witham?

West in his original interview did not say JB phoned Witham. JB denies he did .

SO if the officers are telling fibs then why?

And if JB changed his story then Why ?

[Jan]

oops

[Adam]

Very well done Jan. Putting a new angle on it. Well the judge did not see it this way. Bamber has never accused the police of lying on this. Similar to his 3am call to Julie he has never mentioned it since conviction.

I do not see why the policemen would lie under oath on this. It does not enhance their alleged framing attempt. It actually benefits Bamber in supporting why he choose the ninth best option of phoning Chelmsford after getting Neville's call. 

All I can assume is what he told the police on the night was not true. And what he said under oath was true. But why volunteer a lie on the night ? 

After weighing up the options pre trial and consulting his lawyers, it was decided to tell the truth. Which could suggest the police were lying under oath. Putting doubt into the juries minds.  

There was also  always the possibility officers from Witham could testify the phones were manned every minute of that night. Which is backed up by the fact that Chelmsford got through straight away. This together with the two policemen's testimony would undermine Jeremy's claim he phoned Witham on the night. 

[Jan]

Very well done Jan. Putting a new angle on it. Well the judge did not see it this way. Bamber has never accused the police of lying on this. Similar to his 3am call to Julie he has never mentioned it since conviction.

I do not see why the policemen would lie under oath on this. It does not enhance their alleged framing attempt. It actually benefits Bamber in supporting why he choose the ninth best option of phoning Chelmsford after getting Neville's call.

All I can assume is what he told the police on the night was not true. And what he said under oath was true. But why volunteer a lie on the night ?

After weighing up the options pre trial and consulting his lawyers, it was decided to tell the truth. Which could suggest the police were lying under oath. Putting doubt into the juries minds. 

There was also  always the possibility officers from Witham could testify the phones were manned every minute of that night. Which is backed up by the fact that Chelmsford got through straight away. This together with the two policemen's testimony would undermine Jeremy's claim he phoned Witham on the night.

I trust you  are not being sarcastic  and at least I am considering both angles .

As I said before we don't know how Witham was manned and when they phoned Witham the officers who answered had just returned from a job. so there was a chance the call would not be answered.

Could it be that there was a record of a call to Witham that the police had to explain away?

[Adam]

I trust you  are not being sarcastic  and at least I am considering both angles .

As I said before we don't know how Witham was manned and when they phoned Witham the officers who answered had just returned from a job. so there was a chance the call would not be answered.

Could it be that there was a record of a call to Witham that the police had to explain away?

My view is if the police station was open (it was), then the phone would be manned 100% of the time. If officers left the building, the phone would still be manned.

I do not see why the police would have to explain away a call from Jeremy to Witham. If he did call them it highlights neither guilt or innocence.

But saying on the night he had, then testifying he did not will harm him. The judge saying as much and influencing the jury.