submit questions for the Essex Police Challenge

[lookout]

I've just had a good luck and I can't find it. There is a lot though so will carry on.

The first mention I found for it was in 2011.

But not backed up by any document.

There IS a document somewhere,I've seen it and I'm almost sure it was written by AE,signed and counter-signed. I'll find it if it kills me ( oh good I hear you say )

[lookout]

 During the time of the murders,The Times newspaper had reported that the jobs were at risk of three senior officers with the Essex Police Force.  I wonder who they were ?
Then in the NOTW,it had stated that police may have bungled by destroying vital clues.

These were prints from 1985,as in one newspaper,the Gazette,the public were mounting their concerns over the way the case was being handled.

[lookout]

Erm,here's a good one. " The judge A.Arlidge QC told the Trial Judge and Defence Council in Chambers,and this was repeated in Open Court that " Julie Mugford has given me her assurance that she has not sold her story to a newspaper,and has no intention of doing so ".

JM did so on the 9th of October 1986.

[Jane]

During the time of the murders,The Times newspaper had reported that the jobs were at risk of three senior officers with the Essex Police Force.  I wonder who they were ?
Then in the NOTW,it had stated that police may have bungled by destroying vital clues.

These were prints from 1985,as in one newspaper,the Gazette,the public were mounting their concerns over the way the case was being handled.

Erm,here's a good one. " The judge A.Arlidge QC told the Trial Judge and Defence Council in Chambers,and this was repeated in Open Court that " Julie Mugford has given me her assurance that she has not sold her story to a newspaper,and has no intention of doing so ".

JM did so on the 9th of October 1986.

Good as it MAY be, neither will make a guilty man innocent nor an innocent man guilty. All it can do is bring them to court. The rest is down to "learned counsel."

[lookout]

 However,in JM's 2002 witness statement,she had to admit to having been to the newspapers, which was later ruled in breach of guidelines by the Press Complaints Council,but she was never made to pay back the money.

JM must have known about her large sum of money quite early on because it's known that she stopped work in the March-1986 then ran up a large overdraft until the trial in 1986,so she'd been BOUND by what was to be an act of betrayal and a greed for money.
Also the £ 400 that Jeremy had given to her for a holiday was cashed in the September of 1986,7 days after she'd been taken into custody after accusing Jeremy of hiring a hitman ? Happy to spend money from a " murderer " then ?? 

[Mr. Gee]

However,in JM's 2002 witness statement,she had to admit to having been to the newspapers, which was later ruled in breach of guidelines by the Press Complaints Council,but she was never made to pay back the money.

JM must have known about her large sum of money quite early on because it's known that she stopped work in the March-1986 then ran up a large overdraft until the trial in 1986,so she'd been BOUND by what was to be an act of betrayal and a greed for money.
Also the £ 400 that Jeremy had given to her for a holiday was cashed in the September of 1986,7 days after she'd been taken into custody after accusing Jeremy of hiring a hitman ? Happy to spend money from a " murderer " then ??

Lookout as you and I are quite aware the Law has nothing to do with justice.

[lookout]

Lookout as you and I are quite aware the Law has nothing to do with justice.

You're telling me,Mr G.

[lookout]

DB and PE had both told the police and the court that they'd seen Sheila handling a gun. EP knew anyway,so why was the court led to believe that she couldn't do so ? We all know that PE had told COLP about Scotland and the shoot that went on there,but this piece of evidence which was handwritten went missing after the typed version which had been disclosed to the IPCC and the Defence.

[Mr. Gee]

DB and PE had both told the police and the court that they'd seen Sheila handling a gun. EP knew anyway,so why was the court led to believe that she couldn't do so ? We all know that PE had told COLP about Scotland and the shoot that went on there,but this piece of evidence which was handwritten went missing after the typed version which had been disclosed to the IPCC and the Defence.

Yes I'm afraid these "respectable" people are believed too readily.

[lookout]

Yes I'm afraid these "respectable" people are believed too readily.

Of course they are. Respectability might have counted for something in the early 1900's,but certainly not the mid-80's.

[lookout]

 The ages relating to Sheila,26/27 ? must have been altered to the right age.Were they,and who altered them ? This was only the start of getting things wrong,so are we to believe that EVERYTHING was right about the case ?

[lookout]

For as long as there are differences in the ages to which Sheila was supposed to have been,there will forever be the uncertainty as to whether there were indeed two separate calls made.

[scipio_usmc]

I've already said why there was little or no residue.It was because the bullets were copper-plated.

1) whether they were jacketed or not has to do with whether SHeila's hands would have lead on them from loading the bullets.  Jacketed bullets still result in PGSR and soot getting on the shooter.   

2) You are factually wrong as usual.  The bullets at WHF were not jacketed (copper-coated)

[lookout]

Ah well,brains aren't everything. In fact,in your case they're nothing.

[scipio_usmc]

Ah well,brains aren't everything. In fact,in your case they're nothing.

It would be nice if you would use yours and thus to stop asserting claims already pointed out to you in the past as false.