Author Topic: Peter Eatons fingerprints found on bloodstained ammunition box found in cupboard  (Read 7334 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Peter Eaton did not  handle the box of ammunition at all once David Boutflour recovered it from the scene on the 10th August 1985. There is no reference anywhere to that in any of his witness statements, testimony or interviews by CILP, so I don't know where you have got that idea from. Now the presence of this bloodstained ammunition box in the relatives possession between the 10th August and the 11th September 1985 is very wording indeed, because it demonstrates in the clearest possible terms that blood from the crime scene was transported away from the scene by the relatives and kept by them for a whole month before Ann Eaton hand it over to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985. This was in addition to the relatives removing from the scene on the 10th August 1985, a sound moderator also contaminated with blood, later attributed as belonging exclusively to Sheila Caffell, took it away and kept by themselves for a whole month until Annie Eaton also handed it over to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985. As if all of this isn't bad enough, please hang fire because I have even more alarming revelations to make, because relatives also had possession for a whole month between 10th August and the 11th September 1985, a solitary round of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition with a spot of blood upon it, (part of lab' item no. 93, exhibit DRH/22), which again Annie Eaton handed over to DC Oakley on the 11th September 1985...

Relatives whisked three separate evidential exhibits away from the scene on the 10th August 1985, all of which were bloodstained in respect or another, (1) sound moderator, DRB/1, (2) box of ammunition DRB/2, and (3) a solitary round of .22 Eley subsonic hollow point ammunition (which eventually became part of DRH/22, lab' item no. 93)...

I am still not yet done, because on the 12th September 1985, David Boutflour met police at the scene (whf) and from within the very same gun cupboard in the downstairs office, he removed the metal ring that normally fitted onto the screw thread end of the anshuzt rifle barrel, and he gave it to the police. Now technically speaking this threaded metal ring was the end part of the anshuzt rifles barrel, and arguably just as significant as any sound moderator later introduced to help to convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders. This is because it was a component part of the rifle which police and their experts say belonged to the only weapon used in the shootings - yet, despite David Boutflour handing the end of the anshuzt rifle. Barrel over to police at the scene on the 12th September 1985, police try to conceal its existence or recovery because its very existence has the potential to seriously undermine the evidence of all these different moderators that were merged together as the same one, bearing at least four different exhibit references. SJ/1, SBJ/1, DB/1, CAE or AE/1, and DRB/1...

We are now very close to understanding exactly how corrupted police officers and dishonest relatives worked together to fabricate the key evidence used in the prosecution of Jeremy Bamber for these murders...

In addition to these matters, let us also not forget that Annie Eaton also removed from the scene on the 10th August 1985, a pair of heavily bloodstained knickers belonging to the victim Sheila Caffell. Annie took them away from the scene in the boot of her car, along with the moderator (DRB/1), the bloodstained box of ammunition, and the solitary round of Eley .22 ammunition with a spit of blood upon it...

All of this collectively, is too serious to ignore...

Nothing you say is worth paying attention do because all you do is ignore the facts and make up nonsense.

This is from one of the sources you posted:

  It makes clear Peter Eaton had held the 22 ammunition until police came around to collect it so his print on the 22 box is not unusual and is explained by such being kept at his house. indeed Eaton is the one who handed the moderator to police in August and he wanted to give them the ammunition at the same time but police would not take anything else at that point.  So he had to put everything else away to store for another month before police finally decided to take the remaining items.

Another source you posted was from Oakey and it makes clear the box he though had blood was one of the boxes of Raker 12 bore ammunition not the 22 box that had Eaton's prints on it.  You lied when you claimed his prints were on the same box that had the red mark.

The statement from Oakey



You keep accusing police of lying but the only one you demonstrate to be lying is yourself.  You could not do a better job of ruining your credibility if you had the desire to do so.  I fail to see why you bother which such misrepresentations because all they do is tarnish your reputation nothing more. It is bad enough to make up things and hope no one will figure out the truth but you go a step further and post evidence which rebuts your claims and hope no one who reads the documents will realize they rebut your claims. 
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 04:37:PM by scipio_usmc »
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17250
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
all this really means is he touched the box at some time its not really smoking gun evedence.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
all this really means is he touched the box at some time its not really smoking gun evedence.


Unless he carried it between his teeth, I guess he had to carry it to transport it from A to B which is likely to mean that his prints would be on it.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670

Unless he carried it between his teeth, I guess he had to carry it to transport it from A to B which is likely to mean that his prints would be on it.




Or meant to be.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771



Or meant to be.



I'm becoming confused, Lookout. Thus far, those who had a hand in her demise have been:-  a scruffy man. An UNKNOWN man who attempted to have sex with her. An assortment of police and NOW Peter Eton seems to have managed to get himself in on the act. What ever -WHO ever next?..................By the way, I DO have an alibi :D

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Ann Eaton put the property away after her brother recovered it, Peter Eaton was not present - and the extract you refer to is a witness statement prepared by the police for Peter Eaton to sign, which by the way, he did not sign, so you can hardly say that he handled anything legally...

Police took his fingerprints because they suspected him of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Ann Eaton put the property away after her brother recovered it, Peter Eaton was not present - and the extract you refer to is a witness statement prepared by the police for Peter Eaton to sign, which by the way, he did not sign, so you can hardly say that he handled anything legally...

Police took his fingerprints because they suspected him of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...



Would that be before or after THEY tried to frame him?

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079


Would that be before or after THEY tried to frame him?

What are you referring to, its not clear what you are asking me...

Ask yourself how police knew that Peter Eaton's fingerprints had been found and identified on that ammunition box? Because there is no mention anywhere at all inside the police file that police took Peter Eaton's fingerprints for comparison purposes, and lo and behold Peter Eaton does not even volunteer such information...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
What are you referring to, its not clear what you are asking me...

Ask yourself how police knew that Peter Eaton's fingerprints had been found and identified on that ammunition box? Because there is no mention anywhere at all inside the police file that police took Peter Eaton's fingerprints for comparison purposes, and lo and behold Peter Eaton does not even volunteer such information...


Ooops :) It should have read:- Would that be before or after they tried to frame JEREMY?.......SILLY me :D

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17250
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
i think the bloodstanis on the box is probely more important than fingerprints id expect prints from nearly everybody involved to be there.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 08:44:PM by nugnug »

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Ann Eaton put the property away after her brother recovered it, Peter Eaton was not present - and the extract you refer to is a witness statement prepared by the police for Peter Eaton to sign, which by the way, he did not sign, so you can hardly say that he handled anything legally...

Police took his fingerprints because they suspected him of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...

Peter Eaton is the one who took out the moderator, scope, weapons and ammo and tried to give it all to police on August 12, 1985 but police refused to take anything except the moderator so he had to put the rest of it away again for safe keeping till they finally changed their minds in September.  You accused Peter Eaton of wrongdoing many times int he past with respect to his turning over of the moderator to police so how can you now pretend he had nothing to do with holding onto any of this evidence?

 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Peter Eaton is the one who took out the moderator, scope, weapons and ammo and tried to give it all to police on August 12, 1985 but police refused to take anything except the moderator so he had to put the rest of it away again for safe keeping till they finally changed their minds in September.  You accused Peter Eaton of wrongdoing many times int he past with respect to his turning over of the moderator to police so how can you now pretend he had nothing to do with holding onto any of this evidence?

 

Peter Eaton did not try to hand over everything else to DS Jones on the evening of 12th August, I do not even believe that he handed a moderator to DS Jones on that occasion, I think that part has been made up. If the only moderator recovered from the scene then it was the one retained by the family until Annie Eaton handed it over to DC Oakley on the 11th September. The moderator Cook received from DS Jones on 13th August,  which Cook took along to the lab that very same day, to be looked at by Glynis Howard to have been the sound moderator that Jones took from the scene on the 7th August.  We all know that there shoud have been two sound moderators at the scene at the time of the shootings, and that by the time house keys were handed over to the relatives on the evening of 9th  August, that there was only one remaining moderator still inside whf, because DSaJones had rwmoved the other one days earlier. The moderator recovered by David Boutflour from the scene on 10th August, was retained by the relatives until the 11th September, and handed over to DC Oakley at that time. Therefore, the moderator (DRB/1) found by David Boutflour on 10th August, could not have been the same moderator (SJ/1) taken to the lab' by Cook on the 13th August,  (exhibit reference, later amended  to SBJ/1), nor could it be the same moderator (DB/1) submitted to the lab' on the 30th August,  inside which the crucial and significant small flake of dried blood was found,  producing the key blood group activity (A, EAP B, AK/1 and HP 2-1) associated with and to Sheila Caffell. The moderator found in the gun cupboard by David Boutflour in the gun cupboard on the 10th August,  could not possibly have been the same moderator (DB/1) sent to the lab'  on the 30th August,  since the relatives had possession of the other moderator (DRB/1) until the 11th September, and then police retained possession of it (DRB/1) until the 20th September,  by which time,  it ( DRB/1) had been fingerprinted on the 14th September,  by DS Davidson and DS Eastwood. Details written in the submission of articles form, which accompanied the moderator(DRB/1) states that the moderator  to be checked for blood and fibers - even though by the date this moderator (DRB/1) was being submitted to the lab' (20th September), the crucial flake of blood (aforementioned) had already been found inside the other moderator (DB/1) at the lab', and already analysed at the lab' (between 12th and 19th September), so there it is, the proof for all to see, the absolute truth being that the key flake of blood, was never present at any stage inside the only sound moderator (DRB/1) found at the scene by David Boutflour on the 10th August, and retained by the family until 11th September,  before it was duly handed over to police by Ann Eaton..
« Last Edit: April 01, 2015, 03:11:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Peter Eaton did not try to hand over everything else to DS Jones on the evening of 12th August, I do not even believe that he handed a moderator to DS Jones on that occasion, I think that part has been made up. If the only moderator recovered from the scene then it was the one retained by the family until Annie Eaton handed it over to DC Oakley on the 11th September. The moderator Cook received from DS Jones on 13th August,  which Cook took along to the lab that very same day, to be looked at by Glynis Howard to have been the sound moderator that Jones took from the scene on the 7th August.  We all know that there shoud have been two sound moderators at the scene at the time of the shootings, and that by the time house keys were handed over to the relatives on the evening of 9th  August, that there was inly ne rwmaung moderator still inside whf, because DSaJones had rwmoved the other one days earlier. The moderator recovered bt David Boutflour from the scene on 10th August, was retained by the relatives until the 11th September, and handed over to DC Oakley at that time. Therefore, the moderator (DRB/1) found by David Boutflour on 10th August, could not have been the same moderator (SJ/1) taken to the lab' by Cook on the 13th August,  (exhibit reference, later amended  to SBJ/1), nor could it be the same moderator (DB/1) submitted to the lab' on the 30th August,  inside which the crucial and significant small flake of dried blood was found,  producing the key blood group activity (A, EAP B, AK/1 and HP 2-1) associated with and to Sheila Caffell. The moderator found in the gun cupboard by David Boutflour in the gun cupboard on the 10th August,  could not possibly have been the same moderator (DB/1) sent to the lab'  on the 30th August,  since the relatives had possession of the other moderator (DRB/1) until the 11th September, and then police retained possession of it (DRB/1) until the 20th September,  by which time,  it ( DRB/1) had been fingerprinted on the 14th September,  by DS Davidson and DS Eastwood. Details written in the submission of articles form, which accompanied the moderator(DRB/1) states that the moderator  to be checked for blood and fibers - even though by the date this moderator (DRB/1) was being submitted to the lab' (20th September), the crucial flake of blood (aforementioned) had alrwady been found inside the other moderator (DB/1) at the lab', and already analysed at the lab' (between 12th and 19th September), so there it is, the proof for all to see, the absolute truth being that the key flake of blood, was never present at any stage inside the only sound moderator (DRB/1) found at the scene by David Boutflour on the 10th August, and retained by the family until 11th September,  before it was duly handed over to police by Ann Eaton..

You seem to forget who you are dealing with.  While lookout and some other Jeremy supporters give your unsupported opinions undue influence I do not.  While they are scared or too biased to call your lies out I am not.  The evidence you posted established as clear as day that the red dot suspected of being blood was on one of the boxes containing Raker 12 bore shells while Eaton's print was foudn on a 22 box. There is no way you misconstrued those documents to mean the fingerprint and red dot were on the same box you are too clever to misconstrue them you intentionally distorted.

You know you have no evidence to support a moderator being collected by Jones on the day of the murders let alone any evidence to establish 2 different moderators were tested in 1985.  You made up such claims.  There was only one weapon at WHF capable of having a moderator fitted and only one moderator your claim there were 2 at the murder scene is false. 

Your beliefs not only are not supported by any information they are clearly not genuine.  You constantly change your assertions and end up contradicting yourself precisely because you are not going with genuine beliefs but rather simply making up arguments as you go along that you think you can use to convince people to believe what you want us to believe.  You give us too little credit though in being able to see through such antics given the fact so much evidence in in the public domain including everything you placed in the public domain.  You expect us to not be able to comprehend the documents and thus not to realize they refute your claims.

Your supposed beliefs that Eaton didn't hand over the moderator as he and police claimed and that he never touched any of the items that were stored at his house for more than a month are more than simply unsupported and not credible- they are as disingenuous as your claims that the victim's bodies were used as dummies in a training exercise.  You couldn't convince me that you honestly believe most of the stuff you try to sell to us let alone can you provide evidence to establish the claims are objectively true.  You enjoy toying with us that seems to get your rocks off.

   



 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21084
You seem to forget who you are dealing with.  While lookout and some other Jeremy supporters give your unsupported opinions undue influence I do not.  While they are scared or too biased to call your lies out I am not.  The evidence you posted established as clear as day that the red dot suspected of being blood was on one of the boxes containing Raker 12 bore shells while Eaton's print was foudn on a 22 box. There is no way you misconstrued those documents to mean the fingerprint and red dot were on the same box you are too clever to misconstrue them you intentionally distorted.

You know you have no evidence to support a moderator being collected by Jones on the day of the murders let alone any evidence to establish 2 different moderators were tested in 1985.  You made up such claims.  There was only one weapon at WHF capable of having a moderator fitted and only one moderator your claim there were 2 at the murder scene is false. 

Your beliefs not only are not supported by any information they are clearly not genuine.  You constantly change your assertions and end up contradicting yourself precisely because you are not going with genuine beliefs but rather simply making up arguments as you go along that you think you can use to convince people to believe what you want us to believe.  You give us too little credit though in being able to see through such antics given the fact so much evidence in in the public domain including everything you placed in the public domain.  You expect us to not be able to comprehend the documents and thus not to realize they refute your claims.

Your supposed beliefs that Eaton didn't hand over the moderator as he and police claimed and that he never touched any of the items that were stored at his house for more than a month are more than simply unsupported and not credible- they are as disingenuous as your claims that the victim's bodies were used as dummies in a training exercise.  You couldn't convince me that you honestly believe most of the stuff you try to sell to us let alone can you provide evidence to establish the claims are objectively true.  You enjoy toying with us that seems to get your rocks off.

 
In the Andrew Hunter book draft he claims the blood was found in the wrong silencer(page 21): http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=2441.0


Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21084
The link works for me. Sorry if there are problems with members. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=2441.0