The movement in the window. Who saw it ?

[Adam]

Wilkes's book and the 'Crimes, hearts and coronets' article says movement was spotted. But does not say who spotted it.

Bews is on video saying two different things. Saying it was Jeremy and then saying it was a police officer.

The 'Crimes that shook Britain' video says it was Jeremy who spotted the movement.

It was a trick of the light, and no other movement was spotted that evening. However be good to have a definitive answer on who spotted it.

If it was a policeman who thought he saw something, then Jeremy had been convincing in persuading them about Sheila. If it was Jeremy who spotted it, then it was part of his plan to insinuate Sheila.

[Adam]

It seems there is no conclusive answer to this. Otherwise a guilter or supporter would have provided a source.

If it was Jeremy then there was certainly no movement and it was pre planned.

It was a good move. It insinuated Sheila on the night. And it was also good ground work, as the alleged movement is often brought up in his campaign for freedom and in articles about the case.

[Alias]

This is pointless. Bews says two conflicting things, it could be one or the other. As with so many aspects of this unclear case.

[lookout]

Anyone who doesn't say that the trial was unfair,needs to thoroughly read the many contradictions that there are from start to finish with each interview and statement. Plus the twisting,of which there's plenty.

[scipio_usmc]

Wilkes's book and the 'Crimes, hearts and coronets' article says movement was spotted. But does not say who spotted it.

Bews is on video saying two different things. Saying it was Jeremy and then saying it was a police officer.

The 'Crimes that shook Britain' video says it was Jeremy who spotted the movement.

It was a trick of the light, and no other movement was spotted that evening. However be good to have a definitive answer on who spotted it.

If it was a policeman who thought he saw something, then Jeremy had been convincing in persuading them about Sheila. If it was Jeremy who spotted it, then it was part of his plan to insinuate Sheila.

It is quite obvious no one was alive inside moving around at the time police were sitting outside.  The police said they moved their heads and it gave the impression of movement and that they did not actually see anyone. 

Trying to establish Jeremy told them someone moved in order to get them to believe they were still alive inside is a wasted effort since the police were unclear about who broached it.  It takes no difference in the grand scheme of things, there is so much evidence against Jeremy that trying to pile this on is a waste of time.

In contrast Jeremy supporters have little to establish his innocence and latch onto any desperate thing they can including the claim that they saw Sheila walking around so this proves she had to have killed herself while police were outside.

[Adam]

It is certainly exactly the sort of thing a guilty person would do. If he was trying to insinuate someone else.

It is less likely someone else would see movement. As there would not be.

The OS says the moon was shining on the other side of WHF. Bews said all lights were off at WHF. There was no light from anywhere else. So I am not sure how upstairs movement can be seen from downstairs and yards away.

[Jan]

It is certainly exactly the sort of thing a guilty person would do. If he was trying to insinuate someone else.

It is less likely someone else would see movement. As there would not be.

The OS says the moon was shining on the other side of WHF. Bews said all lights were off at WHF. There was no light from anywhere else. So I am not sure how upstairs movement can be seen from downstairs and yards away.

the lights were not all off.