Police log contents, and position of bodies in photographs don't add up, CRIKEY.

[mike tesko]

I am returning to the UK tomorrow, it has been an eventful week for us, we have made some headway, because The retired officer, has met with Cyclops members, and they have questioned him, and been privy to the facts other members of the forum have not yet been privy too. No doubt from here on in, members of team Cyclops and the retired officer will be in touch with one another without any further involvement from me, for this I am truly gratefull, since it has released a huge burden from my mind, and conscience...

[scipio_usmc]

Whether any of you consider me to be mentally ill or not, would you agree with my analysis, or disagree with it?

I don't consider you mentally ill others think that as a result of your post I simply view you as dishonest and out for attention.

I disagree with your analysis completely because you distort the evidence and when distorting is not enough to help you then you  make up evidence like a photo of Sheila in the bed.

Police who wondered if her body was moved wondered if it had been moved a little on the floor, none of them suggested her body was moved from the bed. There is zero evidence to support her body being in the bed, no accounts from anyone, no physical evidence, no plausible reason why they would move her body to the floor... the only allegations you can make that would be even slightly plausible would be that her body was moved a little while she was on the floor.  That is the best one can try to allege based on questions by select police about whether he head had been slightly different. 

For going beyond such and making allegations that have no evidentiary support at all and thus making up the claims out of this air I don't consider you insane simply dishonest.  To make those allegations and yet be honest one has to admit there is no evidence and that it was made up by you but you suspect it  happened despite zero evidence to prove it because...

Obviously that would end up carrying little weight so you instead engage in subterfuge including making up photos that police can't have taken, never would have taken even if they could have and would have destroyed if they had taken them. 

   

 

[mike tesko]

I don't consider you mentally ill others think that as a result of your post I simply view you as dishonest and out for attention.

I disagree with your analysis completely because you distort the evidence and when distorting is not enough to help you then you  make up evidence like a photo of Sheila in the bed.

Police who wondered if her body was moved wondered if it had been moved a little on the floor, none of them suggested her body was moved from the bed. There is zero evidence to support her body being in the bed, no accounts from anyone, no physical evidence, no plausible reason why they would move her body to the floor... the only allegations you can make that would be even slightly plausible would be that her body was moved a little while she was on the floor.  That is the best one can try to allege based on questions by select police about whether he head had been slightly different. 

For going beyond such and making allegations that have no evidentiary support at all and thus making up the claims out of this air I don't consider you insane simply dishonest.  To make those allegations and yet be honest one has to admit there is no evidence and that it was made up by you but you suspect it  happened despite zero evidence to prove it because...

Obviously that would end up carrying little weight so you instead engage in subterfuge including making up photos that police can't have taken, never would have taken even if they could have and would have destroyed if they had taken them. 

   

for the record, I am not dishonest, and I do not make things up...

[mike tesko]

Goodnight...

[scipio_usmc]

for the record, I am not dishonest, and I do not make things up...

How do you reconcile this comment of yours:

"police message log timed at 8.10am, reads, "after a thorough search a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total""

with the actual log entry:



There was nothing about 3 bodies being found upstairs, simply 3 further bodies found.  The first entry said they entered the house and 2 bodies were found so far thus call for a doctor to attend and arrange for crime scene officers to come to the scene to deal with the bodies. The next said the search was complete and said 3 further bodies found 5 in total. 

-----

Much like Thomas refused to believe Jesus rose without seeing him and being able to feel his spear wound in his side and nail marks I will never believe you saw photos of a moderator with a SJ/1 label on it or of Sheila in bed unless I see them myself. Nor will I believe one of the officers handling the case is an informant feeding information to you unless such person actually admitted to it- which still would not prove his claims true but would prove he made allegations and you didn't simply make the claim up. 

Some of your claims can be honest errors but you always stand by them in the face of evidence proving them wrong and that rises to the level of dishonesty. Certain claims like the photos you say you saw and this informant go beyond the pale and need concrete evidence.   

[mike tesko]

How do you reconcile this comment of yours:

"police message log timed at 8.10am, reads, "after a thorough search a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total""

with the actual log entry:



There was nothing about 3 bodies being found upstairs, simply 3 further bodies found.  The first entry said they entered the house and 2 bodies were found so far thus call for a doctor to attend and arrange for crime scene officers to come to the scene to deal with the bodies. The next said the search was complete and said 3 further bodies found 5 in total. 

-----

Much like Thomas refused to believe Jesus rose without seeing him and being able to feel his spear wound in his side and nail marks I will never believe you saw photos of a moderator with a SJ/1 label on it or of Sheila in bed unless I see them myself. Nor will I believe one of the officers handling the case is an informant feeding information to you unless such person actually admitted to it- which still would not prove his claims true but would prove he made allegations and you didn't simply make the claim up. 

Some of your claims can be honest errors but you always stand by them in the face of evidence proving them wrong and that rises to the level of dishonesty. Certain claims like the photos you say you saw and this informant go beyond the pale and need concrete evidence.

Your idea that the other 3 bodies were not found upstairs, is insane. If the point you are trying to make, or to prove, is that those additional 3 bodies could have also been found downstairs, then there would have been 5 bodies found downstairs, not 2. The content of the message logs are clear, TWO OF THE 5 BODIES WERE FOUND DOWNSTAIRS WITHIN MINUTES OF ENTRY, the other 3 bodies were most definately found upstairs 23 minutes later...

[mike tesko]

Has any body got any idea which 3 bodies were found at 8.10am?

[mike tesko]

Let's look at the sources avaiilable to police to help them to know what was happening inside the farmhouse once the raid team entered?

(1) - open phone line from kitchen phone at scene patched through by operator to the incident room...

(2) - open microphones carried with first 6 firearms officers into premises, info' relayed to Commander PS Adams who was located at a nearby barn..

(3) - occupants of CA07 performing  communication duties between police at scene, and police back in incident room...

(4) - senior officers in the incident room sending messages to officers at the scene via occupants of CA07...

[mike tesko]

Thier is no reason why any party who was privy to the information coming from within the farmhouse, to be misunderstood, and record inaccurate information, without someone taking responsibility for the mistake, and passing a new message clarifying the situation...

[mike tesko]

Two bodies found downstairs, from 7.37am, and a further three bodies found by 8.10am, is self explanetary. Nobody at all in the chain of communication makes mention of only one body having been found downstairs, nor any reference to discovery of  a fourth body upstairs. What I am saying is that if there had been a mix up as alleged by the Collins account, at the beginning of the operation, the situation would have been rectified by 8.10  am. not continued as though two bodies had been discovered downstairs, leaving only three more bodies to find...

[mike tesko]

If only 1 body had been found upon entry at 7.37am, why was it felt necessary to reconfirm that the body of a dead male, and a dead female (7.38am) had been found? Why was a request sent from the scene at 7.42am, requesting that the police surgeon, and Coroners officer be contacted regarding two bodies, not one? You do not continue as if the mix up had not occurred, if it had by informing the police surgeon and the coroners officer that 2 bodies had been found...

Furthermore, back in the incident room...

Within 3 minutes of the request to inform the police surgeon and coronors officer about two bodies, a female employee stationed in the incident room, received information from another source confirming that 1 of the 2 dead bodies was a murder, whilst the other body was a suicide...

[mike tesko]

Linda, contacted DS Davidson at his home at 7.45am, requested him to attend the office because police who were attendinding an incident at whf, involving a murder and a suicide. ..

[mike tesko]

You do not have all this information, if there was some sort of an error involving one dead body getting mixed up for another, yet still provide sensitive information naming one of the bodies being described as male and a female, nor do you go a step further, by declaring that the same body was a murder, and a suicide?

[mike tesko]

Ralph Bamber did not commit suicide,  he was murdered, so the reference to a person having committed suicide could not have been a reference to his body having been mistakenly identified as the body of a female who had committed suicide ; there must have been a second body downstairs, and the Collins explanation is a trick introduced later...

[mike tesko]

Ralph Bamber did not commit suicide,  he was murdered, so the reference to a person having committed suicide could not have been a reference to his body having been mistakenly identified as the body of a female who had committed suicide ; there must have been a second body downstairs, and the Collins explanation is a trick introduced later...

The Collins explanation dies not sit well at all with the known and established sequence of events, since his account commences with the potential for Ralphs body to have been mistakenly identified as the body of a dead female before police had even got unto the farmhouse. A mistake he says not confirmed until after police had entered the main kitchen. This explanation is problematic for a number of different reasons. Firstly, according to Jeremy's interpretation of what Collins said he did, Collins looked through the wrong window to enable him to misidentify Ralphs body, a fact which Jeremy maintains was eventually found in the main kitchen, not the back kitchen...