HOLD THE FRONT PAGE HEADLINE - Bamber was definitely framed. ..

[mike tesko]

Details will appear here shortly.
.

[mike tesko]

Key blood group and paint evidence relied upon to convict Jeremy  Bamber in 1986, is set to become exposed as faked evidence. ..

[mike tesko]

This will be of direct interest to Jeremy and his legal team:-

The following facts are proven beyond doubt...

(1)  - a total of 7 DB exhibits, were handed over to the police by Ann Eaton on the 11th September 1985 ( DB /1 to DB/7 inclusive) one of these was a parker hale sound moderator...

(2) - steps were taken to conceal the hand over of the silencer at the scene (whf) on the 11th September 1985,  by altering the details of what Ann Eaton had actually handed over to police that day. In this version of events Ann Eaton only handed over 6 exhibits, marked DB/2 to DB/7....

(3) - Ann Eaton also handed over to police 2 further itetms to police in the 11th September 1985, these were exhibits, AE/1 and AE/2...

(4) - The silencer sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985, was not silencer DB/1, because that silencer ( DB/1) did not get handed over to the police by Ann Eaton, until the 11th September,  some 13 days too late to be the silencer sent to lab' on 30th August.  I can now reveal that the silencer sent to the lab' on that occasion was silencer SBJ/1, found at the scene by DS Jones,  as reported by PC Whiddon (the exhibits officer) in his COLP witness statement. ..

(5) - the lab' sent silencer SBJ/1 back to the police for the first time on 13th November 1985, which freed up the silencer (DB/1) handed to police by Ann Eaton on 11th September. This resullted in some documentation being altered where the exhibit reference SBJ/1,  was changed into DB/1....

(6) - only 2 exhibit labels, existed, both bearing signatures, one bearing the solitary identification mark of DB/1, the other bearing the identification mark DB/1 (crossed out), DRB/1 (replacing it). There is no exhibit label marked SBJ/1 bearing any signatures. This proves that silencer SBJ/1 was a different silencer than the one marked DB/1 and DRB/1. Moreover, the prosecution has failed in that respect because there is no proper link between silencer SBJ/1 and DB/1, nor between SBJ/1 and DRB/1. The closest they get to merging more of these silencers into the same one, was by presenting the two signed exhibit labels, aforementioned...

(7) - the blood group activity (A, EAP BA, AK/1 and HP 2-1)  was supposed to have been found in the baffles of silencer DB/1, but we now know that silencer DB/1 was not handed over to police by Ann Eaton until 11th September,  so the key blood group evidence must have been found inside a different silencer. I have identified this other silencer as SBJ/1. This was handed back to police from the Lab' on 13th November,  never to surface again...

(8) - DS Jones returned to the scene from Jeremys cottage to seize 4 exhibits, SBJ/1, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4, on 7th August 1985...

(9) - DS Davidson fingerprinted silencer SBJ/1, on the 9th August 1985...

(10) - David Bootyfloor finds one of the silencers in the gun cupboard, it is removed from the scene and taken for safe keeping at his sisters (Ann Eaton) home, kept there until evening of 12th August 1985...

(11) - Robert Bootyflour goes to see police at With am police station, and tells DS Jones that his son, David, had found the gun silencer...

(12) - the silencer handed to DS Jones by Peter Eaton on 12th August, had no identifying mark at that stage...

(13) - the silencer shown to PI Bob Miller by DS Jones on the morning of 13th August 1985, did not have an exhibit reference by that stage...

(14) - the silencer given to DI Cook by DS Jones on 13th August 1985, did not have an exhibit reference by that stage...

(15) - Ron Cook attached a brown coloured CJA exhibit label to the silencer he took to show Glynis Howard on 13th August 1985, he put the identifying mark of SJ/1 on the label which both he and Glynis Howard signed at positions 2 and 3...

(16) - when Glenis Howard gave the silencer back to Ron Cook so that he could finger print it on 13th August 1985, it had an identifying mark of SJ/1...

(17) - the silencer which Ron Cook fingerprinted by oblique light test had an identifying mark of SJ/1...

(18) - the silencer Ron Cook finger printed by superglue treatment on the 23rd August had an identifying mark of SJ/1...

(19) - the silencer that Ron Cook dismantled and rebuilt, then scewed onto the barrel of the anshuzt rifle had an identifying mark of SJ/1...

(20) -  Cook sent silencer SBJ/1 to the lab' on 30th August 1985 (this was the silencer originally collected by DS Jones from the scene on 7th August 1985...

(21) - 10th September 1985,  David Bootyflour contacts police by telephone to inform them that he had found the gun silencer (DB/1). He arranged for the police to collect it on the following day from Ann Eaton, at whf...

(22) - 11th September 1985, silencer dismantled by Fletcher and Hayward, they find a small flake of dried blood trapped between baffles 1 and 2...

(23) - 12th September 1985, blood group activity obtained from examination of flake...

(24) - 13th September 1985, blood group activity obtained from examination of flake...

(25) - DS Davidson and DS Eastwood fingerprinted silencer DB/1 on the 14th September 1985...

(26) - 18th September 1985, blood group activity obtained from examination of flake...

(27) - 19th September 1985, blood group activity obtained from examination of flake...

(28) - 20th September 1985, silencer tested positive for human blood...

(29) - silencer DB/1 is sent to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibers, on the 20th September 1985...

(30) - silencer DB/1 was examined at lab' on the 25th September 1985...

(31) - silencer SBJ/1 returned to police by lab', on 13th November 1985...

(32) - 23rd September 1986, Ron Cook falsifies exhibit reference relating to the events of Tuesday, 13th August 1985...

[lookout]

The blood had NEVER been tested for that of farm animals ( jury weren't aware ). The AK1 enzyme is found in ALL rabbit blood,which the jury were never informed of either. The jury naturally assumed that tests had been performed for animal blood.

[nugnug]

surely they could tell rabbit blood from human blood even then.

[mike tesko]

The blood had NEVER been tested for that of farm animals ( jury weren't aware ). The AK1 enzyme is found in ALL rabbit blood,which the jury were never informed of either. The jury naturally assumed that tests had been performed for animal blood.

I agree
..

[lookout]

surely they could tell rabbit blood from human blood even then.

Only when tested nugs.Blood is blood whatever animal/human,etc it came from. So the credibility of the lab is certainly in question.
This was the fault of Glynis Howard and John Hayward for failing to inform the jury that screening was done for animals.

[Caroline]

Hiding to nowhere with this, it's been done to death and the CCRC wouldn't give it nay credence.

[lookout]

CCRC had no right to turn this argument down in the previous submission.  According to lawyers,they acted unlawfully when they turned down the request over the moderator which had been expertly reviewed by those who were experts in ballistics.

[Caroline]

CCRC had no right to turn this argument down in the previous submission.  According to lawyers,they acted unlawfully when they turned down the request over the moderator which had been expertly reviewed by those who were experts in ballistics.

There you go again. Which lawyers? Where did you get that from?

[lookout]

There you go again. Which lawyers? Where did you get that from?

Try and divert your attention from the fact that Jeremy's guilty and look at OTHER information which is also available and is MORE positive-------and truthful.

[Caroline]

Try and divert your attention from the fact that Jeremy's guilty and look at OTHER information which is also available and is MORE positive-------and truthful.

I've looked at the innocent side and went along with it for a while, but the more I looked into it, the more smoke and mirrors I saw. There is no truth in rehashing old evidence to make it look new, changing your mind about times and only answering the positive questions.

[scipio_usmc]

This will be of direct interest to Jeremy and his legal team:-

The following facts are proven beyond doubt...

(1)  - a total of 7 DB exhibits, were handed over to the police by Ann Eaton on the 11th September 1985 ( DB /1 to DB/7 inclusive) one of these was a parker hale sound moderator...

How was such proven beyond doubt?  All the evidence available establishes only 2 exhibits were turned over by Eaton on the 11th- Nevill's rifle scope (AE1/DB2/DRB2) and the abu ammunition carrier bag which contained ammunition inside (AE2/DB3/DRB3).  All evidence further demonstrates Nevill's moderator (SBJ1/DB1/DRB1) was turned in to police on August 12.  You have produced no evidence which establishes the official claims to be untrue. 

(2) - steps were taken to conceal the hand over of the silencer at the scene (whf) on the 11th September 1985,  by altering the details of what Ann Eaton had actually handed over to police that day.

You have produced zero evidence that a moderator was collected from Ann Eaton on this day and zero evidence police concealed anything.  Far from there being no doubt your claims are true there is nothing but doubt.  The best you do is promise you have evidence that you will share when you feel like it.

In this version of events Ann Eaton only handed over 6 exhibits, marked DB/2 to DB/7....
(3) - Ann Eaton also handed over to police 2 further items to police in the 11th September 1985, these were exhibits, AE/1 and AE/2...

The official account is Eaton handed over only 2 things- the scope and ammunition. You have produced zero evidence to establish anything else was collected from her let alone a moderator.  In the mean time you are counting items multiple times.  AE/1 and DB/2 are one and the same just as AE/2 and DB/3 are the same.  When the moderator was changed from SBJ/1 to DB/1 the scope was changed to DB/2 and ammunition changed to DB/3 and HGO/1 was changed to DB/4.

(4) - The silencer sent to the lab' on 30th September 1985, was not silencer DB/1, because that silencer ( DB/1) did not get handed over to the police by Ann Eaton, until the 11th September,  some 13 days too late to be the silencer sent to lab' on 30th August.  I can now reveal that the silencer sent to the lab' on that occasion was silencer SBJ/1, found at the scene by DS Jones,  as reported by PC Whiddon (the exhibits officer) in his COLP witness statement. ..

Whiddon asserts nothing about Jones collecting a moderator at the scene on the day of the murders.  He said the registry documents had Jones listed as the finder and the where box had David Boutflour listed. They didn't know who found it originally so simply put Jones as the finder and thus gave it the SBJ designation.  Upon learning it was Boutflour they changed the designation and added his name by putting his name in the "where found" field which happens to be right below the "who found" field.   You have produced zero evidence to establish the moderator or any moderator was taken from the scene by Jones or any other police on Aug 7-9 which is when the police had possession of the premises (or taken from WHF by police anytime after).  The only evidence concerning a moderator collected prior to the trial reflects Jones collected one from Peter Eaton at Oak Farm on Aug 12 and this is the moderator the family insists was in Nevill's closet.

Whiddon stated the only other moderators collected by police was during the trial:



So far as the date is concerned he said he wasn't given one so no date found was in the property registers.  He said he was later given an incomplete CID6 and he simply assumed all the DB items were found the same day and thus put such date on the form.  You intentionalyl ignore his own words to pretend he helps establish a moderator was found on September 11 though he admitted he had no basis for using such date he simply assumed and ended up being wrong.

(5) - the lab' sent silencer SBJ/1 back to the police for the first time on 13th November 1985, which freed up the silencer (DB/1) handed to police by Ann Eaton on 11th September. This resullted in some documentation being altered where the exhibit reference SBJ/1,  was changed into DB/1....

Te documentation makes clear the moderator turned over to Whiddon in November was SBJ/1, item 22, then currently known as DB/1.

The only evidence concerning a moderator collected prior to the trial reflects Jones collected one from Peter Eaton at Oak Farm on Aug 12 and this is the moderator the family insists was in Nevill's closet.

SBJ/1 was changed to DB one sometime after September 20 but prior to October 17 because on the latter date Fletcher was informed about the change.  So on top of having zero evidence to prove your allegations you timetable falls apart.

(6) - only 2 exhibit labels, existed, both bearing signatures, one bearing the solitary identification mark of DB/1, the other bearing the identification mark DB/1 (crossed out), DRB/1 (replacing it). There is no exhibit label marked SBJ/1 bearing any signatures. This proves that silencer SBJ/1 was a different silencer than the one marked DB/1 and DRB/1. Moreover, the prosecution has failed in that respect because there is no proper link between silencer SBJ/1 and DB/1, nor between SBJ/1 and DRB/1. The closest they get to merging more of these silencers into the same one, was by presenting the two signed exhibit labels, aforementioned...

This is simply gibberish.  Cook placed a SBJ/1 label on it on August 13 which was later replaced by a DB label which had DRB/1 written in pencil on it. They didn't bother to produce another label they felt hand writing DRB/1 was sufficient.

[scipio_usmc]

Funny how you now edit your posts without it stating the time you edited it and not even having anything that declares you edited it beyond a "today".

Since you added to your post I will address those additions:

(7) - the blood group activity (A, EAP BA, AK/1 and HP 2-1)  was supposed to have been found in the baffles of silencer DB/1, but we now know that silencer DB/1 was not handed over to police by Ann Eaton until 11th September,  so the key blood group evidence must have been found inside a different silencer. I have identified this other silencer as SBJ/1. This was handed back to police from the Lab' on 13th November,  never to surface again...

The only evidence you produce to support your claim of a moderator being found by Ann Eaton on September 11 is an entry from Whiddon made in November which he admits was a mistake.  He wrote 9/11 as the date items were found assuming all DB items were found on that day though in fact they had been found on August 10. SO far from Jeremy's team being able to use this they already are aware that this allegation fell apart because they made this allegation to COLP and COLP ended up refuting it.

( - DS Jones returned to the scene from Jeremys cottage to seize 4 exhibits, SBJ/1, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4, on 7th August 1985...

You have produced zero evidence to establish this. Reliable evidence establishes SBJ/1 was collected from Peter Eaton on the 12th of August. There are no records of anything collected from the scene by Jones.

(9) - the silencer handed to DS Jones by Peter Eaton on 12th August, had no identifying mark at that stage...

Cook is the one who had to label it so of course it had no label on it when Eaton handed it to Jones.  On August 13 Cook labeled it SBJ/1. He did so because there were no prior exhibits form Jones this was the first. Your claims totally fall apart.

You are taking allegations the defense made to COLP which COLP ended up refuting and claiming these allegations will be useful to Jeremy and his defense team.  Jeremy and his defense team came up with these allegations before you, they were already fully investigated and turned out to be a total bust.

[mike tesko]

On 13th August 1985, DI Ronny Crook, received a silencer from DS Jones, and at this time, it did not have an exhibit reference attached to it. Cook took it along to the Lab' to be provisionally examined by Glynis Howard, and he gave it the exhibit reference of SJ/1. Some people argue that Cook gave the silencer in question by that stage the exhibit reference of SBJ/1. This discrepancy warranted sorting out during the trial, because it has a direct bearing upon the integrity of the silencer evidence, as relied upon by the prosecution.

On 23rd September 1986, Crooky made a witness statement. It starts off with the following Citation clearly printed on the front page, as follows:-

"This statement, consisting of 1 pages, each signed by me, is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that if it is tended into evidence I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not know to be true".

Well, what I want to know is why hasn't Crooky been prosecuted for making a false witness statement about the exhibit reference at the time / date specified in the body of his signed statement?

Because evidence elsewhere confirms that the exhibit reference of that silencer at 9.15am, on the 13th August 1985, was definitely not DRB/1...