Silencer (DRB/1) - was found in the gun cupboard at WHF, on 11th September, 1985

[chochokeira]

Thanks, Harters. I have to get ready for a meeting, so have had time for just a quick glimpse at your document. That quick glimpse suggests two ways of understanding it, but I really need to read through it. One question: given how difficult it is for the defence to obtain documents such as this, how did you manage to get hold of this?

[Hartley]

Thanks, Harters. I have to get ready for a meeting, so have had time for just a quick glimpse at your document. That quick glimpse suggests two ways of understanding it, but I really need to read through it. One question: given how difficult it is for the defence to obtain documents such as this, how did you manage to get hold of this?

I'm not sure now, it came via Mike T though, maybe from the sleuthing site.

[chochokeira]

Taking this one piece at a time.

Mike, regardless of any other silencer theories, would you agree that the silencer marked as exhibit DB/1 is the same item as that marked as DRB/1?

And would you also agree that the change is simply due to the discovery of a clash of initials between David Bird and David Robert Boutflour?

Is there any documentation proving that DB/1 was DRB/1 under a change of name, Harters?

Have a read of these two statements by Chris Whiddon made to COLP in '91.

See what you make of it. Of course it's from five/six years after the event so he could be mistaken.

As you say, Harters, the statement was made some years after these entries were written. I could not faultlessly explain sections from my office records after that sort of time lapse. I was put to the test in this respect during an Inland Revenue (as it was then) review. Even with the highly motivating effect of an IR officer at my side, it was impossible to recall many items. Yet Whidden recalls almost everything, seemingly effortlessly, and has it all a bit too off pat for my liking.

I do not believe him when he claims to write in pencil because this makes his writing look neater than when he uses different pens. Identical, free, government issue pens were presumably available at the police station. Other officers were writing this book up in pen, so it must have looked a real mess. In my experience, people write important official records in pencil for one reason: because this enables erasure and alteration of records. They do it in order to correct errors or to make different aspects of the record which do not reconcile appear to agree. It's a red flag that the writer either lacks confidence and expertise and is error prone" "I was not trained" or it's a red flag to the over confidence of those who believe they can get away with things.

[Hartley]

From what I understand all those who were interviewed by COLP in 91 were able to look at previous witness statements to 'refresh' their minds, or allow them to stick to the script, depending on your point of view.

I'm sure even the City of London Police would have been sympathetic towards EP rather than Jeremy, the whole COLP investigation seems geared towards politically sticking up for EP.

If it is a cover up, then they need a round of applause before they're dragged off to prison, because they've covered it up fantasticly and expertly well.


But you know my thoughts already 

[chochokeira]

From what I understand all those who were interviewed by COLP in 91 were able to look at previous witness statements to 'refresh' their minds, or allow them to stick to the script, depending on your point of view.

I'm sure even the City of London Police would have been sympathetic towards EP rather than Jeremy, the whole COLP investigation seems geared towards politically sticking up for EP.

If it is a cover up, then they need a round of applause before they're dragged off to prison, because they've covered it up fantastically and expertly well.


But you know my thoughts already 

I'm totally unconvinced by claims that a Freemasonry conspiracy incriminated Jeremy and unimpressed with the theory that this largely boiled down to a police conspiracy, Harters. My view is that Jeremy Bamber ended up in prison for rather more mundane reasons, a dynamic as old as the hills. Networks of old families, wealthy people, all interconnected by blood or marriage exert influence without even trying. In those days the police treated them as an elite worthy of special treatment - and that's exactly what they got. Events were interpreted in their favour and against the interests of those they identified as the enemy. I think Bamber was identified as the enemy: viz Ann Eaton suggesting in her 72 page statement that adopted members of the family were not proper family. That's an extraordinarily cruel and untrue remark. In saying that, she effectively negated the existance of those cousins and the other relations of hers who were adopted.

[Hartley]

Can't argue with that. 

Anyway it's way past my bedtime so I'll say night night, have a good weekend. 

[chochokeira]

Can't argue with that. 

Anyway it's way past my bedtime so I'll say night night, have a good weekend. 

Night, night to you too, Harters - and everyone. Happy Royal wedding day tomorrow! How exceitng that one of Princess Diana's two lovely boys is getting wed.

[shonapugs]

Blimey, Choch, they were the Bambers, not the Borgias. But have a lovely day, and I hope that you enjoy the wedding. Kiss kiss.

[mike tesko]

Taking this one piece at a time.

Mike, regardless of any other silencer theories, would you agree that the silencer marked as exhibit DB/1 is the same item as that marked as DRB/1?

And would you also agree that the change is simply due to the discovery of a clash of initials between David Bird and David Robert Boutflour?

... Silencers, DB/1 and DRB/1, cannnot possibly be one and the same silencer, because they were found on two separate occasions, and sent to the lab' on two completely different dates (30th August, and 20th September. 1985. We now know, that  S.hìela's blood was found in silencer (DB/1) that got sent to the Lab', on 30th August, 1985 - the small flake of blood found in thìs silencer, was analyzed between 11th and 19th September, 1985, producing the blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1, and HP2-1, on dates before the Bamber silencer (DRB/1) was even sent to the Lab'. Therefore, silencers, DB/1 and DRB/1, could not possibly have been one and the same silencers? The explanation you refer to, about there being somesort of a mixup with the labelling, where the exhibit reference, SBJ/1 clashed with the initials of DS Jones, and that the next lot of initials, DB/1, clashed with PC David Bird, all seems a bit farfetched, to be hondst, as far as I Know, DS JONES, never took possession of anyother exhibit marked SBJ/1 in connection with this investigation, and PC David BIRD, did not seize any items at all, bearing the mark, DB/1.

[Hartley]

Okay then, so DC Whiddon must either by mistaken or actively lying in his statement to COLP?

[mike tesko]

Okay then, so DC Whiddon must either by mistaken or actively lying in his statement to COLP?

... In a nutshell, yes - why should that alarm you? PC Whiddon was photographed in possession of one of the silencers and at that stage, although the rifle (DRH/15) had an exhibit label attached, the silencer he was holding did not. Whiddon knows more about the silencer that DCI 'Taff' Jones, kept om his desk, that he is not letting on about, and as a result, yes, he is / was one of the conspirators., certainly...

[Hartley]

I didn't say it did alarm me.

[mike tesko]

I didn't say it did alarm me.

... As I say, silencer DB/1, and silencer DRB/1, could not possibly be one and the same silencer - you can't have one of these silencers (DB/1) at the Lab, from 30th August, 1985, whilst the other one was not found until much later, and still in police possession until 20th September, 1985, which the police then decide to send to the Lab', and they finally get around to doing so, after the blood found in the other silencer (DB/1) had already been analyzed. This is not just about these silencers being different ones, it's about the blood of Shiela, being found in the wrong silencer (DB/1) - it was not found in the Bamber (DRB/1) silencer...

[Hartley]

That's fine Mike, I disagree with you, but that's just way it is, we clearly have opposing views.

On another note, and no offence intended at all, I watched a couple of videos of yours on youtube and you really remind me of Trevor Eve from 'Waking the Dead'.

[mike tesko]

That's fine Mike, I disagree with you, but that's just way it is, we clearly have opposing views.

On another note, and no offence intended at all, I watched a couple of videos of yours on youtube and you really remind me of Trevor Eve from 'Waking the Dead'.

-------------

Well, i don't see how you or anyone can argue with established facts about when certain silencers were found, handed in , and sent to the Lab'...

The Bamber silencer (DRB/1) was not sent to the Lab' until 20th September 1985, at the very earliest, and by that stage Sheila's blood had already been found inside one of the other silencers (DB/1)...