Author Topic: The rifle at the upstairs window Conundrum - The Bamber Alibi, revisted...  (Read 98120 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Police possession of the silencer at any stage prior to 'it' being handed over to DS Jones on the evening of the 12th August 1985, would have been problematic for the police, in much the same way 'it' has become problematic to Bambers case, involving the claim, that ' with the silencer fitted to the rifles barrel, it would have been too long to enable her to have shot herself, even if she wanted to'...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Police possession of the silencer at any stage prior to 'it' being handed over to DS Jones on the evening of the 12th August 1985, would have been problematic for the police, in much the same way 'it' has become problematic to Bambers case, involving the claim, that ' with the silencer fitted to the rifles barrel, it would have been too long to enable her to have shot herself, even if she wanted to'...

If police shot her (then) this fulfills the prophecy, that 'either', the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle when police brought it to the body from a window and it discharged bullet PV/19 beneath the point of the chin, and police themselves removed the silencer and put it away in the gun cupboard, or there was no silencer fitted to the barrel of that rifle when the police brought 'that' rifle to Sheila's body and dispatched the fatal shot, enacted out in a 'gauging exercise' during a police training exercise (familiars) carried out between 9am and 10am, that morning inside the farmhouse with the bodies of the five victims still 'insitu'. At this time police treated the bodies of the five victims 'as props', after which the anshuzt rifle was photographed (23) resting against the bedroom window where it had been placed immediately after it had discharged the shot under Sheila's chin. Thereafter, put back on Sheila's body and then photographed as per photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. This sequence of photographs did not represent Sheila Caffells death scene, as first found when firearm officers first entered the farmhouse. These 8 photographs simply record Sheila's concocted death scene, as staged by the police. The police put the anshuzt rifle on Sheila's body, and then took photographs. Therefore these key 8 photographs only show Sheila's body after 10 O'clock that morning showing how the police had arranged her body with the rifle that was 'put there by the police, themselves'...
« Last Edit: December 20, 2015, 07:28:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
If police shot her (then) this fulfills the prophecy, that 'either', the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle when police brought it to the body from a window and it discharged bullet PV/19 beneath the point of the chin, and police themselves removed the silencer and put it away in the gun cupboard, or there was no silencer fitted to the barrel of that rifle when the police brought 'that' rifle to Sheila's body and dispatched the fatal shot, enacted out in a 'gauging exercise' during a police training exercise (familiars) carried out between 9am and 10am, that morning inside the farmhouse with the bodies of the five victims still 'insitu'. At this time police treated the bodies of the five victims 'as props', after which the anshuzt rifle was photographed (23) resting against the bedroom window where it had been placed immediately after it had discharged the shot under Sheila's chin. Thereafter, put back on Sheila's body and then photographed as per photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. This sequence of photographs did not represent Sheila Caffells death scene, as first found when firearm officers first entered the farmhouse. These 8 photographs simply record Sheila's concocted death scene, as staged by the police. The police put the anshuzt rifle on Sheila's body, and then took photographs. Therefore these key 8 photographs only show Sheila's body after 10 O'clock that morning showing how the police had arranged her body with the rifle that was 'put there by the police, themselves'...

The jury were entitled to know the truth about the circumstances behind the taking of them, and be told exactly what these  key photographs represented. Instead, Ron Cook and David Bird, lied and sought to deliberately deceive the jury by claiming falsely that the anshuzt rifle had been photographed 8 times on Sheila's body, before 'it' was photographed (23) at the bedroom window, when it had not...

The convictions are unsafe because of the seriousnous of 'this deception' in the Prosecutions case...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Mike,I've been reading about " over-duplicating/editing " in order to confuse the jury--------purposely.
 Justice ? You could have fooled me.!
EP have a lot to answer for. All I've seen is a mish-mash of fabricated evidence which makes me feel heartily sick that we're " made " to trust those who are not answerable to their own shortcomings. I'd have used a stronger word but it wouldn't be permissible on here with all those narrow minds,biased opinions and rose-tinted specs.

Just one sentence of a statement can lead to a dozen pages ! I know this as a FACT !

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Mike,I've been reading about " over-duplicating/editing " in order to confuse the jury--------purposely.
 Justice ? You could have fooled me.!
EP have a lot to answer for. All I've seen is a mish-mash of fabricated evidence which makes me feel heartily sick that we're " made " to trust those who are not answerable to their own shortcomings. I'd have used a stronger word but it wouldn't be permissible on here with all those narrow minds,biased opinions and rose-tinted specs.

Just one sentence of a statement can lead to a dozen pages ! I know this as a FACT !

Where hae you been reading about it? Not sure who is supposed to be wearing the rose tinted specs, I don't wear specs at all but that sounds like projection! You say there is no evidence but when it is posted right in front of you, you ignore it and then deny it. Just a few days ago you argued that you thought Sheila was wearing a RING but when I mentioned 'gun oil' (which I did on purpose) you changed and said you thought it was dirt  - even though confirmation was givem from Venezis's report that it was a ring. Total denial.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Where hae you been reading about it? Not sure who is supposed to be wearing the rose tinted specs, I don't wear specs at all but that sounds like projection! You say there is no evidence but when it is posted right in front of you, you ignore it and then deny it. Just a few days ago you argued that you thought Sheila was wearing a RING but when I mentioned 'gun oil' (which I did on purpose) you changed and said you thought it was dirt  - even though confirmation was givem from Venezis's report that it was a ring. Total denial.







I didn't " change " at all.I said what I said ON PURPOSE and KNEW instantly the answer I'd get,which proved that YOU were the desperate one,not I because of your rapid exchange.

How can I ignore evidence when it's not there ? ::) It never will be there because it wasn't him who murdered his family.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076






I didn't " change " at all.I said what I said ON PURPOSE and KNEW instantly the answer I'd get,which proved that YOU were the desperate one,not I because of your rapid exchange.

How can I ignore evidence when it's not there ? ::) It never will be there because it wasn't him who murdered his family.

The thing is, the ring on Sheila's finger has nothing to do with Jeremy's guilt and you didn't change on purpose at all - you saw an avenue that MIGHT lead to suspicion in Sheula's direction so you grabbed it, The evidence is Venezis's report that states it was a ring. I really don't know why you just can't admit to being wrong but here it is again stating that Sheila wore a ring on her right ring finger!!!!!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
I still stand by what I said was purposely done to see if,for once,I got an agreeable reaction. I could be a ring,but is most DEFINITELY muck also around that area. Rather than ANYONE admit it,it turned out to be a shadow ::) I KNEW that NOBODY would admit to it being mucky.!

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
I still stand by what I said was purposely done to see if,for once,I got an agreeable reaction. I could be a ring,but is most DEFINITELY muck also around that area. Rather than ANYONE admit it,it turned out to be a shadow ::) I KNEW that NOBODY would admit to it being mucky.!

I know you'll sand by what you said because you can't admit to being wrong! Now because I said I PURPOSELY mentioned gun oil, you're using the same argument - as though that is credible!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
That person, who was still alive could only have been Sheila Caffell, no-one else...
hi the only one alive at 7.15am was the dog.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
hi the only one alive at 7.15am was the dog.
 

Hello sami welcome to the forum.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
We now know that Sheila's body was 'displaced' from its original position in the kitchen after 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and that for a period of at least 15 minutes between 8.15 and 8.30am, there was a grave concern as to her whereabouts, which coincided with a 15 minute telephone conversation between DCI Harris and ACC Peter Simpson using the landline inside the kitchen, with Harris updating Simpson in a blow by blow running commentary of the renewed search for Sheila, until she was found collapsed upstairs, on top of the bed...
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe and any firearms found were made safe.so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything.about the rifle.what does it matter where it was and if it was moved .theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle.why would the police fit up bamber.because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide.the farm house was cleaned.items burned and victims cremated case closed.why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools for having been decived by bamber.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
 

Hello sami welcome to the forum.
hi susan;thanks for the wecome :)

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe and any firearms found were made safe.so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything.about the rifle.what does it matter where it was and if it was moved .theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle.why would the police fit up bamber.because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide.the farm house was cleaned.items burned and victims cremated case closed.why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools for having been decived by bamber.





Where's your evidence that Sheila hadn't fired a shot ?

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe and any firearms found were made safe.so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything.about the rifle.what does it matter where it was and if it was moved .theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle.why would the police fit up bamber.because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide.the farm house was cleaned.items burned and victims cremated case closed.why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools for having been decived by bamber.
I agree with most of what you say but I don't believe Taff Jones was 'bumberling' or bumbling, he was highly successful, highly decorated Detective, so why his unwillingness to point the finger at JB?