Author Topic: The rifle at the upstairs window Conundrum - The Bamber Alibi, revisted...  (Read 97692 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

guest7363

  • Guest
Everything points to the fact that the police shot Sheila, and killed her, then they (the police) staged her death scene on the bedroom floor, and then got PC Bird (SOCO) to photograph her body there after the rifle which eventually fired the fatal shot (PV/19) that killed her was brought from the main bedroom window, and positioned on her body. This sequence of events is adequately covered by the content and the detail in the police radio message logs, timed entries, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and photographs, numbered, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33
If they staged it, I wonder why they put one shell case to the right of the body and one shell case to the left? 

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Professor Herbert Leon McDonnell's first report, was in fact, accurate. He concluded that Sheila had been killed by another person, and that her killer had staged her death scene to make it look like she had shot herself. With the benefit of hindsite, we now know that Essex police failed to notify him of the sequence with which key photographs had been taken. Facts which did not come to light until much later, but nevertheless, and as it turns out, Essex police really had staged Sheila Caffells death scene, and what's more,  it was the police who had 'misused the images captured in the photographs' claiming they represented the crime scene in its untouched condition, when it wasn't...

McDonnell, was right in any event, its just that we now know police 'fixed' Sheila's death scene, and they did this because they needed to show that she 'had' taken her 'own life'...
« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 03:05:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Professor Herbert Leon McDonnell's first report, was in fact, accurate. He concluded that Sheila had been killed by another person, and that her killer had staged her death scene to make it look like she had shot herself. With the benefit of hindsite, we now know that Essex police failed to notify him of the sequence with which key photographs had been taken. Facts which did not come to light until much later, but nevertheless, and as it turns out, Essex police really had staged Sheila Caffells death scene, and what's more,  it was the police who had 'misused the images captured in the photographs' claiming they represented the crime scene in its untouched condition, when it wasn't...

McDonnell, was right in any event, its just that we now know police 'fixed' Sheila's death scene, and they did this because they needed to show that she 'had' taken her own life'...

The photographs of Shelia that Jeremy sent to McDonnell in 1992 it was assumed those pictures to be of Sheila as she was found (unaltered), Hence McDonnel came to the conclusion that Shelia was murdered based on the blood patterns on the carpet and the circumstances around the bible. However we now have police interview/notes saying that the crime scene photos of Shelia are different to how they first found her. This evidence came to light not long ago and McDonnell did not know this at the time in 1992 and if he did his conclusions would have been different.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 03:13:PM by david1819 »

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Furthermore, although Mcdonnell concluded that Sheila Caffell had not killed herself, and that her killer(s) had set her death scene to give a general impression that she had taken her own life, he went on to say, that there was no evidence to suggest that Jeremy Bamber was 'that' killer. This was his conclusion, after Essex police had sent to him, all the photographs they claimed they had taken at the scene. What is startling is that Mcdonnell, never claimed involvement of a sound moderator in the shooting of Sheila Caffell, or if he knew about it, that the discovery of such a silencer, found elsewhere in the farmhouse, was evidence to prove 'Jeremy Bambers' involvement in her death, with use of 'it'...

Mcdonnell was right, and is right, there has never been any real evidence which implicates Jeremy Bamber in the shootings of his sister...
« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 03:24:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Beyond reasonable doubt ? I don't think so. Not when you see things like this.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
I was acting on Jeremy Bambers behalf when he first had dealings with Professor Herbert Leon, Mcdonnell, so I do know what I am talking about. Jeremy did not send photographs to Mcdonnell, he paid for the postage and costs, which was required, and an initial fee for McDonnell's first report. The BBC I think actually paid for the experts report, or something like that. But in any event, the photographs Mcdonnell examined and commented upon, came directly from Essex police...
« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 03:23:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Furthermore, although Mcdonnell concluded that Sheila Caffell had not killed herself, and that her killer(s) had set her death scene to give a general impression that she had taken her own life, he went on to say, that there was no evidence to suggest that Jeremy Bamber was 'that' killer. This was his conclusion, after Essex police had sent to him, all the photographs they claimed they had taken at the scene. What is startling is that Mcdonnell, never claimed involvement of a sound moderator in the shooting of Sheila Caffell, or if he knew about it, that the discovery of such a silencer, found elsewhere in the farmhouse, was evidence to prove 'Jeremy Bambers' involvement in her death with use of 'it'...

Mcdonnell was right, and is right, there has never been any real evidence which implicates Jeremy Bamber in the shootings of his sister...

If Mcdonnell had the police interview/notes I had just posted he would give the opinion its inconclusive.

If you think otherwise contact Mcdonnell himself and we shall see what he sais 

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Mcdonnell would have concluded that the photographs relied upon to prosecute Jeremy Bamber were 'misleading' and had given the wrong impression to the jury at trial, and that in particular, when the jury had retired to consider its verdict, that there was a grave concern that these staged photographs gave an impression that Sheila's body had been staged, which fitted in with the main plank of the prosecutions case, that 'Jeremy Bamber ', and no-one else had staged Sheila's death scene, but it was one of many deceptions produced by the police. Mcdonnell would have advised that in view of the crime scene having been 'doctored' and the fact that the photographs themselves which had been taken much later had been used to bolster up the case against Bamber, that the case should be referred to the appeal court with a view of setting the convictions aside...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Mcdonnell would have concluded that the photographs relied upon to prosecute Jeremy Bamber were 'misleading' and had given the wrong impression to the jury at trial, and that in particular, when the jury had retired to consider its verdict, that there was a grave concern that these staged photographs gave an impression that Sheila's body had been staged, which fitted in with the main plank of the prosecutions case, that 'Jeremy Bamber ', and no-one else had staged Sheila's death scene, but it was one of many deceptions produced by the police. Mcdonnell would have advised that in view of the crime scene having been 'doctored' and the fact that the photographs themselves which had been taken much later had been used to bolster up the case against Bamber, that the case should be referred to the appeal court with a view of setting the convictions aside...

this is what I keep saying - The photos are vital as it is those that indicate a staged scene. If the gun had fallen to the side for example and her hand was in a different position it would not have looked like a "staged suicide" it might have looked like a suicide . If you see what I mean . So if the police did pick up the gun and check it before the photos and did not put it back in the same position then we are not really looking at the true scene - or perhaps they moved the body to protect her dignity? And to be honest when you take the statement quoted above into account it does not look like we can be 100% sure?

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
this is what I keep saying - The photos are vital as it is those that indicate a staged scene. If the gun had fallen to the side for example and her hand was in a different position it would not have looked like a "staged suicide" it might have looked like a suicide . If you see what I mean . So if the police did pick up the gun and check it before the photos and did not put it back in the same position then we are not really looking at the true scene - or perhaps they moved the body to protect her dignity? And to be honest when you take the statement quoted above into account it does not look like we can be 100% sure?

Yes, the photographic evidence relied upon at trial, to 'bolster up the case against Jeremy Bamber' was very misleading, and unfair. The jury obviously would have accepted the position of Sheila's body as seen in one or more of those '8 consecutively taken photographs showing Sheila' body on the bedroom floor in the possession of the rifle' as being 'exactly' as it had been found upon first entry by police, with the exception of the fact that PC Bird (SOCO) took a photograph of the rifle leaning against the main bedroom window, a photograph numbered 23, showing the said rifle leaning against the aforementioned window was subject of cross examination in chief, and by defence counsell. PC Bird testified that he he took photograph 23. When asked if he had seen or knew who had put that rifle there at the window, he said he had not seen who had put that rifle there. The matter was further enquired into when Detective Inspector Cook testified. He was questioned about the different positions of Sheila's right hand, and her arm, against her body and upon the gun, as subject to photographs bearing the sequential numbers, 29 / 30? Cook told the court that he had shifted the position of Sheila's hand as shown in the aforementioned photographs so that PC Bird could photograph bloodied fingermarks that were present upon the front lower part of her nightdress. When Cook was asked about the photograph of the rifle (23) at the bedroom window, his answer was (with the benefit of hindsight) very telling. It was very telling because when Cook was asked did he know who had placed that rifle, there? He responded by saying, 'that he had'. He testified that 'he had' placed the rifle there, after PC Bird had finished taking all the photographs showing Sheila' s body in possession of the rifle. Cook testified to the effect that once he had removed the gun from Sheila's body, he had handed the gun to Police Inspector Montgomery to check it to make sure it was safe. Once this had been done, Cook stated that he had then placed the rifle against the bedroom window, as depicted in photograph No.23. The gist of the testimony given by both PC Bird, and DI Cook, was that photographs which showed Sheila's possession of the rifle (photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33) were taken before, photograph No.23, which shows the same rifle resting against the window. This testimony was false, and by anybody's standard, amounts to 'perverting the course of justice', because both Bird and Cook knew that photograph No.23, was taken before photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33). We now know, with the benefit of hindsight, that the rifle was photographed at the bedroom window (23), then somebody brought the rifle from the window and positioned 'it' upon Sheila's body, and only then had PC Bird photographed it there, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. Now that we know this, Cook also lied about the different positions of Sheila's hands when compared in photo's, 29 / 30, by claiming that he had moved them so that PC Bird could photograph bloodied fingermarks upon the front lower part of her nightdress. The stark truth is that PC Bird could have photographed those bloodied fingermarks on the said nightdress whilst the rifle was resting against the bedroom window as depicted at the time Bird himself had taken photograph No.23. The different positions of Sheila's right arm, and her hand, as shown in photographs, No. 29 / 30, was evidence of the fact that 'Ron' Cook, himself was totally responsible for staging Sheila's death scene, which was then photographed by his sidekick PC Bird. The jury had no way of knowing that the photographic evidence had been taken only after the positions of the three adult victims had been moved or displaced during a training exercise which had lasted 'one hour' between 9 and 10 O'clock, and that Senior Officers at the scene had given Cook strict instructions for him to make sure that the gun was photographed on Sheila Caffells body accurately...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Cook brought the rifle from the main bedroom window (23), and put it on Sheila's body, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...

This tells its own story...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
The 'staging' of Sheila Caffells body, was a pivotal point in the prosecutions case, and the photographs showing the rifle in Sheila's possession. We now know that Sheila's body had been staged in all those photographs ( 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 ), staged by Cook and Bird, who acted in the knowlege and with the consent of senior officers...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309


So u are now claiming that not only did the police shoot and kill Sheila, but 'information you have been provided with' shows that the police also shot June and Neville.

1 Did the police shoot and kill June?
2 Did the police shoot and kill Neville?
3 Did the police shoot an already dead June?
4 Did the police shoot an already dead Neville?
5 Do u think Sheila, June and Neville were all still alive when the police arrived?

You've come up with a wide range of theories and conjecture in the past. So in light of ur gut feelings, what u know and what 'informers' have told u, what are your current thoughts with regards my above 5 questions.

A simple yes / no answer will suffice. Waffle and detailed answers / explanation are not required.

Thanks
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 03:50:PM by petey »

guest2181

  • Guest
Cook brought the rifle from the main bedroom window (23), and put it on Sheila's body, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...

This tells its own story...

23 was taken after the other photographs. Numerical exhibit order is not time/date order.

You are certainly telling stories.  ::)

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33764
23 was taken after the other photographs. Numerical exhibit order is not time/date order.

You are certainly telling stories.  ::)

Hartley, I don't know enough about photography to comment, but between the late 70's and the late 80's it became my then husband's hobby. He used a variety of cameras but I don't recall that any of the pictures were numbered. Could I be wrong?