Latest Vlog _ Jeremy's Polygraph Test

[Caroline]

According to the 2005 Sky documentary this is an Essex Police photo.

Why the blood appears wet is anyone's guess. However if it was at all conclusive Jeremy would be released by now. But he is not thus the photo is inconclusive

Regardless, the above picture is still part of the series which produced THIS picture (below) - there was only one set taken (no matter what others might have you believe!). The blood is dry and cracked, she had been dead for some time and dead people don't bleed.

I believed all the horse sh1t about the blood flowing until Bridget (an previous and brilliant poster) showed me this picture. The cracked dried blood proves that she was dead and had been for some time. Perhaps the TV enhanced the colour for dramatic purposes but this picture kicks the 'blood still flowing from the wound' theory out of the window. It's a horrible picture, but one which tells quite a story. You can also see that her face is starting to change colour below her eye, which is slightly open.

[Jane]

Regardless, the above picture is still part of the series which produced THIS picture (below) - there was only one set taken (no matter what others might have you believe!). The blood is dry and cracked, she had been dead for some time and dead people don't bleed.

I believed all the horse sh1t about the blood flowing until Bridget (an previous and brilliant poster) showed me this picture. The cracked dried blood proves that she was dead and had been for some time. Perhaps the TV enhanced the colour for dramatic purposes but this picture kicks the 'blood still flowing from the wound' theory out of the window. It's a horrible picture, but one which tells quite a story. You can also see that her face is starting to change colour below her eye, which is slightly open.

Not only is the blood, which has, at some point, run down her face, dried and cracked, the blood in her mouth appears to have begun to clot.

[Caroline]

Not only is the blood, which has, at some point, run down her face, dried and cracked, the blood in her mouth appears to have begun to clot.

Exactly - the blood on Sheila's mouth (which everyone can CLEARLY see is dried and cracked) contradicts any notion of blood flowing from the wounds in her neck. She hasn't pasted a breath since that blood flowed from her mouth and her heart hadn't pumped any blood since her last breath. If she had tried to breath after or during the flow of blood from her mouth, she would have coughed or spluttered and expirated blood would be visible.

[guest2181]

According to the 2005 Sky documentary this is an Essex Police photo.

Why the blood appears wet is anyone's guess. However if it was at all conclusive Jeremy would be released by now. But he is not thus the photo is inconclusive

They are all Essex police photographs, however this particular image in its current form originated whilst GDS was representing JB.

The colour of the image has been altered to increase the warmth, i.e. the reds are more pronounced. The blood appear a more vivid red; Sheilas skin is 'pinker' than it should be; the rifle is more saturated and is 'blacker' than it should be.

The blood appears wet in that image because it has been altered digitally so that it appears that way. It is actually exactly the same photograph as the cracked blood image. Bridget and I cropped the images and placed then side by side, I will see if I can retrieve that post.

[guest2181]

They are all Essex police photographs, however this particular image in its current form originated whilst GDS was representing JB.

The colour of the image has been altered to increase the warmth, i.e. the reds are more pronounced. The blood appear a more vivid red; Sheilas skin is 'pinker' than it should be; the rifle is more saturated and is 'blacker' than it should be.

The blood appears wet in that image because it has been altered digitally so that it appears that way. It is actually exactly the same photograph as the cracked blood image. Bridget and I cropped the images and placed then side by side, I will see if I can retrieve that post.

See below:

Yes that's it.

Oh no, your memory isn't in as good a nick as we thought.  Do you not recall your conversations with Bridget and I on this very subject? Where we (or rather Bridget) posted a side by side image showing you where it was from?

Trying to keep the number of images repeated to a minimum, but........

This photograph doesn't show wet blood right? : http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4315;image

It's being claimed that this photograph does show wet blood right? : http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=18724;image

But in actual fact, they are the same image, the latter having been enhanced for publication in a newspaper :

[guest2181]

As a further example, this is the darker image which everybody agrees showed dry cracked blood, but I have edited in photoshop to 'appear redder'.

As you can see, people might now say it shows wet blood?

[David1819]

They are all Essex police photographs, however this particular image in its current form originated whilst GDS was representing JB.

The colour of the image has been altered to increase the warmth, i.e. the reds are more pronounced. The blood appear a more vivid red; Sheilas skin is 'pinker' than it should be; the rifle is more saturated and is 'blacker' than it should be.

The blood appears wet in that image because it has been altered digitally so that it appears that way. It is actually exactly the same photograph as the cracked blood image. Bridget and I cropped the images and placed then side by side, I will see if I can retrieve that post.

Putting the issue of wet blood to the side for a second. None of the photos have been altered The problem is the Photos that Mike has taken are photos of photos taken with the flash on in a lit room and it has distorted everything. These photos were taken on a summers morning so everything will be bright as is shown on the left however with everything on the right its heavily distorted. For example the carpet by Sheila appears dark grey and the carpet by June appears pink when in actual fact the carpet is a cream colour as shown correctly on the left in all cases.

[lookout]

So therefore, neither show in their true " colours " ?

One set for the guilts and one set for the innocents. Take your pick.

[guest2181]

Putting the issue of wet blood to the side for a second. None of the photos have been altered The problem is the Photos that Mike has taken are photos of photos taken with the flash on in a lit room and it has distorted everything. These photos were taken on a summers morning so everything will be bright as is shown on the left however with everything on the right its heavily distorted. For example the carpet by Sheila appears dark grey and the carpet by June appears pink when in actual fact the carpet is a cream colour as shown correctly on the left in all cases.

You are mistaken, the image claiming to show wet blood has been digitally manipulated.

Granted the other photographs are not taken directly from the negatives, however both of the photographs which are shown in the comparison in my previous posts, ARE the same image, you can quite clearly see cracked dry blood on one of them.

[Caroline]

You are mistaken, the image claiming to show wet blood has been digitally manipulated.

Granted the other photographs are not taken directly from the negatives, however both of the photographs which are shown in the comparison in my previous posts, ARE the same image, you can quite clearly see cracked dry blood on one of them.

Thans H - it's like talking to a wall sometimes! 

[Caroline]

So therefore, neither show in their true " colours " ?

One set for the guilts and one set for the innocents. Take your pick.

Yes, the innocents can claim Sheila was still alive shortly before begin photographed - they can ignore the dried cracked blood on her face and the dark clotted blood in her mouth. They they ignore the fact that she had clearly been dead for quite some time and no need to explain how fresh blood couldn't flow from a wound on a body who's heart had stopped hours before. You can ignore all of the while the rest of us just shake our head with the incredulity!

[guest154]

So therefore, neither show in their true " colours " ?

One set for the guilts and one set for the innocents. Take your pick.

No that's not how it is at all. there aren't two sets. There is one set - which has been edited and manipulated.  Believing in the photos, when you know they have been edited, manipulated and in essence had their credibility played around with doesn't make you a SUPPORTER and it doesn't make you someone who believes there is a genuine case for innocence  - it makes you someone willing to BELIEVE and spread ANYTHING even though you know it isn't the truth aslong as you think it makes a good case to back up your own selected beliefs.

[guest2181]

You are mistaken, the image claiming to show wet blood has been digitally manipulated.

Granted the other photographs are not taken directly from the negatives, however both of the photographs which are shown in the comparison in my previous posts, ARE the same image, you can quite clearly see cracked dry blood on one of them.

The image has been cropped and digitally altered so that devious people can suggest this:

(Despite the FACT the image is shown above, uncropped and with dry cracked blood.)




There isn't even an argument or a grey area, it is outright lies and deception. There is no defending THAT!

[guest154]

There isn't even an argument or a grey area, it is outright lies and deception. There is no defending THAT!

Agreed, Harters.

[guest2181]

Agreed, Harters.

If there was a genuine miscarriage of justice, then why are there these attempts to manipulate people in to believing lies?

These ARE lies, they are not accidents or misinterpretation, these are fraudulent attempts to hoodwink people.