David1819 - forensic breakthrough claim

[mike tesko]

Mike is clearly feeling left out. 

Mike, obviously knows far more than you could ever imagine...

[guest2181]

Mike, obviously knows far more than you could ever imagine...

Oh I dunno, I can imagine quite a bit

[mike tesko]

The court of trial (October, 1986), and the court of appeal (2002) were 'wrong' to proceed on the footing that the basic blood group results (A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1) were unique and exclusive to Sheila Caffell. The blood group results relied upon served to deceive the court into accepting the premis' that it could only have been her blood, but this was not true, and is not true. The fact of the matter is that the results produced could just as easily have come from a 'third party' to the proceedings, contrary to what the trial judge, Mr Justice Drake, told the jury in his summing up speech, when he told the jury emphatically that there was 'no evidence that a third party could have been involved in the shootings', the killer had to be either Jeremy, or Sheila. But, because the blood group results that were obtained from the flake were by scientific standards 'inconclusive', they lend support to the likelihood that there had been a third party involvement in the killings, and that person could not possibly have been Jeremy Bamber, because he did not share those same 'basic blood group features' found inside the silencer...

[mike tesko]

The court of trial (1986) and the Court of Appeal (2002) have been well and truly deceived by the claim that the blood group results obtained from the examination of the flake, were unique and exclusive to Sheila - when they were not, they could just as easily have belonged or originated from the only other witness to the prosecution who had those very same blood groups, 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour'. The blood could have been his blood, more than it have been Jeremys, or the hitman, Mathew MacDonalds blood type...

[mike tesko]

The court of trial (1986) and the Court of Appeal (2002) have been well and truly deceived by the claim that the blood group results obtained from the examination of the flake, were unique and exclusive to Sheila - when they were not, they could just as easily have belonged or originated from the only other witness to the prosecution who had those very same blood groups, 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour'. The blood could have been his blood, more than it have been Jeremys, or the hitman, Mathew MacDonalds blood type...

Jeremy, nor MacDonald, had the key blood group activity to match the blood group results obtained from the flake, but the chief prosecution protagonist, 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour', did...

[guest7363]

The court of trial (1986) and the Court of Appeal (2002) have been well and truly deceived by the claim that the blood group results obtained from the examination of the flake, were unique and exclusive to Sheila - when they were not, they could just as easily have belonged or originated from the only other witness to the prosecution who had those very same blood groups, 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour'. The blood could have been his blood, more than it have been Jeremys, or the hitman, Mathew MacDonalds blood type...

Not quite following this Mike, I thought Mr. Hayward said that there was a possibility that the blood could be a mixture of blood from more than one person and if it was, a mixture of blood from Nevill Bamber and June Bamber could account for the findings in the grouping tests. However he judged that possibility to be a "remote" one.  Will stand to be corrected though.

[Steve_uk]

Didn't Sheila's natural mother, Susan Jay give a blood sample and there were 13 out of 17 markers present, suggesting that the blood in the silencer was that of Sheila's. In any case in Mike's theory the Defence is still relying on Sheila having returned the silencer to the gun cupboard before proceeding upstairs and shooting herself, which is unlikely with a schizophrenic in a state of psychosis.

[mike tesko]

Not quite following this Mike, I thought Mr. Hayward said that there was a possibility that the blood could be a mixture of blood from more than one person and if it was, a mixture of blood from Nevill Bamber and June Bamber could account for the findings in the grouping tests. However he judged that possibility to be a "remote" one.  Will stand to be corrected though.

Hayward, was edging his bets, he knew that in order to pull it off by claiming that the results obtained from the examination of the flake from the silencer, were supposedly, unique and exclusive to Sheila, was not necessarily true. It was not true because he knows, and I know, and of course others know, that the blood group activity presented by him was a very basic presentation of the facts. You see, it wasn't enough, it isn't enough to simply present those four basic blood group markers, and then be able to say off the top of his head, that these results are unique and exclusive to Sheila, and that by implication it somehow proved that the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the gun that shot and killed her. He deliberately omitted key information that would have served to establish that the blood could not actually have been Sheila Caffells at all. That's why in another witness statement, Hayward stated that the blood found inside the silencer could have originated from either, Sheila Caffell, or Robert Woodwis Boutflour. He threw the possibility that the blood could remotely have been an intimate mixture of the parents bloods, just for good measure. he lied to the court when he claimed that the blood from the flake was unique an exclusive to Sheila. He knew he could not possibly make such a claim without producing the other information required from the testing of that blood, which would either serve to disprove it was her blood, or confirm it. The fact that Hayward did not go so far as to seek to find, or if he did, it begs the question, was key information pointing to the blood of the flake not belonging uniquely, or exclusively to Sheila, deliberately withheld by him?

[mike tesko]

Didn't Sheila's natural mother, Susan Jay give a blood sample and there were 13 out of 17 markers present, suggesting that the blood in the silencer was that of Sheila's. In any case in Mike's theory the Defence is still relying on Sheila having returned the silencer to the gun cupboard before proceeding upstairs and shooting herself, which is unlikely with a schizophrenic in a state of psychosis.

My understanding, is that the dna obtained from the examination of the silencer as per the 2002 appeal, did not confirm the presence of Sheila's dna inside the silencer. The Court of appeal ruled in as many words that the dna results were not obtained from blood, and that the dna found to be present could have got into the silencer by a process of contamination, or otherwise. Yes, Susan Jay did provide a blood sample, the results of which were presented in much more detailed manner, than the results presented by John Hayward for use to help to convict Jeremy Bamber for the murders. I will post examples which I have in my possession, which hopefully will give everyone a far better idea of what I am talking about. Haywards evidence was inaccurate, and very misleading in my opinion, a fact that can surely be bolstered up with further reports from trusted and reputable blood experts...

[guest2181]

No doubt they will be extremely interested in the libellous allegations being promoted here.  I must say, I am somewhat surprised that the resident barrister is allowing such comments.

I'm not so sure that is true, presumably you are also referring to NGB, which I think is a bit cheap.

[mike tesko]

I have several examples of different peoples 'more detailed' blood group activity, than the basic information provided by John Hayward in presenting the four blood group results during the trial (1986) and the appeal (2002), and claiming these were unique and exclusive to Sheila Caffell - he knows, and I know, and others now know that his claim in that respect is not tenable, because he omitted to include the other tell tale information associated with and to those results. For Example, I have the more detailed blood results for the following individuals of interest:-

Robert Woodwis Boutflour
Pamela Boutflour
Peter Eaton
Ann Eaton
David Boutflour
Anthony Pargeter
Ralph Bamber
June Bamber
Sheila Caffell
Daniel Caffell
Nicholas Caffell
Jeremy Bamber
Susan Jay

Once you see these more detailed results, it suddenly becomes clear the extent with which John Hayward deceived the court at trial (October, 1986), and the court of appeal (2002)...

[JackiePreece]

No doubt they will be extremely interested in the libellous allegations being promoted here.  I must say, I am somewhat surprised that the resident barrister is allowing such comments

Are you questioning Ngb's judgement ?
Bad move

[John]

Mike Tesko must realise that there will be consequences for him as a result of his libelling police officers, family members and scientific officers.

Obviously ngb has no say in the matter.

[mike tesko]

Mike Tesko must realise that there will be consequences for him as a result of his libelling police officers, family members and scientific officers.

Obviously ngb has no say in the matter.

Mike Tesko' is speaking the truth, and so long as I believe it to be true, there is nothing they can do about it...

[mike tesko]

Blood evidence given during the trial was 'fraudulent' and 'dishonest'...

Tests and reports produced by reputable blood experts will confirm this to be true...

Was the 'A' type blood result obtained from examination of the flake from the silencer, A+, or A-?