What makes Bamber innocent?

[mike tesko]

And all this 'nonsense' about paint from the aga in the kitchen found on the silencer in August 1985, is nothing but a red herrin' - The relatives did not actually scratch the aga or get red paint onto the silencer until 'after' Annie Eaton handed over to DC Oakey until 11th September 1985, and it was not until a day or so afterwards, that David Boutflour set about leading cops a merry dance by contacting them intent on showing them where the marks on the aga were, and how red paint from 'that' aga had got onto the silencer during the struggle in the kitchen...

'Oh', Look, and then came along the 'scour marks' on the 'underside of the mantelshelf', which were not present there on the morning of the shootings...

[mike tesko]

I believe this photograph was taken after Annie Eaton handed over the silencer (DRB/1) to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985. If I am correct (I may need to refresh my memory on this point)the photograph was taken on either the 12th September, or the 14th September 1985, immediately after David Boutflour, himself had phoned cops to tell them about the 'scour marks' on the underside of the aga...

How utterly remarkable, that nobody noticed these fresh looking scour marks there in clear view, on the morning of the murders? Even more bizarre, how come when 'Ronnie' Cook took his paint sample (RWC/1) at the scene, in the presence of 'Bob' Miller, and Annie Eaton, that Cook nor anybody else saw the 'squiggly scratch marks' there on the 'underside of the mantelpiece', on that date (14th August, 1985)? You see, the fact that relatives must have scratched a silencer which they had in their own possession after the 14th August 1985, independent of the one in police possession from the 12th August 1985, either that or dare I suggest it, the cops scratched the aga before they took the photograph in question. Either way, Cook made a fatal mistake in shoving the fact that he never took paint samples RC/1 or RC/2 from the scene on the 8th or the 9th August 1985. That's right, 'Ronnie', you didn't, PC 'Robert Carr' took those two paint samples, and you thought you was clever by denying any knowledge that he had been there at the scene interfering with the police investigation that he had no business sticking his nose into. And there was you, 'Ronnie' breaking your neck to point out that you had taken two paint samples, 'RWC/1' and 'RWC/2' from the underside of the kitchen aga mantelpiece, on the 14th August 1985. A big mistake that 'Ronnie', because in your haste to show us that you had taken those two paint samples from the part of the kitchen mantelpiece, you 'fucked up big time', my friend. You were too busy bragging about how you had taken those two paint samples on that date, and bragging how you had marked the exact spot where you had taken those paint samples from by attaching a piece of 'yellow sticky tape' there, as some sort of a trophy. So, big boy, how come you never saw, nor reported seeing any of those freshly scoured marks when you took those paint samples, and stuck yellow tape there in the same region where scour marks later gave birth? You would have seen those marks, 'Ronnie', my god you would have seen those marks, if they had been there on the 14th August 1985. Annie Eaton would not have been handing over a second silencer to cops on the 11th September 1985, and David Boutflour would not be phoning cops up on the 14th September 1985, to tell cops that there was scour marks on the underside shelf of the kitchen aga, 'Ronnie' because you would have known about them a month beforehand if they had been present there at  that stage...

'You have blown it', along with the relatives 'Ronnie, you know, the relatives know, and I know, and now everybody in the whole wide world is going to get to know, because 'you lot deliberately framed Jeremy' for these murders, when you know without question that he had killed nobody...

Have a look at the 'yellow sticky tape' you placed on the underside of the kitchen aga, on the 14th August, 1985 'Ronnie', that is where you made 'your big mistake'...

[mike tesko]

Reconstructing 'the sequence of events'  can be very rewarding...

[mike tesko]

Looking at 'this' from a different perspective. If there was only ever one silencer (now hear me out), forget about a second silencer, forget about Annie Eaton handing a second silencer to DC Oakey on the 11th September, 1985. If we say, ok cop, there was only one silencer. We will forget for now all the inconsistencies relating to the exhibit referencing and the lab' item numbering that from time to time is at odds with itself. Lets for arguments sake, say 'ok' there was only one silencer. This silencer had Sheila's blood inside it.This silencer did 'not' have the red paint upon it, until some point after the 14th  August 1985, when 'Ronnie' himself took those two paint samples (RWC/1 and RWC/2). The cop deliberately scratched the silencer (SJ/1, SBJ/1, DB/1, DRB/1) and made those marks on the underside of the aga mantelshelf prior to allowing David Boutflour access to the farmhouse whilst Jeremy was locked up and being interviewed, to discover the marks that no-one had seen before that time, or commented about their existence...

Are you with me 'Ronnie', are you with me...

[mike tesko]

Looking at 'this' from a different perspective. If there was only ever one silencer (now hear me out), forget about a second silencer, forget about Annie Eaton handing a second silencer to DC Oakey on the 11th September, 1985. If we say, ok cop, there was only one silencer. We will forget for now all the inconsistencies relating to the exhibit referencing and the lab' item numbering that from time to time is at odds with itself. Lets for arguments sake, say 'ok' there was only one silencer. This silencer had Sheila's blood inside it.This silencer did 'not' have the red paint upon it, until some point after the 14th  August 1985, when 'Ronnie' himself took those two paint samples (RWC/1 and RWC/2). The cop deliberately scratched the silencer (SJ/1, SBJ/1, DB/1, DRB/1) and made those marks on the underside of the aga mantelshelf prior to allowing David Boutflour access to the farmhouse whilst Jeremy was locked up and being interviewed, to discover the marks that no-one had seen before that time, or commented about their existence...

Are you with me 'Ronnie', are you with me...

Then why is it, 'Ronnie', why is it that its taken a relative to inform cops about these scratch marks, at a time when cops have control of the farmhouse, with Jeremy in custody and being interviewed? This is the bit I don't get 'Ronnie', its baffling me. I am trying my damned hardest to figure it out, trying to be unfair to everyone if you like, but I don't get it. It doesn't make sense to me 'Ronnie, it don't make any sense at all, that cops have the keys to the farmhouse with the son locked up out of harms way, being interviewed, 'Ronnie', about the possibility that he may have had some sort of an involvement in these murders, are you with me 'Ronnie, are you with me? Then lo and behold, out of the blue, 'Ronnie', out of the blue, along comes David Boutflour, phoning into the cops to tell the cops about something that if it had been there on the morning of the murders, 'Ronnie', that he had no right to be telling cops about it being there, because the way I figure it out 'Ronny' old boy, is that if those marks had been there from the time of the murders, 'Ronnie' then the cops would have sure as there's a hell, have known about it, before he did - 'are you with me, Ronnie, are you with me'...

[mike tesko]

The marks scoured on the underside of the mantelpiece is nothing more than a piece of fabricated evidence. I don't need the expertise of Mr Sutherst to convince me that those scour marks could not have been there on the morning of the murders, analysis by the 'sequence of events' brings me to the right conclusion. It works every time, providing you've got facts to work with, or against. Cook would have seen those scour marks on the 14th August 1985, when he took his paint samples and marked the underside of the shelf with that yellow tape. He didn't, so the fresh scour marks can't have been there until sometime after the 14th August 1985. Additionally, since in his own words and testimony, the silencer was always in his possession whenever it was not at the lab', then he must take responsibility for how the red paint got onto the silencer...

[mike tesko]

The marks scoured on the underside of the mantelpiece is nothing more than a piece of fabricated evidence. I don't need the expertise of Mr Sutherst to convince me that those scour marks could not have been there on the morning of the murders, analysis by the 'sequence of events' brings me to the right conclusion. It works every time, providing you've got facts to work with, or against. Cook would have seen those scour marks on the 14th August 1985, when he took his paint samples and marked the underside of the shelf with that yellow tape. He didn't, so the fresh scour marks can't have been there until sometime after the 14th August 1985. Additionally, since in his own words and testimony, the silencer was always in his possession whenever it was not at the lab', then he must take responsibility for how the red paint got onto the silencer...

What a 'coincidence' that when 'Ronnie' separated the baffles which he had taken out of the tubing of the silencer (refer photograph available on this site) that he did not see any blood on any of the first six or seven baffles which he separated, yet by the time he had rebuilt the damn thing and sent it off to his sidekick the ballistic expert Fletcher, how Fletch' discovers the key crucial flake, right there between baffles one and two, where previously there had been no blood, and no flake...

[mike tesko]

I am now pondering long and hard...

Trying to reconstruct what has taken place during this police investigation is akin to trying to reconstruct acts of magic performed by a team of magicians who appear to have the knack of conjuring up evidence, here, there, and every blooming where, out of nothing. Now you see em, now you don't. Where did that come from, it wasn't there beforehand...

The figure at the bedroom window was obviously not a trick of light, it was a person, someone alive, moving around. Now, obviously Bews knew that to have to admit to that as having been true, then Jeremy could not have been prosecuted as the killer, since the last person alive inside the farmhouse would I should think be 'the killer'. In point of fact, Sheila was the last person still alive inside the kitchen, and dare I say it, also alive on the bed before they moved her body to the floor and 'bumped' her off...

Then of course, there is the silencer that wasn't found by cops in the cupboard on the morning of the shootings, but which David Boutflour found there the day after the keys were handed back to the Eatons...

Now, there's a thought, wonder what gun 'Peter' Eaton sneaked back into the farmhouse after cops had finished their investigation by evening of 9th August 1985?

A gun, by jove...

[mike tesko]

Then...

A 'badly fragmented bullet' no less (PV/20) that 'grew' into a 'whole bullet, to enable Fletch' to confirm that it had been loaded and fired via the rifle that was leaning against the bedroom window, at the same precise moment that Sheila was being shot diagonally across the throat in the kitchen downstairs...

As if by 'magic' the badly fragmented bullet just grew and grew until it became whole again...

[mike tesko]

Then there is the 'disappearing body' trick, where the body of a female originally documented as found downstairs in the kitchen, ends up in the bedroom upstairs, shot twice they say by bullets from the gun at the bedroom window, and yet cops still treated her death as, wait for it, 'a suicide'...

[mike tesko]

Her feet were spotlessly clean, not a mark on them, and then there was blood photographed on them...

Her hands were clean, then they had blood on them...

Her arms were clean, not a mark on them that would be consistent with her having been involved in some sort of a struggle with anybody, then there was runs of blood and marks all over her right forearm, and the top part of her right hand and wrist...

Then there was her spotless nightdress, covered in bloodstains in the region of her right armpit and shoulder, a bloodied hand print on the front lower right side of her gown, and expiation marks in the region of her right breast where during her last seconds alive she had been gasping for breath...

So many tricks with words, so many lies being told by cops, and other support witnesses...

[Steve_uk]

Cops found themselves in a dilemma...

Sheila was on the verge of surrendering, she had placed the rifle at the bedroom window in view of cops outside. She had gone downstairs to that part of the farmhouse where police intended to enter. She was unarmed. There was a struggle. She got shot. She was mistakenly presumed dead. Her death was reported as a suicide. In the same room, was the body of her dad. Cops went in search of the other three victims, and located them at 8.10am. By that stage everything appeared, 'tickityboo'. But then things suddenly went pearshaped. Sheila's body was no longer present downstairs in the kitchen...

It's quite 'obvious' what took place afterward...

In order for Sheila's body to wind up dead on the bedroom floor as depicted by PC Birds photographic images, a number of different things needed to happen. (1) Sheila was still alive or dead, after the first shot in the kitchen, (2) she either made her own way upstairs from the kitchen to the bedroom, or she was taken there. (3) she either walked, or was carried. (4) she either collected the rifle from the bedroom window so that she had it in her possession, or a cop brought it from the window and placed it on her body. (5) she either shot herself, once under the chin and killed herself, or the gun discharged a solitary shot whilst cops were manipulating the position of the rifle upon her body...

Mike this is very hard to swallow given that her nightie had very little blood trail down the front.

[David1819]

And all this 'nonsense' about paint from the aga in the kitchen found on the silencer in August 1985, is nothing but a red herrin' - The relatives did not actually scratch the aga or get red paint onto the silencer until 'after' Annie Eaton handed over to DC Oakey until 11th September 1985, and it was not until a day or so afterwards, that David Boutflour set about leading cops a merry dance by contacting them intent on showing them where the marks on the aga were, and how red paint from 'that' aga had got onto the silencer during the struggle in the kitchen...

'Oh', Look, and then came along the 'scour marks' on the 'underside of the mantelshelf', which were not present there on the morning of the shootings...

Mike in the photo that is taken under the mantle, what is all that white powder? I think it may be fingerprint dust?

[mike tesko]

Then...

A 'badly fragmented bullet' no less (PV/20) that 'grew' into a 'whole bullet, to enable Fletch' to confirm that it had been loaded and fired via the rifle that was leaning against the bedroom window, at the same precise moment that Sheila was being shot diagonally across the throat in the kitchen downstairs...

As if by 'magic' the badly fragmented bullet just grew and grew until it became whole again...

Maybe, thats why Special Branch were involved in this case, they were 'experimenting on trying to make ammunition grow back to its original size after firing and it becoming badly fragmented'. That's it, thats why SB destroyed all the key exhibits, so nobody could zero in on their secret 'ammunition growth' program...

[mike tesko]

Mike this is very hard to swallow given that her nightie had very little blood trail down the front.

I don't think so, because looking at the bigger picture, rather than the one everyone is trying to throw up in their imagination of blood streaming from the first neck wound as Sheila ran or walked or crept stealthily upstairs to the bedroom. I don't for one minute think that that was what happened. I shall tell you why. If that had been the case, Sheila would have ended upstairs before cops finally got upstairs to find the other three bodies (as per the police message log version of the location and distribution of bodies, found downstairs, and upstairs - two down, three up). Lets just say that Sheila got shot downstairs in the kitchen at just fractionally before 7.37am. In Jeremys version of events Sheila shot herself at this time. Of course he is absolutely wrong about this, but I will leave him and those who are representing his interests at the moment to their own pleasure. pursuing that angle will not succeed because the rifle she is supposed to have used to shoot herself, where does J and his followers say the gun was at the time she got shot downstairs in the kitchen at lets say 7.37am? It was at the bedroom window upstairs at the time Sheila got shot in the kitchen, so how did she get the rifle from upstairs without anyone seeing her get the gun from the window, take it downstairs and shoot herself with it? She didn't, so thats Jeremys account out of the window, so to speak. Sheila was shot downstairs for sure. Hers was the female body mentioned in the police message logs. Hers was the 'suicide' before 7.45am. Hers was 'not' one of the other three bodies found upstairs by 8.10am...

So, lets look at it logically, Sheila's body is the female referred to in the police message logs found downstairs in the kitchen along with dads body from as early as 7.37am. We know because the contents of the same police message logs, that Sheila's body was 'not' upstairs by 8.10am, otherwise it would have been reported in the message passed at 8.10am, that a further four bodies had been found upstairs. So, we have Sheila downstairs in the kitchen, presumed shot dead during a struggle with the cop over control and possession of the cops gun. In any event, she is shot and declared to be dead downstairs in the kitchen, shot once. Cops called her death a suicide, because she appeared to pull the muzzle of the cops gun in toward her own throat when the gun discharged a solitary shot. In any event, by 7.37am, she is presumed dead, and does not move, does not appear to be breathing, appears not to have a heartbeat, and not showing signs of distress and pain as a result of being shot in the neck. She remains laid on the kitchen floor in this way for another 30 minutes or so. She is laid on her back. Very little blood oozed from the wound to her neck. She fell on top of pooled blood in the kitchen which stained the back of her nightdress. Within ten minutes the bullet entry wound in her throat began to coagulate and formed a natural plug preventing any trapped blood inside her throat in the track of the bullet spilling out when she did eventually regain consciousness and get to her feet. When she stood upright, there was no fresh blood running down her neck onto either her body or her nightdress. There was only a very feint vertically inclined blood flow which ran down her neck which had dried by the time so got back to her feet. She was therefore in this state and this condition able to make the journey from the kitchen downstairs via the spiral stair situated in the corner of the kitchen which took her up onto the main landing and her parents bedroom door. It was just coincidental that no cop saw her, because they had all gone back downstairs via the main staircase at the front of the farmhouse, and as I say just by chance there was nobody to see her arrive upstairs, nobody saw her enter the bedroom, and nobody so her collapse onto her parents bed. In fact, nobody knew that anything had gone wrong with the police operation until senior cops entered the kitchen after the all clear had been given at 8.10am, with five bodies accounted for (two down, three up)...