Well, police originally believed that Sheila 'had' killed four others, and then herself - until the game changer was introduced by the relatives, after Julie Mugford came forward with a different account that was subsequently abandoned. We now know that the Boutflour children, David and Ann, introduced the key silencer evidence from 11th September onwards, and that Mugford had been coaxed forward four days earlier. Let us not forget, that Mugford first witness statement was recorded in a third person presentation, and that soon after the Boutflour children sought to introduce 'dodgy silencer' evidence between 11th and 14th September 1985, that Jeremy was bailed by the Magistrates. In hindsight, this silencer evidence and a significantly different interpretation of Mugford original account became a game changer. I have witnessedmyself the way a person's input can be recorded in a different way when it comes to gathering evidence. It all depends upon the mindset of the police officers who are receiving or recording 'that' evidence. This is what happened in the so called Bamber case. Whilst ever the case was being investigated as 'four murders and a suicide' under 'SC/688/85' police sought to gather and present the evidence in variously different ways and formats to support such a view. Or, in other words, police had a particular mindset at this time, and when seeking to obtain witness statements police paraphrased what witnesses had to say in a manner befitting that overall approach. However, once the nature of the investigation altered in a 'five murder' case, under 'SC/786/85' police gathered the evidence and presented it differently. It all depends on the perception of a situation as to how evidence will be gathered and presented, by the police and the prosecuting authorities. In most cases, there is usually only one perception adopted, but in the so called Bamber case, there are two contradicting ones...
