When the enquiry changed from a suicide to murder did the relatives have alibis?

[Hartley]

Another point, referring to the title of this thread, didn't the relatives have blood samples taken to eliminate them from their inquiries into the silencer discovery?

I have no doubt whatsoever that they were questioned with sufficient attention to detail to eliminate them from being a suspect.

No amount of ranting or slanderous utter piffle (  ) will change that.

They refused to give DNA samples , upon the discovery of DNA !!

Really Jon, where would i find that information? Thats interesting.

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/blood-2002-appeal

Right, so the source is JB's website, I actually don't doubt that they refused (I would also), but as a source to quote this is meaningless.

The swapping of the SBJ/1 and DRB/1 must be believed then as well?

[Alias]

Thanks Jon.

"The male DNA was shown not to match Jeremy’s DNA. The prosecution team attempted to find out whose DNA this was but David Boutflour, Peter Eaton, Robert Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter all refused to give a DNA sample to be checked against this male DNA found inside the sound moderator even though some of them had definitely handled the moderator, including David Bouflour who found DRB/1."

It doesn´t hurt to have a DNA sample taken - not at all. You have to wonder why they refused to cooperate.

[John]

I am working in-between having fun reading your posts I need to be sitting in front of my computer to go back over old posts but I will be doing it don't worry about that


John what was the organisation you have invited Chochokeira and myself to come to we are both always interested in miscarriages of justice

I never mentioned any organisation Jackie, at least I don't think I did as none as such yet exists.  I have already posted to another thread about this but will repost just for your benefit....are you watching??

I genuinely hope you will consider bringing your enthusiasm to bear as everyone with an interest in miscarriages of justice is heartily invited to participate.

[Hartley]

Have a read of Ground 15 of the 2002 appeal judgement.

Lots of info about the DNA and how it was responded to in the last appeal.

[Hartley]

Thanks Jon.

"The male DNA was shown not to match Jeremy’s DNA. The prosecution team attempted to find out whose DNA this was but David Boutflour, Peter Eaton, Robert Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter all refused to give a DNA sample to be checked against this male DNA found inside the sound moderator even though some of them had definitely handled the moderator, including David Bouflour who found DRB/1."

It doesn´t hurt to have a DNA sample taken - not at all. You have to wonder why they refused to cooperate.

I don't, not believe it, but where does that information come from? Apart from JB's site.

[Jackiepreece]

Yep John I am watching

[John]

Have a read of Ground 15 of the 2002 appeal judgement.

Lots of info about the DNA and how it was responded to in the last appeal.

or in conclusion...

In our judgment having reviewed the whole of the evidence about the blood, there is nothing to suggest that the evidence of Mr Hayward in this regard is wrong. The evidence did point to the blood being that of Sheila Caffell but he was right to acknowledge the remote possibility that there was a mixture of blood from June  Bamber  and Nevill  Bamber . That possibility could only be overcome by considering the other aspects of the evidence, the lack of any blood in the barrel of the rifle, the finding of the moderator carefully put away in its proper place and all the other unrelated aspects of the case. We can find nothing to suggest that the evidence that was placed before the jury was misleading nor that the jury would not have given careful consideration to this aspect of the case. Accordingly we reject this ground.

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.html&query=bamber&method=all

[clifford]

Have a read of Ground 15 of the 2002 appeal judgement.

Lots of info about the DNA and how it was responded to in the last appeal.

or in conclusion...

In our judgment having reviewed the whole of the evidence about the blood, there is nothing to suggest that the evidence of Mr Hayward in this regard is wrong. The evidence did point to the blood being that of Sheila Caffell but he was right to acknowledge the remote possibility that there was a mixture of blood from June  Bamber  and Nevill  Bamber . That possibility could only be overcome by considering the other aspects of the evidence, the lack of any blood in the barrel of the rifle, the finding of the moderator carefully put away in its proper place and all the other unrelated aspects of the case. We can find nothing to suggest that the evidence that was placed before the jury was misleading nor that the jury would not have given careful consideration to this aspect of the case. Accordingly we reject this ground.

Was this a quote from the dodgy Appeal judges.Birds of the feather ect.

[Hartley]

Have a read of Ground 15 of the 2002 appeal judgement.

Lots of info about the DNA and how it was responded to in the last appeal.

or in conclusion...

In our judgment having reviewed the whole of the evidence about the blood, there is nothing to suggest that the evidence of Mr Hayward in this regard is wrong. The evidence did point to the blood being that of Sheila Caffell but he was right to acknowledge the remote possibility that there was a mixture of blood from June  Bamber  and Nevill  Bamber . That possibility could only be overcome by considering the other aspects of the evidence, the lack of any blood in the barrel of the rifle, the finding of the moderator carefully put away in its proper place and all the other unrelated aspects of the case. We can find nothing to suggest that the evidence that was placed before the jury was misleading nor that the jury would not have given careful consideration to this aspect of the case. Accordingly we reject this ground.

Was this a quote from the dodgy Appeal judges.Birds of the feather ect.

The judges are dodgy now then?

[Jackiepreece]

They probably took over the baton from the 18 appeal judges who made judgements on the case of the Birmingham 6

[John]

Have a read of Ground 15 of the 2002 appeal judgement.

Lots of info about the DNA and how it was responded to in the last appeal.

or in conclusion...

In our judgment having reviewed the whole of the evidence about the blood, there is nothing to suggest that the evidence of Mr Hayward in this regard is wrong. The evidence did point to the blood being that of Sheila Caffell but he was right to acknowledge the remote possibility that there was a mixture of blood from June  Bamber  and Nevill  Bamber . That possibility could only be overcome by considering the other aspects of the evidence, the lack of any blood in the barrel of the rifle, the finding of the moderator carefully put away in its proper place and all the other unrelated aspects of the case. We can find nothing to suggest that the evidence that was placed before the jury was misleading nor that the jury would not have given careful consideration to this aspect of the case. Accordingly we reject this ground.

Was this a quote from the dodgy Appeal judges.Birds of the feather ect.

The judges are dodgy now then?

Typical response....nothing much changes?   

[John]

They probably took over the baton from the 18 appeal judges who made judgements on the case of the Birmingham 6

As someone correctly posted yesterday, the Birmingham 6 was a politically inspired case whereas Jeremy Bamber's is not.

[jon]

They probably took over the baton from the 18 appeal judges who made judgements on the case of the Birmingham 6

As someone correctly posted yesterday, the Birmingham 6 was a politically inspired case whereas Jeremy Bamber's is not.

Who was responsible for ' The politically inspired case ' against the Birmingham Six ?

[Jackiepreece]

John it had absolutely nothing to do with the Birmingham six being political prisoners they were innocent 18 appeal court judges got it wrong

Appeal court judges do get it wrong don't they John and hartley

[ngb1066]

They probably took over the baton from the 18 appeal judges who made judgements on the case of the Birmingham 6

As someone correctly posted yesterday, the Birmingham 6 was a politically inspired case whereas Jeremy Bamber's is not.

With respect, that makes no difference to the question whether there has been a miscarriage of justice.