Author Topic: Letter Trail - Wallet  (Read 63373 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #570 on: April 02, 2017, 10:03:AM »
I wonder why Nevill would remove the sights from the gun?

Maybe he removed the telescopic site from the gun because he knew Sheila had been taught by David Boutflour and Jeremy on separate occasions how to load rounds into the gun, and because he knew Sheila was coming to stop for a few days he might have thought if she took a turn for the worse he didn't want her in possession of a loaded gun at distance from him where she might take aim and fire shots without him getting close enough to disarm her in time! With the telescopic site fitted to the gun it posed a potentially different threat, than with it removed! Since, as I have said, with the telescopic site fitted Sheila could be lurking in an outbuilding and take pot shots at targets! Neville Bamber was very alert to the potential of Sheila taking one of her funny turns and that's why he may have removed the silencer! Jeremy didn't take the telescopic site off, that's for sure, because he had no reason to as it wasn't fitted when he collected it and left the kitchen on a potential rabbit shoot that evening! Jones and Jones asked him about the state of the rifle when he had possession of it the evening before the tragedy and he told them there was no telescopic site on the gun, and no Parker Hale silencer fitted to the gun at that time either! They also asked him if there was any bullets already loaded into the rifle when he first picked it up and he told them (on 9th August 1985) 'yes', possibly a handful! This is all very interesting because cops knew a few facts of their own by that stage! For example, they knew that by the time they seized the anshuzt rifle from the box room window that morning, brought it into the main bedroom, had used it for gauging purposes against Sheila's body as part of an  'informatives' exercise, at a time when Sheila had only been shot once, that there was no telescopic site on the gun, but that the silencer was fitted because cops had removed it, and Stan Jones had seized it (SBJ/1) that morning along with three other SBJ exhibits he took from the scene on that occasion! Cops were anxious to know if there had already been live bullets (rounds) already loaded into the gun before Jeremy opened a fresh box of ammunition consisting of 50 live rounds which he proceeded to load the guns ammunition magazine up with until it was full!

After speaking with Jeremy about these matters by Jones and Jones on 9th August 1985, cops knew that Sheila must have obtained the silencer from somewhere and screwed it onto the barrel of the rifle after Jeremy had left the scene that evening, and that she must have loaded a further 14 bullets into the rifle magazine at some point thereafter, and fired almost all of them bar one (which I shall explain about  in a moment), the fifteenth round was a police issue round, which had to be switched over with a test fired round fired post the shootings, so that the ballistic expert could present the misleading claim that the five victims had all been shot by bullets fired via the anshuzt rifle, when if the truth be known, only 24 of the 25 had been, and one of the 24 had not been fired by Sheila, or any would be as yet unknown killer, since that shot was inflicted during the aforementioned informative exercise!

Certainly, DCI 'Taff' Jones, and other top brass, along with the firearm officers all knew the true circumstances regarding Sheila Caffells demise! Of course, at the time she first got shot, this involved one of the firearm officers (PS Woodcock) entering the kitchen via an internal door which led from the back passage into the main kitchen, which was a door that was hinged on the left from Woodcocks vantage point, but was hinged on its right from Sheila's vantage point! The opening edge of that door had been problematic right from the word go, because it meant that as Woodcock attempted to enter the kitchen door the barrel of his weapon was always pointing away from any potential target on the opposite side of the door! The muzzle of his weapon was always pointing in the direction of the outside wall of the kitchen! The further he tried to come around the edge of that kitchen door, a larger and larger piece of his weapons barrel became visible to anyone on the other side of the door! That other person was Sheila Caffell! She grabbed at the barrel of Woodcocks rifle, at first grab Woodcock himself had not managed to come around the opening edge of the kitchen door, and this conflict caused the muzzle end of Woodcocks weapon to leave gouge and scour marks on the outer wall of the kitchen! These gouge and scratch marks are still visible in some of the photographs which police took later that morning! The real crux of the matter is that when Woodcock eventually did manage to free himself around the opening edge of that internal kitchen door, he found himself grappling with a deranged Sheila Caffell over the control of his own weapon! It was at this time that Sheila pulled the muzzle of Woodcocks weapon into the region of her own throat, and the force of her doing this caused the trigger mechanism of his weapon to activate!  The angle at which Sheila dragged the barrel end of the rifle towards herself was responsible for the shot across her neck! Woodcock and the others who then followed him into the kitchen all thought that the shot had killed Sheila outright! The reason for this was because it was not possible to tell at which angle the shot had entered her neck or the direction it had penetrated!! They reported her as being dead in the kitchen along with and after having already reported the find of Neville Bambers body there also!

Cops spoke of her death as a suicide because Woodcock told how Sheila had appeared to drag the muzzle of his gun into her own neck, as if she intended for him to shoot her!!
« Last Edit: April 02, 2017, 10:23:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #571 on: April 02, 2017, 10:14:AM »
Guilters have long seen that many of those reports -pertaining to have come from police- are fraudulent.




Well there you are,it just goes to show the many edits etc which were prevalent in EP's statements/notes/documents/files. Their notes remain to be fraudulent.That's why they're hidden !!

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #572 on: April 02, 2017, 10:19:AM »



Well there you are,it just goes to show the many edits etc which were prevalent in EP's statements/notes/documents/files. Their notes remain to be fraudulent.That's why they're hidden !!

Lookout, I don't actually believe that they originated from EP but I DO believe they've been posted to make us believe they did.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #573 on: April 02, 2017, 10:23:AM »
Lookout, I don't actually believe that they originated from EP but I DO believe they've been posted to make us believe they did.





The way things stand with EP at the moment,you wouldn't know, as anything went.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #574 on: April 02, 2017, 10:26:AM »




The way things stand with EP at the moment,you wouldn't know, as anything went.

I don't know that EP are experiencing any more problems than any other force.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #575 on: April 02, 2017, 10:37:AM »
I don't know that EP are experiencing any more problems than any other force.





What about their underlying problem of not coming forward with the rest of the documents from 30 odd years ago ? They have NOTHING to do with Jeremy,directly,but EVERYTHING to do with how the case had been handled initially,so NO technicality involved.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #576 on: April 02, 2017, 10:45:AM »




What about their underlying problem of not coming forward with the rest of the documents from 30 odd years ago ? They have NOTHING to do with Jeremy,directly,but EVERYTHING to do with how the case had been handled initially,so NO technicality involved.

Lookout, first of all, I require clearer clarification -than ANY I've, so far, received here- that documents ARE being withheld. We hear from Jeremy's own pen -going back years- that he now has everything and he knows who did what.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #577 on: April 02, 2017, 11:16:AM »
Lookout, first of all, I require clearer clarification -than ANY I've, so far, received here- that documents ARE being withheld. We hear from Jeremy's own pen -going back years- that he now has everything and he knows who did what.





Clarification will be clearer when we actually/physically SEE just what EP had been up to post initial investigation when they'd changed tack from 4 murders and a suicide.
Also Kennealey's written words that Sheila had murdered her family.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #578 on: April 02, 2017, 11:21:AM »




Clarification will be clearer when we actually/physically SEE just what EP had been up to post initial investigation when they'd changed tack from 4 murders and a suicide.
Also Kennealey's written words that Sheila had murdered her family.

In other words, you only THINK you know what they've got IF they've got it, but you've no proof that they have and according to Jeremy he now has "everything".

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #579 on: April 02, 2017, 11:31:AM »
In other words, you only THINK you know what they've got IF they've got it, but you've no proof that they have and according to Jeremy he now has "everything".





 I KNOW,but I ain't telling you.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #580 on: April 02, 2017, 11:38:AM »
Maybe he removed the telescopic site from the gun because he knew Sheila had been taught by David Boutflour and Jeremy on separate occasions how to load rounds into the gun, and because he knew Sheila was coming to stop for a few days he might have thought if she took a turn for the worse he didn't want her in possession of a loaded gun at distance from him where she might take aim and fire shots without him getting close enough to disarm her in time! With the telescopic site fitted to the gun it posed a potentially different threat, than with it removed! Since, as I have said, with the telescopic site fitted Sheila could be lurking in an outbuilding and take pot shots at targets! Neville Bamber was very alert to the potential of Sheila taking one of her funny turns and that's why he may have removed the silencer! Jeremy didn't take the telescopic site off, that's for sure, because he had no reason to as it wasn't fitted when he collected it and left the kitchen on a potential rabbit shoot that evening! Jones and Jones asked him about the state of the rifle when he had possession of it the evening before the tragedy and he told them there was no telescopic site on the gun, and no Parker Hale silencer fitted to the gun at that time either! They also asked him if there was any bullets already loaded into the rifle when he first picked it up and he told them (on 9th August 1985) 'yes', possibly a handful! This is all very interesting because cops knew a few facts of their own by that stage! For example, they knew that by the time they seized the anshuzt rifle from the box room window that morning, brought it into the main bedroom, had used it for gauging purposes against Sheila's body as part of an  'informatives' exercise, at a time when Sheila had only been shot once, that there was no telescopic site on the gun, but that the silencer was fitted because cops had removed it, and Stan Jones had seized it (SBJ/1) that morning along with three other SBJ exhibits he took from the scene on that occasion! Cops were anxious to know if there had already been live bullets (rounds) already loaded into the gun before Jeremy opened a fresh box of ammunition consisting of 50 live rounds which he proceeded to load the guns ammunition magazine up with until it was full!

After speaking with Jeremy about these matters by Jones and Jones on 9th August 1985, cops knew that Sheila must have obtained the silencer from somewhere and screwed it onto the barrel of the rifle after Jeremy had left the scene that evening, and that she must have loaded a further 14 bullets into the rifle magazine at some point thereafter, and fired almost all of them bar one (which I shall explain about  in a moment), the fifteenth round was a police issue round, which had to be switched over with a test fired round fired post the shootings, so that the ballistic expert could present the misleading claim that the five victims had all been shot by bullets fired via the anshuzt rifle, when if the truth be known, only 24 of the 25 had been, and one of the 24 had not been fired by Sheila, or any would be as yet unknown killer, since that shot was inflicted during the aforementioned informative exercise!

Certainly, DCI 'Taff' Jones, and other top brass, along with the firearm officers all knew the true circumstances regarding Sheila Caffells demise! Of course, at the time she first got shot, this involved one of the firearm officers (PS Woodcock) entering the kitchen via an internal door which led from the back passage into the main kitchen, which was a door that was hinged on the left from Woodcocks vantage point, but was hinged on its right from Sheila's vantage point! The opening edge of that door had been problematic right from the word go, because it meant that as Woodcock attempted to enter the kitchen door the barrel of his weapon was always pointing away from any potential target on the opposite side of the door! The muzzle of his weapon was always pointing in the direction of the outside wall of the kitchen! The further he tried to come around the edge of that kitchen door, a larger and larger piece of his weapons barrel became visible to anyone on the other side of the door! That other person was Sheila Caffell! She grabbed at the barrel of Woodcocks rifle, at first grab Woodcock himself had not managed to come around the opening edge of the kitchen door, and this conflict caused the muzzle end of Woodcocks weapon to leave gouge and scour marks on the outer wall of the kitchen! These gouge and scratch marks are still visible in some of the photographs which police took later that morning! The real crux of the matter is that when Woodcock eventually did manage to free himself around the opening edge of that internal kitchen door, he found himself grappling with a deranged Sheila Caffell over the control of his own weapon! It was at this time that Sheila pulled the muzzle of Woodcocks weapon into the region of her own throat, and the force of her doing this caused the trigger mechanism of his weapon to activate!  The angle at which Sheila dragged the barrel end of the rifle towards herself was responsible for the shot across her neck! Woodcock and the others who then followed him into the kitchen all thought that the shot had killed Sheila outright! The reason for this was because it was not possible to tell at which angle the shot had entered her neck or the direction it had penetrated!! They reported her as being dead in the kitchen along with and after having already reported the find of Neville Bambers body there also!

Cops spoke of her death as a suicide because Woodcock told how Sheila had appeared to drag the muzzle of his gun into her own neck, as if she intended for him to shoot her!!

There exists an 'Officers Report' regarding this shooting incident in the kitchen!

By 7.45am staff in the Incident Room, and the Control Room already knew about this shooting incident, and referred thereafter to this being a deliberate attempt by Sheila to kill herself!

A Suicide!!
« Last Edit: April 02, 2017, 11:38:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #581 on: April 02, 2017, 11:44:AM »
No wonder " Taff " legged it to the golf course.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17579
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #582 on: May 07, 2017, 04:56:PM »
I have read the letters without the redacted parts.  Over the course of the letters, after having failed to answer Caroline's question/s about the wallet, Jeremy claims to not have had Caroline's letter with him, when he originally replied to her questions.

He claims that this is the case nine times out of ten, when replying to people's letters.  He either claims to have memorised Caroline's questions or to have provided his answers to her from memory (his actual remark on this is ambiguous). 

After answering some of Caroline's questions - he does express he will answer other questions when he gets back on the wing - but he doesn't clarify which questions he is referring to.

At one point he claims to have not remembered the wallet question when writing his original letter to Caroline -  but he notes having remembered the answer to wallet question as being either 'no or not important'.

He attempts to provide reasoning for this and some extenuating circs.  He makes reference to the volume of letters and cards he receives, especially after a TV program (presumably about the case). He claims that for the most part, it is only he himself who replies to people's letters / cards.

He claims to be totally convinced that he was framed by police and relatives and he expresses that (because of this) there are some questions in letters he receives that he personally feels are unimportant.  He attempts to apologise for having treated the wallet question in this manner, conceding that he was flippant about it, when from Caroline's point of view it was obviously an important question.

He claimes that DS Stan Jones and Ann Eaton made up hundreds of things that he (Jeremy) is supposed to have said.  He claims to have not known the exact amount in his dad's wallet - but he claims to have known that it was standard practice for his dad to carry a few hundred quid on him in his wallet.

So it is true that he did not answer Caroline's question or avoided her question (depending upon which way this is looked at).  He then goes on to try and provide some reasoning as to why this lack of response occurred.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2017, 05:00:PM by Roch »

Offline JackiePreece

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4743
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #583 on: May 07, 2017, 05:20:PM »
I have read the letters without the redacted parts.  Over the course of the letters, after having failed to answer Caroline's question/s about the wallet, Jeremy claims to not have had Caroline's letter with him, when he originally replied to her questions.

He claims that this is the case nine times out of ten, when replying to people's letters.  He either claims to have memorised Caroline's questions or to have provided his answers to her from memory (his actual remark on this is ambiguous). 

After answering some of Caroline's questions - he does express he will answer other questions when he gets back on the wing - but he doesn't clarify which questions he is referring to.

At one point he claims to have not remembered the wallet question when writing his original letter to Caroline -  but he notes having remembered the answer to wallet question as being either 'no or not important'.

He attempts to provide reasoning for this and some extenuating circs.  He makes reference to the volume of letters and cards he receives, especially after a TV program (presumably about the case). He claims that for the most part, it is only he himself who replies to people's letters / cards.

He claims to be totally convinced that he was framed by police and relatives and he expresses that (because of this) there are some questions in letters he receives that he personally feels are unimportant.  He attempts to apologise for having treated the wallet question in this manner, conceding that he was flippant about it, when from Caroline's point of view it was obviously an important question.

He claimes that DS Stan Jones and Ann Eaton made up hundreds of things that he (Jeremy) is supposed to have said.  He claims to have not known the exact amount in his dad's wallet - but he claims to have known that it was standard practice for his dad to carry a few hundred quid on him in his wallet.

So it is true that he did not answer Caroline's question or avoided her question (depending upon which way this is looked at).  He then goes on to try and provide some reasoning as to why this lack of response occurred.

I believe this will have been dealt with by Ngb but I would not expect Ngb to post anything confidential on an open forum. I have no reason to believe Ngb has changed his stance and each time he has advised me or discussed legal matters with me he has always been 100% right.

Interesting post
"No hour of life is wasted that is spent in the saddle" Winston Churchill

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Letter Trail - Wallet
« Reply #584 on: May 07, 2017, 06:15:PM »
I have read the letters without the redacted parts.  Over the course of the letters, after having failed to answer Caroline's question/s about the wallet, Jeremy claims to not have had Caroline's letter with him, when he originally replied to her questions.

He claims that this is the case nine times out of ten, when replying to people's letters.  He either claims to have memorised Caroline's questions or to have provided his answers to her from memory (his actual remark on this is ambiguous). 

After answering some of Caroline's questions - he does express he will answer other questions when he gets back on the wing - but he doesn't clarify which questions he is referring to.

At one point he claims to have not remembered the wallet question when writing his original letter to Caroline -  but he notes having remembered the answer to wallet question as being either 'no or not important'.

He attempts to provide reasoning for this and some extenuating circs.  He makes reference to the volume of letters and cards he receives, especially after a TV program (presumably about the case). He claims that for the most part, it is only he himself who replies to people's letters / cards.

He claims to be totally convinced that he was framed by police and relatives and he expresses that (because of this) there are some questions in letters he receives that he personally feels are unimportant.  He attempts to apologise for having treated the wallet question in this manner, conceding that he was flippant about it, when from Caroline's point of view it was obviously an important question.

He claimes that DS Stan Jones and Ann Eaton made up hundreds of things that he (Jeremy) is supposed to have said.  He claims to have not known the exact amount in his dad's wallet - but he claims to have known that it was standard practice for his dad to carry a few hundred quid on him in his wallet.

So it is true that he did not answer Caroline's question or avoided her question (depending upon which way this is looked at).  He then goes on to try and provide some reasoning as to why this lack of response occurred.

Thank you Roch MUCH appreciated!
Few people have the imagination for reality