Author Topic: was there a redail feture on the phone.  (Read 9641 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #45 on: November 11, 2017, 10:45:AM »
If Jeremy had phoned from the office phone, would it not be apparent that the phone call had come from that phone and not the kitchen phone?

Yes Bamber was in a difficult situation.

Nevill was dead in the kitchen. So he would have to explain a phone call from a totally different upstairs room. Instead he tried to give the impression Nevill had phoned him from the kitchen.

Bamber had to make an instant decision & chose to take the kitchen phone off the hook.

The upstairs office phone didn't have a redial facility anyway. The COA document supersedes a biased book.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #46 on: November 11, 2017, 10:59:AM »
That does contradict what the Court of Appeal said, but I don't see why the office phone couldn't have a redial feature. It does call into question the accuracy of the Court of Appeal document, which I rely on a lot for information.
It does Kaldin.  I appreciate many believe Lomax I book is biased. He does include JBS arguments therefore one has to be sceptical but these particular paragraphs seem pretty unbiased to me.  Always questions and contraidications.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #47 on: November 11, 2017, 11:10:AM »
'He also told me that there would be a phone call made from the house because the last phone call made would be recorded.
He said the call would be made from the White House to his house. He didn’t say who would make it or why.

I know there was a portable phone in the house with a memory key which when pressed would phone back to the last number called.'

                                          -------------------

Julie's WS just mentions a 'portable' phone, which matches the COA.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #48 on: November 11, 2017, 11:13:AM »
Yes Bamber was in a difficult situation.

Nevill was dead in the kitchen. So he would have to explain a phone call from a totally different upstairs room. Instead he tried to give the impression Nevill had phoned him from the kitchen.

Bamber had to make an instant decision & chose to take the kitchen phone off the hook.

The upstairs office phone didn't have a redial facility anyway. The COA document supersedes a biased book.

So you think that Jeremy wanted to make it look like Nevill had phoned from the office phone. What was Jeremy's plan then? To shoot Nevill in the office?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #49 on: November 11, 2017, 11:21:AM »
So you think that Jeremy wanted to make it look like Nevill had phoned from the office phone. What was Jeremy's plan then? To shoot Nevill in the office?

I think Bamber planned to use the portable phone.

Dial his cottage from it. Then leave it by Nevill.

The office phone didn't have a redial facility in my view.

Bamber probably was not aware the portable phone had been taken away a day earlier.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #50 on: November 11, 2017, 11:28:AM »
I have found it in Lomax's book. Chapter 14 'The Telephone Call' page 198
'The office telephone was seized and, because it was a relatively modern touch dial telephone, it had a last number dialled facility'
Documentary evidence uncovered prior to 2002 appeal showed
one of the Tactical Firearms Officers, ..... used the telephone to contact the station for some reason. '
'Documentary evidence has since come to light which shows that a request was made at 8.20 for the Assistant Chief Constable  of Essex Police,  Peter Simpson to speak with Detective Chief Inspector Harris using a land line, which could only be the telephone in White House Farm. ' 
He goes on to discuss this at greater length.
I know there was much discussion of the office telephone on the forum probably a few years ago. Hope this clears up my posts from last night.

Lomax doesn't post any documentary evidence to support the claim - plus it's a bit far fetched to suggest that Nevil called both Jeremy and the poilce from the office phone and that the calls were interupted by Sheila in both instances. His suggestion is that while Nevil was making the call to Jeremy, it was intercepted by Sheila who, lifted up the kitchen phone handset and then ended the call by depressing the handset button. To call the police, Nevil would then have had to go downstairs, replace the handset, go back up stairs and make the call to the police from the office phone. As the kitchen phone was found off the hook, are we expected to believe that Sheila once again intercepted the call. It all just doesn't make sense. I don't think we have ever actually seen any evidence to support the claim that the office phone revealed a call to the police?
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #51 on: November 11, 2017, 11:36:AM »
'The office telephone was seized and, because it was a relatively modern touch dial telephone, it had a last number dialled facility'
Documentary evidence uncovered prior to 2002 appeal showed
one of the Tactical Firearms Officers, ..... used the telephone to contact the station for some reason. '

                               ------------------

I wonder why Lomax mentions the COA. Probably because he knows the COA refutes what he says.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #52 on: November 11, 2017, 11:36:AM »
I think Bamber planned to use the portable phone.

Dial his cottage from it. Then leave it by Nevill.

The office phone didn't have a redial facility in my view.

Bamber probably was not aware the portable phone had been taken away a day earlier.

So why would he use the office phone, and when did he do so?

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #53 on: November 11, 2017, 11:37:AM »
If Jeremy used the office phone and then merely took the kitchen phone off the hook, the line wouldn't have been open would it?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #54 on: November 11, 2017, 11:39:AM »
So why would he use the office phone, and when did he do so?

He wouldn't. And didn't.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #55 on: November 11, 2017, 11:41:AM »
He wouldn't. And didn't.

I don't understand your previous posts then.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #56 on: November 11, 2017, 11:45:AM »
I don't understand your previous posts then.

Don't pretend to not understand simple posts.

He would have used the portable phone. The only phone with the redial feature according to the COA. As Julie's WS suggested he planned to. 

However the portable phone was not available.

The office phone did not have a redial facility.

Understand ?
« Last Edit: November 11, 2017, 11:54:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #57 on: November 11, 2017, 11:47:AM »
Don't pretend to not understand simply posts.

He would have used the portable phone. The only phone with the redial feature according to the COA. As Julie's WS suggested he planned to. 

However the portable phone was not available.

The office phone did not have a redial facility.

Understand ?

So all this was garbage then.

Quote
Yes Bamber was in a difficult situation.

Nevill was dead in the kitchen. So he would have to explain a phone call from a totally different upstairs room. Instead he tried to give the impression Nevill had phoned him from the kitchen.

Bamber had to make an instant decision & chose to take the kitchen phone off the hook.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #58 on: November 11, 2017, 11:49:AM »
'The office telephone was seized and, because it was a relatively modern touch dial telephone, it had a last number dialled facility'
Documentary evidence uncovered prior to 2002 appeal showed
one of the Tactical Firearms Officers, ..... used the telephone to contact the station for some reason. '

                               ------------------

I wonder why Lomax mentions the COA. Probably because he knows the COA refutes what he says.

The only mention of the office phone in the COA doc is Julie's account of t
what BAMBER told her. This isn't evidence of a call being made fron the TFG - bit confused  ??? Didn't read the whole thing so if someone else can find it?

« Last Edit: November 11, 2017, 11:52:AM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44292
Re: was there a redail feture on the phone.
« Reply #59 on: November 11, 2017, 11:52:AM »
The only mention of the office phone in the COA dec is Juie's account of that BAMBER told her. This isn't eevidence of a call being made fron the TFG - bit confused  ??? Didn't read the whole thing so if someone else can find it?



Julie does mention the 'portable' redial phone prior to the massacre in her WS. Which matches the COA.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.