Disturbing Evidence, which confirms that cops handed back silencer to the family

[Jane]

Why is everything on the document crossed out, and why are side notes scribbled out?

Either it's been previously seen -and dismissed?- OR perhaps it was thought it would authenticate it?

[sami]

Kaldin, it could go one of two ways. You COULD find yourself covered in glory, on the other hand you could find yourself covered in..................... something less sweet.

[Kaldin]

Well look, if it's fake, why would someone photocopy it onto the back of another statement or onto a copy of another statement? Both sides of that piece of paper are photocopies obviously.

[Kaldin]

I don't understand where Mike is getting these copies of documents from anyway. 

[Jane]

Well look, if it's fake, why would someone photocopy it onto the back of another statement or onto a copy of another statement? Both sides of that piece of paper are photocopies obviously.

WHY, if it's real, would someone photocopy it onto the back of another statement/copy of another statement?

[Kaldin]

WHY, if it's real, would someone photocopy it onto the back of another statement/copy of another statement?

Perhaps they were collating evidence and used back to back copying? The question is - where is the original?

[sami]

I don't understand where Mike is getting these copies of documents from anyway. 

it might be from his imagination and a good printer

[Kaldin]

it might be from his imagination and a good printer

Are you accusing him of creating these documents?

[Kaldin]

The content is rather vague. If someone wanted to dispute the evidence and fake a document, they'd be more specific.

It doesn't say where Jones allegedly found the silencer, and it doesn't say whether he put it in the cupboard or not. What would be the point of faking such a vague document?

[Jane]

Perhaps they were collating evidence and used back to back copying? The question is - where is the original?

I won't pretend to know anything about photocopying, but might it be possible to type the original -and it does appear to have been typed on a different machine from the report on the opposite side- on plain paper and then transfer it headed paper? I'm sure someone who knows how could create lookalike headed paper.

[sami]

Are you accusing him of creating these documents?

who mike,absolutely not he wouldnt do such a thing

[Jane]

Are you accusing him of creating these documents?

I think we're supposed to think that the 'report' was in the form of a confession. WHY, given the dates, would this happen? WHY use the word "covertly"? The whole 'report' could just as easily have been written without it inclusion, and if it WAS a confession, it's doubtful that it would have been left anywhere it could be treated so casually and where it became common knowledge. It would have been sent privately.

[mike tesko]

All I know, is that some time ago, a police log was copied onto the reverse of another police log, which supposedly was created in a different part of Chelmsford police station - Jeremy was very excited by this development!

It has been established, therefore, that for one reason or another, somebody has been responsible for copying evidence on the reverse side of other documentation. I do not profess to know why whoever did what they did, all I am interested in, is that they did...

[sami]

could it be that that a police officer who knew jb was innocent had done it .knowing it might be seen at a later date and cause doubt on jb's conviction

[Kaldin]

who mike,absolutely not he wouldnt do such a thing

It looked like you were accusing him to me.