Author Topic: Disturbing Evidence, which confirms that cops handed back silencer to the family  (Read 119483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
I saw AH yesterday in "Crimes Which Shook............" Dahling, WHAT a lovie. He might be an MP but I feel certain he could have been an ector!!!!
:)) :)) :))

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Considering what you peddled about the photos of Sheila's feet. You are last person anyone with an IQ above room temperature would bother listening to. #zerocredibility

You've done so much peddling David, you might well win the tour de Yorkshire if you entered - although not knowing your arse from your elbow, you'd get lost!

The jury is still out on Sheila's feet - lovie! ::)
« Last Edit: December 05, 2017, 09:43:PM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
You've done so much peddling David, you might well win the tour de Yorkshire if you entered - although not knowing your arse from your elbow, you'd get lost!

The jury is still out on Sheila's feet - lovie! ::)
:)) :)) :)) :))

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33772
You've done so much peddling David, you might well win the tour de Yorkshire if you entered - although not knowing your arse from your elbow, you'd get lost!

The jury is still out on Sheila's feet - lovie! ::)


'Spose that means he'd be peddling backwards.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
You then have to believe Sheila was acting rationally and therefore not in the grip of a schizophrenic episode, when the "all people are bad and should be killed " remark of several weeks previously re-entered her head.

In my opinion it was Jeremy who crept into the twins' room first to test the gun, disabling the twins with one shot to the head each, then dispatching his parents in the master bedroom with what he thought would be enough with the remainder of the load, returning to the twins' room subsequently to secure in an arc pattern their demise.

None of this typical of Sheila with her lack of synchronization between head and hands, unable to place the final shot to June right between the eyes, nor would she have lain down on the bed with her mother, who in your scenario was the most hated individual in that household. Her whole serene demeanour and blood spatter on the nightie suggests her death was quick, occurring from the sitting position, Jeremy pulling her legs following the second shot to convince himself that she was finally dead.

Well, considering that Ann Eaton was told by Jones and Clark when she first arrived at Jeremy's cottage on the first morning of the shootings, that the bodies of June had Sheila were in fact and had been when they had viewed them there less than an hour previously, laid on top of the bed side by side, with the rifle on the bed in-between both bodies, and that Sheila had a bible on her chest, and that although Ann Eaton remembers being told this because she confirms she was told this as such in her COLP witness statement, but she conveniently forgets the identity of the police officers that told her this that, it can hardly be my scenario that June and Sheila's bodies had been there on the bed now can it? Or am I missing something out which I am not capable of understanding?

Either, the bodies of June Bamber, and Sheila Caffell, were laid on top of the bed when DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC 'Mick' Clark visited the main bedroom carnage, or they weren't. If they hadn't been, why would Jones and Clark tell her that they were, and had been? In the same breath, they told Ann Eaton and the other relatives that Neville Bambers body had been found downstairs in the kitchen, and it was! They told Ann Eaton that the twins bodies were found shot in their respective beds in another bedroom, and it was true! So, why would these two cops tell Ann Eaton and the other relatives within an hour of leaving the main bedoom at the farmhouse, that the bodies of june and Sheila were laid on top of the bed, side by side, with a rifle on the bed in-between both bodies, and a bible on Sheila's chest, if the bodies had not been there, but had been elsewhere on the same bedroom floor either side of the bed? June by the door, and Sheila on the opposite side of the bed in possession of the rifle, and the bible no longer on her chest, but nestled next to the upper right part of her arm, if it had been this way when they visited the main bedroom?

So, please try to refrain from saying that this is something that I might have made up, or even that it's my scenario because I wasn't there in the main bedroom when Jones and Clark were there, I didn't see what they saw, and I had no involvement in what they told Ann Eaton and the others regarding where the bodies of the five victims had been found! Don't shoot me, I am only the messenger!

There is clearly been something very sinister going on  regarding the displacement of the two female bodies in this case! It's not me deciding to say off the top of my head that Sheila's body was originally found in the kitchen downstairs, that her body was subsequently found upstairs laid on the bed, and that someone moved her body onto the bedroom floor, or that June's body was laid on top of the bed next to Sheila with the gun resting on the bed in-between both of them, before someone moved her body so that it ended up on the bedroom floor near the doorway - it's evidence readily available to anyone seeking the truth contained in the  police files, which I had no control over that which the police themselves were responsible for recording!

These conflicts of evidence cannot be explained away as errors, or mistakes, or typing errors, nobody can make the mistake of seeing a couple of bodies, here, there, and everywhere, and expect anyone to dismiss the devil in the details!
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 09:42:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
I am not responsible for what witnesses put in their witness statements, or what people put into the composite witness statements they are creating for someone else!
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
I am not responsible for what witnesses put in their witness statements, or what people put into the composite witness statements they are creating for someone else!

I am not responsible for what police record in their logs, or their reports, and records
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
I am not responsible for what police record in their logs, or their reports, and records

What I accept that I am responsible for, is trawling through these documents to try to get to the truth!
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
What I do know, because there is evidence confirming this in the police files of the instant case, was that DS Jones returned to the farmhouse after having been with DC Clark at Jeremy's cottage (less than 4 miles away) at about 11.30am, or thereabouts, and that he took possession of four exhibits from the scene which ordinarily he should not have been entitled to remove, since the gathering and collection of items and exhibits from a crime scene is the province of SOC! Now, we know that by the time Jones returned to whf (around 11.30am) that the second team of SOC including Cook, Davidson, Hammersley and Bird, had control of the farmhouse! What I want to know is why was Jones allowed to seize and remove a total of four exhibits from that crime scene without the knowledge or consent of those four SOCO's?

Why was Jones permitted to remove four exhibits from that crime scene, on the first morning of the tragedy?

He removed items bearing the following exhibit marks:-

SBJ/4
SBJ/3
SBJ/2

and

SBJ/1..
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 10:15:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
What I do know, because there is evidence confirming this in the police files of the instant case, was that DS Jones returned to the farmhouse after having been with DC Clark at Jeremy's cottage (less than 4 miles away) at about 11.30am, or thereabouts, and that he took possession of four exhibits from the scene which ordinarily he should not have been entitled to remove since the gathering and collection of items and exhibits from a crime scene is the province of SOC! Now, we know that by the time Jones returned to whf (around 11.30am) that the second team of SOC including Cook, Davidson, Hammersley and Bird, had control of the farmhouse! What I want to know is why was Jones allowed to seize and remove a total of four exhibits from that crime scene without the knowledge or consent of those four SOCO's?

Why was Jones permitted to remove four exhibits from that crime scene on the first morning of the tragedy?

He removed items bearing the following exhibit marks:-

SBJ/4
SBJ/3
SBJ/2

and

SBJ/1..

Police documents show that he recovered these items from two specific locatons inside the downstairs part of the farmhouse, for example, the downstairs tiolet (SBJ/1), and the kitchen (SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4)...

He recovered the silencer / sound moderator / suppressor (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1), therefore, from the downstairs' toilet, the same toilet where Anthony Pargeter normally kept his .22 Bruno bolt action rifle and Parker Hale..
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 10:16:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
What I accept that I am responsible for, is trawling through these documents to try to get to the truth!

And I think we have established the truth as far as the 'aforementioned' statement goes - it's not genuine.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 10:57:AM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
There is a police record which describes the anhuz rifle as a bolt action rifle, when it's not, it's a semi-automatic rifle! Also mentioned on the same document is a silencer! The form in question is dated,..

I believe that DS Jones seized Anthony Pargeters .22 bolt action rile and the attached Parker Hale from the downstairs toilet at the farmhouse (SBJ/1) on the first morning of the police investigation, aforementioned! I further believe that on the evening of 9th August, 1985, that DS Jones returned the Pargeter bolt action rifle and the Parker Hale (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) to the family, and that David Boutflour found it on the following day, that it (SBJ/, SJ/1, DB/1) was taken away for safe keeping at Ann Eaton's home, until the 12th August, when Robert Boutflour visited Witham police station and brought the matter of the possible use of the silencer in the shootings, which caused DS jones to be deployed to recollect it. The reason why Jones collected he silencer from Peter Eaton that evening was because on the 9th August when Jones and Jones met the Eatons at whf to hand back the keys of the premises to them, Jones had handed Peter Eaton Pargeters bolt action rifle to put back inside the farmhouse. At this time, the Parker Hale silencer was not still fixed to the barrel of that gun! This can be borne out by reference to Ann Eaton's handwritten notes, which describe 'Peter' her husband 'putting the gun back in the farmhouse' that night! Stan Jones returned the Parker Hale silencer to the gun cupboard during the same visit!
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
And I think we have established the truth as far as the 'aforementioned' statement goes - it's not genuine.

I don't know which pigged back statement your on about, because there are several of these amongst the police file!

If your referring to the Stan Jones composite statement dated 8th September 1985, it looks genuine to me, and the contents seem to accord with what did take place!

Essex police certainly had a .22 bolt action rifle and a silencer in their possession between the 7th and the 9th August 1985, as shown and confirmed by police records! That bolt action rifle, and it's silencer, disappeared off the radar, after 9th August, and the silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) did not resurface again and land back in police possession until late evening of 12th August 1985...
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 11:09:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
I don't know which pigged back statement your on about, because there are several of these amongst the police file!

If your referring to the Stan Jones composite statement dated 8th September 1985, it looks genuine to me, and the contents seem to accord with what did take place!

Essex police certainly had a .22 bolt action rifle and a silencer in their possession between the 7th and the 9th August 1985, as shown and confirmed by police records! That bolt action rifle, and it's silencer, disappeared off the radar, after 9th August, and the silencer (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1) did not resurface again and land back in police possession until late evening of 12th August 1985...

This one ........ it's not genuine and the use of the word 'aforementioned' is interesting.

Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
The said document has got the same code in the bottom left hand corner as that which Vanezis wrote on.
 4176,then a ref.