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

[Jane]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4455.msg182871.html#msg182871

What exactly are you trying to prove here, David? I'm neither ashamed nor embarrassed to admit that I CHANGED MY MIND  -it's an irony that much of what was true when I believed him to be innocent STILL holds true- but trying to ridicule others appears to be a need buried deep within you. It says much about you. OR is it that you're simply trying to divert attention from the fact that you once believed Jeremy was innocent but your insecurities are such that you'd prefer the finger wasn't pointed at you?

[mike tesko]

Well, if they could see it clearly enough to discuss it and take a unilateral decision to leave it there, not only was it in their sight, it was also well within sight of anyone else who looked.

Ron Cook told the COLP Investigators, that if he had seen a silencer in the gun cupboard located under the stairs in a room known as the den, he would have taken it for takings sake because the thread on the end of the Anshuzt barrel was clean and blood free, and that it gave an impression that something might attach itself there, such as a silencer (and the rifles metal end cap). One thing appears clear and that is that Cook did not arrive at the farmhouse until 9.20am that morning! Him and his team of SOCO's did not get handed the scene from senior officers until 10 O'clock. By the time Cook got to see the end of the anshuzt rifles barrel, a great deal of activity involving its movement and positioning had already occurred! For example, Cook didn't see the anshuzt rifle at the box room window, where Julia Jeapes and PC Brown had seen it earlier that same morning! Cook didn't see the rifle laying alongside Sheila's body at 8.44am, when the police surgeon, Dr Craig, saw Sheila's body on the far side of the bed at that time!  Cook didn't see Sheila's body at about 9.00am when as PS Adams said, he had no recollection of seeing a gun with Sheila's body at that time! Cook was not there when Stan Jones and Mick Clark saw Sheila and Junes bodies laid on top of the bed, with the rifle at that stage resting on the bed in between both bodies! And Cook did not see the bodies being lifted from the bed and placed on the floor, nor could he be expected to know of the whereabouts of the rifle whilst this exercise was going on (informatives)!

But one thing he must have known about, involved Stan Jones return to the scene shortly after 11.30am on that first morning, to collect exhibits SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and SBJ/1. No doubt on the 13th August 1985, when he was given the silencer by Stan Jones, that Cooks mind went into automatic mode, and he must have assumed that the silencer Stan Jones had given him that particular morning, was the very same silencer that he knew Stan Jones had taken from the scene on the first morning of the investigation - hence why Cook attached his own exhibit label and marked it 'SJ/1' he thinking that Stan Jones was the finder of it...

[mike tesko]

Back to posting old posts David? That's what you do when you have nothing - that's why you do it so often. Ready to admit that you got yourself over excited by 3SB and made a berk of yourself? 

I don't think he has made a berk of himself - it seems clear cut to me that what I have referred to as being Stan Jones identifying mark, is genuine..

[Jane]

Ron Cook told the COLP Investigators, that if he had seen a silencer in the gun cupboard located under the stairs in a room known as the den, he would have taken it for takings sake because the thread on the end of the Anshuzt barrel was clean and blood free, and that it gave an impression that something might attach itself there, such as a silencer (and the rifles metal end cap). One thing appears clear and that is that Cook did not arrive at the farmhouse until 9.20am that morning! Him and his team of SOCO's did not get handed the scene from senior officers until 10 O'clock. By the time Cook got to see the end of the anshuzt rifles barrel, a great deal of activity involving its movement and positioning had already occurred! For example, Cook didn't see the anshuzt rifle at the box room window, where Julia Jeapes and PC Brown had seen it earlier that same morning! Cook didn't see the rifle laying alongside Sheila's body at 8.44am, when the police surgeon, Dr Craig, saw Sheila's body on the far side of the bed at that time!  Cook didn't see Sheila's body at about 9.00am when as PS Adams said, he had no recollection of seeing a gun with Sheila's body at that time! Cook was not there when Stan Jones and Mick Clark saw Sheila and Junes bodies laid on top of the bed, with the rifle at that stage resting on the bed in between both bodies! And Cook did not see the bodies being lifted from the bed and placed on the floor, nor could he be expected to know of the whereabouts of the rifle whilst this exercise was going on (informatives)!

But one thing he must have known about, involved Stan Jones return to the scene shortly after 11.30am on that first morning, to collect exhibits SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and SBJ/1. No doubt on the 13th August 1985, when he was given the silencer by Stan Jones, that Cooks mind went into automatic mode, and he must have assumed that the silencer Stan Jones had given him that particular morning, was the very same silencer that he knew Stan Jones had taken from the scene on the first morning of the investigation - hence why Cook attached his own exhibit label and marked it 'SJ/1' he thinking that Stan Jones was the finder of it...

An understair (gun) cupboard is generally located in a hall which may take the form of a narrow corridor, or in the case of a large Georgian house, a wide anti-room, however, be that as it may, your lengthy post in no way addresses the post you quoted.

[Jane]

I don't think he has made a berk of himself - it seems clear cut to me that what I have referred to as being Stan Jones identifying mark, is genuine..

I wouldn't rely too much on David for verification. He changed his mind.

[mike tesko]

An understair (gun) cupboard is generally located in a hall which may take the form of a narrow corridor, or in the case of a large Georgian house, a wide anti-room, however, be that as it may, your lengthy post in no way addresses the post you quoted.

The so called gun cupboard at whf was clearly in the den, and was situated beneath the back stairs...

Since the thread I'm posting on, is about the cops returning the silencer to the family, I was just pointing out that Stan Jones took a silencer away from the scene on the first morning of the police investigation, which the relatives obviously handed back to the cops via Peter Eaton on the 12th August 1985. It must follow that if what I am reporting is true, that cops must have handed the silencer (SBJ/1) back to the family by one means or another prior to the 12th August 1985, when the family gave it back....

[Caroline]

What exactly are you trying to prove here, David? I'm neither ashamed nor embarrassed to admit that I CHANGED MY MIND  -it's an irony that much of what was true when I believed him to be innocent STILL holds true- but trying to ridicule others appears to be a need buried deep within you. It says much about you. OR is it that you're simply trying to divert attention from the fact that you once believed Jeremy was innocent but your insecurities are such that you'd prefer the finger wasn't pointed at you?

Not sure what he's 'trying' to prove but once again he's proved to be a dickhead. He wears it well! 

[Jane]

The so called gun cupboard at whf was clearly in the den, and was situated beneath the back stairs...

Since the thread I'm posting on, is about the cops returning the silencer to the family, I was just pointing out that Stan Jones took a silencer away from the scene on the first morning of the police investigation, which the relatives obviously handed back to the cops via Peter Eaton on the 12th August 1985. It must follow that if what I am reporting is true, that cops must have handed the silencer (SBJ/1) back to the family by one means or another prior to the 12th August 1985, when the family gave it back....

Oh right! I see. It seems that you're saying there was more than one silencer so we're obviously talking about entirely different silencers and different circumstances.

[Adam]

Based on the evidence, it can be safely deduced that the blood was planted maliciously by someone who has both access to Sheila's blood and a vested interest in seeing Jeremy disinherited. Who that person is I do not know for sure, but it can be narrowed down to a list of five people that meet the two prerequisites I just mentioned.

David still hasn't said who these 5 people are who simultaneously had access to Sheila's blood & wanted to disinherit Bamber. I have asked several times since 12.41 this afternoon.

David quietly changed stance because he knew he could goad more as a supporter. However you would think he would at least have a scenario of how the silencer was fabricated. That was his sole reason for changing stance.  If he has a scenario, he hasn't revealed it.

[mike tesko]

Oh right! I see. It seems that you're saying there was more than one silencer so we're obviously talking about entirely different silencers and different circumstances.

It depends what you know, and what your prepared to accept as being true!

If you go by the police, relatives and prosecutions case at trial, and since, then obviously how can the police take control of a silencer from the scene on the first morning of the investigation, and then three days later the family find that self same silencer in a cupboard in the den at the scene? Moreover, how if there was only one silencer, could cops have sent the silencer in question (DB/1) to the Lab' on the 30th August 1985, and yet Ann Eaton and the other relatives still be in possession of the said silencer right up until the 11th September 1985, at which point only then does Ann Eaton decide to hand it over to DC Oakey? How could the same silencer be at the lab' being dismantled by the firearms expert (Fletcher) on the 12th September 1985, yet still be with Essex police so that DS Davidson, and DS Eastwood could fingerprint it on the 13th September 1985? Also, how could a flake of dried blood be found trapped between baffle plates in a silencer at the lab' which when analysed and results obtained on the 12th, 13th, 18th, and 19th September 1985, cops still hadn't by that stage sent the silencer to the lab' and would not do so until a day after the four key blood group results were obtained? If there was only just the one silencer in this miscarriage debacle, how could such a flake of dried blood have been found inside a silencer which the cops had not yet even submitted to the lab', and would not do so, until the 20th September 1985, accompanied by a request for the silencer to be checked for blood and fibers?

If blood had supposedly already been found inside the silencer, why was a request being made by Essex police for the silencer they sent to the lab' on the 20th September 1985, to be checked for blood?

Its starting to look to me like there were two rifles and two silencers at the heart of this tragedy!

The cops, the family, and the experts at the lab' are certainly all guilty of fabrication, and perverting the course of justice!

You simply couldn't make it up what has been going on here with these guns, silencers and bullets!

Jeremy Bamber was definitely framed for these murders, by the cops, the family and experts, who are responsible for manipulating the firearms used in these shootings, the types of ammunition used, and the interchanging misuse of two almost identical Sound moderators! As part of the attempt to frame Jeremy Bamber for these killings, they were cocky in their approach, so cocky and confident that the criminal justice system could be manipulated to secure a conviction, that they even blatantly and openly doctored the exhibit references of key exhibits with a view to creating an environment of confusion which ordinary people would not understand the significance of...

[mike tesko]

No-one has seen any witness statement made either by Stan Jones, or one that was made in his name by another person, when, where, and how, Stan Jones, took possession of, found or seized, or was given the four key exhibits that became known as, SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and SBJ/1, other than some poxy excuse that the silencer that Peter Eaton handed to him on the 12th August 1985, namely a silencer he gave the exhibit reference 'SBJ/1'...

Well, this is remarkable for a number of different reasons, because Ron Cook said that when Stan Jones handed him that particular silencer on the following day (13th August 1985) it did not have any exhibit label attached to it, and before taking it to the Lab' that very same day how Cook had attached his own exhibit label which both he and Glynis Howard signed, he said was marked as 'SJ/1' because he hadn't realised and did not know that Stan Jones even had a middle or a second christian name...

There it is then, as clear as day - one silencer, which Stan Jones claims had the exhibit reference of 'SBJ/1', a silencer which Ron Cook had labelled 'SJ/1', and a silencer which Glynis Howard referred to as exhibit 'DB/1', and 'DRB/1', one silencer, with several different exhibit references at the same time, in the same time frame (13th August 1985)...

Absolutely marvelous, it makes you wonder how these people can sleep or rest at night...

[Caroline]

I don't think he has made a berk of himself - it seems clear cut to me that what I have referred to as being Stan Jones identifying mark, is genuine..

I think he most certainly has and neither of you has posted anything to prove such an identifying mark - I have to conclude that it is because you don't have any. Stan Jones's signature has now been identified and just because you keep saying 3SB is an ID mark for Stan Jones - doesn't make it so. If people signed things with various marks it would make an absolute joke of the admin system and no one would know who signed what! This is why we have signatures - they identify a person! I'm not particularly interested in the claims people make - if they can't back them up.

I don't believe that the document you originally posted is genuine but it would be easy to create and hide any editing by printing, scanning, and saving. Not sure who would want to or why but maybe it was done just to stir conversation. Add to that David and his back bedroom forensic laboratory ......... and here we are!  The faithful will go along with it, the rest will simply keep banging their heads against a brick wall, pointing out the flaws. It will die down eventually, but will once again rear its ugly head and it will all start over again. T'was ever thus!

[Jane]

It depends what you know, and what your prepared to accept as being true!

If you go by the police, relatives and prosecutions case at trial, and since, then obviously how can the police take control of a silencer from the scene on the first morning of the investigation, and then three days later the family find that self same silencer in a cupboard in the den at the scene? Moreover, how if there was only one silencer, could cops have sent the silencer in question (DB/1) to the Lab' on the 30th August 1985, and yet Ann Eaton and the other relatives still be in possession of the said silencer right up until the 11th September 1985, at which point only then does Ann Eaton decide to hand it over to DC Oakey? How could the same silencer be at the lab' being dismantled by the firearms expert (Fletcher) on the 12th September 1985, yet still be with Essex police so that DS Davidson, and DS Eastwood could fingerprint it on the 13th September 1985? Also, how could a flake of dried blood be found trapped between baffle plates in a silencer at the lab' which when analysed and results obtained on the 12th, 13th, 18th, and 19th September 1985, cops still hadn't by that stage sent the silencer to the lab' and would not do so until a day after the four key blood group results were obtained? If there was only just the one silencer in this miscarriage debacle, how could such a flake of dried blood have been found inside a silencer which the cops had not yet even submitted to the lab', and would not do so, until the 20th September 1985, accompanied by a request for the silencer to be checked for blood and fibers?

If blood had supposedly already been found inside the silencer, why was a request being made by Essex police for the silencer they sent to the lab' on the 20th September 1985, to be checked for blood?

Its starting to look to me like there were two rifles and two silencers at the heart of this tragedy!

The cops, the family, and the experts at the lab' are certainly all guilty of fabrication, and perverting the course of justice!

You simply couldn't make it up what has been going on here with these guns, silencers and bullets!

Jeremy Bamber was definitely framed for these murders, by the cops, the family and experts, who are responsible for manipulating the firearms used in these shootings, the types of ammunition used, and the interchanging misuse of two almost identical Sound moderators! As part of the attempt to frame Jeremy Bamber for these killings, they were cocky in their approach, so cocky and confident that the criminal justice system could be manipulated to secure a conviction, that they even blatantly and openly doctored the exhibit references of key exhibits with a view to creating an environment of confusion which ordinary people would not understand the significance of...

...........or you could make it up?

[mike tesko]

...........or you could make it up?

Or you could be making it up, in that you are suggesting that I am making it up - the truth of the matter is that the silencer evidence is made up nonsense introduced at the behest of Robert Woodwis Boutflour, who got a bee in his bonnet from the outset claiming that a silencer would have needed to be used when the children were shot so that the adult victims did not get disturbed!

The ballistic expert in this case, Malcolm Fletcher, could not find any evidence that any of the bullets had been fired through a silencer / sound moderator / suppressor, despite him making attempts to verify this to be true. So we have 25 bullets or so that could not be linked as having been fired through a silencer, not one single bullet that could be said to have been fired through the silencer, and this paint evidence from the kitchen aga, that the silocost impression taken from the gouge that Ron Cook claims he made with a pen knife on the 14th August 1985, has 'regular scratches - (all) equally spaced' that could not have been made by any pen knife, but which were made by the end of the silencers end cap which he brought into direct contact with the underside of the aga mantelpiece shelf, a gouge mark that he subsequently covered with a piece of yellow sticky tape, supposedly on that date (14th August 1984), yet how odd that despite the relatives having access to the farmhouse from the entire period from 9th August 1985 until at least the 12th September 1985, not one of them, and that includes Ann Eaton, David Boutflour, Peter Eaton, Anthony Pargeter, Robert Boutflour, Basil Cock, Barbara Wilson, and every cat and dog imaginable, all fail to recognise something they would have seen, and commented upon in the interim period prior to the 14th September 1985, when a key photograph was taken showing that piece of yellow sticky tape stuck on the underside of the kitchen shelf at the scene!

Nobody but Cook himself says he saw that Yellow sticky tape fixed to the underside of the kitchen aga shelf, from 14th August 1985, onwards...

Its all fake evidence, introduced by cops and relatives and experts at the lab'...

The silencer evidence is a red herrin', its bogus, its dodgy, its fake, its total rubbish...

[mike tesko]

I wouldn't rely too much on David for verification. He changed his mind.

Well, there's nothing wrong with anyone changing their minds about anything is there?

I suppose it might depend on what you get to know later on, or what you see with your own two eyes, and your own experiences in life, not just in your own life, but in the way others have lived their lives, in one way or another. I change my mind often when I find a new piece of evidence that I had not seen before which impacts on something I either believed in, or didn't believe in!

I am still on that journey...

I still have at least half as much again material that I have not read yet in connection with this case, I am finding out new things all of the time every time I pick up a document I have not had sight of before or previously...