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

[mike tesko]

So, everyone must now know that the Prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher did not tell the truth about when he carried out test firing of rifle (18), with use of the silencer ('DB/1') 23, and some as yet unidentified control ammunition, on the 13th September 1985...

He has lied and fabricated his account of when he received the rifle (18), the silencer ('DB/1') and control ammunition in which to do tests to see if the batches of crime scene ammunition had in fact been fired in that rifle (18) which passed through the silencer ('DB/1') 23...

Now, this opens up 'a whole new ball game' - suddenly the prosecutions case is 'on the back foot'!

[mike tesko]

So, everyone must now know that the Prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher did not tell the truth about when he carried out test firing of rifle (18), with use of the silencer ('DB/1') 23, and some as yet unidentified control ammunition, on the 13th September 1985...

He has lied and fabricated his account of when he received the rifle (18), the silencer ('DB/1') and control ammunition in which to do tests to see if the batches of crime scene ammunition had in fact been fired in that rifle (18) which passed through the silencer ('DB/1') 23...

Now, this opens up 'a whole new ball game' - suddenly the prosecutions case is 'on the back foot'!

Suddenly, its not just a case of it being a one gun crime, with use of one silencer or sound moderator! Its not just a case of we can call the silencer anything we want at any stage, and nobody will take the slightest notice, so what if we have given the silencer various exhibit references and different lab' item numbers, and what if two different relatives handed over a silencer with a month difference in the hand over of these or this? So what if relatives still had the silencer by 11th September 1985, when the silencer was supposed to have been at the Lab' at Huntingdon from the 30th August 1985, onward? So what if blood was found inside the silencer which had been dismantled at the lab' on the 12th September 1985, if the silencer handed to DC Oakey by Ann Eaton on the 12th September 1985, was not submitted to the lab' until the 20th September 1985? Does it matter that blood was attributed to a silencer ('DRB/1') that wasn't the silencer inside which the key blood group evidence was supposedly found? So what if  there were two guns involved in the police investigation? what if there were two Parker Hale silencers? What if Cook deliberately contaminated one of the silencers at the scene on the 14th August 1985?

So many what 'ifs'?

The claim that there was only the one silencer in this police investigation is garbage!

The claim that there was only one gun that fired bullets during the shooting of the victims, is also garbage!

There wasn't just the one silencer / sound moderator / suppressor, which had a variety of different exhibit references ranging from 'SBJ/1', to 'SJ/1' to 'DB/1' then ending up as 'DRB/1' depending upon who was saying what, at a particular time or not! Its all official bullshit, part of a state conspiracy!

How can anyone pretend that what has been going on here is lawful and honest?

[mike tesko]

Suddenly, its not just a case of it being a one gun crime, with use of one silencer or sound moderator! Its not just a case of we can call the silencer anything we want at any stage, and nobody will take the slightest notice, so what if we have given the silencer various exhibit references and different lab' item numbers, and what if two different relatives handed over a silencer with a month difference in the hand over of these or this? So what if relatives still had the silencer by 11th September 1985, when the silencer was supposed to have been at the Lab' at Huntingdon from the 30th August 1985, onward? So what if blood was found inside the silencer which had been dismantled at the lab' on the 12th September 1985, if the silencer handed to DC Oakey by Ann Eaton on the 12th September 1985, was not submitted to the lab' until the 20th September 1985? Does it matter that blood was attributed to a silencer ('DRB/1') that wasn't the silencer inside which the key blood group evidence was supposedly found? So what if  there were two guns involved in the police investigation? what if there were two Parker Hale silencers? What if Cook deliberately contaminated one of the silencers at the scene on the 14th August 1985?

So many what 'ifs'?

The claim that there was only the one silencer in this police investigation is garbage!

The claim that there was only one gun that fired bullets during the shooting of the victims, is also garbage!

There wasn't just the one silencer / sound moderator / suppressor, which had a variety of different exhibit references ranging from 'SBJ/1', to 'SJ/1' to 'DB/1' then ending up as 'DRB/1' depending upon who was saying what, at a particular time or not! Its all official bullshit, part of a state conspiracy!

How can anyone pretend that what has been going on here is lawful and honest?

So, what if Robert Boutflour had the exact same blood groups as Sheila Caffell?

So what if cops, relatives and lab' experts colluded to present the case as a one gun crime, one silencer crime, one find and one hand over of one silencer on two separate occasions one month a part?

Ok, ok, ok...

We'll put all of this dishonesty down to 'Noble Cause Corruption'...

Relatives wanted Jeremy to be the killer, cops originally didn't think he was...

But, there came a moment in the Essex police Investigation, when it became  'a case of go for him', or 'we are coming for you'!

[mike tesko]

So, what if Robert Boutflour had the exact same blood groups as Sheila Caffell?

So what if cops, relatives and lab' experts colluded to present the case as a one gun crime, one silencer crime, one find and one hand over of one silencer on two separate occasions one month a part?

Ok, ok, ok...

We'll put all of this dishonesty down to 'Noble Cause Corruption'...

Relatives wanted Jeremy to be the killer, cops originally didn't think he was...

But, there came a moment in the Essex police Investigation, when it became  'a case of go for him', or 'we are coming for you'!

The case turned on what Robert Boutflour spoke to his fellow freemason colleague about (Peter Simpson) on the 6th September 1985! There is no doubt whatsoever that during that meeting that Robert Boutflour told Peter Simpson everything he was reluctant to have to listen too...

'YOU get Jeremy and get him convicted', Robert Boutflour said, 'or we (the family) will be gunning for you and your officers', he told him, we know who shot Sheila, and we know that Sheila and Junes bodies were found on top of the bed, before both ended up on the bedroom floor either side of the bed and thatt police staged her death scene, and we know that police intended to try and force these deaths through the Coroners court system'...

[mike tesko]

The reason why Essex police and the Lab' experts sought to conceal the truth about the earlier test firing of rifle (18), with and without use of the silencer ('DB/1') 23, using as yet unidentified control ammunition, on the 13th September 1985, should become self-evident considering that exactly 10 spent cartridge cases had been verified as having been compared against markings on control ammunition fired through the rifle (18) before the ballistic expert, Fletcher officially receive the gun, silencer and control ammunition from Essex police! In his witness statement, probably made for him by Essex police, so it was a composite witness statement in effect, it states that he did not receive these items until 20th September 1985, but his own handwritten notes, initialled by him and dated, prove entirely differently...

Fletcher had control of all these exhibits from as early as 12th September 1985!

This was a wicked deception...

[mike tesko]

The reason why Essex police and the Lab' experts sought to conceal the truth about the earlier test firing of rifle (18), with and without use of the silencer ('DB/1') 23, using as yet unidentified control ammunition, on the 13th September 1985, should become self-evident considering that exactly 10 spent cartridge cases had been verified as having been compared against markings on control ammunition fired through the rifle (18) before the ballistic expert, Fletcher officially receive the gun, silencer and control ammunition from Essex police! In his witness statement, probably made for him by Essex police, so it was a composite witness statement in effect, it states that he did not receive these items until 20th September 1985, but his own handwritten notes, initialled by him and dated, prove entirely differently...

Fletcher had control of all these exhibits from as early as 12th September 1985!

This was a wicked deception...

It is a very disturbing matter - since, by all accounts, once Fletcher dismantled the silencer ('DRB/1') on the 12th September 1985 and he discovered the flake trapped between two baffle plates, he went on to test fire control rounds with the rifle (18), bullets which must have passed right through the silencer in question on the following day (13th September 1985), as if he intended to destroy any possible evidence that the blood group evidence which had been found inside that silencer ('DB/1') 23, had been tested to destruction...

[mike tesko]

What was the source of the control ammunition which Fletcher test fired in the rifle (18) which passed through the silencer ('DB/1') on the 13th September 1985?

Was it used in a substitution process so that the case for the shootings being a one gun crime could be presented to the court?

[mike tesko]

What was the source of the control ammunition which Fletcher test fired in the rifle (18) which passed through the silencer ('DB/1') on the 13th September 1985?

Was it used in a substitution process so that the case for the shootings being a one gun crime could be presented to the court?

There's going to have to be another police investigation into these matters now...

But which police force should be given the task?

You simply can't trust the police to carry out an impartial Inquiry upon and into its own kind...

[mike tesko]

There's going to have to be another police investigation into these matters now...

But which police force should be given the task?

You simply can't trust the police to carry out an impartial Inquiry upon and into its own kind...

To say that Jeremy Bamber has been framed by the police, his relatives and experts from Huntingdon Lab' would be an understatement...

[mike tesko]

I have other working notes, all dated, made in Fletcher's own handwriting which for the sake of completeness I shall post them up for reference purposes and to try and stimulate debate...

[mike tesko]

I have other working notes, all dated, made in Fletcher's own handwriting which for the sake of completeness I shall post them up for reference purposes and to try and stimulate debate...

I find myself having to report that some of the contents I have stumbled upon are very disturbing indeed!

An innocent mans liberty and reputation may have been compromised by certain findings of the prosecutions ballistic expert, during his testing and examination which he must have chosen to deliberately keep quite about...

Now, after over 32 years his voice and conclusions shall be concealed no longer!

[mike tesko]

I find myself having to report that some of the contents I have stumbled upon are very disturbing indeed!

An innocent mans liberty and reputation may have been compromised by certain findings of the prosecutions ballistic expert, during his testing and examination which he must have chosen to deliberately keep quite about...

Now, after over 32 years his voice and conclusions shall be concealed no longer!

Ok, ok, ok...

I shall cut to the chase, guess what the prosecutions ballistic expert concluded when examining the burn marks on the back of Neville Bambers neck?

Can one or more of you hazard a guess to make this even more interesting, please?

[Adam]

Did you really think you would get away with that?  you sneeky butthole.

Please show what I missed out on these quotes. You sneeky creep -



What compensation did Daniel and Nicholas get when Jeremy blew their brains out in an unprovoked attack?



'He has a whole life tariff because he wont accept responsibility, you cant be rehabilitated if you don't accept responsibility.'



'The rifle he used was fine for the job. Anyone could shoot five people, it's staging the suicide that's the tricky part.'



'30 Years have now passed and Jeremy's supporters have failed to free him.

'The forensics point to him in all directions despite the police errors and inconsistencies. Therefore you must find the only potential evidence that could free him (if it exists)'.



'Yes, Its all well and good saying he is innocent but at the end of the day one must prove the points I have made above.

Too long have Jeremy supporters just repeated the same inconsistencies and oddities around the case thinking that if they repeat it enough times he will be released but that is not feasible. For Jeremy to be released they must prove a conspiracy or moral motivated corruption has produced the evidence that convicted him in order to secure his release.'



'Jeremy said he didn't do it and he wrights nice things about his family on his blog - Therefore he cant have done it.

That's lookouts logic'.


'Just to remind you, Supporters are yet to complete step 1

Good luck '


There is only one plausible scenario for Jeremy to be innocent. That is once rumors spread of Jeremy's possible involvement round the police ranks they think they have made a huge mistake closing and dismantling the crime scene to soon, Feeling stupid and fooled they become more convinced he done it and that they will get the blame for helping a mass murderer walk free. So they plant and manufacture evidence and coerce Julie into testifying and all parties involved believe they are doing the right thing to bring Justice. Now 30 years later the police who manufactured the evidence still think he is guilty and think they done the right thing putting mass murderer behind bars

This scenario is possible but very very very unlikely.  If its the case Jeremy is a victim of a chain of bizarre situations and circumstances where he cannot possibly prove his innocence.



This sinister smile is what Ozzy Osborne called "The Bambinator" I think Ozzy was spot on



He looks straight into the camera and smiles. Not something people tend to do while under arrest.


Quote from: lookout on April 29, 2015, 06:27:PM

He didn't have it on at the time,Patti. If he'd just come out of the shower downstairs,he'd have met Sheila's wrath immediately, not having the time to get properly dressed poor man.

lol

Then how did he have time to ring Jeremy then go upstairs to get shot four times in the main bedroom then run back downstairs to be shot in the kitchen after having a shower at 3 in the morning?



If they believe he is innocent its the only way



Jeremy supporters must use the above methods to prove innocence, However be advised Telephone and Computer hacking is illegal, So is trespassing to obtain this information so do so at your own risk



Let's face it, the only thing that will make hardcore supporters like lookout change their minds is if Jeremy admits to doing it.

[Adam]

Now, Now, please don't start falling out....

We are here to try and get to the truth the incontrovertible truth!

That is right Mike.

Hopefully David will give the 5 names now.

[mike tesko]

If 'I declared to the whole world' that the prosecutions ballistic expert (Malcolm Fletcher) concluded in his notes, dated, 27th September, 1985, that the measurements and dimensions of at least one of the burn marks present on the back of Neville Bambers neck were consistent with a guns barrel having been pressed there which had made that mark?

Yep, that's what's recorded in Fletcher's own handwritten notes, initialled and dated...

So, what do all of you amatuer sleuths make of that revelation, then?