*Unequivocal Proof Jeremy Bamber is innocent*

[Roch]

The only cop involved was S Jones.

S Jones was working underneath Ainsley.  Ainsley had oversight of the framing.

There is no evidence to support this.

I think there is evidence of police coaching regarding prosecution witness testimony

[Roch]

What on earth is your point?

Neil I think this may be an oblique reference to your apparent position on Jeremy's guilt vs innocence.  As far as I am aware, your belief is that Jeremy had an unfair trial and has subsequently experienced a great deal of stonewalling and negative practices employed by the judicial system.  I think you feel that on- balance, the evidence tends towards Jeremy's sister as having been responsible for the kilings - but - you prefer to err on the side of caution and not totally dismiss any evidence or behaviour that could indicate involvement from Jeremy. 

[David1819]

S Jones was working underneath Ainsley.  Ainsley had oversight of the framing.

I dont believe so. That would mean Taff Jones just sat idly and let the framing happen.

If the police had oversight of the framing they would have produced a much better array of evidence. The conspiracy would not be sustainable as too many people would be involved.

Evidence that was used against Jeremy is as follows

- Silencer not found by police.
- Bitter Ex girlfiend who testimony contradicts the facts of the prosecution case.

This is not the work of any oversight by the police.

[Roch]

I dont believe so. That would mean Taff Jones just sat idly and let the framing happen.

If the police had oversight of the framing they would have produced a much better array of evidence. The conspiracy would not be sustainable as too many people would be involved.

Evidence that was used against Jeremy is as follows

- Silencer not found by police.
- Bitter Ex girlfiend who testimony contradicts the facts of the prosecution case.

This is not the work of any oversight by the police.

How could the police produce a 'much better array of evidence' if Jeremy didn't commit the killings? 

I think the framing is well 'imagined' here:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8513.msg404906.html#msg404906

[Steve_uk]

What on earth is your point?

You've just proved it to those conversant with the modus operandi of this forum.

[Nigel]

You've just proved it to those conversant with the modus operandi of this forum.

"There was one woman who was like 90 pounds soaking wet. She threw a Lutheran deacon who was about 200 pounds across the room," he says. "That's not psychiatry. That's beyond psychiatry."

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/04/health/exorcism-doctor/index.html

[Steve_uk]

I dont believe so. That would mean Taff Jones just sat idly and let the framing happen.

If the police had oversight of the framing they would have produced a much better array of evidence. The conspiracy would not be sustainable as too many people would be involved.

Evidence that was used against Jeremy is as follows

- Silencer not found by police.
- Bitter Ex girlfiend who testimony contradicts the facts of the prosecution case.

This is not the work of any oversight by the police.

No it fitted hand in glove, which is why the Defence barristers were so gloomy and why Bamber was ultimately convicted.

[Nigel]

No it fitted hand in glove, which is why the Defence barristers were so gloomy and why Bamber was ultimately convicted.

What did Julie do with her £25,000?

you are so knowledgeable, I'm sure you know the answer.

[Steve_uk]

What did Julie do with her £25,000?

you are so knowledgeable, I'm sure you know the answer.

"All I can say is: I bought a flat."

[Harry]

I dont believe so. That would mean Taff Jones just sat idly and let the framing happen.

If the police had oversight of the framing they would have produced a much better array of evidence. The conspiracy would not be sustainable as too many people would be involved.

Evidence that was used against Jeremy is as follows

- Silencer not found by police.
- Bitter Ex girlfiend who testimony contradicts the facts of the prosecution case.

This is not the work of any oversight by the police.

From the allegation document

47. On the 13th August 1985, DS 21 Jones showed DI Miller the sound moderator and drew his attention to the red paint and blood present upon it. (See DI Miller’s statement dated October 1985, Document AB – 13).

48. On the 14th August 1985 DS 21 Jones took a witness statement from Ann Eaton and there is no mention of a sound moderator having been discovered on the 10th August 1985. While it is also asserted that Ann Eaton spent the day with DI Cook, DS Jones and DI Miller to show them where DRB/1 had scratched the red mantel shelf, (see DI Cook Statement to COLP page 21, Document S 10).

49. It is submitted that if it was true that DRB/1 was found on the 10th August 1985 then it would be logical for her to mention the discovery because it was deemed so relevant by officers and indeed herself."

The police told the relatives to say they had found a silencer. They told the relatives to say that they had noticed the scratches on the mantel shelf and the paint on the silencer.

Glynis Howard did not find paint on the silencer.

Peter Sutherst saw no paint fragments visible on the carpet in photographs of the crime scene. Because the scratches were added later by the police.

The whole thing is a charade but you refuse to see through it.

[Harry]

I dont believe so. That would mean Taff Jones just sat idly and let the framing happen.

If the police had oversight of the framing they would have produced a much better array of evidence. The conspiracy would not be sustainable as too many people would be involved.

Evidence that was used against Jeremy is as follows

- Silencer not found by police.
- Bitter Ex girlfiend who testimony contradicts the facts of the prosecution case.

This is not the work of any oversight by the police.

Demonizing Julie Mugford is a real retrograde step. She didn't even go to the police. She just talked some crap to Liz Rimmington which she thought would be of no account, but then Liz got the police who, with Ainsley in charge and with his stooge Stan Jones doing the dirty work, threatened her with a long jail term, if she didn't tell them what she knew about Bamber's involvement in the killings.

She was there when the police told Ann Eaton about Sheila being on the bed with a bible on her chest, so she just did the best she could to save herself.  The police knew she was lying-because they knew Sheila was not found on the bed and that it was they who gave the relatives that wrong information.

Ann Eaton relates that the police told her that June was on the bed next to Sheila with the rifle between them. But in Mugford's story June's body is said to be on the floor. The explanation is probably that Mugford remembered the bible on the chest bit from when she was with Ann Eaton at Goldhanger, but got the description of June on the floor from newspaper reports. 

[Adam]

Demonizing Julie Mugford is a real retrograde step. She didn't even go to the police. She just talked some crap to Liz Rimmington which she thought would be of no account, but then Liz got the police who, with Ainsley in charge and with his stooge Stan Jones doing the dirty work, threatened her with a long jail term, if she didn't tell them what she knew about Bamber's involvement in the killings.

She was there when the police told Ann Eaton about Sheila being on the bed with a bible on her chest, so she just did the best she could to save herself.  The police knew she was lying-because they knew Sheila was not found on the bed and that it was they who gave the relatives that wrong information.

Ann Eaton relates that the police told her that June was on the bed next to Sheila with the rifle between them. But in Mugford's story June's body is said to be on the floor. The explanation is probably that Mugford remembered the bible on the chest bit from when she was with Ann Eaton at Goldhanger, but got the description of June on the floor from newspaper reports.

Julie had told 5 people before Liz Rimington rang the police.

It was Liz Rimington's house & phone so can't see what the big deal was about her making the call to the police while Julie was with her.

No person would dare perjure themselves to such a serious extent, by accusing an innocent man of murdering 5 people. A month after the massacre. Bamber's one reason for her doing this is that he apparently 'jilted her'.

A lot of what is in Julie's WS she could have only got from Bamber. Claims that the relatives told her this falls flat as the relatives wouldn't alert Bamber's girlfriend they were digging. They would not have had the information or the opportunity to tell Julie anyway. The only other option is the police told Julie to include all of it in their WS.

Neither the police or relatives would have told Julie to include Matthew Macdonald on her WS. Matthew Macdonald came from Bamber.

It is a simple case that Bamber committed the massacre . Then his girlfriend told the police everything she knew in a 34 WS, a month later.

[David1819]

How could the police produce a 'much better array of evidence' if Jeremy didn't commit the killings? 

Lots of ways.

- Give mugford accurate information that corroborates the scene of crime and does not include fictional assasins with cast iron alibis.

- Obtain Jeremys fingerprints in a silicone mould then use paraffin wax to plant Jeremy's finger prints over the bible, silencer and rifle for DI Cook to disover later on.

- Obtain the same make size and type of shoe Jeremy had and leave mud/dirt or even bloody shoe prints on the bathroom floor etc.

- Plant text books in Jeremys place on altruistic familicide, mental illness and supicous deaths. That the police will then "discover"

- Take blood samples from the lab and plant some on Jeremys clothes, house and car.

- Obtain the pargeter rifle then plant blood on it then plant it in Jeremys house.

- Take blood samples from the lab and purchase a pair of gloves, cover the both gloves in the victims   blood and leave one glove at WHF and plant the other at Jeremys house.

[David1819]

No it fitted hand in glove, which is why the Defence barristers were so gloomy and why Bamber was ultimately convicted.

Fitted hand in glove?  Shelia was ordered to lay on the bed and shoot herself under the orders of Mathew McDonald who then placed the bible on her chest. Said Julie



Is this your idea of how a glove should fit?

[David1819]

From the allegation document

The police told the relatives to say they had found a silencer. They told the relatives to say that they had noticed the scratches on the mantel shelf and the paint on the silencer.

Glynis Howard did not find paint on the silencer.

Peter Sutherst saw no paint fragments visible on the carpet in photographs of the crime scene. Because the scratches were added later by the police.

The whole thing is a charade but you refuse to see through it.

The allegation document is not evidence.

Glynis Howard was from the biology department and was tasked to perform blood tests on the silencer. Why would she report finding paint? That was done by Brian Elliot under a micro-scope.