One bark for 'YES', two barks for 'NO'..

[mike tesko]

At around 5.25am, the firearms team were engaged in a conversation with a person from inside the farmhouse!

[mike tesko]

Despite almost 33 years having elapsed since the time of the event, Essex police have doggedly remained 'mute' on what was said by one party or the other...

But, it can be revealed that the reason why no transcript of these conversations has ever been forthcoming, is because of the rather unusual circumstances involved!

[mike tesko]

No-one has questioned why there are no timed messages in any police log, or witness statement, where what police were saying via a loud hailer to the occupants inside the farmhouse, and the actual responses they got!

Instead, all the police say is that challenges to the occupants of the farmhouse were met with 'no response'..

But,that was not true, since all the challenges that the firearm team were making to the occupants of the house were met with either a single bark, or a howl, or a whine, or two!

[mike tesko]

No-one has questioned why there are no timed messages in any police log, or witness statement, where what police were saying via a loud hailer to the occupants inside the farmhouse, and the actual responses they got!

Instead, all the police say is that challenges to the occupants of the farmhouse were met with 'no response'..

But,that was not true, since all the challenges that the firearm team were making to the occupants of the house were met with either a single bark, or a howl, or a whine, or two!

It is impossible to have a conversation with a person from inside the farmhouse, if that person does not correspond!

[mike tesko]

At 5.25am, precisely, the firearms team were 'ENGAGED IN A CONVERSATION' with a person from inside the farmhouse - so, there must have been some response or other..

[mike tesko]

At 5.25am, precisely, the firearms team were 'ENGAGED IN A CONVERSATION' with a person from inside the farmhouse - so, there must have been some response or other..

Why is it, that cops don't say what the conversation they were having with this person from inside the farmhouse was about?

[mike tesko]

It seems to me, that a number of critical events took place around the time that the firearms officers were engaged in a conversation with this person inside the farmhouse, occurred...

5.25am - conversation with a person inside farmhouse
5.55am - phone line suddenly became engaged, whereas previously it had been off the hook
6.09am - Operator patches the phone line through to police control room using 999 system
6.15am - ambulances summoned to the scene to tend to the wounded and dying

[mike tesko]

It seems to me, that a number of critical events took place around the time that the firearms officers were engaged in a conversation with this person inside the farmhouse, occurred...

5.25am - conversation with a person inside farmhouse
5.55am - phone line suddenly became engaged, whereas previously it had been off the hook
6.09am - Operator patches the phone line through to police control room using 999 system
6.15am - ambulances summoned to the scene to tend to the wounded and dying

Has no-one ever wondered, who contacted the emergency services requesting that two ambulances be summoned to the scene? Who called them out? What were they told?

All this evidence is 'missing'...

[mike tesko]

Has no-one ever wondered, who contacted the emergency services requesting that two ambulances be summoned to the scene? Who called them out? What were they told?

All this evidence is 'missing'...

All we know, because the powers that be don't think we should know, is that two ambulances arrived at the scene by 7.00am..

[mike tesko]

Now..

We also know that despite the plan to be was that one of the ambulances was to go directly to the farmhouse, whilst the other remained on standby in nearby Pages Lane - who decided that one of the two ambulances had to go straight to the farmhouse? Where was this information obtained from?

Seems somewhat obvious that this information must have been agreed to, by somebody who was still alive inside the farmhouse, whilst others were wounded, or even dying, or dead!

[mike tesko]

Now..

We also know that despite the plan to be was that one of the ambulances was to go directly to the farmhouse, whilst the other remained on standby in nearby Pages Lane - who decided that one of the two ambulances had to go straight to the farmhouse? Where was this information obtained from?

Seems somewhat obvious that this information must have been agreed to, by somebody who was still alive inside the farmhouse, whilst others were wounded, or even dying, or dead!

Yet, still further..

Something happens, which prevents the designated ambulance from going directly to the farmhouse...

What could that something have been?

[mike tesko]

Well, what Essex police do not what everyone to know, was that the firearms officers were communicating with a person inside the farmhouse, who they believed to be Sheila, by giving her instructions, and making requests to her via the loud hailer, and the Sound of a dog barking, or howling, or at times whining came back from within the farmhouse in response! It didn't take the firearm officers long, to relealise that it was not the dog from within the house that kept barking, but that rather it was Sheila Mimicking a dog!

Now, I have it on good authority, that at an early stage (around 5.25am) that the firearms team had already established a coded response from Sheila inside the farmhouse, where they suggested to her, that in answer to their requests and questions, that she should bark like a dog once for 'YES', or bark twice for 'NO'. Sheila responded positively to this request, hence why at 5.25am it is documented that the firearms team were engaged in a conversation with a person from inside the farmhouse! It wasn't a conversation like two people ordinarily would have, simply requests put to Sheila via the loud hailer, and Sheila either, barking, or howling, or whining like a dog, once or twice..

This is why Essex police refuse to provide a full transcript of the requests they were making to Sheila via the loudhailer, because the contents of such a transcript emphatically prove that Sheila was still alive inside the farmhouse after 5.25am, and that she was the reason why the firearms team were prevented from going in any sooner than they did at about 7.30am.

As far as is known 'Crispy' the family pet, was incapable of understanding any instructions given by the firearm team via the loud hailer!

The instructions and requests passed by the firearm team to the person they were engaged in a conversation with from inside the farmhouse, were structured, directional and simple, so simple were these requests and if you like demands, that Sheila was able to respond by barking, or howling, or whining, once or twice!

The responses were noted down by the firearms team at the scene!

Sight of this transcript would leave everybody in no doubt that the firearms officers were engaged in a conversation with a person from inside the farmhouse, not talking to the family dog (Crispy)..

[mike tesko]

Well, what Essex police do not what everyone to know, was that the firearms officers were communicating with a person inside the farmhouse, who they believed to be Sheila, by giving her instructions, and making requests to her via the loud hailer, and the Sound of a dog barking, or howling, or at times whining came back from within the farmhouse in response! It didn't take the firearm officers long, to relealise that it was not the dog from within the house that kept barking, but that rather it was Sheila Mimicking a dog!

Now, I have it on good authority, that at an early stage (around 5.25am) that the firearms team had already established a coded response from Sheila inside the farmhouse, where they suggested to her, that in answer to their requests and questions, that she should bark like a dog once for 'YES', or bark twice for 'NO'. Sheila responded positively to this request, hence why at 5.25am it is documented that the firearms team were engaged in a conversation with a person from inside the farmhouse! It wasn't a conversation like two people ordinarily would have, simply requests put to Sheila via the loud hailer, and Sheila either, barking, or howling, or whining like a dog, once or twice..

This is why Essex police refuse to provide a full transcript of the requests they were making to Sheila via the loudhailer, because the contents of such a transcript emphatically prove that Sheila was still alive inside the farmhouse after 5.25am, and that she was the reason why the firearms team were prevented from going in any sooner than they did at about 7.30am.

As far as is known 'Crispy' the family pet, was incapable of understanding any instructions given by the firearm team via the loud hailer!

The instructions and requests passed by the firearm team to the person they were engaged in a conversation with from inside the farmhouse, were structured, directional and simple, so simple were these requests and if you like demands, that Sheila was able to respond by barking, or howling, or whining, once or twice!

The responses were noted down by the firearms team at the scene!

Sight of this transcript would leave everybody in no doubt that the firearms officers were engaged in a conversation with a person from inside the farmhouse, not talking to the family dog (Crispy)..

GOD
DOG
GOD
DOG
GOD

Sheila believed that when God spoke, he must bark like a dog, or that if she barked like a dog that God would make the firearm officers understand her and no doubt she must have ammused herself knowing that the firearms officers, understood her intention and resolve, when she took on the voice of a dog..

DOG
GOD
DOG
GOD
DOG..

[frankie]

OK I'm new to this and may be missing some nuances but this is a wind up? Right?

[Roch]

OK I'm new to this and may be missing some nuances but this is a wind up? Right?

Cant comment on the veracity - but this thread is from 2012

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3512.msg138815/topicseen.html#msg138815