The Finding of the Silencer by David Boutflour on September 11th 1985

[Steve_uk]

This is the thread for any newcomers: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6961.0.html

[maggie]

I'll accept it was probably a cursory look. What on earth would they have been searching for? After 3 days it was still a case od "It wuz Sheila wot dun it". The weapon used was there for all to see, lain across her person.

So do you accept the silencer as fact Jane?  I cannot conceive why anyone as cold a calculating as JB had to be to kill his family in that way would go to the trouble of putting it in a box and hiding it at the back of the cupboard without even cleaning it even leaving a white hair stuck on there and days later when found there is still a blob of red blood on it.  Whether the police did their job properly or not is not the crux of the argument, the finding of it by the relatives is farcical.  Whether he is guilty or innocent I cannot believe the silencer evidence, it's obviously contrived.

[Jane]

Is there proof that it was the killer weapon just because it was found on her body ?

No MORE so than had they seen someone standing over a body with a gun in their hand. However, in THIS case, we have to remember what preceded their find. A phone call from Jeremy relaying an alleged phone call fro Nevill saying Sheila had gone mad and got hold of a gun, followed by Jeremy giving them a full and somewhat exaggerated version of her mental history, her gun toting capabilities, and her previous suicide attempts. What were the supposed to conclude, when once inside a house secured from the inside, they discover a dead Sheila with a gun across her body? I don't care HOW often it's suggested. I DON'T believe it wuz Crispy!!!

[lookout]

No MORE so than had they seen someone standing over a body with a gun in their hand. However, in THIS case, we have to remember what preceded their find. A phone call from Jeremy relaying an alleged phone call fro Nevill saying Sheila had gone mad and got hold of a gun, followed by Jeremy giving them a full and somewhat exaggerated version of her mental history, her gun toting capabilities, and her previous suicide attempts. What were the supposed to conclude, when once inside a house secured from the inside, they discover a dead Sheila with a gun across her body? I don't care HOW often it's suggested. I DON'T believe it wuz Crispy!!!

The phone-call had been hours previous to the rifle having been found so during those hours we certainly don't know what was happening.
I imagine EP were acting on the phone-call they'd received from Nevill which would have been more " believed " and which had prompted more police and the firearms.

[Jane]

So do you accept the silencer as fact Jane?  I cannot conceive why anyone as cold a calculating as JB had to be to kill his family in that way would go to the trouble of putting it in a box and hiding it at the back of the cupboard without even cleaning it even leaving a white hair stuck on there and days later when found there is still a blob of red blood on it.  Whether the police did their job properly or not is not the crux of the argument, the finding of it by the relatives is farcical.  Whether he is guilty or innocent I cannot believe the silencer evidence, it's obviously contrived.

Maggie, I'm ambivalent. EITHER it wasn't used at all, OR having cocked up shooting Sheila the first time, it suddenly dawned on him that she wouldn't have been able to shoot herself with it on -incidentally, my gun expert has said it wouldn't have been easy for her to do it without it- and was momentarily thrown by it, resulting in him taking it off and getting it out of sight as quickly as possible without putting serious thought to it.

[Jane]

The phone-call had been hours previous to the rifle having been found so during those hours we certainly don't know what was happening.
I imagine EP were acting on the phone-call they'd received from Nevill which would have been more " believed " and which had prompted more police and the firearms.

When it can be proved that Nevill had made a call to police I'll be prepared to listen. Until then, it's a fantasy covered by Mike's favourite prefix "There is evidence that..........." I repeat. The police found EXACTLY what Jeremy had spent hours suggesting they'd find.

[lookout]

When it can be proved that Nevill had made a call to police I'll be prepared to listen. Until then, it's a fantasy covered by Mike's favourite prefix "There is evidence that..........." I repeat. The police found EXACTLY what Jeremy had spent hours suggesting they'd find.

You can't really call it " fantasy ". Everyone's input in this case is their personal belief and valuable to them. Mike isn't on his own by any means who believes such a phone-call took place.

[maggie]

Maggie, I'm ambivalent. EITHER it wasn't used at all, OR having cocked up shooting Sheila the first time, it suddenly dawned on him that she wouldn't have been able to shoot herself with it on -incidentally, my gun expert has said it wouldn't have been easy for her to do it without it- and was momentarily thrown by it, resulting in him taking it off and getting it out of sight as quickly as possible without putting serious thought to it.

I agree we may never know the truth whether the silencer was used but there are massive questions over how it was 'found'. It is thoroughly unconvincing and yet stood as main evidence in the case. How can that be right?

[Steve_uk]

I agree we may never know the truth whether the silencer was used but there are massive questions over how it was 'found'. It is thoroughly unconvincing and yet stood as main evidence in the case. How can that be right?

..because there was supplementary evidence in the case.

[Jane]

I agree we may never know the truth whether the silencer was used but there are massive questions over how it was 'found'. It is thoroughly unconvincing and yet stood as main evidence in the case. How can that be right?

If we buy into it being a last moment "F***! It's too long. I've got to get rid of it" coupled with a not quite dead Sheila to be dealt with, it becomes rather less than "thoroughly unconvincing". Now I'm not saying that's exactly as it was, but it's not SO off the wall a suggestion that it can be dismissed out of hand.

[Jane]

You can't really call it " fantasy ". Everyone's input in this case is their personal belief and valuable to them. Mike isn't on his own by any means who believes such a phone-call took place.

You pride yourself in never once having changed your mind from the moment you first made it up. There are some here who have changed what they believe to have occurred -and presented it as true fact- too many times for any of what they say to be believed. Mike isn't on his own in this particular belief. You believe him.

[lookout]

You pride yourself in never once having changed your mind from the moment you first made it up. There are some here who have changed what they believe to have occurred -and presented it as true fact- too many times for any of what they say to be believed. Mike isn't on his own in this particular belief. You believe him.

CT have got the proof. I'll be speaking to those who KNOW when I attend their meeting in October.

[Jane]

CT have got the proof. I'll be speaking to those who KNOW when I attend their meeting in October.

'COURSE they have "The proof" has, allegedly, been around for about as long as I've been on this forum. If it's been so well known for so long, it would have found it's way into the public domain before next October.

[lookout]

'COURSE they have "The proof" has, allegedly, been around for about as long as I've been on this forum. If it's been so well known for so long, it would have found it's way into the public domain before next October.

But it wasn't believed until now !

[Jane]

But it wasn't believed until now !

No one was given the chance. It was simply "evidence exists". As for the CT, I guess it's the way they tell'm.