Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on May 11, 2022, 03:41:AM
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E76jxCp_F6o
Had not heard it before. Interesting.
-
CAL says she has seen the original photo of Sheila. With dry cracked blood.
The one on the internet with wet looking blood has been doctored.
Sheila was not alive inside WHF.
-
Colin also speaks. Saying Sheila had zero eye to hand co ordination.
He would know. He drove her to WHF.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0b12lCUCZY
Here is CAL talkng about the police. Mainly Taff, Stan & Ainsley.
Mike Clark may have information. He worked alongside Stan.
I don't agree Taff still believed it was Sheila near to the trial. Wilkes's book says he had changed his mind.
-
CAL says she has seen the original photo of Sheila. With dry cracked blood.
So have I.
The one on the internet with wet looking blood has been doctored.
No, it hasn't.
-
Colin also speaks. Saying Sheila had zero eye to hand co ordination.
He would know. He drove her to WHF.
Does he then explain why he never questioned what the police initially told him?
-
Oh dear, are things hotting up in JB's favour ? Everyone comes out of the woodwork at the first hint ???
-
So have I.
No, it hasn't.
Sorry David. But no one believes you cycled to a meeting with Jeremy's legal team. Six years ago.
Everyone will go by what an investigative author has said.
-
Does he then explain why he never questioned what the police initially told him?
Probably in shock. After being told his ex wife had killed herself, his sons & Sheila's parents.
-
Just had a second listen of this. CAL really shows she is a guilter.
-
Says the main evidence pointing to Sheila early on was Jeremy. As he had free reign to insinuate her for hours.
Would also add that the ground floor windows being closed & doors locked helped. But no surprise in a big old house when a window that could be manipulated was found.
-
CC quickly realised it was not Sheila. She had problems making coffee & had no hand to eye co ordination. Was on a cocktail of major sedative drugs.
Says he has never doubted since.
-
Says that even now there is confusion over when Jeremy could ring the police.
Nevill not hanging up meant Bamber could not phone out for a period of time.
There would have been a gap anyway as he looked through Yellow Pages for the number of Chelmsford Police. Although he said he 'immediately called the police'.
-
CAL says Nevill would have difficulty speaking after being shot 4 times upstairs.
She does not mention the possibilty of Nevill calling while fully fit. Must believe it is too far fetched.
-
She mentions some of the other incriminating forensic evidence & was not sure how many silencers the CT are now including.
Says that she was happy with the TV series & impressed with the WHF creation.
Would have liked a reconstruction of the massacre. It would just be a case of following her own scenario. This could be the last 20 minutes of the series. After conviction. The final scene showing him cycling back to Goldhanger in the dark to make phone calls.
But Colin said he didn't want that.
-
The Pathologist said Sheila's second shot was 'not impossible but unlikely'.
-
Will watch later on. Interesting.
-
CAL says she has seen the original photo of Sheila. With dry cracked blood.
The one on the internet with wet looking blood has been doctored.
Sheila was not alive inside WHF.
Who doctored the image?
Giovanni?
Mike?
-
Who doctored the image?
Giovanni?
Mike?
She did not say. But easy to do.
-
Who doctored the image?
Giovanni?
Mike?
Nobody.
-
She did not say. But easy to do.
How can you be so sure it is doctored?
-
Nobody.
I don't believe it is either.
But Adam says it is.
If it can be sourced that it has been doctored I will recognise it.
-
I don't believe it is either.
But Adam says it is.
If it can be sourced that it has been doctored I will recognise it.
I am saying CAL says the photo was doctored by the CT.
She said she has seen the original.
It would have been doctored for properganda reasons.
-
It's just di Stefano playing silly beggars with an over-saturated photo, whereas in the original the glossy effect was caused by reflection of flashgun light from dried and cracked blood. Have a proper gander at this -
-
I am saying CAL says the photo was doctored by the CT.
She said she has seen the original.
It would have been doctored for properganda reasons.
I don't see the point in why Jeremy Bamber would furnish her with the original copy when he had a doctored one which I am guessing would have been doctored on his say so, it kind of defeats the object.
-
I don't see the point in why Jeremy Bamber would furnish her with the original copy when he had a doctored one which I am guessing would have been doctored on his say so, it kind of defeats the object.
I doubt CAL was going to Jeremy for photos.
-
CAL says she has seen the original photo of Sheila. With dry cracked blood.
The one on the internet with wet looking blood has been doctored.
Sheila was not alive inside WHF.
The photo with the dried cracked blood is on the forum, people just ignore it in favour of the 'other one'.
-
If this is photo was doctored where did it originate from?
And the most important thing was it done on the say so of Jeremy Bamber. A man locked up since 1985 with probably very little knowledge if none of the concept of doctoring images online or anything.
-
The photo posted above is the original, whereas di Stefano appeared in one of the docu videos showing, let us say, a more saturated one with blood "flowing" (as he put it) from two neck wounds.
-
CAL says Nevill would have difficulty speaking after being shot 4 times upstairs.
She does not mention the possibilty of Nevill calling while fully fit. Must believe it is too far fetched.
George Barwood seems to believe that Nevill called Jeremy before being shot and then presumably went back upstairs to be shot by Sheila and then came downstairs again to be shot again and killed.
-
George Barwood seems to believe that Nevill called Jeremy before being shot and then presumably went back upstairs to be shot by Sheila and then came downstairs again to be shot again and killed.
No idea of the events and can not rule anything out.
He may have made the initial call not on the kitchen phone.
It's perfectly feasible that an injury to his mouth rendering him unable to speak came after the phonecall to Jeremy.
He may have attempted to use the kitchen phone in the kitchen onslaught.
This is not a pro Bamber argument from me. This is just mere fact.
-
George Barwood seems to believe that Nevill called Jeremy before being shot and then presumably went back upstairs to be shot by Sheila and then came downstairs again to be shot again and killed.
I know supporters say that. The defence at trial & CAL believe that is not possible.
Nevill would instantly take the rifle off Sheila rather than start calling Bamber's AM at 3am.
-
I know supporters say that. The defence at trial & CAL believe that is not possible.
Nevill would instantly take the rifle off Sheila rather than start calling Bamber's AM at 3am.
On planet adam
-
I don't believe it is either.
But Adam says it is.
If it can be sourced that it has been doctored I will recognise it.
As I have mentioned before. I have crime scene photos that are not on this forum or on the internet. The photos I have show Sheila at different angles than the alleged doctored photo. The blood is the same on all photos. Nothing has been edited.
I have shared these photos with NGB. Maybe he could comment on it?
Its rather tedious that I have to keep repeating this. I also have documents from the CCRC dealing with what Giovanni Distefano had submitted. Nowhere do they claim the photos have been doctored.
-
As I have mentioned before. I have crime scene photos that are not on this forum or on the internet. The photos I have show Sheila at different angles than the alleged doctored photo. The blood is the same on all photos. Nothing has been edited.
I have shared these photos with NGB. Maybe he could comment on it?
Its rather tedious that I have to keep repeating this. I also have documents from the CCRC dealing with what Giovanni Distefano had submitted. Nowhere do they claim the photos have been doctored.
I can confirm what David has said.
-
As I have mentioned before. I have crime scene photos that are not on this forum or on the internet. The photos I have show Sheila at different angles than the alleged doctored photo. The blood is the same on all photos. Nothing has been edited.
I have shared these photos with NGB. Maybe he could comment on it?
Its rather tedious that I have to keep repeating this. I also have documents from the CCRC dealing with what Giovanni Distefano had submitted. Nowhere do they claim the photos have been doctored.
So why are there photos online which show the blood either dry looking or bright red?
-
So why are there photos online which show the blood either dry looking or bright red?
Because one photo is actually a photograph of a photograph that mike took and he seems to have taken it in a room with little light. Making the entire scene look very dark.
-
The photo posted above is the original, whereas di Stefano appeared in one of the docu videos showing, let us say, a more saturated one with blood "flowing" (as he put it) from two neck wounds.
Exactly! Sorry, I didn't see that you had posted the photo before my last post. I've posted it so many times to deaf ears that I literally couldn't be bothered. However, it shows perfectly what Craig saw when he viewed Sheila soon after discovery. It's game over with this picture as far as Bamber is concerned!
-
As I have mentioned before. I have crime scene photos that are not on this forum or on the internet. The photos I have show Sheila at different angles than the alleged doctored photo. The blood is the same on all photos. Nothing has been edited.
I have shared these photos with NGB. Maybe he could comment on it?
Its rather tedious that I have to keep repeating this. I also have documents from the CCRC dealing with what Giovanni Distefano had submitted. Nowhere do they claim the photos have been doctored.
Thanks for enlightening me Dave
-
As I have mentioned before. I have crime scene photos that are not on this forum or on the internet. The photos I have show Sheila at different angles than the alleged doctored photo. The blood is the same on all photos. Nothing has been edited.
I have shared these photos with NGB. Maybe he could comment on it?
Its rather tedious that I have to keep repeating this. I also have documents from the CCRC dealing with what Giovanni Distefano had submitted. Nowhere do they claim the photos have been doctored.
Do you have the CCRC's 2012 Statement of Reasons?
-
I have the document I will not be uploading it on this forum due to respect of Jeremy Bambers confidentiality. I also wouldn't feel comfortable in uploading it.
Certain documents I have uploaded previously have been taken down. Which is fair enough. Which is construed to myself thay certain individuals have not been happy with it. Which again is fair enough.
It would be very embarrassing to Jeremy Bamber if someone published it. People would be able to see that nearly all of the Campaign Team's arguments have already been refuted.
If the Statement of Reasons is kept confidential, people can chose to believe that CCRC are corrupt or biased.
-
It would be very embarrassing to Jeremy Bamber if someone published it. People would be able to see that nearly all of the Campaign Team's arguments have already been refuted.
If the Statement of Reasons is kept confidential, people can chose to believe that CCRC are corrupt or biased.
I disagree it would be embarrassing.
Whatever your own personal view on the case it Jeremy Bamber is in a upheaval position. Trying to satisfy the ccrc is no easy feat. It's already had one appeal knockback.
However I can see why he'd be reluctant to share it as he may be afraid it would lose moral and support to his campaign.
-
Thanks for enlightening me Dave
A photograph of a photograph wouldn't make blood look dried and cracked if it wasn't dried and cracked. It is obvious that sheila was dead for some time.
-
Because one photo is actually a photograph of a photograph that mike took and he seems to have taken it in a room with little light. Making the entire scene look very dark.
So why are the CT saying it is proof Sheila died later?
-
It's just di Stefano playing silly beggars with an over-saturated photo, whereas in the original the glossy effect was caused by reflection of flashgun light from dried and cracked blood. Have a proper gander at this -
This photo negates the movement inside, 999 calls, 2 bodies in the kitchen etc.
-
This photo negates the movement inside, 999 calls, 2 bodies in the kitchen etc.
How long does blood take to dry and shrink causing cracks Adam?
More than an hour?
Craig seen Sheilas body around 8.45 I think!
-
How long does blood take to dry and shrink causing cracks Adam?
More than an hour?
Craig seen Sheilas body around 8.45 I think!
If her blood is dried and cracked at 08:45, she can't be still bleeding by the time the photographer took the pictures can she?
-
If her blood is dried and cracked at 08:45, she can't be still bleeding by the time the photographer took the pictures can she?
Of course not Zoso!
But that isn't what I asked!
I'm asking if Sheila could have killed herself around 7.45 when the TFG entered and if the blood on her cheeks could have been dried and cracked an hour later when Dr Craig pronounced death!
-
Did Craig say the blood was dry & cracked?
What time were the photos taken?
-
Did Craig say the blood was dry & cracked?
What time were the photos taken?
Yes,I think Craig said the blood running down her mouth was dried Adam.
I believe they started taking the photos photos around 10.00 or so.
I dont think Stefano mentioned the blood running down her cheeks, just that it was still running from the neck wounds!
Although,how could you tell if blood was running in a still photo?
-
Yes,I think Craig said the blood running down her mouth was dried Adam.
I believe they started taking the photos photos around 10.00 or so.
I dont think Stefano mentioned the blood running down her cheeks, just that it was still running from the neck wounds!
Although,how could you tell if blood was running in a still photo?
Of course he isn't going to mention the dried cracked blood that ran from her mouth, because that would be at odds with what he was trying to convey as blood running from wounds on her neck. That's why on that picture, you can't see her face.
-
There is both we and dried blood on her crime scene images. The flash photography argument has limitations.
-
Dr Craig is not a pathologist and he never carried out a physical examination of bodies (see the Dickinson report attached). All he did was confirm they were dead. He failed to even notice Sheila had been shot twice. Based on the timings given in the witness statements, he spent less than 15 minutes at the crime scene.
(https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10975.0;attach=58279)
-
According to the "Roles and responsibilities of SOC officers" which includes a scientific pathologist -Craig, who appeared to have done nothing more and nothing less than the basic requirements, was a GP - who carries out the post mortem, the medical attendant isn't required to give cause of death. He noted gun shot wounds in all victims. He didn't count them. Such was not in his remit. Such fell within the remit of a scientific pathologist, the services of whom, in this case -for some unknown reason- were dispensed with. PV found this oversight odd, perhaps even insulting?
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228104586_Drying_properties_of_bloodstains_on_common_indoor_surfaces%23:~:text%3DA%2520study%2520by%2520van%2520Oorschot,deposit%2520is%2520dry.%2520...&ved=2ahUKEwiqmZTtwJeJAxVCXEEAHe7zGJ0QFnoECBgQBQ&usg=AOvVaw2Ks_LBUbeyGzm1ADQQOc0R
This says it takes an hour for blood to dry.
-
Dry blood on Sheila does not determine when she died. As Craig & the photographer were over an hour away.
But the CT doctoring a photo & saying it proves she died later makes you ask what else they have done.
-
Dry blood on Sheila does not determine when she died. As Craig & the photographer were over an hour away.
But the CT doctoring a photo & saying it proves she died later makes you ask what else they have done.
It occurs to me that if the CT feel the need to 'doctor' photos -and maybe anything else?- does it not suggest that they're not entirely convinced their 'boy' is innocent?
-
Doctoring photos is a risky affair and I'm not entirely sure but I'd guess completely illegal.( in terms of submitting evidence to a legal body) not a forum)
I can't see Jeremy Bamber sanctioning doing this
Even if you'd argue out of desperation. Jeremy's not stupid and he would know it would bite him on the arse.
-
According to the "Roles and responsibilities of SOC officers" which includes a scientific pathologist -Craig, who appeared to have done nothing more and nothing less than the basic requirements, was a GP - who carries out the post mortem, the medical attendant isn't required to give cause of death. He noted gun shot wounds in all victims. He didn't count them. Such was not in his remit. Such fell within the remit of a scientific pathologist, the services of whom, in this case -for some unknown reason- were dispensed with. PV found this oversight odd, perhaps even insulting?
Yes,Craig said there was a wound in Sheila's neck and went on to say Daniel had been shot beside the ear and so on.
As you rightly say,he didn't count the number of gunshot wounds on any of the victims Jane.
The claim of Sheila having one shot to her neck when Craig saw her doesn't mean much.
Lets be fair.
-
Yes,Craig said there was a wound in Sheila's neck and went on to say Daniel had been shot beside the ear and so on.
As you rightly say,he didn't count the number of gunshot wounds on any of the victims Jane.
The claim of Sheila having one shot to her neck when Craig saw her doesn't mean much.
Lets be fair.
Over the years, there have been those here, who have accused him of numerous infractions, including alcoholism, but namely of NOT doing A, B, and C. He was not required to do anything other than pronounce life extinct. He was not required to give cause of death, but in this instance it would have been fairly clear! He was not required to give ETD -although he may have- to which end he was not required to insert a thermometer into various orifices to ascertain such. It was not within his remit, such being the job of the scientific pathologist who, for what reason I know not, much to his chagrin, was not called. I seem to think his presence was said to have been unnecessary!
-
It occurs to me that if the CT feel the need to 'doctor' photos -and maybe anything else?- does it not suggest that they're not entirely convinced their 'boy' is innocent?
I do not believe the CT have ever "doctored" photographs and they certainly do believe in JB's innocence. To be clear I am not a member of the CT and never have been.
-
Doctoring photos is a risky affair and I'm not entirely sure but I'd guess completely illegal.( in terms of submitting evidence to a legal body) not a forum)
I can't see Jeremy Bamber sanctioning doing this
Even if you'd argue out of desperation. Jeremy's not stupid and he would know it would bite him on the arse.
I agree ILB.
-
I do not believe the CT have ever "doctored" photographs and they certainly do believe in JB's innocence. To be clear I am not a member of the CT and never have been.
Do you believe there to be photos which have been "doctored"?
-
Do you believe there to be photos which have been "doctored"?
I have no reason to suppose any have been doctored but if you want to draw my attention to any specific ones I will have a look.
-
I have no reason to suppose any have been doctored but if you want to draw my attention to any specific ones I will have a look.
The photo of Sheila's neck blood. Where it is bright red.
CAL says that was doctored by the CT. It does look a lot different to the photo on page 2.
-
The photo of Sheila's neck blood. Where it is bright red.
CAL says that was doctored by the CT. It does look a lot different to the photo on page 2.
Without a solid admission it's a baseless accusation
-
Without a solid admission it's a baseless accusation
Its not the first time CAL has made a baseless claim.
-
Doctoring photos is a risky affair and I'm not entirely sure but I'd guess completely illegal.( in terms of submitting evidence to a legal body) not a forum)
I can't see Jeremy Bamber sanctioning doing this
Even if you'd argue out of desperation. Jeremy's not stupid and he would know it would bite him on the arse.
All things being equal, I'd agree. However, having had submissions turned down?.......................
-
All things being equal, I'd agree. However, having had submissions turned down?.......................
CCRC are not exactly well thought of Jane. They don't come with a glowing rep for helping to overturn wrongful convictions.
-
All things being equal, I'd agree. However, having had submissions turned down?.......................
He's had a provisional knockback in 2011 and 2012 full one.
In 2001 he got a referral.
CCRC wise
-
I have no reason to suppose any have been doctored but if you want to draw my attention to any specific ones I will have a look.
Mike and Di Stephano are two who come immediately to mind. As for the CT, I wouldn't expect them to do their own re-presentation.
-
CCRC are not exactly well thought of Jane. They don't come with a glowing rep for helping to overturn wrongful convictions.
It's just swamped.
What can they do except throw more money at it?
An alternative remedy?
-
It's just swamped.
What can they do except throw more money at it?
An alternative remedy?
That's because people like Bamber clog up the system, while REAL miscarriages of justice end up waiting longer than need be.
-
That's because people like Bamber clog up the system, while REAL miscarriages of justice end up waiting longer than need be.
I accept you think him gulity. That's fair enough. I'm not completely 100 per cent sure. He maintains innocence and has done for almost forty years. It's his right to go to the ccrc. It's a right we would all have if in the same situation.
However Bambers just one person. Surely the bigger picture is that as a blank chequebook approach which it is. Money shouldn't be an issue. The CCRC is government funded.
It was Adam I believe who brought up CCRC staff may have to have a nesecary skill set. On reflection I believe he may be correct. It's definitely probably a manpower shortage than funding anyway.
-
That's because people like Bamber clog up the system, while REAL miscarriages of justice end up waiting longer than need be.
It's the high volume as well.
Bambers case Has clearly take time in all his submissions, his first ccrc application took four years, his second was that submitted in 2005? It took it 2011 to get provisionally refused. His latest submissions are come next March 4 years of age since they were submitted.
Surely for the vast majority of cases, " those clogging up the system " " cases of no merit " would be able to be thrown out much earlier?
It must be a case of manpower.
-
Can you ever stop an indidvual applying to the ccrc?
I don't think it would ever happen.
So how do you stop someone clogging up the system?
After an initial appeal Is thrown out the ccrc is the only avenue.i
I think the old way to petition the home secretary which Jeremy did do. Many years ago.
-
Can you ever stop an indidvual applying to the ccrc?
I don't think it would ever happen.
So how do you stop someone clogging up the system?
After an initial appeal Is thrown out the ccrc is the only avenue.i
I think the old way to petition the home secretary which Jeremy did do. Many years ago.
There was one case where the CCRC said they would not consider any further submissions from application unless it was based on new evidence accompanied by a legal opinion that the new evidence was substantial.
The problem with Bamber is there is always multiple grounds, with parts to each ground, and these grounds are backed up some "more evidence", such as the photos of Sheila's foot which was allegedly disclosed in 2004, the phone logs evidencing a call from Nevill which were "found" in 2010 and the 347,000 documents / 347,000 pages which were supposedly disclosed in November 2011.
-
Mike and Di Stephano are two who come immediately to mind. As for the CT, I wouldn't expect them to do their own re-presentation.
I do not believe either of them doctored photographs. There was a witness statement which was altered, which I called out as soon as it was posted. Part of the problem with the photographs is that until late 2011 the defence only had the trial photograph albums, which were of course prints rather than negatives. As a result every copy tended to be distorted in terms of contrast/colour intensity etc. I think proper allowance should be made for that before allegations of doctoring are made.
-
I do not believe either of them doctored photographs. There was a witness statement which was altered, which I called out as soon as it was posted. Part of the problem with the photographs is that until late 2011 the defence only had the trial photograph albums, which were of course prints rather than negatives. As a result every copy tended to be distorted in terms of contrast/colour intensity etc. I think proper allowance should be made for that before allegations of doctoring are made.
I was a kid in the 1980s and 1990s and used to love taking photos on holiday and other times. What was wrong with colour prints?
-
How can blood still be flowing at least two hours after death when the photos were taken anyway?
It would need to be forced out by gravity after Sheila's heart had stopped!
-
There was one case where the CCRC said they would not consider any further submissions from application unless it was based on new evidence accompanied by a legal opinion that the new evidence was substantial.
The problem with Bamber is there is always multiple grounds, with parts to each ground, and these grounds are backed up some "more evidence", such as the photos of Sheila's foot which was allegedly disclosed in 2004, the phone logs evidencing a call from Nevill which were "found" in 2010 and the 347,000 documents / 347,000 pages which were supposedly disclosed in November 2011.
Interesting
Which case?
-
The CCRC say they aim to complete 85% of cases in a maximum of 12 months.
Obviously cases like Jeremy's are complex. Hence they don't fall in this category.
-
Bamber knows that there isn't a cat in hell's chance of him ever being released, so he's just stringing out the number of grounds/submissions to irritate and annoy both his relatives and Essex Police.
-
Bamber knows that there isn't a cat in hell's chance of him ever being released, so he's just stringing out the number of grounds/submissions to irritate and annoy both his relatives and Essex Police.
He seems very determined and always has been. He's been fighting for forty years almost.
However I agree he must often know it's unlikely he will ever get out.
Believe he has referenced this himself recently.
-
I do not believe either of them doctored photographs. There was a witness statement which was altered, which I called out as soon as it was posted. Part of the problem with the photographs is that until late 2011 the defence only had the trial photograph albums, which were of course prints rather than negatives. As a result every copy tended to be distorted in terms of contrast/colour intensity etc. I think proper allowance should be made for that before allegations of doctoring are made.
Naturally, and in fairness, .........proper allowance should be made............." However -and not wishing to sound like a conspiracy theorist- given the track record/career path of both, I don't believe 'allowances' to be necessarily clear cut. Give a dog a bad name? Perhaps. But there's rarely any smoke without fire
-
He seems very determined and always has been. He's been fighting for forty years almost.
However I agree he must often know it's unlikely he will ever get out.
Believe he has referenced this himself recently.
I think his supporters give him false hope, with their various multiple "irrefutable" pieces of evidence and the very thorough CCRC submission.
-
I think his supporters give him false hope, with their various multiple "irrefutable" pieces of evidence and the very thorough CCRC submission.
And their practice of accusing uncle Tom Cobley and all, of malpractice, malfeasance in public office and corrupt practices.
-
And their practice of accusing uncle Tom Cobley and all, of malpractice, malfeasance in public office and corrupt practices.
And therefore it stands to reason that when every participant, other than the accused, is claimed to be lying, one may be forgiven for smelling a rat.
-
He seems very determined and always has been. He's been fighting for forty years almost.
However I agree he must often know it's unlikely he will ever get out.
Believe he has referenced this himself recently.
I thought you didn't have time for a supporter on a windup?
-
And therefore it stands to reason that when every participant, other than the accused, is claimed to be lying, one may be forgiven for smelling a rat.
Definitely, and even worse that that, even people like Colin Caffell and Brett Collins to give a few examples, neither of whom were in any sense "participants" or had anything to gain from Jeremy being convicted are also called liars.
-
Definitely, and even worse that that, even people like Colin Caffell and Brett Collins to give a few examples, neither of whom were in any sense "participants" or had anything to gain from Jeremy being convicted are also called liars.
Vanezis seems to have done well out of it.
-
I thought you didn't have time for a supporter on a windup?
Is Dan CC?
-
I thought you didn't have time for a supporter on a windup?
Dave, I don't know what the crack is with multiple account stuff and why somebody would do it to be perfectly honest. I'm an old man.
-
Is Dan CC?
No, Curiosity is CC.
-
Dave, I don't know what the crack is with multiple account stuff and why somebody would do it to be perfectly honest. I'm an old man.
Dont be silly ILB!
56 is the new 36 !!
-
Dont be silly ILB!
56 is the new 36 !!
Only in waistline and beyond ;D
-
Is Dan CC?
What? Is CC a barefoot runner?
-
No, Curiosity is CC.
Nope, I'm a common or garden moggie from Cheshire, not a wealthy ickle cutie from Cambridge. It'll sink in eventually!
-
Nope, I'm a common or garden moggie from Cheshire, not a wealthy ickle cutie from Cambridge. It'll sink in eventually!
You are most certainly not a wealthy ickle cutie. :))
-
I do not believe either of them doctored photographs. There was a witness statement which was altered, which I called out as soon as it was posted. Part of the problem with the photographs is that until late 2011 the defence only had the trial photograph albums, which were of course prints rather than negatives. As a result every copy tended to be distorted in terms of contrast/colour intensity etc. I think proper allowance should be made for that before allegations of doctoring are made.
The brighter red photograph of Sheila's neck was used to given the impression that Sheila was still bleeding when the picture was taken. That would be impossible because Craig pronounced death hours before and also mentions the dried cracked blood around her mouth. That was omitted from the photo when it appeared in the newspaper - for obvious reasons.
-
The brighter red photograph of Sheila's neck was used to given the impression that Sheila was still bleeding when the picture was taken. That would be impossible because Craig pronounced death hours before and also mentions the dried cracked blood around her mouth. That was omitted from the photo when it appeared in the newspaper - for obvious reasons.
There is both wet and dried blood in her crime scene image.
-
There is both wet and dried blood in her crime scene image.
Would not the dried blood give a better indication of TOD, than wet? Recently deceased bodies don't bleed dry blood.
-
Would not the dried blood give a better indication of TOD, than wet? Recently deceased bodies don't bleed dry blood.
Possibly Jane. I can't really work it out. The defence are arguing that Sheila killed herself with the first shot. That means the order of shots is reversed.
-
Only in waistline and beyond ;D
Ha ha, I'm actually still a 36 waist ILB!
-
There is both wet and dried blood in her crime scene image.
Huh? By the time the photo's were taken, the blood on her neck would be dry. She's laying on her back, there is no heart beat to pump out fresh blood and blood that had come from those wounds, trailed down her neck. The blood would have been dry by the time the CS pictures were taken.
-
Huh? By the time the photo's were taken, the blood on her neck would be dry. She's laying on her back, there is no heart beat to pump out fresh blood and blood that had come from those wounds, trailed down her neck. The blood would have been dry by the time the CS pictures were taken.
Yes the soc image shows SC lying completely flat but there's some evidence that this position wasn't the position she was found in. EG A/PS Woodcock:
"I was aware that Sheila Bamber was lying flat on her back with her head slightly raised as it was against a bedside locker".
Ironically this chimes with the prosecution case at the 2002 appeal. Testimony form Martyn Ismail:
518. To decide whether we considered that the interests of justice required that we heard Mr Ismail's evidence, we first had regard to the evidence that it was said that he could give. From the blood staining he concluded that following the second and fatal shot Sheila Caffell was lying almost flat on her back with her head propped against a bedside cabinet.
It would seem SC's found position was with her head propped up against the bedside cabinet and that at some stage she was pulled by her feet thus causing her head to fall flat to the floor and dislodging blood that had pooled in the back of her throat.
-
What? Is CC a barefoot runner?
I am a runner but not of the barefoot variety. I wear Brooks 8)
-
I am a runner but not of the barefoot variety. I wear Brooks 8)
I had a pair of Brooks for years. Apparently they make shoes for people with disabilities.
-
I had a pair of Brooks for years. Apparently they make shoes for people with disabilities.
I wasn't aware of that. They were recommended based on a gait analysis. Very comfortable and supportive. Really pleased with them.
Are you a runner?
-
I wasn't aware of that. They were recommended based on a gait analysis. Very comfortable and supportive. Really pleased with them.
Are you a runner?
I've been a jogger in my past. Mainly off-road. I never liked pavement pounding. I couldn't run down the street these days.
-
I've been a jogger in my past. Mainly off-road. I never liked pavement pounding. I couldn't run down the street these days.
I started cross country at school and have been running ever since but mainly pavement pounding now.
Any particular reason?
-
I started cross country at school and have been running ever since but mainly pavement pounding now.
Any particular reason?
Very much out of shape. I've got a WaterRower and my intention is to use that instead of jogging.. when I eventually get round to it.
-
I started cross country at school and have been running ever since but mainly pavement pounding now.
Any particular reason?
I hope you get a lot out of your running. Fair play to you for sticking with it.
-
Very much out of shape. I've got a WaterRower and my intention is to use that instead of jogging.. when I eventually get round to it.
I think you have to find something you enjoy!
-
I hope you get a lot out of your running. Fair play to you for sticking with it.
3 or 4 times a week. Usually about half with a club and half solo. Most of the time I really enjoy it. Sometimes if I'm tired, weather is bad or a bit hungover I have to push myself.
-
3 or 4 times a week. Usually about half with a club and half solo. Most of the time I really enjoy it. Sometimes if I'm tired, weather is bad or a bit hungover I have to push myself.
I used to run in winter. And when the weather was foul, at the end of my run I felt like I had beat the elements. Very satisfying.
-
I used to run in winter. And when the weather was foul, at the end of my run I felt like I had beat the elements. Very satisfying.
Yep 8)
When I run with the group I always want to be #1 so push myself much harder and get the 'runners high' 8)
-
Have you recovered from the loss of your dog? Lola?
-
Nope, I'm a common or garden moggie from Cheshire, not a wealthy ickle cutie from Cambridge. It'll sink in eventually!
Hmmm this is afterall the person who believes AE wrung out SC's, left to soak, menstrual stained knickers into the silencer thus contaminating it!
-
I am a runner but not of the barefoot variety. I wear Brooks 8)
Therefore CC is not me (as someone suggested)
-
Therefore CC is not me (as someone suggested)
I am like the Scarlet Pimpernel:
"They seek him here, they seek him there / Those Frenchies seek him everywhere / Is he in heaven, or is he in hell?/ My own elusive Pimpernel"
-
Definitely, and even worse that that, even people like Colin Caffell and Brett Collins to give a few examples, neither of whom were in any sense "participants" or had anything to gain from Jeremy being convicted are also called liars.
I would not say they are liars. They simply believe a version of events.
It is only relatively recent BC has popped up. He contributed to Theroux's doc and if I recall correctly said he thought it would be JB's style to pay a hitman.
CC has something to gain emotionally. Far easier for him to believe his former brother-in-law is responsible for murdering his young sons than their mother. Assuage his guilt. Not that he is in any way responsible. But to believe its JB means he doesn't have to have the conversation with himself about whether he could/should have done more, seen it coming, not allowed the twins to visit WHF etc, etc.
-
Yes the soc image shows SC lying completely flat but there's some evidence that this position wasn't the position she was found in. EG A/PS Woodcock:
"I was aware that Sheila Bamber was lying flat on her back with her head slightly raised as it was against a bedside locker".
Ironically this chimes with the prosecution case at the 2002 appeal. Testimony form Martyn Ismail:
518. To decide whether we considered that the interests of justice required that we heard Mr Ismail's evidence, we first had regard to the evidence that it was said that he could give. From the blood staining he concluded that following the second and fatal shot Sheila Caffell was lying almost flat on her back with her head propped against a bedside cabinet.
It would seem SC's found position was with her head propped up against the bedside cabinet and that at some stage she was pulled by her feet thus causing her head to fall flat to the floor and dislodging blood that had pooled in the back of her throat.
That’s one person and regardless of any of that. By the time the CS pictures were taken she couldn’t have still been bleeding. Any blood in the back of her throat would have congealed. The the outside blood - dried.
-
That’s one person and regardless of any of that. By the time the CS pictures were taken she couldn’t have still been bleeding. Any blood in the back of her throat would have congealed. The the outside blood - dried.
That one person happened to be someone who first observed SC. His testimony is supported by a forensic scientist.
Blood around NB was described as pooled not congealed.
-
https://youtu.be/NthBz9Lyjdo?si=XQxFGVXw0ar8eT1L
Here is another more general CAL interview.
-
https://youtu.be/NthBz9Lyjdo?si=XQxFGVXw0ar8eT1L
Here is another more general CAL interview.
What a shame women authors feel they need anonymity in this day and age.