Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on July 15, 2011, 09:11:PM
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
-
But how would that fit in with the police being in cahoots with any of the relatives? It's Cook who has assigned the job.
-
Would they not have taken these blood samples anyway, to eliminate them?
-
Would they not have taken these blood samples anyway, to eliminate them?
But it appears that Robert Boutflour had the same blood group as Sheila? That should have eliminated the silencer as evidence immediately. But it appears that the police played along with the relatives for some reason?
-
Would they not have taken these blood samples anyway, to eliminate them?
But it appears that Robert Boutflour had the same blood group as Sheila? That should have eliminated the silencer as evidence immediately. But it appears that the police played along with the relatives for some reason?
It should have been highlighted and taken into account, rather than dismissed as evidence.
What I'm struggling with here is that there are no doubt lots of people with the same blood groupings, but how many of us know all the 'AKs' and 'HPs' etc. I think that it's more likely a coincidence that the blood groupings are the same, I don't think that the relatives would know all the different enzymes in each of their blood in order to exactly match that of Sheila's, nor would they be in the know about what tests forensics could actually carry out.
Doesn't add up to me.
-
Would they not have taken these blood samples anyway, to eliminate them?
If we follow a line where Cook is involved in fabrication, surely this result would have been a huge disappointment? I'm just not sure what to make of it. Was this document withheld? If so, that might ptovide a clue in itself. Anything withheld is effectively something that has been suppressed?
-
By claiming to suspect the relatives of planting blood in the silencer then the EP officers concerned (primarily Cook) divert the issue of who planted the blood away from themselves.
In my view there seemed to be far too much blood inside the silencer than would make sense for backsplatter with a .22 rifle. This is probably something the officers concerned were also wary of so pre-empting suspicion falling on them should this fabrication come to light it would be best to suggest the possibility of fabrication by relatives first.
-
By claiming to suspect the relatives of planting blood in the silencer then the EP officers concerned (primarily Cook) divert the issue of who planted the blood away from themselves.
In my view there seemed to be far too much blood inside the silencer than would make sense for backsplatter with a .22 rifle. This is probably something the officers concerned were also wary of so pre-empting suspicion falling on them should this fabrication come to light it would be best to suggest the possibility of fabrication by relatives first.
I don't think the police have claimed that they thought the relatives planted blood. I would be more concerned if the relatives blood was not tested.
Rochford makes a good point though, if this information has been withheld (I don't know if it was) then that would set some alarm bells ringing in my opinion.
-
By claiming to suspect the relatives of planting blood in the silencer then the EP officers concerned (primarily Cook) divert the issue of who planted the blood away from themselves.
In my view there seemed to be far too much blood inside the silencer than would make sense for backsplatter with a .22 rifle. This is probably something the officers concerned were also wary of so pre-empting suspicion falling on them should this fabrication come to light it would be best to suggest the possibility of fabrication by relatives first.
I don't think the police have claimed that they thought the relatives planted blood. I would be more concerned if the relatives blood was not tested.
Rochford makes a good point though, if this information has been withheld (I don't know if it was) then that would set some alarm bells ringing in my opinion.
The reason for the testing implies a line of thought that those who had been in possesion of the silencer may have planted the blood. Otherwise the testing would make no sense. Remember 7 police officers had looked in that gun cupboard and looked in the 2 boxes and noticed .22 ammunition and shotgun ammunition but somehow did not see any silencer or telescopic sight which is a bit incredible.
When the relatives give a very dodgy story(constantly changing and contradictory) to have found the silencer and sight in one of those two boxes that were examined it leaves the relatives rather exposed to accusations of falsifying evidence and any police officers linked to it.
-
The reason for the testing implies a line of thought that those who had been in possesion of the silencer may have planted the blood. Otherwise the testing would make no sense.
I don't really see it that way though. I see it as the relatives being tested, is to strengthen or weaken the chances of the blood belonging to Sheila, nothing more than that.
On the other hand though, as the relatives were somewhat hell bent on putting Jeremy in the frame from early on for whatever reason, perhaps you are right and the police were just covering all the angles to make sure they weren't being duped?
-
The reason for the testing implies a line of thought that those who had been in possesion of the silencer may have planted the blood. Otherwise the testing would make no sense.
I don't really see it that way though. I see it as the relatives being tested, is to strengthen or weaken the chances of the blood belonging to Sheila, nothing more than that.
On the other hand though, as the relatives were somewhat hell bent on putting Jeremy in the frame from early on for whatever reason, perhaps you are right and the police were just covering all the angles to make sure they weren't being duped?
Blood group testing only goes so far... In reality the blood in the silencer could have come from anyone with the correct blood group for that found providing the tests were conducted correctly and properly assessed. DNA tests since show the tests were inadequate.
why select the relatives...some silly strengthen or weaken it being Sheila's blood...how..? why select just the relatives...why not everyon in the uk or local area... The relatives needed to be checked as they had possession of the silencer (claimed to have it)and a motive to frame JB....and could not be trusted as their many many lies show.
-
The reason for the testing implies a line of thought that those who had been in possesion of the silencer may have planted the blood. Otherwise the testing would make no sense.
I don't really see it that way though. I see it as the relatives being tested, is to strengthen or weaken the chances of the blood belonging to Sheila, nothing more than that.
On the other hand though, as the relatives were somewhat hell bent on putting Jeremy in the frame from early on for whatever reason, perhaps you are right and the police were just covering all the angles to make sure they weren't being duped?
Blood group testing only goes so far... In reality the blood in the silencer could have come from anyone with the correct blood group for that found providing the tests were conducted correctly and properly assessed. DNA tests since show the tests were inadequate.
why select the relatives...some silly strengthen or weaken it being Sheila's blood...how..? why select just the relatives...why not everyon in the uk or local area... The relatives needed to be checked as they had possession of the silencer (claimed to have it)and a motive to frame JB....and could not be trusted as their many many lies show.
Well yes, they were obviously tested because they had access to the item, everyone else in the country did not.
Wasn't it also suggested that the blood in the silencer could have been a mixture of more than one persons blood and or animal blood therefore potentially giving false grouping readings?
-
the blood testing was very much mickey mouse level it seems and not very well carried out.
it could well have been a mixture ...the results were dubious.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
-
By claiming to suspect the relatives of planting blood in the silencer then the EP officers concerned (primarily Cook) divert the issue of who planted the blood away from themselves.
In my view there seemed to be far too much blood inside the silencer than would make sense for backsplatter with a .22 rifle. This is probably something the officers concerned were also wary of so pre-empting suspicion falling on them should this fabrication come to light it would be best to suggest the possibility of fabrication by relatives first.
Buried in your posts on this subject is a good point Smiffy which has been bothering me since I first read about the silencer evidence. I am not convinced that a.22 rimfire round fired even at close range would generate much if any backspatter and the evidence that quite a lot of blood was found deep inside the sound moderator (I believe reaching the baffles almost half way down) surprises me. This is a subject which requires expert evidence. It should be possible to carry out tests to investigate this point properly.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Which part of Mike's post is untrue? Perhaps 19th September is more accurately described as mid rather than late September but apart from that Mike's observation seems fair. Am I missing something?
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
Possibly, if it is untrue.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
Possibly, if it is untrue.
The date is out by a whole year.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
Possibly, if it is untrue.
The date is out by a whole year.
I had missed that. It nevertheless has no bearing upon whether it is libelous or not. Presumably the police request was made in preparation for the trial in October 1996.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
Possibly, if it is untrue.
The date is out by a whole year.
I had missed that. It nevertheless has no bearing upon whether it is libelous or not. Presumably the police request was made in preparation for the trial in October 1996.
October 1986 you mean. Yes it's very likely that is the case.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
Possibly, if it is untrue.
The date is out by a whole year.
I had missed that. It nevertheless has no bearing upon whether it is libelous or not. Presumably the police request was made in preparation for the trial in October 1996.
October 1986 you mean. Yes it's very likely that is the case.
You are quite right - I am making a mess of the dates today! I will not edit my post as you have corrected it.
-
a lot of the things said if not true are very libelous witch makes you wonder why nobody has sued for libel
-
a lot of the things said if not true are very libelous witch makes you wonder why nobody has sued for libel
Maybe it's more effort and money than it's worth? I don't know, but I see your point.
-
Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. So much so, that police asked relatives for samples of their blood so that they could check to see if any of them had the same blood group activity as Sheila, and whether or not the blood could have originated from one of the relatives?
The date of the document request is 19th September 1986 so it is incorrect and untrue to state and detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
Yes that seems a bit naughty. Maybe it was simply a genuine mistake though.
Very libelous also...........
Possibly, if it is untrue.
It is untrue to state - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ....'
Whilst citing a document dated 19th September 1986 as the basis for what is / would be a very serious accusation.
If it was the case someone was found guilty of such an offence I am sure it has been mentioned on the forum that a custodial sentence would be applied.
-
libel is civil law and not criminal law as far as I am aware so please explain "curious" as to how you come to claim what you do.
-
"Funny" how ALL physical evidence was destroyed in 1996 - DNA testing was improving fast, and in the years after, a lot of wrongfully convicted prisoners have been freed.
-
"Funny" how ALL physical evidence was destroyed in 1996 - DNA testing was improving fast, and in the years after, a lot of wrongfully convicted prisoners have been freed.
Yes it seems that police and others were deliberately getting rid of stuff that may incriminate them? Apparently?
-
libel is civil law and not criminal law as far as I am aware so please explain "curious" as to how you come to claim what you do.
Smiffy
I am not claiming anything.
I was merely pointing out that it is incorrect and untrue for Mike to detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
The document which appears to be the basis of the accusation is dated 19th September 1986.
Maybe you can help explain how the document supports the printed accusation i.e. By late September 1985 Essex police suspecting the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders etc.. In this context it should be noted the title of the thread is Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
-
I think it is misleading, as Curiousessex says, but I didn't spot it and nor did others, so it could well be a simple mistake on behalf of the original poster rather than intentional.
-
libel is civil law and not criminal law as far as I am aware so please explain "curious" as to how you come to claim what you do.
Smiffy
I am not claiming anything.
I was merely pointing out that it is incorrect and untrue for Mike to detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
The document which appears to be the basis of the accusation is dated 19th September 1986.
Maybe you can help explain how the document supports the printed accusation i.e. By late September 1985 Essex police suspecting the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders etc.. In this context it should be noted the title of the thread is Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
you may be wrong in claiming it is incorrect and untrue for Mike to make the claims he made. Mike may have information available to him that allow him to make the claims he makes and that he may indeed be correct in what he asserts.
-
libel is civil law and not criminal law as far as I am aware so please explain "curious" as to how you come to claim what you do.
Smiffy
I am not claiming anything.
I was merely pointing out that it is incorrect and untrue for Mike to detail - 'Yes, by late September 1985, Essex police suspected the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders - including for the possibility that the relatives put blood into the silencer that originated from Sheila. ...'
The document which appears to be the basis of the accusation is dated 19th September 1986.
Maybe you can help explain how the document supports the printed accusation i.e. By late September 1985 Essex police suspecting the relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders etc.. In this context it should be noted the title of the thread is Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?
you may be wrong in claiming it is incorrect and untrue for Mike to make the claims he made. Mike may have information available to him that allow him to make the claims he makes and that he may indeed be correct in what he asserts.
Well in that case Mike should provide information that supports the claim rather than posting a document that is dated 19th September 1986 which relates to Essex police suspecting relatives by late September 1985.
I have no problem in relation to Mike making the claim but within this thread the claim is not supported by the document that he has posted in his first post which appears directly under the thread heading. This also being a thread that was started by Mike.
-
"Funny" how ALL physical evidence was destroyed in 1996 - DNA testing was improving fast, and in the years after, a lot of wrongfully convicted prisoners have been freed.
Yes it seems that police and others were deliberately getting rid of stuff that may incriminate them? Apparently?
Well yes, it does appear so. People covering their behinds, that´s what it looks like. Why not take the opportunity to perform DNA tests on the evidence when the DNA testing really took off? Lousy police force! LOUSY!
Not even in USA, which I consider a third world country when it comes to their justice system, have they done this! Lots of prisoners have been freed after years in prison and on death row, based on the improved DNA testing.
-
"Funny" how ALL physical evidence was destroyed in 1996 - DNA testing was improving fast, and in the years after, a lot of wrongfully convicted prisoners have been freed.
Yes it seems that police and others were deliberately getting rid of stuff that may incriminate them? Apparently?
Well yes, it does appear so. People covering their behinds, that´s what it looks like. Why not take the opportunity to perform DNA tests on the evidence when the DNA testing really took off? Lousy police force! LOUSY!
Not even in USA, which I consider a third world country when it comes to their justice system, have they done this! Lots of prisoners have been freed after years in prison and on death row, based on the improved DNA testing.
It stinks!
-
Would they not have taken these blood samples anyway, to eliminate them?
.
Why would Essex police wait until September 1985, to take blood samples from the relatives, regarding blood allegedly found in a silencer a month previously? Now that we know there were two silencers, and that the one found in the gun cupboard by Boutflour was not found there until around 10/11th September 1985, one cane see why police were asking for blood samples from the relatives by 19th September 1985? The silencer with the blood inside it, was not sent to the Lab' until about 26th September 1985, along with a request for the silencer to be checked for blood and fibers from a tampon? And so, within days of the silencer being found, Essex police requested that blood samples be obtained from the relatives so that the silencer and the blood found inside it, could be checked to see if the donor was one of the relatives?
Which, as it happens, turned out to bear the same blood group activity as Robert Boutflour...
-
Would they not have taken these blood samples anyway, to eliminate them?
.
Why would Essex police wait until September 1985, to take blood samples from the relatives, regarding blood allegedly found in a silencer a month previously? Now that we know there were two silencers, and that the one found in the gun cupboard by Boutflour was not found there until around 10/11th September 1985, one cane see why police were asking for blood samples from the relatives by 19th September 1985? The silencer with the blood inside it, was not sent to the Lab' until about 26th September 1985, along with a request for the silencer to be checked for blood and fibers from a tampon? And so, within days of the silencer being found, Essex police requested that blood samples be obtained from the relatives so that the silencer and the blood found inside it, could be checked to see if the donor was one of the relatives?
Which, as it happens, turned out to bear the same blood group activity as Robert Boutflour...
Mike
You need to look at your first post in your thread titled 'Essex police suspected relatives of trying to frame Jeremy for the murders?'
The document posted is dated 19th September 1986 and not 19th September 1985 as you are claiming.
In my opinion, without a document dated 19th September 1985 your post and this thread is unsubstantiated and therefore untrue and incorrect.