Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on September 06, 2022, 05:21:PM
-
So, 'if she had not', or 'could not provide this service', [refer police logs which deal with the open line to and from whf, start to finish - and compare this with the strong likely hood that the operator was referring to the specific open line account which covered the period between 6.09am - 8.09am]. 'Maybe', the full history of the open line eavesdrop [7.42am, onwards] 'started out' as an aut
believe that 'the only logical explanation' to account for the fact that the open line was being monitored from the outset, must be linked to a much earlier call that someone inside the farmhouse made directly to 'a privileged police contact service' a facility not available to ordinary members of the public, but accessible to 'a privileged clientel' including 'a magistrate in danger or distress'. In order for the open phone line to and from the scene to be being monitored by police headquarters and the operator, must be bonded to a call made by someone inside the farmhouse, who used the aforementioned, [privileged access] to alert police to what was, or had taken place. I am satisfied that 'NEVILLE BAMBER' activated this process, and that 'Jeremys' mention of 'trying to re-establish contact with his father back at the scene', was met by 'a constant engaged tone' which has to be associated with the open telephone line') both' to and from the scene being monitored, throughout until around 8.06am [ that morning]...
-
In my honest opinion, this establishes that 'Jeremy Bamber' has consistently been telling the truth' and that 'NEVILLE BAMBER' had indeed made a call to the police prior to 3.30 am...