Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: BarefootDanC on September 21, 2024, 06:54:PM
-
A few member of this group (CambridgeCutie and David) believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer.
What do you make of the Campaign Team's claim that there was match to David & Palema's blood group?
-
A few member of this group (CambridgeCutie and David) believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer.
What do you make of the Campaign Team's claim that there was match do David & Palema's blood group?
I think it was Robert Boutflours blood group.
I think it's highly unlikely.
-
From memory although I may be wrong. Jeremy June and Shelia were blood group A whilst Nevill and the twins were O
-
I think it's highly unlikely.
It's indicated on the scientist's diagram.
-
It's indicated on the scientist's diagram.
Why would RWBs blood be on a silencer in WHF?
-
A few member of this group (CambridgeCutie and David) believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer.
What do you make of the Campaign Team's claim that there was match do David & Palema's blood group?
I am less inclined to believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer (internal) and more inclined to believe the lab just produced a set of results on the basis of the external contaminants and JM's testimony ie 'this guy dunnit you need to pull out all the stops'.
I don't make anything of the CT's claims. I think they are totally misguided, and that's putting it very politely, and I will be writing to Bamber in the very near future letting him know what I think. Ie if he does not change tack he will never see justice.
-
I am less inclined to believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer (internal) and more inclined to believe the lab just produced a set of results on the basis of the external contaminants and JM's testimony ie 'this guy dunnit you need to pull out all the stops'.
I don't make anything of the CT's claims. I think they are totally misguided, and that's putting it very politely, and I will be writing to Bamber in the very near future letting him know what I think. Ie if he does not change tack he will never see justice.
He's asking you specifically about DB / PB blood groupings. You are waffling.
-
He's asking you specifically about DB / PB blood groupings. You are waffling.
Roch how do you think RBs blood got on the silencer?
Only thing I could think of is when going out shooting game with Nevill. But that although tangible is weak. It would have had to been very very recent as well.
To my knowledge none of the relatives on June's side said they had used the .22 at WHF. Although I know that AP said he had.
-
I am less inclined to believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer (internal) and more inclined to believe the lab just produced a set of results on the basis of the external contaminants and JM's testimony ie 'this guy dunnit you need to pull out all the stops'.
I don't make anything of the CT's claims. I think they are totally misguided, and that's putting it very politely, and I will be writing to Bamber in the very near future letting him know what I think. Ie if he does not change tack he will never see justice.
What tack do you think he should take?
Him & his supporters have gone down every avenue possible. For decades.
-
What tack do you think he should take?
Him & his supporters have gone down every avenue possible. For decades.
He's had a knock back in 1989 at the first hurdle. This was not a full appeal. It was thrown out at the first stage
A COLP enquiry
A ccrc referral in 97
A failed appeal in 2002.
A ccrc knock back in 2012, a new submission to the ccrc in 2021.
What other avenues?
-
He's had a knock back in 1989 at the first hurdle. This was not a full appeal. It was thrown out at the first stage
A COLP enquiry
A ccrc referral in 97
A failed appeal in 2002.
A ccrc knock back in 2012, a new submission to the ccrc in 2021.
What other avenues?
That is what I have just asked CC.
-
What tack do you think he should take?
Him & his supporters have gone down every avenue possible. For decades.
Many people believe him innocent. It is what it is.
-
I am less inclined to believe Sheila's blood was planted in the silencer (internal) and more inclined to believe the lab just produced a set of results on the basis of the external contaminants and JM's testimony ie 'this guy dunnit you need to pull out all the stops'.
I don't make anything of the CT's claims. I think they are totally misguided, and that's putting it very politely, and I will be writing to Bamber in the very near future letting him know what I think. Ie if he does not change tack he will never see justice.
He's already seen it, in October 1986.
-
He's already seen it, in October 1986.
Don't understand that. And why are you talking to yourself?
-
Don't understand that. And why are you talking to yourself?
She means he got justice when he was rightly convicted of murder in 1986 ( from her point of view)
-
What tack do you think he should take?
Him & his supporters have gone down every avenue possible. For decades.
The tack that all the evidence supports towards ie that the forensic evidence was all fabricated.
Bamber and his 'supporters' are utterly clueless and do more harm than good.
-
He's asking you specifically about DB / PB blood groupings. You are waffling.
You are clueless. You have been around the case far longer than I have and you are either unable or unwilling to work it out. Its not rocket science.
-
The tack that all the evidence supports towards ie that the forensic evidence was all fabricated.
Bamber and his 'supporters' are utterly clueless and do more harm than good.
You think there was an industrial frame.
Isn't that what supporters have been saying for decades?
-
You think there was an industrial frame.
Isn't that what supporters have been saying for decades?
Did I say there was an industrial frame?
-
Don't understand that. And why are you talking to yourself?
Is CC talking to herself again?
-
Is CC talking to herself again?
CAN THE MODERATORS PLEASE PUT AN END TO ALL OF THIS.
-
Did I say there was an industrial frame?
There would have to be if all the incriminating evidence was fabricated.
-
There would have to be if all the incriminating evidence was fabricated.
and this is exactly what the Campaign Team claim - they now claim that all the evidence is fabricating, including almost all of the expert witness opinion!
-
CAN THE MODERATORS PLEASE PUT AN END TO ALL OF THIS.
Looking into it. In the meantime, can those members accusing Curiosity of being CC please desist.
-
Looking into it. In the meantime, can those members accusing Curiosity of being CC please desist.
I am curious and cute but not from Cambridge -
-
Looking into it. In the meantime, can those members accusing Curiosity of being CC please desist.
From what I've heard she is not even denying it.
-
How do you solve a thorny problem like David1819? THAT is the question!
-
I am curious and cute but not from Cambridge -
Ha ha,very good Curiosity,very good!
But,if that is your cat, may I suggest you cut down on the feeding a bit!
-
I am curious and cute but not from Cambridge -
The cat reminds you of Churchill making a speach!
-
There would have to be if all the incriminating evidence was fabricated.
I have given my opinion. The relatives dripped poison in the ears of EP. That is not an offence. DCI Jones rightfully shut them down but unfortunately the relatives were still able to exert undue influence. Particularly RB with senior officers. There did not appear to be any proper management controls and oversight in place. DS Jones was pretty much allowed to run the show. He was there at every turn. A relatively junior officer who had no experience of a mass shooting.
He alone fabricated the outside of the silencer and put the frighteners on JM to secure her testimony.
The lab did the rest for which there is overwhelming evidence.
The above is not an 'industrial frame'. It is very similar to the case of Stefan Kiszko:
Kiszko Bamber
Lay Witness 4 x teenage girls lied for a laugh Mugford
Police Officer Holland charged with perverting DS Jones
course of justice
Forensics Outteridge charged with Outteridge transferred to Huntingdon
perverting course of justice when Bamber exhibits under
examination
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed
-
This is an 'industrial frame':
https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/liars-lobby
The above shows the sheer stupidity of those claiming to represent Bamber.
-
How do you solve a thorny problem like David1819? THAT is the question!
Its sad that a guy in his early/mid 30's has nothing better to do with his time than harass middle aged women online :(
-
I am curious and cute but not from Cambridge -
And I am cute and from Cambridge but do not have a pussy ;)
-
Its sad that a guy in his early/mid 30's has nothing better to do with his time than harass middle aged women online :(
Gee whiz! I'm old enough to be Dave's dad!
-
This is an 'industrial frame':
https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/liars-lobby
The above shows the sheer stupidity of those claiming to represent Bamber.
They're very much mistaken in thinking a libellous contribution such as that will help free their client.
-
Gee whiz! I'm old enough to be Dave's dad!
I work full time and spend a large portion of that time in New York and Connecticut. This year alone I helped install new network infrastructure in some of the best country clubs on the US east coast.
Whereas CC I suspect hasn't worked in decades and spent the last three years trolling this forum with over 4000+ posts. People in glass houses would be a huge understatement. :))
-
They're very much mistaken in thinking a libellous contribution such as that will help free their client.
Bamber's supporters have to give a better story about his AM - he had one but it was switched off on the night.
Very incriminating.
-
I work full time and spend a large portion of that time in New York and Connecticut. This year alone I helped install new network infrastructure in some of the best country clubs on the US east coast.
Whereas CC I suspect hasn't worked in decades and spent the last three years trolling this forum with over 4000+ posts. People in glass houses would be a huge understatement. :))
And how does the above relate to Snow's post?
I would hope you do work full-time given your age. I worked full-time when I was your age plus around two decades after that!
And if I've spent 3 years trolling this forum with over 4000+ posts, as you claim, it says more about the moderation than my posts.
I am to the case what Messi is to football 8). A fact you are hopefully ill at ease with. I run past you and score blinders 8)
-
Bamber's supporters have to give a better story about his AM - he had one but it was switched off on the night.
Very incriminating.
Bamber's 'supporters' are not a one size fits all.
There was no answering machine pre murders. You know this.
-
Bamber's 'supporters' are not a one size fits all.
There was no answering machine pre murders. You know this.
Yes there was.
It's not even an incriminating aspect. So no worries to be honest
-
Bamber's 'supporters' are not a one size fits all.
There was no answering machine pre murders. You know this.
I was posting to Curiosity.
-
I work full time and spend a large portion of that time in New York and Connecticut. This year alone I helped install new network infrastructure in some of the best country clubs on the US east coast.
Whereas CC I suspect hasn't worked in decades and spent the last three years trolling this forum with over 4000+ posts. People in glass houses would be a huge understatement. :))
Sounds the life Dave, enjoy it mate.
-
Curiosity obviously agrees with everyone else. That Bamber had an AM pre massacre.
She would have said by now if she thought otherwise.
CC is the lone wolf on this issue.
-
Curiosity obviously agrees with everyone else. That Bamber had an AM pre massacre.
She would have said by now if she thought otherwise.
CC is the lone wolf on this issue.
Can you list your reasons why you think the AM is incriminating? I have forgotten what you said to be honest.
Although please do not say " nevill wouldn't ring Bambers AM" I do remember you saying that.
-
I have given my opinion. The relatives dripped poison in the ears of EP. That is not an offence. DCI Jones rightfully shut them down but unfortunately the relatives were still able to exert undue influence. Particularly RB with senior officers. There did not appear to be any proper management controls and oversight in place. DS Jones was pretty much allowed to run the show. He was there at every turn. A relatively junior officer who had no experience of a mass shooting.
He alone fabricated the outside of the silencer and put the frighteners on JM to secure her testimony.
The lab did the rest for which there is overwhelming evidence.
The above is not an 'industrial frame'. It is very similar to the case of Stefan Kiszko:
Kiszko Bamber
Lay Witness 4 x teenage girls lied for a laugh Mugford
Police Officer Holland charged with perverting DS Jones
course of justice
Forensics Outteridge charged with Outteridge transferred to Huntingdon
perverting course of justice when Bamber exhibits under
examination
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed
There's no comparison whatsoever with the text highlighted in bold.
-
And how does the above relate to Snow's post?
I would hope you do work full-time given your age. I worked full-time when I was your age plus around two decades after that!
And if I've spent 3 years trolling this forum with over 4000+ posts, as you claim, it says more about the moderation than my posts.
I am to the case what Messi is to football 8). A fact you are hopefully ill at ease with. I run past you and score blinders 8)
As far as I'm aware Lionel Messi didn't change his name three times. Don't get me wrong: you do write some incisive posts, but a little humility wouldn't go amiss.
-
I work full time and spend a large portion of that time in New York and Connecticut. This year alone I helped install new network infrastructure in some of the best country clubs on the US east coast.
Whereas CC I suspect hasn't worked in decades and spent the last three years trolling this forum with over 4000+ posts. People in glass houses would be a huge understatement. :))
Wow,that sounds like a fulfilling and well paid job Dave!
I've heard Roch speak of a connection with the USA before.
Well done!
-
Can you list your reasons why you think the AM is incriminating? I have forgotten what you said to be honest.
Although please do not say " nevill wouldn't ring Bambers AM" I do remember you saying that.
Bamber would have it on 24/7.
Nevill would not ring an AM after being shot 4 times.
Nevill would not ring an AM if fully fit.
If Nevill rang an AM, he would leave a message.
Bamber would not wake from 3-7 rings before an AM comes on.
Bamber would not get to the phone before Nevill hangs up.
Nevill would not repeatedly ring an AM.
Bamber could phone his AM from WHF as proof of a call.
-
Bamber would have it on 24/7.
Nevill would not ring an AM after being shot 4 times.
Nevill would not ring an AM if fully fit.
If Nevill rang an AM, he would leave a message.
Bamber would not wake from 3-7 rings before an AM comes on.
Bamber would not get to the phone before Nevill hangs up.
Nevill would not repeatedly ring an AM.
Bamber could phone his AM from WHF as proof of a call.
Thank you for that.
Will respond to replies 2,3,4 by responding that Nevill would not call an for an AM, he would call for a person. Like anybody else does who makes a phonecall. Myself and you included.
And 7.
-
Are you saying that nobody with an AM has ever awoken to a phonecall in the middle of the night on planet earth?
-
There's no comparison whatsoever with the text highlighted in bold.
I rather think there is!
The case of Stefan Kiszko involved 4 lay prosecution witnesses who, post acquittal, admitted lying for a laugh at trial. Their testimony helped secure the conviction. Police superintendent Richard Holland and forensic scientist Ronald Outteridge were charged with perverting the course of justice.
In Bamber's case it involves JM, DS Jones and the lab headed up by none other than the same forensic scientist Ronald Outteridge.
There is no need for an implausible 'industrial frame' which Adam regularly refers to. Ironically the CT also refers to an 'industrial frame':https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/liars-lobby
-
Are you saying that nobody with an AM has ever awoken to a phonecall in the middle of the night on planet earth?
Doubtful anyone would wake. Unless the phone was next to them.
-
You are clueless. You have been around the case far longer than I have and you are either unable or unwilling to work it out. Its not rocket science.
OK clever clogs, can you show me a lab sketch where SC's blood groupings are actually pointed out on the SM?
-
Doubtful anyone would wake. Unless the phone was next to them.
Are you 100 percent sure?
Have you conducted a survey?
-
I rather think there is!
The case of Stefan Kiszko involved 4 lay prosecution witnesses who, post acquittal, admitted lying for a laugh at trial. Their testimony helped secure the conviction. Police superintendent Richard Holland and forensic scientist Ronald Outteridge were charged with perverting the course of justice.
In Bamber's case it involves JM, DS Jones and the lab headed up by none other than the same forensic scientist Ronald Outteridge.
There is no need for an implausible 'industrial frame' which Adam regularly refers to. Ironically the CT also refers to an 'industrial frame':https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/liars-lobby
Kiszko confessed as well.
-
Contrary to popular belief kiszko was vulnerable but not " stupid or backward" he had a normal schooling, was a tax clerk, and could drive. He was of normal intelligence. He was just socially awkward and vulnerable and was a giant man child. Easy victim for police at that era.
He had no social life beyond his mother. They lived for one another. It's a sad tragic case.
Hope that evil bastard Castree rots eventually. I read his sons book.
-
Are you 100 percent sure?
Have you conducted a survey?
Doubtful does not mean 100%.
Doubtful anyone would wake from a downstairs phone ringing 3-7 times.
Certainly no chance of answering it in time.
More chance if the phone is next to you.
-
Kiszko confessed as well.
It seems Holland wrote the statement where he 'confessed' and he signed it. He was socially inept, totally naive and ill equipped to deal with an officer like Holland. He redacted the statement but sadly the harm was done.
https://www.watersidepress.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Richard-Holland_statement.pdf
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Delusions-Innocence-Tragic-Stefan-Kiszko/dp/1909976466?asin=1909976466&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1
-
Doubtful does not mean 100%.
Doubtful anyone would wake from a downstairs phone ringing 3-7 times.
Certainly no chance of answering it in time.
More chance if the phone is next to you.
I know.
Do you accept that he may have answered it ?
Do you accept we would have to conduct a survey ?
-
It seems Holland wrote the statement where he 'confessed' and he signed it. He was socially inept, totally naive and ill equipped to deal with an officer like Holland. He redacted the statement but sadly the harm was done.
https://www.watersidepress.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Richard-Holland_statement.pdf
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Delusions-Innocence-Tragic-Stefan-Kiszko/dp/1909976466?asin=1909976466&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1
It is said that they told kiszko " get this signed and we can get it all wrapped up for Christmas "
The reality is there was sleep deprivation, gentle threats, and persuasion of a stronger kind.
This is 1970s policing in Britain. In the early 80s as a teenager I witnessed similar myself.
-
It seems Holland wrote the statement where he 'confessed' and he signed it. He was socially inept, totally naive and ill equipped to deal with an officer like Holland. He redacted the statement but sadly the harm was done.
https://www.watersidepress.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Richard-Holland_statement.pdf
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Delusions-Innocence-Tragic-Stefan-Kiszko/dp/1909976466?asin=1909976466&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1
I recommend you read " did you never suspect " by Ronald Castrees son Nick Castree. It's a good read.
-
It is said that they told kiszko " get this signed and we can get it all wrapped up for Christmas "
The reality is there was sleep deprivation, gentle threats, and persuasion of a stronger kind.
This is 1970s policing in Britain. In the early 80s as a teenager I witnessed similar myself.
And according to the authors of the book, Michael O'Connell and Campbell Malone, the police rode roughshod over his legal rights. Eg he was not told he could have a solicitor present and when he was in fact free to leave he was held in custody. You can see how a thick tunnel visioned copper(s) could have someone like Kiszko in sight but when the scientific evidence proved he was not their man they refused to accept it >:(
-
OK clever clogs, can you show me a lab sketch where SC's blood groupings are actually pointed out on the SM?
Wow I was being a bit rude there. Sorry about that :-[ I get frustrated with you because you appear to jump on absurd theories without thinking them through. The idea the relatives contaminated the silencer is a complete non-starter.
Blood is removed from the exhibits and then goes to the lab for testing all within FSS, Huntingdon. The enzyme and protein groups eg AK, EAP, HP, PGM are tested using gel electrophoresis which calculates the weight of molecules and produces photographic evidence by way of bars in columns.
It is unclear from the documentation exactly what the protocols, systems and processes were in terms of scientists removing blood and transporting it to the lab area for testing.
All my research around the blood and surrounding topics points to wrongdoing at the lab.
As far as I can see re the blood flake, which is what Bamber's conviction hangs on, there are two possibilities:
- The lab was in possession of 3 vials of SC's blood from pm/Dr Vanezis. Therefore blood was available for contamination.
- The lab simply produced a set of test results. Bearing in mind it had already done this for SC's blood made available from pm.
I am inclined to think it was the latter because:
- There does not appear to be any detailed sketches as to where exactly the blood was found within the silencer, measurements etc as there was with the rifle.
- The testimony about who found it, where and how much seems contradictory and vague.
- The LCN DNA testing carried out in 2002 was unable to find SC's DNA. The reason given was that it was all swabbed away for the testing in 1985/86. This seems improbable when you consider LCN DNA can identify DNA from poorly degraded samples as small as a millionth the size of a grain of salt.
And for those going ::) the above is just the tip of the iceberg 8)
-
And according to the authors of the book, Michael O'Connell and Campbell Malone, the police rode roughshod over his legal rights. Eg he was not told he could have a solicitor present and when he was in fact free to leave he was held in custody. You can see how a thick tunnel visioned copper(s) could have someone like Kiszko in sight but when the scientific evidence proved he was not their man they refused to accept it >:(
I guarantee you that had Stan Jones not been interviewing a posh boy from a wealthy educated background and he had been a young kid from a south london council estate the interview would have not been done under such " polite circumstances "
They would have never in a million years been able to a cough out of Jeremy Bamber.
-
In fairness though perhaps they were treading on eggshells so to speak. If Bamber had been vindicated at this early stage then it wouldn't have been good PR for EP to be seen as " accusing a grieving man who has just lost five members of his family" especially a intelligent one who was soon to be very wealthy as well
-
Wow I was being a bit rude there. Sorry about that :-[ I get frustrated with you because you appear to jump on absurd theories without thinking them through. The idea the relatives contaminated the silencer is a complete non-starter.
Blood is removed from the exhibits and then goes to the lab for testing all within FSS, Huntingdon. The enzyme and protein groups eg AK, EAP, HP, PGM are tested using gel electrophoresis which calculates the weight of molecules and produces photographic evidence by way of bars in columns.
It is unclear from the documentation exactly what the protocols, systems and processes were in terms of scientists removing blood and transporting it to the lab area for testing.
All my research around the blood and surrounding topics points to wrongdoing at the lab.
As far as I can see re the blood flake, which is what Bamber's conviction hangs on, there are two possibilities:
- The lab was in possession of 3 vials of SC's blood from pm/Dr Vanezis. Therefore blood was available for contamination.
- The lab simply produced a set of test results. Bearing in mind it had already done this for SC's blood made available from pm.
I am inclined to think it was the latter because:
- There does not appear to be any detailed sketches as to where exactly the blood was found within the silencer, measurements etc as there was with the rifle.
- The testimony about who found it, where and how much seems contradictory and vague.
- The LCN DNA testing carried out in 2002 was unable to find SC's DNA. The reason given was that it was all swabbed away for the testing in 1985/86. This seems improbable when you consider LCN DNA can identify DNA from poorly degraded samples as small as a millionth the size of a grain of salt.
And for those going ::) the above is just the tip of the iceberg 8)
I agree wholeheartedly. I do not believe the family were responsible for the blood contamination though they may have had a role in the paint on the knurled end.
This was my take on a possible source taken from a longer post which is shown below.
1 Sheila contaminated it by her actions.
This could have been caused by a nose bleed when adding or removing the SM blood drips on the SM or muzzle. Another possibility is that she had blood on her hand which transferred to the muzzle during handling. It is also possible some blood dripped onto the SM around the exit. It is also possible that SC ‘prodded dead victims putting blood on the muzzle.
2 The TFG unwittingly contaminated it.
If there was blood on the muzzle and maybe a small incursion into the barrel and they then fitted the SM to make at least one shot (say the first or second shot as outlined in evidence). The action would possibly cause minute particles/mist size droplets to be distributed on the baffle plates and inside the main SM’s barrel/bore as far as that noted in the evidence.
3 A deliberate action at the lab
They, MDF in particular, could have created a flake or they obtained it from the receptacle containing PV20 and blood. As noted by Taylor on his GER. (QC I believe this is another document dated 12/09/85). Since there is a distinct possibility that he swapped PV20 to help create the one-gun crime, the creation of a flake or a flake from the PV20 receptacle would hold no fear.
4 A mistake by MDF who test fired the rifle.
Though he says he did a pull through and found no blood he might have come to the conclusion that he had caused it when small quantities were found by testing for bloods. He may have test fired before the blood tests. A mistake by a ‘novice’? Any earlier contamination would be blasted into the SM. If he visually inspected, it before both the test fire and/or the pull through. It is unlikely he could see the blood because JH and PJL asserted that the blood was not visible to the naked eye.
This suggestion comes into play if 2 above is excluded.
I do not know which if any of the four scenarios I favour but I feel it could be an amalgam of any 2 or 3 from the total. All these scenarios place blood on the muzzle and a strong likelihood that this fact resulted in stronger blood findings which were found on the female screw head. A condition that cannot occur in normal operating conditions. They (SM’s) are designed and built so as not to leak in this area.
My full post
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11938.msg549432.html#msg549432
-
I agree wholeheartedly. I do not believe the family were responsible for the blood contamination though they may have had a role in the paint on the knurled end.
No. DS Jones acted completely alone was responsible for the blood, paint and hair on the outside.
This was my take on a possible source taken from a longer post which is shown below.
Longer post? You? No?
I do not know which if any of the four scenarios I favour but I feel it could be an amalgam of any 2 or 3 from the total. All these scenarios place blood on the muzzle and a strong likelihood that this fact resulted in stronger blood findings which were found on the female screw head. A condition that cannot occur in normal operating conditions. They (SM’s) are designed and built so as not to leak in this area.
My full post
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11938.msg549432.html#msg549432
You over complicate everything.
-
I agree wholeheartedly. I do not believe the family were responsible for the blood contamination though they may have had a role in the paint on the knurled end.
This was my take on a possible source taken from a longer post which is shown below.
I do not know which if any of the four scenarios I favour but I feel it could be an amalgam of any 2 or 3 from the total. All these scenarios place blood on the muzzle and a strong likelihood that this fact resulted in stronger blood findings which were found on the female screw head. A condition that cannot occur in normal operating conditions. They (SM’s) are designed and built so as not to leak in this area.
My full post
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11938.msg549432.html#msg549432
The silencer was found on August the 10th. The blood was first "noticed" reported later that day at Oak Farm. The blood samples from Sheila that were taken by Peter Vanezis were already sent up to Huntington on August 9th the day before. This narrows down the culprits to those in Oak Farm.
-
No. DS Jones acted completely alone was responsible for the blood, paint and hair on the outside.
Longer post? You? No?
You over complicate everything.
I agree about the flake but how were the tiny/minuscule droplets found by PL in his first report created?
-
In fairness though perhaps they were treading on eggshells so to speak. If Bamber had been vindicated at this early stage then it wouldn't have been good PR for EP to be seen as " accusing a grieving man who has just lost five members of his family" especially a intelligent one who was soon to be very wealthy as well
Well he was vindicated at the earliest possible stage. The most senior officers considered the soc murder/suicide: Chief Sup Harris and DCI Jones. The latter checking the windows and doors were all secured from within. The police surgeon thought it was murder/suicide based on SC's appearance and Bamber's reactions. None of the firearms team contradicted the murder/suicide theory and some were military trained and had been on active duty ie they were familiar with gunshot wounds. The pathologist found nothing to contradict the murder/sucide theory.
It really is very simple:
- The relatives who in reality knew very little about Bamber and SC became convinced SC could not be responsible. DS Jones, who had no experience of a mass shooting and was ignorance personified, was all ears to the relatives. You can hear from the horse's mouth his reasons for believing SC could not have been responsible in Sky's 'killing mum and dad' production.
- DS Jones alone fabricated the outside of the silencer: blood, paint and hair. He then secured JM's testimony by making all sorts of threats during her interrogation. Much the same way the police did with Kiszko and all the other high profile MOJ's than involved false confessions.
- The lab faced with what they thought was a legitimate exhibit ie the silencer as above and JM's testimony were persuaded to come up with the flake.
-
Well he was vindicated at the earliest possible stage. The most senior officers considered the soc murder/suicide: Chief Sup Harris and DCI Jones. The latter checking the windows and doors were all secured from within. The police surgeon thought it was murder/suicide based on SC's appearance and Bamber's reactions. None of the firearms team contradicted the murder/suicide theory and some were military trained and had been on active duty ie they were familiar with gunshot wounds. The pathologist found nothing to contradict the murder/sucide theory.
It really is very simple:
- The relatives who in reality knew very little about Bamber and SC became convinced SC could not be responsible. DS Jones, who had no experience of a mass shooting and was ignorance personified, was all ears to the relatives. You can hear from the horse's mouth his reasons for believing SC could not have been responsible in Sky's 'killing mum and dad' production.
- DS Jones alone fabricated the outside of the silencer: blood, paint and hair. He then secured JM's testimony by making all sorts of threats during her interrogation. Much the same way the police did with Kiszko and all the other high profile MOJ's than involved false confessions.
- The lab faced with what they thought was a legitimate exhibit ie the silencer as above and JM's testimony were persuaded to come up with the flake.
Can understand cohesion about the threats to mugford. But the hair and blood on the silencer? What are you suggesting Jones did?
-
The silencer was found on August the 10th. The blood was first "noticed" reported later that day at Oak Farm. The blood samples from Sheila that were taken by Peter Vanezis were already sent up to Huntington on August 9th the day before. This narrows down the culprits to those in Oak Farm.
No it does not. You are completely wrong and totally misunderstand the blood evidence. When is it going to sink in the blood on the outside was completely different to the set of results created by the lab for the flake said to have been found inside?
EP released WHF from a soc back to Bamber late noon on 9th Aug. He said he did not want to go back in at that stage so DS Jones met the Eatons and handed the keys over to AE and gave instructions about the newly fitted alarm.
DS Jones had access to WHF and was in a position of being there alone. The silencer had already become very topical hence Bamber was asked to complete a further statement about it on 8th Aug.
DS Jone inside WHF alone was able to recover the silencer contaminate it with small bloodstains, paint and hair and leave it for the relatives to find. He didn't need SC's blood. Small blood stains were incapable of being typed a fact he would have been well aware of. He may well have pricked his own finger.
The really incriminating 'evidence' was not created until a month later when the lab produced a set of test results.
-
Why would Jones do this though even if he thought Bamber gulity?
Bamber getting away with it wouldn't effect DS Jones life. A moral standpoint gone wrong? What are you suggesting?
-
I agree about the flake but how were the tiny/minuscule droplets found by PL in his first report created?
That's not what PL stated in his report. There were no tiny/minuscule droplets found by PL inside the silencer. There was nothing visible.
Weak or very weak positive reactions for blood which could have indicated the presence of blood were detectable on the collar ring and the first 8 baffle plates. These reactions were all weak and there was no blood clearly visible to the naked eye. Such findings could be consistent with an item having been previously swabbed by a forensic scientist to remove bloodstains for testing
-
Why would Jones do this though even if he thought Bamber gulity?
Bamber getting away with it wouldn't effect DS Jones life. A moral standpoint gone wrong? What are you suggesting?
It is what the evidence supports. Only he knows why. I have thought the relatives may have incentivised him. Possibly Peter Eaton but that's just a thought. According to AE when the silencer was handed over she was in bed/or went to bed and PE and DS Jones sat drinking whisky into the small hours. What was under discussion?
-
That's not what PL stated in his report. There were no tiny/minuscule droplets found by PL inside the silencer. There was nothing visible.
Weak or very weak positive reactions for blood which could have indicated the presence of blood were detectable on the collar ring and the first 8 baffle plates. These reactions were all weak and there was no blood clearly visible to the naked eye. Such findings could be consistent with an item having been previously swabbed by a forensic scientist to remove bloodstains for testing
OK Poor phrasing on my part. So what caused these other weak findings which were found it seems throughout the length of the SM and on 8 baffle plates. You also have ignored other findings that there were two SM's involved which has been well researched. I believe they form part of the latest submission. You accuse me of overcomplicating things. I find yours an over simplification. The framing of JB was not the work of one malicious DS.
-
Can understand cohesion about the threats to mugford. But the hair and blood on the silencer? What are you suggesting Jones did?
Contaminated the silencer to incriminate Bamber to fit his theory. It is what coppers did in that era.
-
OK Poor phrasing on my part. So what caused these other weak findings which were found it seems throughout the length of the SM and on 8 baffle plates. You also have ignored other findings that there were two SM's involved which has been well researched. I believe they form part of the latest submission. You accuse me of overcomplicating things. I find yours an over simplification. The framing of JB was not the work of one malicious DS.
Definition of word 'could' is 'possibility'.
I am totally uninterested in 2 silencers or even more than 2! I am interested in the silencer that was the subject of the trial SBJ/1 and more importantly blood said to have been found inside and the set of test results.
Agree the framing was not the work of one malicious DS. It was the work of one malicious DS and the FSS at Huntingdon.
The simplest explanations are the best. Your absurd theories about blue socks, phone calls, Jean Rowe etc are absolute nonsense.
-
Contaminated the silencer to incriminate Bamber to fit his theory. It is what coppers did in that era.
I often wondered if DS Jones felt unhappy that he wasn't inspector. Purely speculative. He may have felt stunted at being as DS. He wanst a spring chicken by police force career means. Pushing 50 at the time of the Bamber case
Maybe he saw this as his shining moment.
Would a relative and him sharing a few whiskeys swing him in a full " get Bamber stance " though?
-
Contaminated the silencer to incriminate Bamber to fit his theory. It is what coppers did in that era.
Big risk to take though to frame a guy who was seen as a bereaved relative. And soon to be a wealthy one. If it had gone tit's up he would be fucked.
Do you believe he was offered money by the relatives?
-
Big risk to take though to frame a guy who was seen as a bereaved relative. And soon to be a wealthy one. If it had gone tit's up he would be fucked.
Do you believe he was offered money by the relatives?
How would it go tit's up? He had an opportunity to be alone inside WHF and contaminate the silencer with blood, paint and a hair. He was experienced enough to know what he could get away with. I would not mind betting he got up to all sorts all the time. What happened to the contents of NB's wallet?
I do not have any firm views on the relatives incentivising him. Its just a thought when I think about DS Jones' motivation. He probably just liked playing 'God'. I've transcribed his contribution to 'Killing mum and dad'. I'll post it up.
-
How would it go tit's up? He had an opportunity to be alone inside WHF and contaminate the silencer with blood, paint and a hair. He was experienced enough to know what he could get away with. I would not mind betting he got up to all sorts all the time. What happened to the contents of NB's wallet?
I do not have any firm views on the relatives incentivising him. Its just a thought when I think about DS Jones' motivation. He probably just liked playing 'God'. I've transcribed his contribution to 'Killing mum and dad'. I'll post it up.
Very easily.
His malpractice being discovered prior.
Even if it wasn't and Bamber was charged.
A not gulity verdict being recorded.
Bamber taking legal action post trial.
Bamber going to the media
An internal inquiry or external inquiry taking place
DS Jones being uncovered
DS Jones being charged
DS Jones being convicted
DS Jones being imprisoned
DS Jones being fired.
DS Jones losing his livelihood and freedom
DS Jones being plunged into financial difficulty as a disgraced ex copper trying to frame an innocent bereaved relative.
-
How would it go tit's up? He had an opportunity to be alone inside WHF and contaminate the silencer with blood, paint and a hair. He was experienced enough to know what he could get away with. I would not mind betting he got up to all sorts all the time. What happened to the contents of NB's wallet?
I do not have any firm views on the relatives incentivising him. Its just a thought when I think about DS Jones' motivation. He probably just liked playing 'God'. I've transcribed his contribution to 'Killing mum and dad'. I'll post it up.
Why would you suggest that Jones would have taken it?
-
Very easily.
His malpractice being discovered prior.
Even if it wasn't and Bamber was charged.
A not gulity verdict being recorded.
Bamber taking legal action post trial.
Bamber going to the media
An internal inquiry or external inquiry taking place
DS Jones being uncovered
DS Jones being charged
DS Jones being convicted
DS Jones being imprisoned
DS Jones being fired.
DS Jones losing his livelihood and freedom
DS Jones being plunged into financial difficulty as a disgraced ex copper trying to frame an innocent bereaved relative.
I don't understand how it could possibly go tits up as you put it? It was in era pre DNA and digitalisation. How was he going to get caught and who was going to catch him?
-
Why would you suggest that Jones would have taken it?
Kill two birds with one stone.
-
No it does not. You are completely wrong and totally misunderstand the blood evidence. When is it going to sink in the blood on the outside was completely different to the set of results created by the lab for the flake said to have been found inside?
EP released WHF from a soc back to Bamber late noon on 9th Aug. He said he did not want to go back in at that stage so DS Jones met the Eatons and handed the keys over to AE and gave instructions about the newly fitted alarm.
DS Jones had access to WHF and was in a position of being there alone. The silencer had already become very topical hence Bamber was asked to complete a further statement about it on 8th Aug.
DS Jone inside WHF alone was able to recover the silencer contaminate it with small bloodstains, paint and hair and leave it for the relatives to find. He didn't need SC's blood. Small blood stains were incapable of being typed a fact he would have been well aware of. He may well have pricked his own finger.
The really incriminating 'evidence' was not created until a month later when the lab produced a set of test results.
Bamber was 'asked' to make the second statement? That's not what the statement implies, it implies that Bamber initiated the second statement by the term "Further to the statement I made to the police dated 7th August 1985 I would like to clarify my movements and actions I made at my parents farm on the evening of 6th August 1985" - it doesn't state 'he had been asked' which it usually does.
-
Kill two birds with one stone.
There is no evidence he took it at all and given that Bamber questioned it, he would hardly be likely to keep it. I'm pretty sure that Ann said she gave it to the accountant.
-
I don't understand how it could possibly go tits up as you put it? It was in era pre DNA and digitalisation. How was he going to get caught and who was going to catch him?
I'm more interested as to why you believe a police officer would put an innocent man in life when he was just a DS and had no particular motivation to see Jeremy Bamber jailed?
I have referenced police corruption myself in the 70s and 80s do you believe DS Jones was offered money?
-
I'm more interested as to why you believe a police officer would put an innocent man in life when he was just a DS and had no particular motivation to see Jeremy Bamber jailed?
I have referenced police corruption myself in the 70s and 80s do you believe DS Jones was offered money?
Or why any of them would? I have asked this question time and again - there is no answer other than ....... 'something' might have happened at the cs that the police didn't want to get out'. No one knows what that 'something' was. Truth is, there is no reason. Yes, Stefan Kiszko was framed but in that case, they didn't have anyone else in the frame, whereas, you can't say that about the Bamber case. Also, to change from Sheila to Jeremy, EP came under a LOT of criticism and ridicule. It would have been easier for them to stay with Sheila.
-
Or why any of them would? I have asked this question time and again - there is no answer other than ....... 'something' might have happened at the cs that the police didn't want to get out'. No one knows what that 'something' was. Truth is, there is no reason. Yes, Stefan Kiszko was framed but in that case, they didn't have anyone else in the frame, whereas, you can't say that about the Bamber case. Also, to change from Sheila to Jeremy, EP came under a LOT of criticism and ridicule. It would have been easier for them to stay with Sheila.
Only way I can see DS Jones or any senior officer framing Jeremy is if they were tempted by monetary reward.
There's no incentive or appeal otherwise to do so. And to do something of thus magnitude it would only be tempted by a large amount.
No copper is going to risk his job, pension, family over a hunch or personal belief. Unless someone put money in his pocket.
-
Only way I can see DS Jones or any senior officer framing Jeremy is if they were tempted by monetary reward.
There's no incentive or appeal otherwise to do so. And to do something of thus magnitude it would only be tempted by a large amount.
No copper is going to risk his job, pension, family over a hunch or personal belief. Unless someone put money in his pocket.
I pretty much agree - it would also have to be untraceable - which isn't easy to do, not even back then. Also, anyone offering such an incentive would have to be pretty sure it was likely to be accepted or they would find themselves in deep doodoo!
-
Bamber was 'asked' to make the second statement? That's not what the statement implies, it implies that Bamber initiated the second statement by the term "Further to the statement I made to the police dated 7th August 1985 I would like to clarify my movements and actions I made at my parents farm on the evening of 6th August 1985" - it doesn't state 'he had been asked' which it usually does.
Semantics. The point being the subject of the silencer was extremely topical at the earliest of stages in the investigation. According to DS Jones' trial testimony, he and DCI Jones visited Bamber at Bourtree on 9th Aug to question Bamber re the second statement/silencer. This would not have fallen on deaf ears with DS Jones. He could see immediately how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect the silencer to the soc.
-
There is no evidence he took it at all and given that Bamber questioned it, he would hardly be likely to keep it. I'm pretty sure that Ann said she gave it to the accountant.
Of course there's no evidence DS Jones removed and retained the contents of NB's wallet but it appears someone did. The counter argument is that Bamber did and made the phone call to cover his arse.
-
Bamber was 'asked' to make the second statement? That's not what the statement implies, it implies that Bamber initiated the second statement by the term "Further to the statement I made to the police dated 7th August 1985 I would like to clarify my movements and actions I made at my parents farm on the evening of 6th August 1985" - it doesn't state 'he had been asked' which it usually does.
Correct Zoso. Bamber went back to Bolster his story, he was asked certain questions on the 7th and he wanted to put this in to his story, one was he was asked if Sheila could see him loading the rifle, in his second statement he adds, "as i was loading i would have been a side view to where Sheila was sitting, she would have had a good view of what i was doing"
I don't think DS Jones would just simply rely on the silencer to frame Bamber if he had access to WHF, it was always with other People when he was in there, and someone else would have to be in with it with him, [very risky] not only that, he got authorisation to hand WHF over to Mrs Eaton on the 12th of August i think? he had Access to get to Jeremy through his House phone [contamination of blood], Car, bike and clothing. Stan went away around the 15 th of August on Annual leave i believe and left Barlow with it.
-
Semantics. The point being the subject of the silencer was extremely topical at the earliest of stages in the investigation. According to DS Jones' trial testimony, he and DCI Jones visited Bamber at Bourtree on 9th Aug to question Bamber re the second statement/silencer. This would not have fallen on deaf ears with DS Jones. He could see immediately how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect the silencer to the soc.
Others were asking questions, they are trained Police to spot the unusual, wouldn't you question the fact Bamber had gone to shoot Bunnies and the rifle is then found without silencer and sights?
-
Semantics. The point being the subject of the silencer was extremely topical at the earliest of stages in the investigation. According to DS Jones' trial testimony, he and DCI Jones visited Bamber at Bourtree on 9th Aug to question Bamber re the second statement/silencer. This would not have fallen on deaf ears with DS Jones. He could see immediately how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect the silencer to the soc.
So what your saying then Cutie, Stan realises the silencer wasn't on the rifle and straight after the interview he goes over to WHF and contaminates the silencer on the 9th, he gained access to Sheila's blood first, contaminated the silencer with the hair blood and paint just before the relatives find it on the 10th? Or was they all in with it together?
-
I'm more interested as to why you believe a police officer would put an innocent man in life when he was just a DS and had no particular motivation to see Jeremy Bamber jailed?
I have referenced police corruption myself in the 70s and 80s do you believe DS Jones was offered money?
But that's just it, in the mind of DS Jones Bamber was not an innocent man. He was utterly convinced he was guilty based on non-scientific matters such as SC's nails and looking like an angel. Surely this is self-evident from his contribution to 'Killing Mum and Dad'? He talks about going through hell knowing he had committed all these murders and praying something would turn up!
I have no idea whether he was financially incentivised or not. It was just a thought.
-
Or why any of them would? I have asked this question time and again - there is no answer other than ....... 'something' might have happened at the cs that the police didn't want to get out'. No one knows what that 'something' was. Truth is, there is no reason. Yes, Stefan Kiszko was framed but in that case, they didn't have anyone else in the frame, whereas, you can't say that about the Bamber case. Also, to change from Sheila to Jeremy, EP came under a LOT of criticism and ridicule. It would have been easier for them to stay with Sheila.
There was nothing wrong with the soc at all.
How would it have been easier for EP to stay with Sheila post relatives, JM's testimony and External and Internal debris on/in silencer?
-
Correct Zoso. Bamber went back to Bolster his story, he was asked certain questions on the 7th and he wanted to put this in to his story, one was he was asked if Sheila could see him loading the rifle, in his second statement he adds, "as i was loading i would have been a side view to where Sheila was sitting, she would have had a good view of what i was doing"
I don't think DS Jones would just simply rely on the silencer to frame Bamber if he had access to WHF, it was always with other People when he was in there, and someone else would have to be in with it with him, [very risky] not only that, he got authorisation to hand WHF over to Mrs Eaton on the 12th of August i think? he had Access to get to Jeremy through his House phone [contamination of blood], Car, bike and clothing. Stan went away around the 15 th of August on Annual leave i believe and left Barlow with it.
It was the relatives that raised all aspects of the rifle, silencer, scope, magazine and ammo at a very early stage. Page 108:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The keys to WHF were handed over to the Eatons late noon on 9th Aug by DS Jones and DCI Jones. DS Jones explained the newly fitted alarm system. It would have been easy for DS Jones to slip in and out alone either before or after handing the keys over.
-
So what your saying then Cutie, Stan realises the silencer wasn't on the rifle and straight after the interview he goes over to WHF and contaminates the silencer on the 9th, he gained access to Sheila's blood first, contaminated the silencer with the hair blood and paint just before the relatives find it on the 10th? Or was they all in with it together?
No that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying the relatives introduced the subject of the rifle, silencer, scope, magazine and ammo on 8th Aug. The relatives, particularly AP who claims to have seen the rifle during the last weekend of July with the silencer and scope fitted, found the fact the rifle was found on SC without the silencer and scope fitted suspicious. This fact would not have fallen on deaf ears with DS Jones who soon realised how incriminating it would be for Bamber if he could connect the silencer with the soc.
DS Jones did not need any of SC's blood. He would know as an experienced officer that very small blood stains were incapable of being typed. A small bloodstain would only reveal that it was in fact blood and human in origin. He may well have pricked his own finger.
He could have contaminated the silencer on 9th at WHF or on 12th after he collected it from the Eatons. If the latter it would account for all the contradictory statements supplied by the relatives as to its appearance etc.
-
It was the relatives that raised all aspects of the rifle, silencer, scope, magazine and ammo at a very early stage. Page 108:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The keys to WHF were handed over to the Eatons late noon on 9th Aug by DS Jones and DCI Jones. DS Jones explained the newly fitted alarm system. It would have been easy for DS Jones to slip in and out alone either before or after handing the keys over.
He was with DCI Jones on the evening of the 9th interviewing Bamber, if he had handed the keys over to the relatives at noon, when did he slip in and out to do the deed? I will post the links later.
-
He was with DCI Jones on the evening of the 9th interviewing Bamber, if he had handed the keys over to the relatives at noon, when did he slip in and out to do the deed? I will post the links later.
He had many opportunities to fabricate the outside of the silencer whilst he was alone. Either on 9th or after he collected it from the relatives. The latter perhaps accounting for the various contradictory statements from the relatives about the finding of the silencer and its appearance.
I have always wondered what exactly he spent discussing with PE into the small hours drinking whisky. Surely anyone can see this is not how above board police investigations should be run?
-
So what your saying then Cutie, Stan realises the silencer wasn't on the rifle and straight after the interview he goes over to WHF and contaminates the silencer on the 9th, he gained access to Sheila's blood first, contaminated the silencer with the hair blood and paint just before the relatives find it on the 10th? Or was they all in with it together?
lol
-
lol
Lol that's Hardy Boy's interpretion.
There will never be a bigger lol than your theory that AE wrung out SC's menstrual stained knickers into the silencer. LOL
-
Semantics. The point being the subject of the silencer was extremely topical at the earliest of stages in the investigation. According to DS Jones' trial testimony, he and DCI Jones visited Bamber at Bourtree on 9th Aug to question Bamber re the second statement/silencer. This would not have fallen on deaf ears with DS Jones. He could see immediately how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect the silencer to the soc.
Where did he get the blood?
-
No that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying the relatives introduced the subject of the rifle, silencer, scope, magazine and ammo on 8th Aug. The relatives, particularly AP who claims to have seen the rifle during the last weekend of July with the silencer and scope fitted, found the fact the rifle was found on SC without the silencer and scope fitted suspicious. This fact would not have fallen on deaf ears with DS Jones who soon realised how incriminating it would be for Bamber if he could connect the silencer with the soc.
DS Jones did not need any of SC's blood. He would know as an experienced officer that very small blood stains were incapable of being typed. A small bloodstain would only reveal that it was in fact blood and human in origin. He may well have pricked his own finger.
He could have contaminated the silencer on 9th at WHF or on 12th after he collected it from the Eatons. If the latter it would account for all the contradictory statements supplied by the relatives as to its appearance etc.
Are you serious, he may well have pricked his own finger? He would be the first detective iv’e ever heard who puts his own blood at a crime scene?
-
Where did he get the blood?
He pricked his own finger and used that ;D ;D ;D
-
There was nothing wrong with the soc at all.
How would it have been easier for EP to stay with Sheila post relatives, JM's testimony and External and Internal debris on/in silencer?
I wasn’t talking about YOUR theory. There are more posters with ideas than just yourself. There are those that believe the police started framing Bamber from the start - that’s who I’m talking about!
-
He pricked his own finger and used that ;D ;D ;D
What is remotely amusing about that? You do not appear to understand the blood evidence and what was available to police investigations in a pre dna era. The only tests available were based on serology which is incapable of producing anything statistically individualsing. The nearest being groupings which are shared by 8% of unrelated white British population. Even then it requires a large sample of the right quality. Hence when the blood stains were analysed on the rifle they were incapable of being typed:
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful.
How many times do you think officers needed to send items to the lab only for them to come back with 'tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful' to fully understand what was required to get a result?
DS Jones would have been only to aware that tiny traces of blood would only show up as blood and human in origin. How would his blood implicate him?
Note the size of the stains on the rifle v the outside of the silencer,
-
I can't see Jones fitting Bamber without any type of monetary value going his way as I've alluded to earlier.
It would be hard for Jones to keep such money lying about. He would not want to bank it and if he kept it in cash and his wife found out or something questions would be asked.
In my view it would have had to been a substantial amount of money. This isn't fitting up somebody for shoplifting. It would of murder x5 and the person your fitting up is seen as a bereaved relative at that present point
If it transpired that one of the relatives had paid him to fit Bamber up then they'd be both fucked.
-
Believe if he had tried to fit him up it always come out of the woodwork eventually. Especially if Jones was a drinker.
-
Why would a copper cause himself such a potential amount of headache though lying?
-
I can't see Jones fitting Bamber without any type of monetary value going his way as I've alluded to earlier.
It would be hard for Jones to keep such money lying about. He would not want to bank it and if he kept it in cash and his wife found out or something questions would be asked.
In my view it would have had to been a substantial amount of money. This isn't fitting up somebody for shoplifting. It would of murder x5 and the person your fitting up is seen as a bereaved relative at that present point
If it transpired that one of the relatives had paid him to fit Bamber up then they'd be both fucked.
The incentive of money was just a thought. The overwhelming motivation for DS Jones was his total belief that Bamber was responsible:
@26.40 - I voiced my opinions and said I think Bambers involved. At that stage I was told not unless anything other evidence is forthcoming its still going to be treated as 4 murders and suicide. And to be quite honest with you for a month I went through hell. Because I was leading what I would call a double life I suppose knowing that he'd committed all these murders but trying to play ball with me job. I had to just pray that something else would come up very shortly to prove that I was right.
-
I can't see Jones fitting Bamber without any type of monetary value going his way as I've alluded to earlier.
It would be hard for Jones to keep such money lying about. He would not want to bank it and if he kept it in cash and his wife found out or something questions would be asked.
In my view it would have had to been a substantial amount of money. This isn't fitting up somebody for shoplifting. It would of murder x5 and the person your fitting up is seen as a bereaved relative at that present point
If it transpired that one of the relatives had paid him to fit Bamber up then they'd be both fucked.
I am not saying he was incentivised. It was simply a thought.
BW did report PE to EP, post trial, for selling off a lot of WHF plant machinery and Bamber's car below market value for cash. Of course this might have been simply convenient for seller and buyer, cash was king in the day, or to avoid paying tax. Although I can't recall what the tax rules were in the day regarding farm plant/machinery. Or it may have been he had a debt to settle that need repaying in cash!
-
He pricked his own finger and used that ;D ;D ;D
The special brew has kicked in early today it seems. :-\
-
It was the relatives that raised all aspects of the rifle, silencer, scope, magazine and ammo at a very early stage. Page 108:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The keys to WHF were handed over to the Eatons late noon on 9th Aug by DS Jones and DCI Jones. DS Jones explained the newly fitted alarm system. It would have been easy for DS Jones to slip in and out alone either before or after handing the keys over.
He was asked on the 7th during his giving statements about the silencer and scope before the relatives had met the police, and it was DCI Jones who brought it up again on the evening of the 9th. I know it was raised again by the relatives.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31214;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33758;image
-
What is remotely amusing about that? You do not appear to understand the blood evidence and what was available to police investigations in a pre dna era. The only tests available were based on serology which is incapable of producing anything statistically individualsing. The nearest being groupings which are shared by 8% of unrelated white British population. Even then it requires a large sample of the right quality. Hence when the blood stains were analysed on the rifle they were incapable of being typed:
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful.
How many times do you think officers needed to send items to the lab only for them to come back with 'tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful' to fully understand what was required to get a result?
DS Jones would have been only to aware that tiny traces of blood would only show up as blood and human in origin. How would his blood implicate him?
Note the size of the stains on the rifle v the outside of the silencer,
I'm quite aware of what was possible during blood testing, and yes i do find it amusing you accusing Stan of pricking his finger to inplant blood into a silencer as evidence. He was called to collect the silencer from the family, he didn't think it was of any value to the police investigation until he was told that there was blood on it, he also noticed the red paint on it, this was before he took it back to Witham, so the blood and paint must have been planted before the 10th when the family found the silencer, and your saying the blood inside the silencer and on the outside is Stan Jones?
-
The special brew has kicked in early today it seems. :-\
You fail to understand the blood evidence.
-
He was asked on the 7th during his giving statements about the silencer and scope before the relatives had met the police, and it was DCI Jones who brought it up again on the evening of the 9th. I know it was raised again by the relatives.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31214;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33758;image
Bamber did not mention the silencer and scope in his statement of 7th Aug:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1091.msg33705.html#msg33705
It was first raised by the relatives particularly AP.
-
Bamber did not mention the silencer and scope in his statement of 7th Aug:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1091.msg33705.html#msg33705
It was first raised by the relatives particularly AP.
I will rephrase that, he was asked on the 7th about the silencer and Scope,
-
I'm quite aware of what was possible during blood testing, and yes i do find it amusing you accusing Stan of pricking his finger to inplant blood into a silencer as evidence. He was called to collect the silencer from the family, he didn't think it was of any value to the police investigation until he was told that there was blood on it, he also noticed the red paint on it, this was before he took it back to Witham, so the blood and paint must have been planted before the 10th when the family found the silencer, and your saying the blood inside the silencer and on the outside is Stan Jones?
I am not saying he pricked his finger. I am saying he was forensically aware that small bloodstains would be incapable of being grouped. Therefore any human blood would suffice. All he needed to show was that a) it was blood and b) it was human. Obviously if he pricked his finger, job done. No of course he did not contaminate the inside of the silencer. How would he know SC's groups? Surely you can see with your own eyes from the diagrams I have uploaded ( rifle and outside of silencer) what has happened?
-
I will rephrase that, he was asked on the 7th about the silencer and Scope,
But Bamber did not initiate any conversation about the silencer and scope. The point that I am attempting to make is that the relatives seized on the silencer and scope very early on. DS Jones was aware of this fact. He was able to see how incriminating it would be for Bamber if the silencer could be linked to the soc.
-
But Bamber did not initiate any conversation about the silencer and scope. The point that I am attempting to make is that the relatives seized on the silencer and scope very early on. DS Jones was aware of this fact. He was able to see how incriminating it would be for Bamber if the silencer could be linked to the soc.
He put it in his 8th of August statement about the silencer because he had been asked about them on the 7th.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1091.0;attach=18249;image
-
I am not saying he was incentivised. It was simply a thought.
BW did report PE to EP, post trial, for selling off a lot of WHF plant machinery and Bamber's car below market value for cash. Of course this might have been simply convenient for seller and buyer, cash was king in the day, or to avoid paying tax. Although I can't recall what the tax rules were in the day regarding farm plant/machinery. Or it may have been he had a debt to settle that need repaying in cash!
In my view it must have been a significant cash lure or it just doesn't seem feasible
-
He put it in his 8th of August statement about the silencer because he had been asked about them on the 7th.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1091.0;attach=18249;image
Why didn't the police go to the farm and collect the sights and silencer once they knew of their existance, instead of waiting until the relatives handed them in HB?
This has always confused me!
-
He put it in his 8th of August statement about the silencer because he had been asked about them on the 7th.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1091.0;attach=18249;image
I have seen this floating about.
Do we know for sure he volunteered a 2nd statement or did he and police and have a conversation off the record and then it was a mutual agreement a second statement was given?
-
Why didn't the police go to the farm and collect the sights and silencer once they knew of their existance, instead of waiting until the relatives handed them in HB?
This has always confused me!
Because they didn’t think it was linked to anything, they only questioned why it wasn’t on at this stage, they was gone with it being a murder suicide, they never looked in the Gun Cupboard properly and they even left ammunition and fire arms. It wouldn’t happen today, but it was a very poor investigation Snow.
-
I have seen this floating about.
Do we know for sure he volunteered a 2nd statement or did he and police and have a conversation off the record and then it was a mutual agreement a second statement was given?
I don’t know for sure ILB, I think he was asked Questions after his statement on the 7th, he either thought later I wish I had put that in or he was asked Questions on the 8th and he wanted it to go to statement? He was asked something very simple on the 7th, would Sheila see him loading the rifle, he made sure that was put in on the 8th of Aug statement that she would be able to see him loading the rifle but his Mum and Dad wouldn’t be able to see him?
-
He put it in his 8th of August statement about the silencer because he had been asked about them on the 7th.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1091.0;attach=18249;image
Yes because others, particularly AP, could not understand why the rifle was found on SC's body without scope and silencer. Bamber did not initiate any conversations about the silencer/scope. Why would he? It was a very hot topic for the relatives from the off. As a result DS Jones seized on how incriminating it could be for Bamber if the silencer could be connected to soc.
-
Because they didn’t think it was linked to anything, they only questioned why it wasn’t on at this stage, they was gone with it being a murder suicide, they never looked in the Gun Cupboard properly and they even left ammunition and fire arms. It wouldn’t happen today, but it was a very poor investigation Snow.
How did the police know sights and a silencer existed in order to quiz Bamber about them HB?
-
How did the police know sights and a silencer existed in order to quiz Bamber about them HB?
You have the same material as me to read, if you read Anne’s statements, she say’s on the 7th of August he was asked about the sights and silencer for the rifle, whether it was a question to see if it had sights and silencer or it was a question raised at first and he replied and said they had to be removed to fit in the gun cupboard? So this was asked before any input from the family because he was asked this on the 7th . I don’t think it was Stan who asked the question, I think it was Clark? Taff asked him about the sights and silencer on the evening of the 9th.
-
You have the same material as me to read, if you read Anne’s statements, she say’s on the 7th of August he was asked about the sights and silencer for the rifle, whether it was a question to see if it had sights and silencer or it was a question raised at first and he replied and said they had to be removed to fit in the gun cupboard? So this was asked before any input from the family because he was asked this on the 7th . I don’t think it was Stan who asked the question, I think it was Clark? Taff asked him about the sights and silencer on the evening of the 9th.
I see HB.
So Bamber himself must have volunteered the info about the existence of sights and a silencer then?
Wonder how the interview got from leaving the rifle out to the fact it had sights and a silencer and didn't fit in the cupboard with them attached?
-
I see HB.
So Bamber himself must have volunteered the info about the existence of sights and a silencer then?
Wonder how the interview got from leaving the rifle out to the fact it had sights and a silencer and didn't fit in the cupboard with them attached?
It was Anthony Pargeter who first brought up the silencer and sights.
-
It was Anthony Pargeter who first brought up the silencer and sights.
Did he arrive on the 7th Dave?
-
Did he arrive on the 7th Dave?
I think if memory recalls correctly he had spent the weekend at WHF in the late July.
He and Jeremy spending some time together. Having a shooting competition
-
Did he arrive on the 7th Dave?
Yes.
-
Yes.
No AP did not arrive on 7th. AE spoke with him on the phone during 7th. He arrived at Oak farm on 8th and stayed overnight at Oak Farm.
-
Yes.
Thanks Dave!
-
No AP did not arrive on 7th. AE spoke with him on the phone during 7th. He arrived at Oak farm on 8th and stayed overnight at Oak Farm.
Thanks Cutie.
So who first brought up the fact that the rifle had sights and a silencer then? JB himself, just in general conversation during his interview?
-
You have the same material as me to read, if you read Anne’s statements, she say’s on the 7th of August he was asked about the sights and silencer for the rifle, whether it was a question to see if it had sights and silencer or it was a question raised at first and he replied and said they had to be removed to fit in the gun cupboard? So this was asked before any input from the family because he was asked this on the 7th . I don’t think it was Stan who asked the question, I think it was Clark? Taff asked him about the sights and silencer on the evening of the 9th.
David B mentions in one of his statements that Bamber was asked about the sights and silencer back at WHF at his first interview.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,774.msg20379.html#msg20379
-
David B mentions in one of his statements that Bamber was asked about the sights and silencer back at WHF at his first interview.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,774.msg20379.html#msg20379
That is no surprise.
The rifle would have sights and silencer on virtually all the time. It was used for shooting rabbits.
So a surprise the sights were not on the murder weapon & silencer was not next to Sheila.
The blood and paint were from back spatter & wrestling for the rifle.
-
David B mentions in one of his statements that Bamber was asked about the sights and silencer back at WHF at his first interview.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,774.msg20379.html#msg20379
I don't know what is hard for people to understand, it's there for everyone to see, questions were first asked about the sights and silencer by the POLICE on the day of the murders on the 7th, it's backed up by two witnesses. He would have been asked about these because he told the Police he had loaded the rifle to go shoot Bunnies, yet the rifle had been found without sights and silencer. He then makes another statement on the 8th to say the sights and silencer wasn't on the rifle. Ann would have told the rest of the family what she heard and the fact the rifle was minus sights and silencer ETC.
It must have been of concern to Taff at the same tome, because this is one off the questions he wanted to ask Bamber when he went with Stan to interview him at 7.30 pm on the 9th.
-
Thanks Cutie.
So who first brought up the fact that the rifle had sights and a silencer then? JB himself, just in general conversation during his interview?
No he was asked this question by the POLICE, without any input from AP, AE, DB or any family member. Why it wasn't put in his first statement i don't know, but it was added to his second statement on the 8th of August.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=774.0;attach=19460;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=774.0;attach=19461;image
-
Yes.
As far as i am aware Stan had a conversation with AE and AP on the 8th of August at Head Street?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35033;image
-
I don't know what is hard for people to understand, it's there for everyone to see, questions were first asked about the sights and silencer by the POLICE on the day of the murders on the 7th, it's backed up by two witnesses. He would have been asked about these because he told the Police he had loaded the rifle to go shoot Bunnies, yet the rifle had been found without sights and silencer. He then makes another statement on the 8th to say the sights and silencer wasn't on the rifle. Ann would have told the rest of the family what she heard and the fact the rifle was minus sights and silencer ETC.
It must have been of concern to Taff at the same tome, because this is one off the questions he wanted to ask Bamber when he went with Stan to interview him at 7.30 pm on the 9th.
The relatives were first to raise the question about the sights and silencer. There was no reason for the police to give the fact the rifle was found on SC sans sights and silencer a second thought because they were unaware of their existence.
With the exception of AE the relatives did not make statements until September. The statement AE made on 14th Aug does not even mention the finding of the silencer.
-
No he was asked this question by the POLICE, without any input from AP, AE, DB or any family member. Why it wasn't put in his first statement i don't know, but it was added to his second statement on the 8th of August.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=774.0;attach=19460;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=774.0;attach=19461;image
No it was not. It was the RELATIVES. AP phoned EP on 8th during the morning and that is how it first came to light that the rifle was found on SC sans sights and silencer. EP then arranged for Bamber to complete his second statement during the evening on 8th in the evening.
Sheet 33 in the following:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The relatives were all over the silencer from the earliest stage. DS Jones had plenty of time to work out how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect it to the soc.
-
The relatives were first to raise the question about the sights and silencer. There was no reason for the police to give the fact the rifle was found on SC sans sights and silencer a second thought because they were unaware of their existence.
With the exception of AE the relatives did not make statements until September. The statement AE made on 14th Aug does not even mention the finding of the silencer.
No surprise if the relatives were the first to ask.
They would know the rifle would have sights and silencer permanently attached. It was a rifle for shooting rabbits.
-
As far as i am aware Stan had a conversation with AE and AP on the 8th of August at Head Street?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35033;image
With regard to the sights and silencer this was first brought to EP's attention by the relatives. AP arrived at Oak Farm on the morning of 8th Aug and phoned Witham. He spoke to DCI Jones. Bamber was then asked to complete a statement regarding the sights and silencer during the evening of 8th Aug.
Page 33:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The above gave DS Jones plenty of time to work out how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect it to the soc which he did: external blood, paint and hair.
-
With regard to the sights and silencer this was first brought to EP's attention by the relatives. AP arrived at Oak Farm on the morning of 8th Aug and phoned Witham. He spoke to DCI Jones. Bamber was then asked to complete a statement regarding the sights and silencer during the evening of 8th Aug.
Page 33:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The above gave DS Jones plenty of time to work out how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect it to the soc which he did: external blood, paint and hair.
Is your narrative -
The relatives asked about the silencer.
SJ put his blood & the aga paint in the silencer. Then put it back in the gun cupboard.
SJ gave the WHF keys to AE.
The relatives found the silencer and gave it back to SJ.
-
SJ would have also put the grey hair on the silencer.
Can't remember if it was SJ or the relatives who lost that.
-
No surprise if the relatives were the first to ask.
They would know the rifle would have sights and silencer permanently attached. It was a rifle for shooting rabbits.
The reason Bamber gave for not having the sights/silencer attached was that it would not fit in its case (not the cupboard) with them attached. This was demonstrated at trial.
-
SJ would have also put the grey hair on the silencer.
Can't remember if it was SJ or the relatives who lost that.
The relatives do not mention the grey hair.
-
With regard to the sights and silencer this was first brought to EP's attention by the relatives. AP arrived at Oak Farm on the morning of 8th Aug and phoned Witham. He spoke to DCI Jones. Bamber was then asked to complete a statement regarding the sights and silencer during the evening of 8th Aug.
Page 33:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
The above gave DS Jones plenty of time to work out how incriminating the silencer could be for Bamber if he could connect it to the soc which he did: external blood, paint and hair.
A question was raised by the Police during his interview on the 7th. I’m not denying AP’s involvement at all, he certainly didn’t have any input on the 7th when the question was asked, if the rifle had sights and silencer.
-
The relatives do not mention the grey hair.
Please provide your narrative.
Either SJ fabricated the silencer & hoped the relatives would find it.
Or SJ fabricated the silencer & asked the relatives to say they found it.
-
The reason Bamber gave for not having the sights/silencer attached was that it would not fit in its case (not the cupboard) with them attached. This was demonstrated at trial.
A weak reason.
Strange having a case for a weapon which can't fit essential accessories.
-
A silencer would only take a few seconds to put on. Worth doing if going out to shoot rabbits.
-
SJ would have also put the grey hair on the silencer.
Can't remember if it was SJ or the relatives who lost that.
If Stan is pricking his finger to offer blood as evidence to fabricate Bamber a couple of days into the investigation, he mist plucked a hair out of his scalp to offer this as well.
-
question was raised by the Police during his interview on the 7th. I’m not denying AP’s involvement at all, he certainly didn’t have any input on the 7th when the question was asked, if the rifle had sights and silencer.
No, you are wrong. If you disagree please provide the evidence.
-
If Stan is pricking his finger to offer blood as evidence to fabricate Bamber a couple of days into the investigation, he mist plucked a hair out of his scalp to offer this as well.
If it was SJ's blood, surprising the experts were so specific - Sheila's blood with a remote possibility of being a mixture of June & Nevill's
Hope CC provides her simple narrative now.
-
If it was SJ's blood, surprising the experts were so specific - Sheila's blood with a remote possibility of being a mixture of June & Nevill's
Hope CC provides her simple narrative now.
I thought I made it clear DS Jones fabricated the outside of the silencer not the inside.
-
I thought I made it clear DS Jones fabricated the outside of the silencer not the inside.
Who fabricated the inside?
-
Another narrative is the relatives gave SJ a silencer & suggested he fabricate it. SJ agreed.
Don't agree with this either. But CC has SJ as the main person behind the fabrication.
Hope she provides her narrative now.
-
Regarding the relatives. They either -
Found the silencer which SJ had fabricated.
Agreed to SJ's request to testify they found it. When they had not.
Asked SJ to fabricate a silencer. In return they would agree to testify they found it with blood/paint on.
-----------
The most plausible is the first one. SJ would have had to have acted quickly. Then hope the relatives found it.
-
Who fabricated the inside?
Look at the size of the bloodstains on the rifle and the conclusion after testing. Hopefully this tells you all you need to know.
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful.
-
SJ would have had to have acted quickly. As a lone wolf.
If he wanted the relatives to find his fabricated silencer.
Seems he had made his mind up straight away -
Bamber guilty.
Must be framed.
How?
-
SJ was relying on the relatives finding the silencer.
He was then relying on the fabricated blood being a match to Sheila"s
He was lucky on both counts.
-
Unless CC corrects me with her narrative, she is agreeing the relatives told the truth - silencer found with blood & paint on.
However she believes SJ put the blood and paint on beforehand, rather than it arising during the massacre.
-
Unless CC corrects me with her narrative, she is agreeing the relatives told the truth - silencer found with blood & paint on.
However she believes SJ put the blood and paint on, rather than it arising during the massacre.
I am very dubious about the state of the silencer when it was found by the relatives because:
- It was found on 10th Aug
- Afaik the only relative to make a wit stat in Aug was AE. This was on 14th Aug and there is no mention of the silencer in any context.
- When the relatives did make stats in Sep these were contradictory with regard who saw what, when etc
- When the relatives testified at trial this again was contradictory
- When the relatives made stats for COLP these were again contradictory
- When DB has made contributions to the media over the years and discussed the silencer it was again contradictory
- Afaik none of the relatives refer to the grey hair
- DS Jones testimony contradicts the above
On the balance of probabilities I am more inclined to think DS Jones fabricated the silencer after he collected it from Oak Farm.
-
I am very dubious about the state of the silencer when it was found by the relatives because:
- It was found on 10th Aug
- Afaik the only relative to make a wit stat in Aug was AE. This was on 14th Aug and there is no mention of the silencer in any context.
- When the relatives did make stats in Sep these were contradictory with regard who saw what, when etc
- When the relatives testified at trial this again was contradictory
- When the relatives made stats for COLP these were again contradictory
- When DB has made contributions to the media over the years and discussed the silencer it was again contradictory
- Afaik none of the relatives refer to the grey hair
- DS Jones testimony contradicts the above
On the balance of probabilities I am more inclined to think DS Jones fabricated the silencer after he collected it from Oak Farm.
So SJ didn't fabricate the silencer prior to the relatives finding it.
What do you believe was on the silencer that the relatives thought worthy of handing to SJ?
-
So SJ didn't fabricate the silencer prior to the relatives finding it.
I never said that.
What do you believe was on the silencer that the relatives thought worthy of handing to SJ?
If they found what was claimed why not phone EP from WHF and leave it for EP to collect? They would probably send a patrol car with flashing lights. Maybe even the rotund one would resurface.
If they found what was claimed why not reiterate this to EP on the phone and why would the officer collecting not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label?
If they found what was claimed why did it take EP some 2 days to collect. Forensic evidence deteriorates.
-
I never said that.
If they found what was claimed why not phone EP from WHF and leave it for EP to collect? They would probably send a patrol car with flashing lights. Maybe even the rotund one would resurface.
If they found what was claimed why not reiterate this to EP on the phone and why would the officer collecting not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label?
If they found what was claimed why did it take EP some 2 days to collect. Forensic evidence deteriorates.
And why did DS Jones collect and not one of the officers tasked with collecting exhibits eg DC Bird, DS Davidson, DI Cook?
-
I never said that.
If they found what was claimed why not phone EP from WHF and leave it for EP to collect? They would probably send a patrol car with flashing lights. Maybe even the rotund one would resurface.
If they found what was claimed why not reiterate this to EP on the phone and why would the officer collecting not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label?
If they found what was claimed why did it take EP some 2 days to collect. Forensic evidence deteriorates.
So you are saying SJ fabricated the silencer prior to the relatives finding it. So the relatives are telling the truth.
Then SJ fabricated it more after the relatives handed it in.
-
So you are saying SJ fabricated the silencer prior to the relatives finding it. So the relatives are telling the truth.
Then SJ fabricated it more after the relatives handed it in.
Please stop twisting.
I see I am now CC and not Curiosity/CC.
I said on the balance of probabilities DS Jones fabricated the silencer AFTER collecting it from the relatives.
-
Please stop twisting.
I see I am now CC and not Curiosity/CC.
I said on the balance of probabilities DS Jones fabricated the silencer AFTER collecting it from the relatives.
In which case, it almost certainly already had blood on it.
-
Please stop twisting.
I see I am now CC and not Curiosity/CC.
I said on the balance of probabilities DS Jones fabricated the silencer AFTER collecting it from the relatives.
So what was on the silencer which the relatives thought worthy of handing into SJ?
-
In which case, it almost certainly already had blood on it.
What makes you say this?
-
So what was on the silencer which the relatives thought worthy of handing into SJ?
We don't know there was anything on the silencer worth handing into DS Jones. And I've know idea why he went and not an exhibit officer.
RWB mentioned in his diary notes that the silencer should be examined for tampon fibres. Sheila was having a period at the time of the murders. On 9th Aug AE identified a tampon applicator in the living room at WHF. This was clearly relayed to RWB and he came to the conclusion Bamber used the tampon to clean the silencer. Perhaps this is the reason the relatives wanted the silencer collected and examined.
-
We don't know there was anything on the silencer worth handing into DS Jones. And I've know idea why he went and not an exhibit officer.
RWB mentioned in his diary notes that the silencer should be examined for tampon fibres. Sheila was having a period at the time of the murders. On 9th Aug AE identified a tampon applicator in the living room at WHF. This was clearly relayed to RWB and he came to the conclusion Bamber used the tampon to clean the silencer. Perhaps this is the reason the relatives wanted the silencer collected and examined.
So the relatives handed in a silencer with nothing on. RB suggesting it should be examined for tampon fibres.
The results then say there was human blood and paint on the silencer. Due to SJ's fabrication.
SJ then asks the relatives to say they found the silencer with human blood & paint on. They agree.
-
Its pretty much set out in RWB's diary notes:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,246.msg1557.html#msg1557
-
So the relatives handed in a silencer with nothing on. RB suggesting it should be examined for tampon fibres.
The results then say there was human blood and paint on the silencer. Due to SJ's fabrication.
SJ then asks the relatives to say they found the silencer with human blood & paint on. They agree.
Why did AE not mention the finding of the silencer, blood, paint, scratches and hair in her 14th Aug wit stat?
-
Why did AE not mention the finding of the silencer, blood, paint, scratches and hair in her 14th Aug wit stat?
No idea.
Is your narrative -
The relatives handed SJ a silencer with nothing on.
SJ fabricated the silencer. Successfully.
The relatives agreed to say they found the silencer with human blood & the aga paint on.
-
So the relatives handed in a silencer with nothing on. RB suggesting it should be examined for tampon fibres.
The results then say there was human blood and paint on the silencer. Due to SJ's fabrication.
SJ then asks the relatives to say they found the silencer with human blood & paint on. They agree.
The relatives told the Police there was Blood on the silencer.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35034;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35035;image
-
The relatives told the Police there was Blood on the silencer.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35034;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35035;image
CC's narrative is that SJ & the relatives have lied.
The relatives handed in a silencer with nothing on.
The relatives agreed to say they found the silencer with blood & paint on after SJ had fabricated it.
-
I never said that.
If they found what was claimed why not phone EP from WHF and leave it for EP to collect? They would probably send a patrol car with flashing lights. Maybe even the rotund one would resurface.
If they found what was claimed why not reiterate this to EP on the phone and why would the officer collecting not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label?
If they found what was claimed why did it take EP some 2 days to collect. Forensic evidence deteriorates.
They was told to take everything to Anne's house by B. Cock, they then phoned the Police from Anne's house. The police didn't come to collect it for two day's, because the Policve was treating it as a Murder Suicide case at this time, they put little relavance into the finding of the Silencer.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19340;image
-
CC's narrative is that SJ & the relatives have lied.
The relatives handed in a silencer with nothing on.
The relatives agreed to say they found the silencer with blood & paint on after SJ had fabricated it.
That is not what I said.
Given Bamber was asked by EP to make a second statement about the rifle etc on 8th Aug it rather begs the question why AE's wit stat of 14th Aug makes no mention of a silencer in any context. And it rather begs the question why the relatives did not make wit stats about the silencer until about a month after it was found.
-
Why did AE not mention the finding of the silencer, blood, paint, scratches and hair in her 14th Aug wit stat?
Because her 14th of August consists of two pages signed by Anne, there is only one here or have i missed it? is there an other one?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2396.0;attach=23157;image
-
They was told to take everything to Anne's house by B. Cock, they then phoned the Police from Anne's house. The police didn't come to collect it for two day's, because the Policve was treating it as a Murder Suicide case at this time, they put little relavance into the finding of the Silencer.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19340;image
No they were not told to take everything to Anne's house by B. Cock. B. Cock was the accountant and was tasked with valuing the estate for probate. He asked for all valuable eg cash, cheque books. AE put away paintings and silver within WHF.
Page 45:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did AP phone EP about it on the morning of 8th Aug?
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did EP ask JB to complete a further wit stat about it on 8th Aug?
-
Because her 14th of August consists of two pages signed by Anne, there is only one here or have i missed it? is there an other one?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2396.0;attach=23157;image
P.47 AE's COLP Stat:
I have been asked why in my statement dated 14.8.85 is there no mention of the finding of the silencer. The only reason I can think of is that DS Jones was not convinced of our observations, hence it was really a nothing statement. I don't even think we spoke about it.
-
No they were not told to take everything to Anne's house by B. Cock. B. Cock was the accountant and was tasked with valuing the estate for probate. He asked for all valuable eg cash, cheque books. AE put away paintings and silver within WHF.
Page 45:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did AP phone EP about it on the morning of 8th Aug?
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did EP ask JB to complete a further wit stat about it on 8th Aug?
Maybe because they were guns and Ammunition, Cock thought it was better kept at AE house? Or DB lied on oath at Court?
-
P.47 AE's COLP Stat:
I have been asked why in my statement dated 14.8.85 is there no mention of the finding of the silencer. The only reason I can think of is that DS Jones was not convinced of our observations, hence it was really a nothing statement. I don't even think we spoke about it.
Well there you have your answer then, i just noticed that a page was missing that's all?
-
Taking the silencer & other items back to Oak Farm does not mean anything. AE & PE lived there.
Surprised they gave SJ a silencer with nothing on.
Also surprised SJ trusted the relatives to later say the silencer had blood & paint on after he had fabricated it.
-
No they were not told to take everything to Anne's house by B. Cock. B. Cock was the accountant and was tasked with valuing the estate for probate. He asked for all valuable eg cash, cheque books. AE put away paintings and silver within WHF.
Page 45:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did AP phone EP about it on the morning of 8th Aug?
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did EP ask JB to complete a further wit stat about it on 8th Aug?
I think the Police was happy with Jeremy's explanation at first, that the silencer wasn't on the rifle when he left, it all tied in with the murder suicide theory.
They didn't just ask him to make a statement about the silencer on the 8th, it was Bamber who wanted to add further to his statement, he wished to Clarify things, he was probably asked questions after finishing his first statement and wanted to clear these things up by making another statement?
-
Maybe because they were guns and Ammunition, Cock thought it was better kept at AE house? Or DB lied on oath at Court?
It was nothing to do with Basil Cock. He was the accountant. The relatives took all the firearms, ammunition, silencer and scope to Oak Farm. This to my mind seems the sensible thing to have done. It says a lot about EP that they left firearms in an unoccupied property. Especially given the firearms were not in any sort of secure unit.
In what context did DB lie on oath at court?
-
Because her 14th of August consists of two pages signed by Anne, there is only one here or have i missed it? is there an other one?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2396.0;attach=23157;image
I do not suppose you know where page 2 has gone?
-
I think the Police was happy with Jeremy's explanation at first, that the silencer wasn't on the rifle when he left, it all tied in with the murder suicide theory.
They didn't just ask him to make a statement about the silencer on the 8th, it was Bamber who wanted to add further to his statement, he wished to Clarify things, he was probably asked questions after finishing his first statement and wanted to clear these things up by making another statement?
There's no evidence JB wanted to make any further statements after his statement of 7th Aug.
His statement made on 8th Aug in the evening was on the back of AP's call to Witham on morning of 8th Aug.
-
That is not what I said.
Given Bamber was asked by EP to make a second statement about the rifle etc on 8th Aug it rather begs the question why AE's wit stat of 14th Aug makes no mention of a silencer in any context. And it rather begs the question why the relatives did not make wit stats about the silencer until about a month after it was found.
He wasn't asked to make a Statement just about the rifle, he said he wanted to Clarify his movements and actions he made at his parents house.
-
I do not suppose you know where page 2 has gone?
No i don't know where it has gone.
-
No they were not told to take everything to Anne's house by B. Cock. B. Cock was the accountant and was tasked with valuing the estate for probate. He asked for all valuable eg cash, cheque books. AE put away paintings and silver within WHF.
Page 45:
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did AP phone EP about it on the morning of 8th Aug?
If the police/family put little relevance into the finding of the silencer why did EP ask JB to complete a further wit stat about it on 8th Aug?
Perhaps he was concerned that some of his shooting equipment had been taken by the police on the 7th.
-
Perhaps he was concerned that some of his shooting equipment had been taken by the police on the 7th.
May I suggest you read the relevant documents.
-
No i don't know where it has gone.
Is there a second page? Matters not in the context of finding the silencer. We know from COLP AE did not mention it in her wit stat of 14th Aug.
-
He wasn't asked to make a Statement just about the rifle, he said he wanted to Clarify his movements and actions he made at his parents house.
This was all on the basis of AP's call to EP on the morning of 8th Aug eg Sheila's ability to operate the rifle etc.
-
I am very dubious about the state of the silencer when it was found by the relatives because:
- It was found on 10th Aug
- Afaik the only relative to make a wit stat in Aug was AE. This was on 14th Aug and there is no mention of the silencer in any context.
- When the relatives did make stats in Sep these were contradictory with regard who saw what, when etc
- When the relatives testified at trial this again was contradictory
- When the relatives made stats for COLP these were again contradictory
- When DB has made contributions to the media over the years and discussed the silencer it was again contradictory
- Afaik none of the relatives refer to the grey hair
- DS Jones testimony contradicts the above
On the balance of probabilities I am more inclined to think DS Jones fabricated the silencer after he collected it from Oak Farm.
In DB's statement of the 12 Sept he says he saw blood and paint on the silencer when it was found at WHF?
Something as important as this cannot be forgotten but in other statements and at trail it was at Oak farm the blood and paint was first noticed?
The silencer was also sticky? would fingerprint testing have caused this?
-
This was all on the basis of AP's call to EP on the morning of 8th Aug eg Sheila's ability to operate the rifle etc.
Wonder why he wanted to Clarify HIS movements and HIS actions if he was just making a statement about Sheila's ability to operate a rifle on the basis of AP's call?
-
That is not what I said.
Given Bamber was asked by EP to make a second statement about the rifle etc on 8th Aug it rather begs the question why AE's wit stat of 14th Aug makes no mention of a silencer in any context. And it rather begs the question why the relatives did not make wit stats about the silencer until about a month after it was found.
Again, you're saying he was 'asked' to make the statement, when he actually states that HE wanted to clarify things. He mentions both items in his statement, so this can't be just out of the blue! You can't just disregard what is said in the statements and make your own interpretations because they fit better with your own thoughts! David said that the items were mentioned on 7th and this is confirmed because Bamber mentions sights and silencer when he 'amends/clarifies' his statement the following day.
-
It was nothing to do with Basil Cock. He was the accountant. The relatives took all the firearms, ammunition, silencer and scope to Oak Farm. This to my mind seems the sensible thing to have done. It says a lot about EP that they left firearms in an unoccupied property. Especially given the firearms were not in any sort of secure unit.
In what context did DB lie on oath at court?
I don't know, would that be lying on oath when he said that Cock was there and he gave instructions to take everything to his sisters house, if you say Cock never gave these instructions?
-
There's no evidence JB wanted to make any further statements after his statement of 7th Aug.
His statement made on 8th Aug in the evening was on the back of AP's call to Witham on morning of 8th Aug.
There is evidence, because he made such statement and put in it that HE would like to Clarify his movements and actions.
-
May I suggest you read the relevant documents.
Such as? I seem to remember that his shooting materials were left at WHF because it was a condition of his licence. He also won a civil case against the Sunday Sport who claimed his rifle was on the premises. I seem to remember he said he always took the bolt home rendering it inoperable. It is clamed that he also had a SM and two magazines for bullets stored with Brno rifle.
-
Such as? I seem to remember that his shooting materials were left at WHF because it was a condition of his licence. He also won a civil case against the Sunday Sport who claimed his rifle was on the premises. I seem to remember he said he always took the bolt home rendering it inoperable. It is clamed that he also had a and two magazines for his stored with Brno rifle.
Here are a couple of quotes from the late and much missed MT
The following information will lead to the quashing of convictions/release from custody of Jeremy Bamber - Essex police seized Anthony Pargeters silencer from the scene, on the first morning of the police investigation (7th August 1985). it was Seized by 'DS Jones after he returned to the farmhouse as a result of information received from Jeremy Bamber, regarding the fact that there existed 'A SILENCER'and a telescopic sight belonging to 'THE GUN' (as evidenced by the witness, 'Ann Eaton, who went to 9 Head Street at 9.10am that same morning, and overheard that discussion). Two hours later (11.10am) 'DS JONES' left 9 Head street, Goldhanger, and returned to the scene to look for and collect 'that silencer' and telescopic sight, belonging to 'THE GUN' used in the shootings.
A Uniformed PC who had been instructed to keep a log of anyone who arrived or left the farmhouse building after 10.00am, recorded in his handwritten (timed events) log, records for the fact that 'DS JONES' did return to the scene at that time..
Years later, as a result of the 'COLP' Enquiry into claims made by 'Jeremy BAMBER' that Essex police and his relatives had fabricated the 'SILENCER', blood, and paint/scratchmark evidence, to get him convicted, 'DS Jones' was asked by COLP investigators, why he had returned to the scene at 11.10am, on that first morning of the police investigation, and 'DS Jones' claimed that he had no recollection of having done so.
THEY KEEP BLOCKING THIS INFORMATION FROM BEING POSTED...
Please Click on link (below), and type 'Open File', to view unfinished project
In Ann EATONS Witness Statement, she states the following:-
As a result of information received at about 9.10am on Wednesday 7th August 1985, I went to 9 Head Street, Goldhanger where I saw two plain clothes policemen and Jeremy Bamber discussing the deaths at white house farm and taking a statement regarding the same.
I cannot be precise of when it was said by the police or Jeremy but during the taking of the statement questions were raised about the Silencer and telescopic sites of the gun. Jeremy made replies to the effect that the Silencer and telescopic sights had to be removed from the gun before it could be stored in one of the cupboards.
'Ann EATON, knew about the existence of 'THE SILENCER' belonging to the gun she thought had been used in the shootings on the morning of 7th August 1985
'DS Jones' knew about the existence of 'THE SILENCER' belonging to the gun he thought had been used in the shootings on the morning of 7th August 1985
'DC Clark' knew about the existence of 'THE SILENCER' belonging to the gun he thought had been used in the shootings on the morning of 7th August 1985
Eaton, Jones, and Clark knew about 'A silencer' to a gun, by 9.10am, on the morning of 7th August 1985, because Jeremy himself told them about 'it'...
By 11.10am, that very same morning (7th August 1985) 'DS Jones, left Jeremy's cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger, and went back to the scene to collect 'THE SILENCER' (which subsequently became exhibit 'SBJ/1' and telescopic sight) that Jeremy had told them about. But he seized 'Anthony Pargeters' silencer, in error. This came about, because Police at the scene 'soon after point of entry' seized 'Anthony Pargeters' .22 bolt action (Brno model), as well as the .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt' rifle, and 'DS Jones' seized 'Anthony Pargerters' silencer which was recovered from the downstairs toilet/bathroom. One of the four 'exhibits' that 'DS Jones' took from whf that morning (in addition to the silencer ('SBJ/1'), was a photograph that 'DS Jones' had taken of the downstairs toilet/bathroom, where 'Anthony Pargeter' always kept his collection of guns, including his .22 (brno) bolt action rifle, accessories, and ammunitions.
'Jeremy Bamber' knew about the existence of the 'THE SILENCER' (which would later on become exhibit 'DB/1'), to his own families .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt' rifle before the tragedy, and also afterwards. He never spoke to 'DS Jones', or 'DC Clark' about the silencer belonging to 'Anthony Pargeters' . 22 rifle. 'Ann Eaton' does not mention anything about the existence of a second silencer when she was listening to the conversation between 'Jones', 'Clark' and 'Jeremy' at 'Jeremy's cottage on that first morning. Hence, why 'DS Jones' upon finding 'Anthony Pargeters' silencer (the original exhibit, 'SBJ/1' - 'Lab item number 22), in the downstairs toilet/bathroom on his return to the scene (7th August 1985), no further enquiries were made with regards to which silencer belonged to which gun, because as far as 'DS Jones was concerned he was only aware of the existence of one silencer ('SBJ/1' - Lab item number 22) after speaking with Jeremy in the presence of 'DC Clark, and in the hearshot of 'Ann Eaton'..
That 'mistake/error' only came to light after the seizure of 'THE SILENCER'- (Lab item number 23') belonging to the Bamber family owned .22 semi-automatic rifle, found by David Boutflour, in the gun cupboard at the scene (on 10th August 1985), was the self-same gun cupboard where the .22 semi-automatic rifle, telescopic sight and ammunitions were normally kept. It now seems almost certain, and without doubt, that at some point between 'David Boutflour, finding 'THE SILENCER ('DB/1' - Lab item number 23) which belonged to the .22 semi-automatic 'Anshuzt rifle, on 10th August 1985, and the 12th August 1985, when 'Robert Woodwis Boutflour went along to Witham police station, and informed 'PS Miller' that his son ('David Boutflour') had found 'a silencer' (Lab item number 23) at the scene a couple of days beforehand. Hence, why 'DS Jones, attends the 'Ann/Peter Eaton' residence later that 12th August 1985, evening and collects 'THE SILENCER ('DB/1') belonging to the Bamber family rifle. It becomes clear that by that stage, Essex police were in possession of two different lookalike parker hale silencers, ('SBJ/1' and 'DB/1'), one belonging to the Pargeter gun, and the other one belonging to the Bamber gun...
-
There's no evidence JB wanted to make any further statements after his statement of 7th Aug.
His statement made on 8th Aug in the evening was on the back of AP's call to Witham on morning of 8th Aug.
Well, there is because his he states that HE wanted to clarify his movements etc. on 7th. Your comment about AP above being the case, why did Jones and Jones visit Bamber on 9th to ask about the silencer/sights?
-
Well, there is because his he states that HE wanted to clarify his movements etc. on 7th. Your comment about AP above being the case, why did Jones and Jones visit Bamber on 9th to ask about the silencer/sights?
Taff visited because AP told him that the silencer and sights were fitted the week before the murders Zoso!
Taff asked Bamber who removed them!
-
Well, there is because his he states that HE wanted to clarify his movements etc. on 7th. Your comment about AP above being the case, why did Jones and Jones visit Bamber on 9th to ask about the silencer/sights?
Yes I am aware of the visit on 9th. Maybe DCI Jones arranged for DC Clarke to take a statement on 8th on the basis he was going to interview him about it on 9th.
I disagree that because the typed statement refers to Bamber wanting to clarify his movements and actions that he instigated this statement.
-
Yes I am aware of the visit on 9th. Maybe DCI Jones arranged for DC Clarke to take a statement on 8th on the basis he was going to interview him about it on 9th.
I disagree that because the typed statement refers to Bamber wanting to clarify his movements and actions that he instigated this statement.
You can disagree if you like, the point is you can't just dismiss it as though it were never said. However, the visit on the 9th was as a result of the meeting with the relatives. There would be no need for the visit if they were aware of the statement and Bamber saying the sights and silencer weren't on the rifle.
-
Taff visited because AP told him that the silencer and sights were fitted the week before the murders Zoso!
Taff asked Bamber who removed them!
And you're telling me this because?
-
And you're telling me this because?
Why anyone keeps saying Taff only went to interview Bamber because of what AP told the Police is just rubbish, Taff went to interview him on things he had told the Police outside WHF that morning as well, his first question to Bamber was............"Did he fire any shots that night at Rabbits" his second question was "where he left the gun and the safety of the gun" his third question was "when he took the gun out that night was the sights and silencer fitted, only the previous weekend they were seen on" the other questions were about the Magazine and the number of rounds fired ETC and the chat was about general family background, and then Sheila was brought up and this is when Bamber asked "Could you Chaps tell tell in which order they were KILLED" Only iv'e been to see my Accountant.................................
The main reason TAFF went was because a number of things Bamber had said in HIS statements, not because of what AP had said
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35034;image
-
The relatives do not mention the grey hair.
Yes they did, Anne was qusetioned on Oath and she said She looked at the Grey Hair with Stan, they both made comments about the Grey hair being there, so in Answer to your Post, the relatives DID mention the Grey Hair.
Although David did not see the hair, he say's he cannot bstand up here and say he saw the Hair?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19342;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=211.0;attach=19377;image
So, how did Stan get the Grey hair, Paint and Blood on the Silencer before the relatives finding on the 10th of Aug. He couldn't have done it on the 7th, he was interviewing on the 8th, he handed the keys over on the 9th and was with DCI jones interviewing Bamber on the evening of the 9th, the silencer was found on the 10th, which day are you going with?
-
Yes they did, Anne was qusetioned on Oath and she said She looked at the Grey Hair with Stan, they both made comments about the Grey hair being there, so in Answer to your Post, the relatives DID mention the Grey Hair.
Although David did not see the hair, he say's he cannot bstand up here and say he saw the Hair?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19342;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=211.0;attach=19377;image
So, how did Stan get the Grey hair, Paint and Blood on the Silencer before the relatives finding on the 10th of Aug. He couldn't have done it on the 7th, he was interviewing on the 8th, he handed the keys over on the 9th and was with DCI jones interviewing Bamber on the evening of the 9th, the silencer was found on the 10th, which day are you going with?
I was referring to pre-trial P.46 and P.47 of AE's wit stat
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
Surely the fact there are so many conflicting accounts about the exhibit that underpins the conviction tells you all you need to know about its reliability? Please note in AE's wit stat she states the paint immediately reminded of her of the paint around the Aga. Any yet roll on 6 years at COLP, when the heat was turned up, and she claims that was not really the case! Why say it then?
-
I was referring to pre-trial P.46 and P.47 of AE's wit stat
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.0.html
Surely the fact there are so many conflicting accounts about the exhibit that underpins the conviction tells you all you need to know about its reliability? Please note in AE's wit stat she states the paint immediately reminded of her of the paint around the Aga. Any yet roll on 6 years at COLP, when the heat was turned up, and she claims that was not really the case! Why say it then?
Doesn’t matter, your claim The relatives never mentioned the Grey Hair is totally wrong, your feeding information to bolster your stupid theory about Stan, your behaving like the CT and then others just follow and repeat what you accuse, instead of doing their own research. Show me Evidence about your claim Stan doctored the silencer, it’s your accusation.
-
Doesn’t matter, your claim The relatives never mentioned the Grey Hair is totally wrong, your feeding information to bolster your stupid theory about Stan, your behaving like the CT and then others just follow and repeat what you accuse, instead of doing their own research. Show me Evidence about your claim Stan doctored the silencer, it’s your accusation.
It does matter. All the statements, trial testimony, and COLP are contradictory.
And the trial testimony you uploaded claiming it originated from AE was in fact from PE. PE was not present when the silencer was found.
You are the one who is wrong.
-
Yes they did, Anne was qusetioned on Oath and she said She looked at the Grey Hair with Stan, they both made comments about the Grey hair being there, so in Answer to your Post, the relatives DID mention the Grey Hair.
Although David did not see the hair, he say's he cannot bstand up here and say he saw the Hair?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19342;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=211.0;attach=19377;image
So, how did Stan get the Grey hair, Paint and Blood on the Silencer before the relatives finding on the 10th of Aug. He couldn't have done it on the 7th, he was interviewing on the 8th, he handed the keys over on the 9th and was with DCI jones interviewing Bamber on the evening of the 9th, the silencer was found on the 10th, which day are you going with?
The above excerpts of trial testimony relate to DB and PE not AE as you claim.
PE was not present when the silencer was found.
-
And you're telling me this because?
I think my original question was, why didn't the police go and pick up the sights and silencer from the farm once there was a hullabaloo about them in the hours and days following the murders?
Even if the police didn't necessarilly see them as important at that stage,wouldn't they at least have considered them worthy of being crime scene exhibits?
As we can see,Mike claims that Stan went to the farm and picked up sights and a silencer once he found out of their existence!
This makes a lot of sense really!
-
I think my original question was, why didn't the police go and pick up the sights and silencer from the farm once there was a hullabaloo about them in the hours and days following the murders?
Even if the police didn't necessarilly see them as important at that stage,wouldn't they at least have considered them worthy of being crime scene exhibits?
As we can see,Mike claims that Stan went to the farm and picked up sights and a silencer once he found out of their existence!
This makes a lot of sense really!
They did.
-
They did.
Who did what Zoso?
-
Seems to me the sights and silencer were a bit like the buckets of clothing strewn over the kitchen floor,the police had first dibs at them, but ignored them like the plague, leaving Ann Eaton to deal with them and describe the bloodied findings in court even.
-
The above excerpts of trial testimony relate to DB and PE not AE as you claim.
PE was not present when the silencer was found.
I didn't say he was present when the silencer was found, he was there when it was handed over to Jones though and that's when the hair was discussed, Anne i think had to go to WHF the Alarm had gone off so i'm pretty certain Peter handed it to Jones? I got my P's mixed up with my E's statements wise, i had four up and clicked on the wrong one. Anyway you can read Anne's bit where she say's her Husband must have got it for the Police? So yes the relatives did mention seeing the Grey hair and it was mentioned more importantly at trial? Have you thought, probably no one thought no more about the Grey hair, it wasn't important, because when it came to make their statement hadn't the hair been lost, or they was honest and some didn't see it, i don't know just a thought really?
My only take on the Silencer and why the Police didn't rush to fetch it, maybe when the Family made the call to the Police on the Saturday, and it was a weekend and i don't know if the police was told about the Blood and Paint on it, i say this because how i understand it from Jones, they didn't think much off it, and i think [i will check when i have time] RWB went to Witham and wanted to know why they hadn't collected the Silencer on the Monday, he told them it had blood on it and i think this is when Stan was told to fetch it because it had Blood on it on the Monday? I think it was Anne who made the initial call to the Police about the silencer.
I could be wrong in all this, i haven't got time at the moment but i will try to put links up later or Tomorrow?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4069.0;attach=29943;image
-
Doesn’t matter, your claim The relatives never mentioned the Grey Hair is totally wrong, your feeding information to bolster your stupid theory about Stan, your behaving like the CT and then others just follow and repeat what you accuse, instead of doing their own research.
How dare you sir. The CT graveside reading, cake baking and CC making 4000 posts pretending to be guilter while guzzling crates of beer is the pinnacle of investigate excellence.
-
Who did what Zoso?
You asked the question lol
-
Seems to me the sights and silencer were a bit like the buckets of clothing strewn over the kitchen floor,the police had first dibs at them, but ignored them like the plague, leaving Ann Eaton to deal with them and describe the bloodied findings in court even.
Buckets of clothes strewn all over the kitchen floor? There were two buckets lol
-
It does matter. All the statements, trial testimony, and COLP are contradictory.
And the trial testimony you uploaded claiming it originated from AE was in fact from PE. PE was not present when the silencer was found.
You are the one who is wrong.
Peter Eaton mentioned the Grey hair in his witness statement, so No you are wrong when you say none of the Family mentioned the Grey hair, the Grey Hair was mentioned and available for defence at trial.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=774.0;attach=19451;image
-
Buckets of clothes strewn all over the kitchen floor? There were two buckets lol
Wasn't it three Zoso?
No matter,why weren't they emptied out by SOCO to look for bullet casings or other trinkets?
-
Just checked!
Two buckets, but still the same question!
-
Peter Eaton mentioned the Grey hair in his witness statement, so No you are wrong when you say none of the Family mentioned the Grey hair, the Grey Hair was mentioned and available for defence at trial.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=774.0;attach=19451;image
Hey Softy Boy, Peter Eaton did not mention the grey hair in his first wit stat so it is you who is in the wrong.
In any event I think it was quite obvious I was referring to the relatives who found the silencer not mentioning it in their wit stats. PE was not present when the silencer was found.
-
But hey lo and behold PE suddenly remembered weeks later he had indeed observed the grey hair ::)
-
I didn't say he was present when the silencer was found, he was there when it was handed over to Jones though and that's when the hair was discussed, Anne i think had to go to WHF the Alarm had gone off so i'm pretty certain Peter handed it to Jones? I got my P's mixed up with my E's statements wise, i had four up and clicked on the wrong one. Anyway you can read Anne's bit where she say's her Husband must have got it for the Police? So yes the relatives did mention seeing the Grey hair and it was mentioned more importantly at trial? Have you thought, probably no one thought no more about the Grey hair, it wasn't important, because when it came to make their statement hadn't the hair been lost, or they was honest and some didn't see it, i don't know just a thought really?
My only take on the Silencer and why the Police didn't rush to fetch it, maybe when the Family made the call to the Police on the Saturday, and it was a weekend and i don't know if the police was told about the Blood and Paint on it, i say this because how i understand it from Jones, they didn't think much off it, and i think [i will check when i have time] RWB went to Witham and wanted to know why they hadn't collected the Silencer on the Monday, he told them it had blood on it and i think this is when Stan was told to fetch it because it had Blood on it on the Monday? I think it was Anne who made the initial call to the Police about the silencer.
I could be wrong in all this, i haven't got time at the moment but i will try to put links up later or Tomorrow?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4069.0;attach=29943;image
Really? DB attempted to unscrew the end and yet failed to notice a hair attached? AE noticed the tiny blood stain and paint which she instantly recognised matched the paint surrounding the Aga but failed to notice the hair? ::)
-
Hey Softy Boy, Peter Eaton did not mention the grey hair in his first wit stat so it is you who is in the wrong.
In any event I think it was quite obvious I was referring to the relatives who found the silencer not mentioning it in their wit stats. PE was not present when the silencer was found.
What do you mean Softy Boy? Are we into name calling because you lost the argument, iv'e always refrained from calling you KE or Curiosity and defended what you have been called?
-
Really? DB attempted to unscrew the end and yet failed to notice a hair attached? AE noticed the tiny blood stain and paint which she instantly recognised matched the paint surrounding the Aga but failed to notice the hair? ::)
Read my post, i did say some were honest and said they didn't see it, they could have just simply said they seen it end of, who would question this when Stan had seen it.
-
What do you mean Softy Boy? Are we into name calling because you lost the argument, iv'e always refrained from calling you KE or Curiosity and defended what you have been called?
I didn't lose the argument at all. It was obvious I was referring to the relatives who were present when the silencer was found not mentioning the hair. Why would PE be relevant when he was not present when the silencer was found? Don't blame me for your poor reading comprehension skills.
Call me whatever you like Softy Boy.
-
I didn't lose the argument at all. It was obvious I was referring to the relatives who were present when the silencer was found not mentioning the hair. Why would PE be relevant when he was not present when the silencer was found? Don't blame me for your poor reading comprehension skills.
Call me whatever you like Softy Boy.
Ok thanks
-
Read my post, i did say some were honest and said they didn't see it, they could have just simply said they seen it end of, who would question this when Stan had seen it.
In case it escaped your attention DS Jones was not present when the silencer was found.
I am referring to what AE and DB put in their statements re the finding of the silencer and their observations of it back at the ranch Softy Boy.
-
In case it escaped your attention DS Jones was not present when the silencer was found.
I am referring to what AE and DB put in their statements re the finding of the silencer and their observations of it back at the ranch Softy Boy.
Really, good god i never knew that? Well that is a first.
-
Really, good god i never knew that? Well that is a first.
So why say DS Jones saw it as though he was some sort of reliable overseer?
-
So why say DS Jones saw it as though he was some sort of reliable overseer?
I know, i never knew Stan wasn't at WHF when the family found the Silencer, i'm amazed thanks for your information. Nearly 14 years iv'e been with this site and it's a first.
-
In case it escaped your attention DS Jones was not present when the silencer was found.
I am referring to what AE and DB put in their statements re the finding of the silencer and their observations of it back at the ranch Softy Boy.
Doesn't bother me one bit, that wasn't the point, the point was iv'e refrained from doing it to you, but don't worry i never go crying to the Mods like you just done when you was being accused of more than one account, i defeneded you about your accusation about alchol abuse from David. But yes it's a natural sign, once someone has lost and can't go anymore, they tend to name call. You said NONE OF THE FAMILY mentioned the hair and they did PE is family, he put it in his statement and he testified in Court that he seen it, now if that isn't enough for you, tough.
-
Some of this name-calling has to stop. I read a post this morning where she accused another member of suffering from mental illness. I hope moderators will act.
-
i defeneded you about your accusation about alcohol abuse from David.
Its not an accusation, its an observation.
-
Doesn't bother me one bit, that wasn't the point, the point was iv'e refrained from doing it to you, but don't worry i never go crying to the Mods like you just done when you was being accused of more than one account, i defeneded you about your accusation about alchol abuse from David. But yes it's a natural sign, once someone has lost and can't go anymore, they tend to name call. You said NONE OF THE FAMILY mentioned the hair and they did PE is family, he put it in his statement and he testified in Court that he seen it, now if that isn't enough for you, tough.
Crying to the mods? Alcohol abuse? What are you talking about?
-
Some of this name-calling has to stop. I read a post this morning where she accused another member of suffering from mental illness. I hope moderators will act.
Who is she?
-
Some of this name-calling has to stop. I read a post this morning where she accused another member of suffering from mental illness. I hope moderators will act.
Doesnt worry me in the slightest Steve, I was concerned about the meaning of the word, I’ve never heard it said that’s all, Softy Boy, is it slang for something? heard of Ball Boy or Handsome boy ;D ;D. But not that, so I took it as a name call and it was out the blue which surprised me.
-
Crying to the mods? Alcohol abuse? What are you talking about?
Hi Guys
There have been a number of posts recently about posters having multiple accounts and using these accounts simultaneously which is against forum rules. I can confirm I have never done this.
I assume, rightly or wrongly, that every post is stamped with an ip address visible to admin?
It has recently been confirmed by Admin that Munska and CC are not one and the same. It is now being said that Curiosity and CC are one and the same. Please can this be nipped in the bed as it detracts from the objectives of the forum.
Thank you.
-
Doesn't bother me one bit, that wasn't the point, the point was iv'e refrained from doing it to you, but don't worry i never go crying to the Mods like you just done when you was being accused of more than one account, i defeneded you about your accusation about alchol abuse from David. But yes it's a natural sign, once someone has lost and can't go anymore, they tend to name call. You said NONE OF THE FAMILY mentioned the hair and they did PE is family, he put it in his statement and he testified in Court that he seen it, now if that isn't enough for you, tough.
How many more times I was referring to those that were present when the silencer was found in their wit stats: AE, DB and RB. PE was not present. I was not referring to trial testimony or COLP. Just the wit stats re the finding of the silencer. You then start telling me I am like the CT.
-
Hi Guys
There have been a number of posts recently about posters having multiple accounts and using these accounts simultaneously which is against forum rules. I can confirm I have never done this.
I assume, rightly or wrongly, that every post is stamped with an ip address visible to admin?
It has recently been confirmed by Admin that Munska and CC are not one and the same. It is now being said that Curiosity and CC are one and the same. Please can this be nipped in the bed as it detracts from the objectives of the forum.
Thank you.
That is not crying to the mods. Crying to the mods is sending a pm. It detracts from the forum when there are endless posts about who is who. It is especially irritating when there's no truth whatsover in the accusations.
-
Crying to the mods? Alcohol abuse? What are you talking about?
Your Post
CAN THE MODERATORS PLEASE PUT AN END TO ALL OF THIS.
-
Your Post
CAN THE MODERATORS PLEASE PUT AN END TO ALL OF THIS.
Yes because it detracts from the forum when there is endless speculation about who is who. I do not ever recall sending a pm to a mod complaining.
-
Wasn't it three Zoso?
No matter,why weren't they emptied out by SOCO to look for bullet casings or other trinkets?
No!
-
Just checked!
Two buckets, but still the same question!
It's still no!
-
Some of this name-calling has to stop. I read a post this morning where she accused another member of suffering from mental illness. I hope moderators will act.
Pot calling kettle Steve. You have been abusive to myself in the past in fairness.
I've called Adam names, he has called me names. Sometimes debate and insults go hand in hand.
-
Pot calling kettle Steve. You have been abusive to myself in the past in fairness.
I've called Adam names, he has called me names. Sometimes debate and insults go hand in hand.
I don't recall, unless I have the onset of vascular dementia. Be specific.
-
I don't recall, unless I have the onset of vascular dementia. Be specific.
I don't mind any banter or name calling, i do try to refrain from it, i had never heard the word before, SOFTY BOY, i wondered why she used it, it's either the opposite of Hardy Boy or Innuendo............
There are other terms it refers to which i'm not putting up on here, and like i said names don't bother me, and i don't want the Mods to get involved i can fight my own battles, but i hope she remembers this before she goes crying to the Mods again.
Then you realize why she name called, because she was questioned in her accusation by accusing Stan of pricking his finger to fabricate his own blood onto the silencer and offer as evidence to the forensic team when he took the silencer back to his office.
HOW was it possible for Stan to do this if he is told to collect the Silencer from the family in the first place because there is BLOOD on the silencer? RWB went to Witham to see why the Police on Monday hadn't collected the silencer because there was blood on it, so how or why does Stan add his own blood to the silencer in his office like she has suggested when there is already blood on the silencer, the BLOOD is already on it? She has basically made a fool of herself.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35034;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35035;image
-
No!
Why has there been a suggestion that Jewellery and ornaments were in the buckets Zoso? Trinkets?
-
If you have a look DS Jones, he was trying to convince RWB that Sheila had done the murders,even on the Monday the 12th he had no idea that a silencer had been found, it was only when RWB went to see the police that Stan became aware of it, yet Cutie is saying that Stan pricked his finger in his office and fabricated the silencer, or nipped in at an earlier date at WHF to plant the blood on the silencer?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=20566;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=20567;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=20568;image
-
It's 39 years ago today that Jez was nicked as he returned on the ferry to Dover.
-
Hi Guys
There have been a number of posts recently about posters having multiple accounts and using these accounts simultaneously which is against forum rules. I can confirm I have never done this.
I assume, rightly or wrongly, that every post is stamped with an ip address visible to admin?
It has recently been confirmed by Admin that Munska and CC are not one and the same. It is now being said that Curiosity and CC are one and the same. Please can this be nipped in the bed as it detracts from the objectives of the forum.
Thank you.
Hello HB, hope you are well. ngb posted about this recently, to say he was not confident that CC is Curiosity. I don't think CC is Curiosity either. However, I think David and Adam had suggested they were the same. ngb also stated that he knows for a fact that Munska wasn't CC. We are hoping it will die off.
-
It's 39 years ago today that Jez was nicked as he returned on the ferry from Dover.
Well done for remembering. 12 months will soon pass and it will be a big milestone. I wonder if he will get a gift from the prison governor for long sentence? Maybe a clock?
-
Hello HB, hope you are well. ngb posted about this recently, to say he was not confident that CC is Curiosity. I don't think CC is Curiosity either. However, I think David and Adam had suggested they were the same. ngb also stated that he knows for a fact that Munska wasn't CC. We are hoping it will die off.
You know Curiosity is CC.
If she wants to talk to herself, it will not enhance her theories. But it does degrade the forum.
-
Hello HB, hope you are well. ngb posted about this recently, to say he was not confident that CC is Curiosity. I don't think CC is Curiosity either. However, I think David and Adam had suggested they were the same. ngb also stated that he knows for a fact that Munska wasn't CC. We are hoping it will die off.
Hi Roch, thanks, I’m out at moment, I will get back to you, I think you’ve miss read why I put it up
-
If you have a look DS Jones, he was trying to convince RWB that Sheila had done the murders,even on the Monday the 12th he had no idea that a silencer had been found, it was only when RWB went to see the police that Stan became aware of it, yet Cutie is saying that Stan pricked his finger in his office and fabricated the silencer, or nipped in at an earlier date at WHF to plant the blood on the silencer?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=20566;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=20567;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=20568;image
Morning Softy Hardy Boy
The above links are from RWB's statements produced for the COLP investigation. These are RWB's recollections some 6 years on. The heat was on and you see a somewhat less bombastic RWB. His diary entries are there for all to see and can be summed up in one word SICK.
A far more reliable source comes from the pathologist Dr Vanezis who produced a statement post trial stating DS Jones was the only dissenter from the murder/suicide theory but his reasons for dissenting held no evidential value. This was based on a meeting late noon 8th Aug. Moreover you can hear direct from the horse's mouth in Sky's Killing Mum and Dad which I have recently transposed and uploaded.
I have very good reasons for homing in on who fabricated the outside of the silencer: blood, paint and hair. In reality there are five possibilities:
1. DS Jones acted alone
2. The relatives acted collectively
3. DS Jones together with relatives collectively
4. DS Jones together with one or more relatives
5. One or more relatives
I am going for 1 or 4. DS Jones would have to be involved to have the level of knowledge required.
-
You know Curiosity is CC.
If she wants to talk to herself, it will not enhance her theories. But it does degrade the forum.
You're overdue for another gallop on your gish, Adam.
-
You know Curiosity is CC.
If she wants to talk to herself, it will not enhance her theories. But it does degrade the forum.
Hi Madam
Put it in a pm then.
-
Hello HB, hope you are well. ngb posted about this recently, to say he was not confident that CC is Curiosity. I don't think CC is Curiosity either. However, I think David and Adam had suggested they were the same. ngb also stated that he knows for a fact that Munska wasn't CC. We are hoping it will die off.
I'm absolutely certain that Cc isn't Curiosity, in the same way that it's a fact William defeated Harold in 1066. ngb will know.
-
I'm absolutely certain that Cc isn't Curiosity, in the same way that it's a fact William defeated Harold in 1066. ngb will know.
I'm reading a book about the Saxon resistance after 1066. Think I need an Anglo Saxon dictionary!
-
I'm reading a book about the Saxon resistance after 1066. Think I need an Anglo Saxon dictionary!
Plenty available online - https://www.lexilogos.com/english/english_old.htm
-
Well done for remembering. 12 months will soon pass and it will be a big milestone. I wonder if he will get a gift from the prison governor for long sentence? Maybe a clock?
By all accounts a model prisoner.
-
I don't mind any banter or name calling, i do try to refrain from it, i had never heard the word before, SOFTY BOY, i wondered why she used it, it's either the opposite of Hardy Boy or Innuendo............
There are other terms it refers to which i'm not putting up on here, and like i said names don't bother me, and i don't want the Mods to get involved i can fight my own battles, but i hope she remembers this before she goes crying to the Mods again.
Then you realize why she name called, because she was questioned in her accusation by accusing Stan of pricking his finger to fabricate his own blood onto the silencer and offer as evidence to the forensic team when he took the silencer back to his office.
HOW was it possible for Stan to do this if he is told to collect the Silencer from the family in the first place because there is BLOOD on the silencer? RWB went to Witham to see why the Police on Monday hadn't collected the silencer because there was blood on it, so how or why does Stan add his own blood to the silencer in his office like she has suggested when there is already blood on the silencer, the BLOOD is already on it? She has basically made a fool of herself.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35034;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35035;image
SoftyHardy Boy
Why do you keep uploading COLP statements? They are simply the individual's recollections some 6 years on. They are not evidence of anything.
- There seems little doubt the silencer was found in the cupboard at WHF by the relatives on 10th Aug.
- Afaik BW and BC were within WHF but I have not seen any statements from them about this blockbuster piece of evidence?
- The relatives did not make any statements until Sept with the exception of AE who made a stat on 14th Aug but no mention of the silencer
- When they did make statements in Sept they are extremely contradictory about who saw what when, where the silencer was stored after it was removed from WHF and who contacted the police to advise them of this blockbuster piece of evidence
- When DS Jones arrived on 12th Aug he did not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label. He improvised with the inner of a kitchen roll
- Instead of hurrying back to the station to secure this blockbuster piece of evidence he stayed at Oak Farm for some considerable time drinking whisky with PE. What was under discussion? DS Jones was not a family liaison officer and PE was only related to the Bambers by marriage.
- On 10th Aug for reasons unknown and quite unfathomable PE and CN camped outside WHF in CN's campervan. Not the 9th Aug when the firearms and valuables had not been removed or secured but the night after. Why?
It is you who continues to make a fool of yourself by living in denial.
-
Plenty available online - https://www.lexilogos.com/english/english_old.htm
Thanks, I saw one or two of those. I was going to get a book. Might try the online ones first though.
-
SoftyHardy Boy
Why do you keep uploading COLP statements? They are simply the individual's recollections some 6 years on. They are not evidence of anything.
- There seems little doubt the silencer was found in the cupboard at WHF by the relatives on 10th Aug.
- Afaik BW and BC were within WHF but I have not seen any statements from them about this blockbuster piece of evidence?
- The relatives did not make any statements until Sept with the exception of AE who made a stat on 14th Aug but no mention of the silencer
- When they did make statements in Sept they are extremely contradictory about who saw what when, where the silencer was stored after it was removed from WHF and who contacted the police to advise them of this blockbuster piece of evidence
- When DS Jones arrived on 12th Aug he did not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label. He improvised with the inner of a kitchen roll
- Instead of hurrying back to the station to secure this blockbuster piece of evidence he stayed at Oak Farm for some considerable time drinking whisky with PE. What was under discussion? DS Jones was not a family liaison officer and PE was only related to the Bambers by marriage.
- On 10th Aug for reasons unknown and quite unfathomable PE and CN camped outside WHF in CN's campervan. Not the 9th Aug when the firearms and valuables had not been removed or secured but the night after. Why?
It is you who continues to make a fool of yourself by living in denial.
Oh sorry i didn't know COLP statements was off limits?
-
SoftyHardy Boy
Why do you keep uploading COLP statements? They are simply the individual's recollections some 6 years on. They are not evidence of anything.
- There seems little doubt the silencer was found in the cupboard at WHF by the relatives on 10th Aug.
- Afaik BW and BC were within WHF but I have not seen any statements from them about this blockbuster piece of evidence?
- The relatives did not make any statements until Sept with the exception of AE who made a stat on 14th Aug but no mention of the silencer
- When they did make statements in Sept they are extremely contradictory about who saw what when, where the silencer was stored after it was removed from WHF and who contacted the police to advise them of this blockbuster piece of evidence
- When DS Jones arrived on 12th Aug he did not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label. He improvised with the inner of a kitchen roll
- Instead of hurrying back to the station to secure this blockbuster piece of evidence he stayed at Oak Farm for some considerable time drinking whisky with PE. What was under discussion? DS Jones was not a family liaison officer and PE was only related to the Bambers by marriage.
- On 10th Aug for reasons unknown and quite unfathomable PE and CN camped outside WHF in CN's campervan. Not the 9th Aug when the firearms and valuables had not been removed or secured but the night after. Why?
It is you who continues to make a fool of yourself by living in denial.
I think a lot of this can be put down to Miller, i don't think they put any importance to the finding of the silencer, even with the Possibility of Blood being on the exterior? I think he got slated for the fact this was sufficient to delay the release of the bodies for Burial?
It's standard practice by the Police to go back for statements at a later date, the CPS once looking at the evidence will always ask for more. But i do agree a statement should have been taken at the time, maybe Stan had the Holiday head on, he was going on Annual leave in a couple of days.
Even though Stan was blamed for a lot, he was only there for the first week of the investigation and then he was on Holiday, not quite sure but i think it's about the begining of Sept end of Aug he's back at work?
-
SoftyHardy Boy
Why do you keep uploading COLP statements? They are simply the individual's recollections some 6 years on. They are not evidence of anything.
- There seems little doubt the silencer was found in the cupboard at WHF by the relatives on 10th Aug.
- Afaik BW and BC were within WHF but I have not seen any statements from them about this blockbuster piece of evidence?
- The relatives did not make any statements until Sept with the exception of AE who made a stat on 14th Aug but no mention of the silencer
- When they did make statements in Sept they are extremely contradictory about who saw what when, where the silencer was stored after it was removed from WHF and who contacted the police to advise them of this blockbuster piece of evidence
- When DS Jones arrived on 12th Aug he did not go prepared with an exhibit bag/label. He improvised with the inner of a kitchen roll
- Instead of hurrying back to the station to secure this blockbuster piece of evidence he stayed at Oak Farm for some considerable time drinking whisky with PE. What was under discussion? DS Jones was not a family liaison officer and PE was only related to the Bambers by marriage.
- On 10th Aug for reasons unknown and quite unfathomable PE and CN camped outside WHF in CN's campervan. Not the 9th Aug when the firearms and valuables had not been removed or secured but the night after. Why?
It is you who continues to make a fool of yourself by living in denial.
Maybe a Red Flag for me, this is what makes me think there could have been nothing on the silencer when it was found at WHF, DB made a statement saying he found it and looked at it at WHF and the blood and Paint was seen, if it was seen, there is no doubt BC and BW would have been shown or known about such,
The family would know this as well, so maybe DB made the mistake when he made the statement and didn't follow what was planned, to switch such findings of the blood on the silencer to Oak Farm, that is why the confusion witht the statements, this way it keeps BC and BW out of it?
-
I think a lot of this can be put down to Miller, i don't think they put any importance to the finding of the silencer, even with the Possibility of Blood being on the exterior? I think he got slated for the fact this was sufficient to delay the release of the bodies for Burial?
It's standard practice by the Police to go back for statements at a later date, the CPS once looking at the evidence will always ask for more. But i do agree a statement should have been taken at the time, maybe Stan had the Holiday head on, he was going on Annual leave in a couple of days.
Even though Stan was blamed for a lot, he was only there for the first week of the investigation and then he was on Holiday, not quite sure but i think it's about the begining of Sept end of Aug he's back at work?
Even down to the 30th of August, RWB went to see Barlow for updates and to offer more information, he asked Barlow [who had taken over from DS Jones since the 15th] if they had any results from the Silencer test, Barlow hadn't a clue what he was on about, he didn't know a Silencer had been found, he sort of Bluffed his way through it and said Nothing had come back yet?
This is the level of importance they had put on the Silencer, rightly or wrongly that's why no statements were ever taken in my view?
-
Interesting posts HB.
-
It's still no!
'No' doesn't answer the question of why SOCO didn't search the buckets Zoso!
-
'No' doesn't answer the question of why SOCO didn't search the buckets Zoso!
I believe you said the clothes from the two buckets were "strewn all over the floor"? What do you think the police would find in empty buckets, and why would they search them?
-
I believe you said the clothes from the two buckets were "strewn all over the floor"? What do you think the police would find in empty buckets, and why would they search them?
Ah yes,got you Jane! Clumsily phrased,as ever!
Yes, all that I was asking was, why didn't the SOCO team search the two plastic buckets sitting on the kitchen floor?
I didn't mean that the clothes from the bucket were strewn all over the floor, just the buckets, which was a silly thing to say!
-
Ah yes,got you Jane! Clumsily phrased,as ever!
Yes, all that I was asking was, why didn't the SOCO team search the two plastic buckets sitting on the kitchen floor?
I didn't mean that the clothes from the bucket were strewn all over the floor, just the buckets, which was a silly thing to say!
Search the buckets for what?
-
'No' doesn't answer the question of why SOCO didn't search the buckets Zoso!
Well, given that Taff called 4 murders and a suicide - what would they be searching buckets for? And how do you know they didn't? Had they done, they would have found two pairs of kids jogging pants and a pair of dirty knickers. What would you expect them to learn from that?
-
Hello HB, hope you are well. ngb posted about this recently, to say he was not confident that CC is Curiosity. I don't think CC is Curiosity either. However, I think David and Adam had suggested they were the same. ngb also stated that he knows for a fact that Munska wasn't CC. We are hoping it will die off.
This shouldn't even be an issue now. Munska is someone I know away from the forum.
-
Even down to the 30th of August, RWB went to see Barlow for updates and to offer more information, he asked Barlow [who had taken over from DS Jones since the 15th] if they had any results from the Silencer test, Barlow hadn't a clue what he was on about, he didn't know a Silencer had been found, he sort of Bluffed his way through it and said Nothing had come back yet?
This is the level of importance they had put on the Silencer, rightly or wrongly that's why no statements were ever taken in my view?
That's not surprising when you consider for whatever reason(s) DS Jones did not enter the silencer exhibit into the correct record book. He was a very exprienced officer and would have understood the processes and systems. Why did he circumvent the system?
-
Interesting posts HB.
I mean youv'e got Stan, he's been accused of all sorts, but when you look at his timeline, he's had Wed, Thurs, Friday, on the case, he's obviously not Happy from what he's heard from Jeremy, but he's got nothing other than Suspecting Bamber.
He's relayed his feelings to Taff and goes Friday evening with Taff, hoping for Taff to agree with him, Taff went about the two statements and what officers had said and what AP had said about the rifle and Sheila, they then come out and Taff kinda cuts Stan short, "Still murder Suicide", the two statements matched as far as Taff was concerend?
At this point, Stan would feel a little deflated on the Friday Evening, but he's off work over the weekend on the 10th and 11th. He gets Back on the Monday, Probably resigned to the fact there is no evidence and then up Pops RWB, kicking off why haven't they been to fetch the silencer, there's blood on it, i think he went about 5.00pm to Oak Farm to fetch the silencer and he left at 10.30pm. He probably asked who found it, there is only PE there i think Anne had gone to WHF alarm trouble, and then returned, so Stan would say, i might need a statemnt at sometime of DB?
The 16th, he's on Holiday annual leave and doesn't return till the 2nd of Sept, so technically, he's spent about 6 days on the case and from 7th of August till 2nd of Sept he's away. Yet he's accused of being into all sorts and in it at every turn.
Barlow Takes over the investigation, Taff called Barlow in on the 24th i think to see how it was going, and Barlow is like Stan, not happy about Bamber, but has nothing on him. He comes away from Taff with the feeling that Taff wants him to keep plugging away and come back when you have something concrete to go to his Bosses with.
-
That's not surprising when you consider for whatever reason(s) DS Jones did not enter the silencer exhibit into the correct record book. He was a very exprienced officer and would have understood the processes and systems. Why did he circumvent the system?
Yes, i'm not saying it wasn't poor Police work, i think and this is my own personnel opinion, Taff had dampened any enthusiasm about the case, Taff came away Friday and was Adament it was Murder Suicide and Bamber was innocent.
Stan is off work Sat and Sun, he comes back Monday and he's thinking about his annual leave on Thursday and he will not see the case till Sept 2nd. I think Stan, and it's a classic and Happens, thought i'll leave it with them. Not saying the case, sometimes when people are handing over, they don't tell everything, they try to Make themselves look smarter than that other person?
When i worked in the Coal Mines, the two week Annual leave in August was something you looked forward to all Year, two weeks off work was like winning the Lottery, two weeks before the Annual Leave we called it Bull Week, everyone worked as much as they could and this was the wage you took with you on Holiday. The next week, the week before you was off, we used to say it's wind down week, in other words, no one gave a FK and it didn't matter ;D ;D ;D
-
Yes, i'm not saying it wasn't poor Police work, i think and this is my own personnel opinion, Taff had dampened any enthusiasm about the case, Taff came away Friday and was Adament it was Murder Suicide and Bamber was innocent.
Stan is off work Sat and Sun, he comes back Monday and he's thinking about his annual leave on Thursday and he will not see the case till Sept 2nd. I think Stan, and it's a classic and Happens, thought i'll leave it with them. Not saying the case, sometimes when people are handing over, they don't tell everything, they try to Make themselves look smarter than that other person?
When i worked in the Coal Mines, the two week Annual leave in August was something you looked forward to all Year, two weeks off work was like winning the Lottery, two weeks before the Annual Leave we called it Bull Week, everyone worked as much as they could and this was the wage you took with you on Holiday. The next week, the week before you was off, we used to say it's wind down week, in other words, no one gave a FK and it didn't matter ;D ;D ;D
Gentle reminder! NEVER buy anything made on Friday afternoons!!! :))
-
Yes, i'm not saying it wasn't poor Police work, i think and this is my own personnel opinion, Taff had dampened any enthusiasm about the case, Taff came away Friday and was Adament it was Murder Suicide and Bamber was innocent.
Stan is off work Sat and Sun, he comes back Monday and he's thinking about his annual leave on Thursday and he will not see the case till Sept 2nd. I think Stan, and it's a classic and Happens, thought i'll leave it with them. Not saying the case, sometimes when people are handing over, they don't tell everything, they try to Make themselves look smarter than that other person?
When i worked in the Coal Mines, the two week Annual leave in August was something you looked forward to all Year, two weeks off work was like winning the Lottery, two weeks before the Annual Leave we called it Bull Week, everyone worked as much as they could and this was the wage you took with you on Holiday. The next week, the week before you was off, we used to say it's wind down week, in other words, no one gave a FK and it didn't matter ;D ;D ;D
It appears DS Jones was the relatives go-to officer. Perhaps because he was the only one prepared to condone their theories. DS Jones was not a SOCO officer. Why did he go to Oak Farm to pick up the silencer? And why did he not go prepared with an exhibit bag and label?
We have the finding of the silencer on Sat 10th Aug circa noon. This appears reliable. We then have the collection of the silencer from Oak Farm on Mon 12th Aug circa late noon/early eve. This appears reliable. A window of around 48 hours where we have an unexplained and unfathomable overnight camp at WHF involving PE and an extended stay by DS Jones drinking whisky with PE well into the night at Oak Farm. My instincts tell me something very dodgy was going on.
Bamber's conviction hangs on the blood said to have been found inside the silencer and matchings SC's groups. Tests now show this was fabricated. I think we are only going to find out who fabricated the blood on the outside, paint, scratches and hair when CCRC/CoA interview the Eatons, DB, BC and BW. Sadly DS Jones is no longer alive so will escape any justice coming his way. I believe the Eatons, DB and BW are still alive. RWB is deceased. I'm unsure about BC.
It would almost certainly have involved DS Jones as he was the only one with the knowledge:
- access to soc images to check area to be scratched
- aware of no visible blood on/in rifle/barrel
- aware small blood stains were incapable of proving anything beyond confirmation the stain was blood and human in origin
-
It appears DS Jones was the relatives go-to officer. Perhaps because he was the only one prepared to condone their theories. DS Jones was not a SOCO officer. Why did he go to Oak Farm to pick up the silencer? And why did he not go prepared with an exhibit bag and label?
We have the finding of the silencer on Sat 10th Aug circa noon. This appears reliable. We then have the collection of the silencer from Oak Farm on Mon 12th Aug circa late noon/early eve. This appears reliable. A window of around 48 hours where we have an unexplained and unfathomable overnight camp at WHF involving PE and an extended stay by DS Jones drinking whisky with PE well into the night at Oak Farm. My instincts tell me something very dodgy was going on.
Bamber's conviction hangs on the blood said to have been found inside the silencer and matchings SC's groups. Tests now show this was fabricated. I think we are only going to find out who fabricated the blood on the outside, paint, scratches and hair when CCRC/CoA interview the Eatons, DB, BC and BW. Sadly DS Jones is no longer alive so will escape any justice coming his way. I believe the Eatons, DB and BW are still alive. RWB is deceased. I'm unsure about BC.
It would almost certainly have involved DS Jones as he was the only one with the knowledge:
- access to soc images to check area to be scratched
- aware of no visible blood on/in rifle/barrel
- aware small blood stains were incapable of proving anything beyond confirmation the stain was blood and human in origin
There is over 200 pieces of evidence against him. Nearly 100 forensic. All sourced. Together with multiple witnesses.
This is why his appeals have covered so many different areas looking for a technicality.
There was also paint in the silencer.
But appreciate you will focus on SJ fabricating the silencer with his blood.
-
There is over 200 pieces of evidence against him. Nearly 100 forensic. All sourced. Together with multiple witnesses.
This is why his appeals have covered so many different areas looking for a technicality.
There was also paint in the silencer.
But appreciate you will focus on SJ fabricating the silencer with his blood.
200 pieces of evidence
68 pieces of evidence
37 pieces of evidence
64 pieces of evidence
92 pieces of evidence
16 pieces of evidence
489 pieces of evidence
8 pieces of evidence
55 pieces of evidence
-
There is over 200 pieces of evidence against him. Nearly 100 forensic. All sourced. Together with multiple witnesses.
This is why his appeals have covered so many different areas looking for a technicality.
There was also paint in the silencer.
But appreciate you will focus on SJ fabricating the silencer with his blood.
Imo Bamber has been poorly advised and supported over the years. He is incredibly lucky to have someone like me on the 'A' team. Like most convictions, Bamber's hangs on a tiny piece of forensic evidence. Namely a flake of blood said to have been found inside the silencer which matched SC's blood groups. It is this and this alone that the case stands or falls on. All the rest is a sideshow. I am in the process of writing to him to remind him of this fact.
This can be evidenced by the judge's summing up (blood flake). Jurors question to the judge (blood flake). And the fact the CCRC referral to the CoA in 2002 was based on this very matter (blood flake).
-
Imo Bamber has been poorly advised and supported over the years. He is incredibly lucky to have someone like me on the 'A' team. Like most convictions, Bamber's hangs on a tiny piece of forensic evidence. Namely a flake of blood said to have been found inside the silencer which matched SC's blood groups. It is this and this alone that the case stands or falls on. All the rest is a sideshow. I am in the process of writing to him to remind him of this fact.
This can be evidenced by the judge's summing up (blood flake). Jurors question to the judge (blood flake). And the fact the CCRC referral to the CoA in 2002 was based on this very matter (blood flake).
I think confessing to his girlfriend is very strong evidence in fairness.
Arlidge was on record saying " this was the strongest piece of evidence in his view"
But Justice Drakes " on the evidence of the silencer alone you may convict Mr Bamber" speaks for itself
-
Imo Bamber has been poorly advised and supported over the years. He is incredibly lucky to have someone like me on the 'A' team.
Why is Jeremy Bamber lucky to have you and what have you done for him? Out of interest?
-
Baked him a burnt cake?
-
I think confessing to his girlfriend is very strong evidence in fairness.
Arlidge was on record saying " this was the strongest piece of evidence in his view"
But Justice Drakes " on the evidence of the silencer alone you may convict Mr Bamber" speaks for itself
Alledgedly.
Exactly.
-
Why is Jeremy Bamber lucky to have you and what have you done for him? Out of interest?
A better question might be, what haven't I done!!!???
-
Baked him a burnt cake?
Do you think SJ fabricated the silencer?
-
Do you think SJ fabricated the silencer?
Of course NOT! The only thing that's fictional and fabricated is Cc's skewed view.
-
Of course NOT! The only thing that's fictional and fabricated is Cc's skewed view.
Do you think Bamber shot the twins first or last?
-
Do you think SJ fabricated the silencer?
The so-called 'silencer evidence' falls into two distinct parts:
Part 1 which was forensically examined on 13th Aug:
- Blood on the OUTSIDE
- Paint - OUTSIDE
- Scratches - OUTSIDE
Part 2 which was forensically examined on/around 14th Sep:
- Blood on the INSIDE
Which part are you referring to?
-
Do you think Bamber shot the twins first or last?
It doesn't matter when they were shot. But if he hadn't, they would be here today (barring illness and accidents) and enjoying their lives which he swept away purely for greed.
-
The so-called 'silencer evidence' falls into two distinct parts:
Part 1 which was forensically examined on 13th Aug:
- Blood on the OUTSIDE
- Hair - OUTSIDE
- Paint - OUTSIDE
- Scratches - OUTSIDE
Part 2 which was forensically examined on/around 14th Sep:
- Blood on the INSIDE
Which part are you referring to?
The Hair was lost, so how was this Forensically examined?
-
The Hair was lost, so how was this Forensically examined?
Yes my mistake. I will amend my post.
-
Yes my mistake. I will amend my post.
Who Forensically examined the Paint, blood and scratches on the 13th of Aug then?
-
A better question might be, what haven't I done!!!???
I have no idea?
Have you represented him in a professional capacity?
We're you in a relationship with him?
Have you funded him?
Have you campaigned for him?
Just genuinely curious
-
Who Forensically examined the Paint, blood and scratches on the 13th of Aug then?
Well I am not sure if there has ever been any particular examination of the scratches, but the blood was examined by Glynis Howard. The paint did not fall under her area of expertise so from memory I think she just removed it for forensic examination by one of the other scientists. Don't forget a control sample hadn't been taken from WHF at this stage.
-
Do you think Bamber shot the twins first or last?
What was the consensus on the boxroom post on the FB group?
-
Well I am not sure if there has ever been any particular examination of the scratches, but the blood was examined by Glynis Howard. The paint did not fall under her area of expertise so from memory I think she just removed it for forensic examination by one of the other scientists. Don't forget a control sample hadn't been taken from WHF at this stage.
Yes i think she did examine it on the 13th, i thought it was just a Peliminary exam though? But after reading again, i'm not sure?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=461.0;attach=18805;image
-
I have no idea?
It shows.
Have you represented him in a professional capacity?
Do I sound professional?
We're you in a relationship with him?
You mean like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T396I1jfhNA
Nah.
Have you funded him?
He once thanked me for sending stamps when I never sent any and haven't since.
Have you campaigned for him?
You mean like this?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3472521/Mass-murder-Jeremy-Bamber-sends-supporter-read-bizarre-rant-grave-parents-killed-blaming-sister-murdered-mass-killing.html
Nah.
Just genuinely curious
Well now you know.
-
Yes i think she did examine it on the 13th, i thought it was just a Peliminary exam though? But after reading again, i'm not sure?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=461.0;attach=18805;image
Please refer to her trial testimony.
-
It shows.
Do I sound professional?
You mean like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T396I1jfhNA
Nah.
He once thanked me for sending stamps when I never sent any and haven't since.
You mean like this?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3472521/Mass-murder-Jeremy-Bamber-sends-supporter-read-bizarre-rant-grave-parents-killed-blaming-sister-murdered-mass-killing.html
Nah.
Well now you know.
Did he reject you?
-
Did he reject you?
In what capacity?
-
Please refer to her trial testimony.
Yes i re read it thanks. So what we are left with if you think Stan Planted the blood and Paint on his OWN, from 10.30pm on Monday evening the 12th when he leaves PE, to 9.15am in the morning the next day on the 13th when he hands it to Cook? Unless you now think the relatives were involved with him?
-
That's not surprising when you consider for whatever reason(s) DS Jones did not enter the silencer exhibit into the correct record book. He was a very exprienced officer and would have understood the processes and systems. Why did he circumvent the system?
How do you know he would have know? People make errors everyday why does it have to be that he ‘circumvented’ the system?
-
Imo Bamber has been poorly advised and supported over the years. He is incredibly lucky to have someone like me on the 'A' team. Like most convictions, Bamber's hangs on a tiny piece of forensic evidence. Namely a flake of blood said to have been found inside the silencer which matched SC's blood groups. It is this and this alone that the case stands or falls on. All the rest is a sideshow. I am in the process of writing to him to remind him of this fact.
This can be evidenced by the judge's summing up (blood flake). Jurors question to the judge (blood flake). And the fact the CCRC referral to the CoA in 2002 was based on this very matter (blood flake).
I hope that A Team comment was a joke? 😆😆
-
I hope that A Team comment was a joke? 😆😆
Ye, here Jeremy i'm taking over, sack your Legal and bin the CT, it was Stan who pricked his finger and smeared the silencer, it's Stans blood on the silencer. I don't know when he put the paint on it but it's deffo him. CC
-
Yes i re read it thanks. So what we are left with if you think Stan Planted the blood and Paint on his OWN, from 10.30pm on Monday evening the 12th when he leaves PE, to 9.15am in the morning the next day on the 13th when he hands it to Cook? Unless you now think the relatives were involved with him?
I didn't say on his OWN. I said he had to have been involved to have the level of inside knowledge and forensic awareness that the relatives could not possibly have had. As I said we will probably never know until such time that the survivors are hauled before the CCRC/CoA to give evidence. And even then it will be a case of breaking them down. According to DB's contribution to the New Yorker there's no love lost between him and his sister so this could assist. Divide and conquer. Plus they are all getting on in years now. I think DB might be a bit of a believer too.
-
Ye, here Jeremy i'm taking over, sack your Legal and bin the CT, it was Stan who pricked his finger and smeared the silencer, it's Stans blood on the silencer. I don't know when he put the paint on it but it's deffo him. CC
But you seem to overlook that JB's conviction has never been underpinned on the external contaminants.
-
How do you know he would have know? People make errors everyday why does it have to be that he ‘circumvented’ the system?
He was an experienced officer. Circa a quarter of a century under his belt. It stands to reason he would be offay with the 'property register'.
Why did he go to Oak farm to collect the silencer? He was not a SOCO officer. Why did he not take an exhibit bag and label?
-
He was an experienced officer. Circa a quarter of a century under his belt. It stands to reason he would be offay with the 'property register'.
Why did he go to Oak farm to collect the silencer? He was not a SOCO officer. Why did he not take an exhibit bag and label?
But stupid enough to offer his own blood to ne forensically tested in a murder imquiry.
5.00pm Monday night, would Soco be on hand, why would it need SOCO to collect something that the Family have handled like a Baton?
This was Essex Police remember, the Clousea squad, even Bird the photographer was allowed to collect exhibits.
-
I know Basil Cock was the Accountant, but i always though he was the Executor as well, Mike has always refered him as the Executor and others on here have, RWB refers to him being the Executor as well in Court, was he or wasn't he, does anyone know, he seems to be the one everyone goes through which is usually the Executors job?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=12318.0;attach=60141;image
-
I didn't say on his OWN. I said he had to have been involved to have the level of inside knowledge and forensic awareness that the relatives could not possibly have had. As I said we will probably never know until such time that the survivors are hauled before the CCRC/CoA to give evidence. And even then it will be a case of breaking them down. According to DB's contribution to the New Yorker there's no love lost between him and his sister so this could assist. Divide and conquer. Plus they are all getting on in years now. I think DB might be a bit of a believer too.
Yes you did, you said ONE and FOUR which means number ONE he acted alone, why do you move the Goal posts all the time? It's because whenever your proved wrong you will not accept it and want to change things, but don't worry it gets spotted.
I bet your Glad you moved from RED to Blue, at least on here your getting Educated
1. DS Jones acted alone
2. The relatives acted collectively
3. DS Jones together with relatives collectively
4. DS Jones together with one or more relatives
5. One or more relatives
I am going for 1 or 4. DS Jones would have to be involved to have the level of knowledge required.
No. DS Jones acted COMPLETLEY alone was responsible for the blood, paint and hair on the outside.
-
But stupid enough to offer his own blood to ne forensically tested in a murder imquiry.
How many more times? Back in the day, pre DNA, it was not possible for forensics to stastically individualise bloodstains. It was only possible to group and these groups were shared by approx 8% of unrelated white British population. And even this required good quality bloodstains of a particular size. Hence when the bloodstains on the rifle were examined the test results came back:
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful.
Please pay careful attention to the size of the bloodstains on the rifle and silencer. DS Jones would know that the tiny bloodstains he contaminated the outside of the silencer with were too small to show anything other than the stain was in fact blood and human in origin.
5.00pm Monday night, would Soco be on hand, why would it need SOCO to collect something that the Family have handled like a Baton?
When did the relatives make the call? It was SOCO's role to handle exhibits.
This was Essex Police remember, the Clousea squad, even Bird the photographer was allowed to collect exhibits.
I thought DC Bird was a SOCO officer?
-
< = less than!
-
I know Basil Cock was the Accountant, but i always though he was the Executor as well, Mike has always refered him as the Executor and others on here have, RWB refers to him being the Executor as well in Court, was he or wasn't he, does anyone know, he seems to be the one everyone goes through which is usually the Executors job?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=12318.0;attach=60141;image
Its not unusual (I saw Tom Jones in concert during the summer) for accountants to also take on the role of executor. Basically just an administrator for sorting out the estate.
-
It doesn't matter when they were shot. But if he hadn't, they would be here today (barring illness and accidents) and enjoying their lives which he swept away purely for greed.
Agree if Bamber had not shot the twins, they would still be here today.
Me & Steve believe he shot them first. Once each.
CAL believes he shot them once each after shooting Nevill & June 9 times.
How long do you think Bamber hit Nevill for with the rifle.
-
Yes you did, you said ONE and FOUR which means number ONE he acted alone, why do you move the Goal posts all the time? It's because whenever your proved wrong you will not accept it and want to change things, but don't worry it gets spotted.
I bet your Glad you moved from RED to Blue, at least on here your getting Educated
1. DS Jones acted alone
2. The relatives acted collectively
3. DS Jones together with relatives collectively
4. DS Jones together with one or more relatives
5. One or more relatives
I am going for 1 or 4. DS Jones would have to be involved to have the level of knowledge required.
No. DS Jones acted COMPLETLEY alone was responsible for the blood, paint and hair on the outside.
That's your interpretation not mine. You appear to be saying I said DS Jones acted alone period. I am saying I don't know. It is possible he did act alone. I am also saying it is possible one or more relatives colluded with him.
-
That's your interpretation not mine. You appear to be saying I said DS Jones acted alone period. I am saying I don't know. It is possible he did act alone. I am also saying it is possible one or more relatives colluded with him.
One thing I am certain about is that the relatives, either alone or one or more together, did not act without input from DS Jones.
-
How many more times? Back in the day, pre DNA, it was not possible for forensics to stastically individualise bloodstains. It was only possible to group and these groups were shared by approx 8% of unrelated white British population. And even this required good quality bloodstains of a particular size. Hence when the bloodstains on the rifle were examined the test results came back:
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful.
Please pay careful attention to the size of the bloodstains on the rifle and silencer. DS Jones would know that the tiny bloodstains he contaminated the outside of the silencer with were too small to show anything other than the stain was in fact blood and human in origin.
When did the relatives make the call? It was SOCO's role to handle exhibits.
I thought DC Bird was a SOCO officer?
It was claimed they made the call as soon as they took them home? No one came, i personally don't think they mentioned blood on the silencer ay this call, i think they just said they found the silencer? because later Jones refers to it being of no interset, it wasn't found at the tip of the crime scene and it had been explained away that it wasn't even on the rifle and in my opinion they just resigned to it being murder suicide, RWB goes in Monday and kicks off and tells them there is blood on the silencer and why hasn't no one collected it, Jones is told at 5.00pm to go and collect it?
i'm pretty certain Bird states his role Job is Photography, there is no one lower than him he say's, yes he was part of SOCO, but i think this was his first real big Job [notsure on that]
-
That's your interpretation not mine. You appear to be saying I said DS Jones acted alone period. I am saying I don't know. It is possible he did act alone. I am also saying it is possible one or more relatives colluded with him.
Yes you did, you posted it with Bubo, you was not agreeing with Bubo about the realtives being involved, you said it was Stan COMPLETELY alone. So one minute it's Stan on his own , now your moving it to with another?
Quote from: Bubo bubo on September 25, 2024, 10:28:AM
I agree wholeheartedly. I do not believe the family were responsible for the blood contamination though they may have had a role in the paint on the knurled end.
No. DS Jones acted completely alone was responsible for the blood, paint and hair on the outside.
-
Its not unusual (I saw Tom Jones in concert during the summer) for accountants to also take on the role of executor. Basically just an administrator for sorting out the estate.
Could be worse i suppose, i was watching that Shower of Shite yesterday get hammered.
-
DB expalins when they called Police and the little relevance thay put to the Silencer? Again, if they rang immediatly is it possible they hadn't spotted anything at this stage on the silencer and didn't mention the blood?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19340;image
-
Yes you did, you posted it with Bubo, you was not agreeing with Bubo about the realtives being involved, you said it was Stan COMPLETELY alone. So one minute it's Stan on his own , now your moving it to with another?
Quote from: Bubo bubo on September 25, 2024, 10:28:AM
I agree wholeheartedly. I do not believe the family were responsible for the blood contamination though they may have had a role in the paint on the knurled end.
No. DS Jones acted completely alone was responsible for the blood, paint and hair on the outside.
Yes DS Jones contaminated the silencer single handedly with regards to the actual contaminants but I am unsure as to whether the relative(s) were aware or unaware.
-
Its not unusual (I saw Tom Jones in concert during the summer) for accountants to also take on the role of executor. Basically just an administrator for sorting out the estate.
YouTube is littered with ridiculous clickbait - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsHLMePBgs4&ab_channel=ConcealedSecrets
Another channel claimed that Suzi Quatro had died in a car accident, until I complained to YT admin who eventually banned them. Maybe it's the same one resurfacing under a different name.
-
YouTube is littered with ridiculous clickbait - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsHLMePBgs4&ab_channel=ConcealedSecrets
Another channel claimed that Suzi Quatro had died in a car accident, until I complained to YT admin who eventually banned them. Maybe it's the same one resurfacing under a different name.
Slept with hundreds of woman while his wife stayed at home, no time for the man and no respect and its not Unusal to think that way. Surprised Cutie has has gone to see him actually i thought SHE'S A LADY with morals, and anti MAN'S MAN'S WORLD?
-
Why is Jeremy Bamber lucky to have you and what have you done for him? Out of interest?
Made 4000+ forum posts claiming he is guilty.
-
Yes DS Jones contaminated the silencer single handedly with regards to the actual contaminants but I am unsure as to whether the relative(s) were aware or unaware.
Did SJ ask the relatives to create false WS's & lie under oath that they found the silencer?
-
Made 4000+ forum posts claiming he is guilty.
Are you Joining her A team David, you could discuss the case over a few Drinks again?
-
Did SJ ask the relatives to create false WS's & lie under oath that they found the silencer?
79 pieces of evidence
44 pieces of evidence
176 pieces of sourced evidence
32 pieces of evidence
-
79 pieces of evidence
44 pieces of evidence
176 pieces of sourced evidence
32 pieces of evidence
I don't understand that.
Currently 89 pieces of sourced forensic evidence. Thread on forum.
The amount does increase as new pieces are found.
Over 200 pieces of forensic & circumstantial evidence combined. Thread on forum.
-
Yes DS Jones contaminated the silencer single handedly with regards to the actual contaminants but I am unsure as to whether the relative(s) were aware or unaware.
The relatives must have been aware if SJ fabricated the silencer 'single handedly'.
He asked them to create false WS's & lie under oath!
-
He was an experienced officer. Circa a quarter of a century under his belt. It stands to reason he would be offay with the 'property register'.
Why did he go to Oak farm to collect the silencer? He was not a SOCO officer. Why did he not take an exhibit bag and label?
So what? He can still write something in the wrong book and not he hauled over the coals for it!
He was the family liaison officer, he built up a rapport with members of the family - that was his job. Not too long ago you stated that he was forensically aware so surely (especially as he was such an experienced officer), he could be trusted to deliver a piece of evidence that had already been handled by most of the family? One minute he should be perfect in every way, the next - not to be trusted with things YOU DEEM outside his ability? I guess you don't think he was A Team material? ;D
-
It appears DS Jones was the relatives go-to officer. Perhaps because he was the only one prepared to condone their theories. DS Jones was not a SOCO officer. Why did he go to Oak Farm to pick up the silencer? And why did he not go prepared with an exhibit bag and label?
We have the finding of the silencer on Sat 10th Aug circa noon. This appears reliable. We then have the collection of the silencer from Oak Farm on Mon 12th Aug circa late noon/early eve. This appears reliable. A window of around 48 hours where we have an unexplained and unfathomable overnight camp at WHF involving PE and an extended stay by DS Jones drinking whisky with PE well into the night at Oak Farm. My instincts tell me something very dodgy was going on.
Bamber's conviction hangs on the blood said to have been found inside the silencer and matchings SC's groups. Tests now show this was fabricated. I think we are only going to find out who fabricated the blood on the outside, paint, scratches and hair when CCRC/CoA interview the Eatons, DB, BC and BW. Sadly DS Jones is no longer alive so will escape any justice coming his way. I believe the Eatons, DB and BW are still alive. RWB is deceased. I'm unsure about BC.
It would almost certainly have involved DS Jones as he was the only one with the knowledge:
- access to soc images to check area to be scratched
- aware of no visible blood on/in rifle/barrel
- aware small blood stains were incapable of proving anything beyond confirmation the stain was blood and human in origin
Yep, he was the family liaison officer!
Test now show the evidence was fabricated? What tests? Tests the A Team carried out?
-
A better question might be, what haven't I done!!!???
No, that would be a very long answer so easier to ask what you have done? I guess you're not prepared to say, probably because you know it will lead to nothing. I think people have had enough of bragging and drip feeding BS - either say or just don't say anything.
-
He was an experienced officer. Circa a quarter of a century under his belt. It stands to reason he would be offay with the 'property register'.
Why did he go to Oak farm to collect the silencer? He was not a SOCO officer. Why did he not take an exhibit bag and label?
So according to you DS Jones was ....
He was an experienced officer.
A relatively junior officer who had no experience of a mass shooting
He was not a SOCO officer
He was forensically aware
Which is it or does it just depend on which argument your forcing?
-
Could be worse i suppose, i was watching that Shower of Shite yesterday get hammered.
Switch to WSL 8)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/womens-super-league/table
-
I don't understand that.
Currently 89 pieces of sourced forensic evidence. Thread on forum.
The amount does increase as new pieces are found.
Over 200 pieces of forensic & circumstantial evidence combined. Thread on forum.
Bollocks
-
By all accounts a model prisoner.
Bollocks.
-
DB expalins when they called Police and the little relevance thay put to the Silencer? Again, if they rang immediatly is it possible they hadn't spotted anything at this stage on the silencer and didn't mention the blood?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=632.0;attach=19340;image
According to DI Cook (COLP) he received a tel call, noon on 12th Aug, from DS Jones stating that the relatives had found a silencer with blood on.
-
Switch to WSL 8)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/womens-super-league/table
Please answer my question. Third request.
If SJ fabricated the silencer 'single handedly', did he then ask the relatives to create false WS's & lie under oath to say they found it?
-
According to DI Cook (COLP) he received a tel call, noon on 12th Aug, from DS Jones stating that the relatives had found a silencer with blood on.
Sorry we don't accept COLP reports six years afterwards, case dismissed.
-
According to DI Cook (COLP) he received a tel call, noon on 12th Aug, from DS Jones stating that the relatives had found a silencer with blood on.
So they Phoned twice, they still didn't go, thats why RWB went down and played hell up, are you now accepting there was blood on it and it was impossible for Stan to be involved, the phone call now proves it, or are we dismissing this COLP report six years later.
-
Slept with hundreds of woman while his wife stayed at home, no time for the man and no respect and its not Unusal to think that way. Surprised Cutie has has gone to see him actually i thought SHE'S A LADY with morals, and anti MAN'S MAN'S WORLD?
I had free tickets for 4 concerts: Tom Jones, James Orchestral, Pete Tong/Ibiza Classics and Nile Rodgers with Sophie Ellis Baxter. Tom Jones was embarrassing imo. Way past his sell-by date. James Orchestral clashed with England playing in Euros and the Euros took precedence. Pete Tong was very heavy rain and I am beyond the age of not minding. Sopie Ellis Baxter was good. Nile Rodgers and Chic were excellent.
-
So they Phoned twice, they still didn't go, thats why RWB went down and played hell up, are you now accepting there was blood on it and it was impossible for Stan to be involved, the phone call now proves it, or are we dismissing this COLP report six years later.
Assuming DI Cook is correct in his recollection how does it preclude DS Jones fabricating?
-
Please answer my question. Third request.
If SJ fabricated the silencer 'single handedly', did he then ask the relatives to create false WS's & lie under oath to say they found it?
CC cannot answer.
Back to square one for her.
-
Yep, he was the family liaison officer!
Test now show the evidence was fabricated? What tests? Tests the A Team carried out?
FLO's were not introduced in UK policing until 1999:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_liaison_officer
-
So what? He can still write something in the wrong book and not he hauled over the coals for it!
He was the family liaison officer, he built up a rapport with members of the family - that was his job. Not too long ago you stated that he was forensically aware so surely (especially as he was such an experienced officer), he could be trusted to deliver a piece of evidence that had already been handled by most of the family? One minute he should be perfect in every way, the next - not to be trusted with things YOU DEEM outside his ability? I guess you don't think he was A Team material? ;D
FLO's were not introduced in UK policing (or should that be England? Eng/Wales? Eng/Wales/NI?) until 1999:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_liaison_officer
He was an experienced officer, circa 25 years, and yes forensically aware by the standards of the day but he was not a SOCO. Why not send a SOCO? And it appears he was aware it contained a spot of blood on it before he collected it so why not take an exhibit bag and label?
-
The relatives must have been aware if SJ fabricated the silencer 'single handedly'.
He asked them to create false WS's & lie under oath!
Not necessarily. He could have had access to WHF on the evening of Fri 9th Aug.
-
Assuming DI Cook is correct in his recollection how does it preclude DS Jones fabricating?
Well how does he do this if the relatives have phoned to say they have found the silencer with blood on it?
Yes DS Jones contaminated the silencer single handedly with regards to the actual contaminants but I am unsure as to whether the relative(s) were aware or unaware.
Are you now going back to Stan Nipping in to WHF before the relatives and contaminating the silencer?
-
Not necessarily. He could have had access to WHF on the evening of Fri 9th Aug.
He was with Taff, interviewing Bamber and Anne had the keys and the Alarm number.
-
Not necessarily. He could have had access to WHF on the evening of Fri 9th Aug.
So you are saying SJ fabricated the silencer. Then hoped the relatives found it.
Fast work by Stan. And he got lucky.
-
Are you Joining her A team David, you could discuss the case over a few Drinks again?
David doesn't drink alcohol. He was on coffee. Bizarrely the place we met in, Tap East, Westfield Stratford City, didn't do coffee but allowed patrons to buy elsewhere and consume on its premises. I didn't see whether or not he had sugar as he would go off buy his coffees and come back. I had 3 halves of lager. Albeit they were quite strong ones.
https://www1.camra.org.uk/pubs/tap-east-westfield-stratford-city-155668
-
He was with Taff, interviewing Bamber and Anne had the keys and the Alarm number.
They all left together. He could easily have slipped back in. Left a window open. Had a key cut.
-
So you are saying SJ fabricated the silencer. Then hoped the relatives found it.
Fast work by Stan. And he got lucky.
A bit like Bamber telling the relatives they would have a surprise upon opening the safe.
-
Made 4000+ forum posts claiming he is guilty.
I am still not up to 4000 plus posts!
-
Please answer my question. Third request.
If SJ fabricated the silencer 'single handedly', did he then ask the relatives to create false WS's & lie under oath to say they found it?
I don't think it needed to be that direct. See AE's COLP pages 49, 50 and 56. Just nudges of sorts in the right direction.
-
David doesn't drink alcohol. He was on coffee. Bizarrely the place we met in, Tap East, Westfield Stratford City, didn't do coffee but allowed patrons to buy elsewhere and consume on its premises. I didn't see whether or not he had sugar as he would go off buy his coffees and come back. I had 3 halves of lager. Albeit they were quite strong ones.
https://www1.camra.org.uk/pubs/tap-east-westfield-stratford-city-155668
Oh right, David's sensible, he's like me, i imagine he looks after his Body like me Cutie, keeps our youthful looks, i still get asked for ID when i fetch the wife's Red Wine.
-
They all left together. He could easily have slipped back in. Left a window open. Had a key cut.
What and did a Bamber and climbed through the window ;D ;D ;D
-
All I can be sure of is that the INSIDE of the silencer was fabricated. And through a process of elimination DS Jones fabricated the OUTSIDE. When I say process of elimination I mean the only contenders were relatives and/or DS Jones. The relatives did not have the inside knowledge or forensic awareness. Therefore must have been DS Jones.
DS Jones knew where the silencer was likely to be from AP's/JB's comments re the silencer/cupboard/case. Yes I believe he slipped back in on 9th Aug and did the deed. Leaving it for the relatives to find.
-
David doesn't drink alcohol. He was on coffee. Bizarrely the place we met in, Tap East, Westfield Stratford City, didn't do coffee but allowed patrons to buy elsewhere and consume on its premises. I didn't see whether or not he had sugar as he would go off buy his coffees and come back. I had 3 halves of lager. Albeit they were quite strong ones.
https://www1.camra.org.uk/pubs/tap-east-westfield-stratford-city-155668
It's not far from where i go regular, Walthamstow and Hackney Marshes, then to Lee Valley, i cycle from St pancras.
-
Oh right, David's sensible, he's like me, i imagine he looks after his Body like me Cutie, keeps our youthful looks, i still get asked for ID when i fetch the wife's Red Wine.
There's nothing wrong with drinking alcohol in moderation. It is probably healthier to drink 3 halves of beer/lager than 3 coffees with lots of sugar.
-
It's not far from where i go regular, Walthamstow and Hackney Marshes, then to Lee Valley, i cycle from St pancras.
Well it was well out of the way for me. It's West Ham territory. I thought you were based ooop North?
-
All I can be sure of is that the INSIDE of the silencer was fabricated. And through a process of elimination DS Jones fabricated the OUTSIDE. When I say process of elimination I mean the only contenders were relatives and/or DS Jones. The relatives did not have the inside knowledge or forensic awareness. Therefore must have been DS Jones.
DS Jones knew where the silencer was likely to be from AP's/JB's comments re the silencer/cupboard/case. Yes I believe he slipped back in on 9th Aug and did the deed. Leaving it for the relatives to find.
;D ;D ;D What, kinda, pricked his finger, plucked an hair and scratched the Aga.
Yes mention it to Jeremy when you write to him, it could be in the next Submission, Stan the AGA man.
-
Well it was well out of the way for me. It's West Ham territory. I thought you were based ooop North?
Yes i am, my son lives that area, well i thought i lived up North, if i go past Sheffield i'm from Down South and if i go to Nottingham i'm a Northerner, so i don't actually know where i am.
-
;D ;D ;D What, kinda, pricked his finger, plucked an hair and scratched the Aga.
Yes mention it to Jeremy when you write to him, it could be in the next Submission, Stan the AGA man.
Yes and I must remember to let him know that in addition to fabricating the OUTSIDE of the silencer he is the most likely culprit for emptying NB's wallet.
-
Well it was well out of the way for me. It's West Ham territory. I thought you were based ooop North?
Do you use the Cambridge Busway cutie, i sometimes cycle along that route either from Peterborough or come in from Ely. I go to Great Shelford on the Campsite, iv'e done it three times now. Couldn't believe the Busway, never seen anything like that.
-
So according to you DS Jones was ....
He was an experienced officer.
Yes circa 25 years
A relatively junior officer who had no experience of a mass shooting
Junior by way of rank. None of the officers had experience of a mass shooting. It was pre Hungerford. Name another mass shooting in the UK that DS Jones was involved in? Mass shootings or any shooting incident are rare in the UK thanks to our licensing laws.
He was not a SOCO officer
No. The SOCO's were DI Cook, DS Davidson and DC Hammersley. DC Bird?
He was forensically aware
Yes by the standards of the day and based on his circa 25 years experience
Which is it or does it just depend on which argument your forcing?
No contradictions.
-
Do you use the Cambridge Busway cutie, i sometimes cycle along that route either from Peterborough or come in from Ely. I go to Great Shelford on the Campsite, iv'e done it three times now. Couldn't believe the Busway, never seen anything like that.
I was born in Cambridge but now live some 30 miles south west. I visit often. About twice a month. We will have to meet up for a beer sometime. I like brunch at Fitzbillies on a Sunday.
-
So what? He can still write something in the wrong book and not he hauled over the coals for it!
He was the family liaison officer, he built up a rapport with members of the family - that was his job. Not too long ago you stated that he was forensically aware so surely (especially as he was such an experienced officer), he could be trusted to deliver a piece of evidence that had already been handled by most of the family? One minute he should be perfect in every way, the next - not to be trusted with things YOU DEEM outside his ability? I guess you don't think he was A Team material? ;D
Pity the A-Team hadn't been hired to shoot the family, that way no one would have died!
-
Please answer my question. Third request.
If SJ fabricated the silencer 'single handedly', did he then ask the relatives to create false WS's & lie under oath to say they found it?
Well,the relatives were probably asked to add several bits of evidence to their statements Adam, including the blood stained knickers once Stan found out fron Vanezis that it was Sheila's time of the month!
-
So according to you DS Jones was ....
He was an experienced officer.
A relatively junior officer who had no experience of a mass shooting
He was not a SOCO officer
He was forensically aware
Which is it or does it just depend on which argument your forcing?
He was a senior officer. A member of rank of CID. One below a DI.
Quite why she puts him as a junior I have no idea.
-
He was a senior officer. A member of rank of CID. One below a DI.
Quite why she puts him as a junior I have no idea.
There are 9 ranks:
1.Constable
2.Sergeant
3.Inspector
4.Chief Inspector
5.Superintendent
6.Chief Superintendent
7.Assistant Chief Constable
8.Deputy Chief Constable
9.Chief Constable
The lowest marked 1 above is constable. The highest marked 9 above is chief constable. DS Jones was a sergeant marked 2 above. That rank is 1 above the lowest. Or 7 below the highest. He was 2/9. He was nowhere near senior as you claim. What is difficult to understand about that?
He had circa 25 years under his belt. He was either happy with his position or his superiors did not think he was suitable for progression.
-
FLO's were not introduced in UK policing until 1999:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_liaison_officer
The term may not have been introduced until then, but that was his role.
-
Yes circa 25 years
Junior by way of rank. None of the officers had experience of a mass shooting. It was pre Hungerford. Name another mass shooting in the UK that DS Jones was involved in? Mass shootings or any shooting incident are rare in the UK thanks to our licensing laws.
No. The SOCO's were DI Cook, DS Davidson and DC Hammersley. DC Bird?
Yes by the standards of the day and based on his circa 25 years experience
No contradictions.
You're all over the place ;D
-
You're all over the place ;D
OH yes, her only way out now.................. after parting ways with TAFF on the Friday Evening the 9th of Aug she has put Stan climbing through WHF window or [having a key cut] locating the silencer, Pricking his OWN finger, scratching the AGA, and then plucking his hair, then hidng the silencer in the hope the relatives find it?
-
The term may not have been introduced until then, but that was his role.
Well as ILB said he clearly wasn't FLO material with his comment to JB telling him to accept the fact his family are dead only minutes after being told. And as ILB said today, he would be put on sandwich duty and the comment would trigger an internal inquiry.
-
The term may not have been introduced until then, but that was his role.
And who was assigned the role when DS Jones went on leave circa mid Aug according to HB?
-
And who was assigned the role when DS Jones went on leave circa mid Aug according to HB?
Not according to HB, According to DC barlow, i said he took over from DC Jones, he was asked to look after the case.
-
OH yes, her only way out now.................. after parting ways with TAFF on the Friday Evening the 9th of Aug she has put Stan climbing through WHF window or [having a key cut] locating the silencer, Pricking his OWN finger, scratching the AGA, and then plucking his hair, then hidng the silencer in the hope the relatives find it?
Or using some kind of skeleton key. He was an experienced police officer with much of his service pre PACE. He would be use to finding ways to enter apparently locked buildings. See the image of the police entering SC's via a window.
He knew where the silencer was located from AP.
Yes he used his own blood knowing that tiny bloodstains at that time were incapable of grouping.
Yes he scratched the AGA having already had a look at SOC images.
No he didn't pluck a hair from his own head. That's silly. He was mainly dark and NB was grey. It would be easy to locate NB's hair on combs, brushes, outerwear, hats. It would be all over the place. I assume the inference with the hair was that the silencer was on when NB sustained a beating with an object thought to be the rifle.
He didn't need to hide the silencer. It was simply popped back in its rightful place. And if they hadn't found it when they did he could simply have slipped it into a conversation later eg 'Oh btw did you find the silencer'?
And before he left he helped himself to the contents of NB's wallet.
-
Not according to HB, According to DC barlow, i said he took over from DC Jones, he was asked to look after the case.
Have you got any documentary evidence showing who was responsible for what and when or anything close? Thank you.
-
They weren't breaking and entering her flat, just snooping through the glass to see if Bamber was in. They then knocked on the door to wake him and his boyfriend up. Do get your facts right!
-
I was born in Cambridge but now live some 30 miles south west. I visit often. About twice a month. We will have to meet up for a beer sometime. I like brunch at Fitzbillies on a Sunday.
It's either GREGGS and a Porridge or Nothing, i can't afford those prices Cutie. Save me a table in Greggs, a word of warning though, sit near the door for ventilation or bring the air freshner, after a 80k bike ride who Knows? Anyway look out for me, iv'e include for the first time a picture of me.
https://bikeportland.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Screen-Shot-2019-07-26-at-7.57.54-AM.jpg
-
They weren't breaking and entering her flat, just snooping through the glass to see if Bamber was in. They then knocked on the door to wake him and his boyfriend up. Do get your facts right!
Not sure what has happened to the subject title in your post?!
No that image is from the immediate aftermath.
-
It's either GREGGS and a Porridge or Nothing, i can't afford those prices Cutie. Save me a table in Greggs, a word of warning though, sit near the door for ventilation or bring the air freshner, after a 80k bike ride who Knows? Anyway look out for me, iv'e include for the first time a picture of me.
https://bikeportland.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Screen-Shot-2019-07-26-at-7.57.54-AM.jpg
Will do. I'm a runner but not when I'm in Cambridge.
-
There are 9 ranks:
1.Constable
2.Sergeant
3.Inspector
4.Chief Inspector
5.Superintendent
6.Chief Superintendent
7.Assistant Chief Constable
8.Deputy Chief Constable
9.Chief Constable
The lowest marked 1 above is constable. The highest marked 9 above is chief constable. DS Jones was a sergeant marked 2 above. That rank is 1 above the lowest. Or 7 below the highest. He was 2/9. He was nowhere near senior as you claim. What is difficult to understand about that?
He had circa 25 years under his belt. He was either happy with his position or his superiors did not think he was suitable for progression.
He was a member of CID, a detective. CID investigate crimes of a serious nature. He was one rank below a DI, and just two below DCI.
That's not junior by any stretch of the information. If he was PS then yes perhaps.
-
He was a member of CID, a detective. CID investigate crimes of a serious nature. He was one rank below a DI, and just two below DCI.
That's not junior by any stretch of the information. If he was PS then yes perhaps.
We will have to agree to disagree.
-
OH yes, her only way out now.................. after parting ways with TAFF on the Friday Evening the 9th of Aug she has put Stan climbing through WHF window or [having a key cut] locating the silencer, Pricking his OWN finger, scratching the AGA, and then plucking his hair, then hidng the silencer in the hope the relatives find it?
lol
-
August 7th
DC Clarke tells Ann Eaton that Nevills body was found by the AGA near the mantle shelf.
August 8th:
Ann Eaton takes Julie to the mortuary and notes down Nevills injuries after talking to Julie.
Jeremy provides a witness statement saying he left the rifle in the kitchen without the silencer on.
August 9th:
After visiting the accountant, Jeremy asks Ann Eaton to pay back the loan for the farmland that she is living on. In order to pay death duties.
Ann Eaton visits WHF with DCI and DS Jones. While there she would have seen the blue coat obscuring a certain area of the mantle shelf.
August 10th:
Relatives visit WHF again and collected the silencer and also take back home Sheila's blood stained clothing. David Boutflour does not recall seeing any blood, paint or hair on the silencer while at WHF at this stage.
Ann Eaton contacts Whitam police station about the silencer later that evening. It stays in Ann bedroom cupboard for the next two days.
August 13th:
Stan Jones collects the silencer and gives it to DI Cook.
August 14th:
Ann Eaton alerts DI Cook to the scratch marks under the mantle shelf.
The above events are all factual. Not speculative.
Factoring in the conflicting statements, testimony and lies she told. It can be inferred that it was Ann Eaton who fabricated the silencer.
-
We will have to agree to disagree.
Fine.
-
" the answer is in the documents "
Jeremy Bamber 2010.
-
August 7th
DC Clarke tells Ann Eaton that Nevills body was found by the AGA near the mantle shelf.
August 8th:
Ann Eaton takes Julie to the mortuary and notes down Nevills injuries after talking to Julie.
Jeremy provides a witness statement saying he left the rifle in the kitchen without the silencer on.
August 9th:
After visiting the accountant, Jeremy asks Ann Eaton to pay back the loan for the farmland that she is living on. In order to pay death duties.
Ann Eaton visits WHF with DCI and DS Jones. While there she would have seen the blue coat obscuring a certain area of the mantle shelf.
August 10th:
Relatives visit WHF again and collected the silencer and also take back home Sheila's blood stained clothing. David Boutflour does not recall seeing any blood, paint or hair on the silencer while at WHF at this stage.
Ann Eaton contacts Whitam police station about the silencer later that evening. It stays in Ann bedroom cupboard for the next two days.
August 13th:
Stan Jones collects the silencer and gives it to DI Cook.
August 14th:
Ann Eaton alerts DI Cook to the scratch marks under the mantle shelf.
The above events are all factual. Not speculative.
Factoring in the conflicting statements, testimony and lies she told. It can be inferred that it was Ann Eaton who fabricated the silencer.
I don't know about the blood so i can't agree there,[i think this will always be disputed] it was PE who put the silencer in the Wardrobe,
youv'e got Stan collecting the silencer on the 13th of Aug when in fact he collected it on the 12th of August, he did hand it over to Cooke on the 13th though.
I'm not sure when Anne rang the police on Saturday evening, would be nice if you have a time for this, only all i have is they rang the Police Immediate when they got back to Anne's house.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=211.0;attach=19377;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4985.0;attach=35034;image
-
Well as ILB said he clearly wasn't FLO material with his comment to JB telling him to accept the fact his family are dead only minutes after being told. And as ILB said today, he would be put on sandwich duty and the comment would trigger an internal inquiry.
Regardless, that's pretty much what his role was and given that Bamber was eventually snared and convicted - the only internal inquiry, was how the case was messed up from day one and Bamber almost got away with it.
-
He was a senior officer. A member of rank of CID. One below a DI.
Quite why she puts him as a junior I have no idea.
To bolster her point. It's OK - I know it's rubbish, you know it's rubbish. She does the same with Fletcher. I guess when she said the 'A Team', she really meant the 'A Team' - Murdoch perhaps?
-
Or using some kind of skeleton key. He was an experienced police officer with much of his service pre PACE. He would be use to finding ways to enter apparently locked buildings. See the image of the police entering SC's via a window.
He knew where the silencer was located from AP.
Yes he used his own blood knowing that tiny bloodstains at that time were incapable of grouping.
Yes he scratched the AGA having already had a look at SOC images.
No he didn't pluck a hair from his own head. That's silly. He was mainly dark and NB was grey. It would be easy to locate NB's hair on combs, brushes, outerwear, hats. It would be all over the place. I assume the inference with the hair was that the silencer was on when NB sustained a beating with an object thought to be the rifle.
He didn't need to hide the silencer. It was simply popped back in its rightful place. And if they hadn't found it when they did he could simply have slipped it into a conversation later eg 'Oh btw did you find the silencer'?
And before he left he helped himself to the contents of NB's wallet.
I have to Admit Cutie, you might have a time slot that i have found, i can't quite read all of it, mabe someone else can, but it seems Stan didn't finish work till Friday evening at 11.15pm, i can't quite make this out or he was just hading them or collecting them? Doesn't mean he was upto something, i don't know if Taff was with him also, but................This was on the 9th of Aug
I think after enlarging it, he's gone to hand the keys over to Anne at Oak Farm, and finished at 11.15pm? He's said all Police examination completed
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33758;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33760;image
-
I have to Admit Cutie, you might have a time slot that i have found, i can't quite read all of it, mabe someone else can, but it seems Stan didn't finish work till Friday evening at 11.15pm, i can't quite make this out or he was just hading them or collecting them? Doesn't mean he was upto something, i don't know if Taff was with him also, but................This was on the 9th of Aug
I think after enlarging it, he's gone to hand the keys over to Anne at Oak Farm, and finished at 11.15pm? He's said all Police examination completed
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33758;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33760;image
Right, what i can make out, after the meeting between Taff and Stan with Jeremy on the 9th of August, they left about 9.00pm, i think at this stage Taff was happy with what Jeremy had said and told Stan as such. It was decided to Hand the Keys over to Anne, and the house was ready, so a call was made and it was arranged to meet at WHF, PE attended with her, it was to Hand the Keys over and Show the Alarm System.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1923.0;attach=9564;image
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1923.0;attach=9565;image
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1923.0;attach=9566;image
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1923.0;attach=24615;image
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1923.0;attach=24617;image
-
August 7th
DC Clarke tells Ann Eaton that Nevills body was found by the AGA near the mantle shelf.
August 8th:
Ann Eaton takes Julie to the mortuary and notes down Nevills injuries after talking to Julie.
Jeremy provides a witness statement saying he left the rifle in the kitchen without the silencer on.
August 9th:
After visiting the accountant, Jeremy asks Ann Eaton to pay back the loan for the farmland that she is living on. In order to pay death duties.
Ann Eaton visits WHF with DCI and DS Jones. While there she would have seen the blue coat obscuring a certain area of the mantle shelf.
August 10th:
Relatives visit WHF again and collected the silencer and also take back home Sheila's blood stained clothing. David Boutflour does not recall seeing any blood, paint or hair on the silencer while at WHF at this stage.
Ann Eaton contacts Whitam police station about the silencer later that evening. It stays in Ann bedroom cupboard for the next two days.
August 13th:
Stan Jones collects the silencer and gives it to DI Cook.
August 14th:
Ann Eaton alerts DI Cook to the scratch marks under the mantle shelf.
The above events are all factual. Not speculative.
Factoring in the conflicting statements, testimony and lies she told. It can be inferred that it was Ann Eaton who fabricated the silencer.
But you're doing what you always do: seeing connections that only exist in your mind. You did the same with your so-called 'forensic evidence breakthrough'. You saw meaning in shapes that again only existed in your mind.
You completely misunderstand the blood evidence. You are either unable or unwilling, probably because you are wedded to your theory above, to accept scientific facts. In 1985 forensics were only able to produce blood groupings if the material they had to work with ie blood had not been 'environmentally insulted' and was of sufficient quantity. AE did not have access to such material. Sheila's menstrual stained knickers soaking in a bucket of water for some 3 days had been 'environmentally insulted' and the quantity was near zero it was so diluted.
-
" the answer is in the documents "
Jeremy Bamber 2010.
?
-
Regardless, that's pretty much what his role was and given that Bamber was eventually snared and convicted - the only internal inquiry, was how the case was messed up from day one and Bamber almost got away with it.
The Dickinson inquiry could have singled out DS Jones for praise but nothing of the sort. And his career ended through retirement in 1991 still a DS.
There was also COLP and Stokenchurch.
-
I have to Admit Cutie, you might have a time slot that i have found, i can't quite read all of it, mabe someone else can, but it seems Stan didn't finish work till Friday evening at 11.15pm, i can't quite make this out or he was just hading them or collecting them? Doesn't mean he was upto something, i don't know if Taff was with him also, but................This was on the 9th of Aug
I think after enlarging it, he's gone to hand the keys over to Anne at Oak Farm, and finished at 11.15pm? He's said all Police examination completed
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33758;image
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4596.0;attach=33760;image
If you refer to AE's wit stats she met DS Jones and DCI Jones at WHF as the light was fading. She said there was no need to turn the kitchen light on. PE was also with her. Anyway it matters not he had the wherewithal and opportunity to enter during the hours of darkness regardless of his shift finishing at 11.15pm.
-
Well as ILB said he clearly wasn't FLO material with his comment to JB telling him to accept the fact his family are dead only minutes after being told. And as ILB said today, he would be put on sandwich duty and the comment would trigger an internal inquiry.
This was policing in the 70s and 80s. How times have changed!
1984. 16. St James Park Newcastle I was arrested at half time during a football match for " behaviour likely to cause breach of the peace, I was built like a matchstick. This is a one of many instances in my memories of police in the 80s ( although most of my trouble was with south yorkshire police back then )On the way to the police station two constables kicked me incessantly. Jeering, jiving etc etc. Once we got the custody suite I complained to the desk sergeant what had happened, merely peered over at me, and then just carried on with paperwork before a cell was allocated. This is just how it was. It was pretty much carte blanche.
-
I do believe had Jeremy Bamber in this case had been of a "lower end background" he may have been treated very differently in interview and overall to be honest.
-
August 7th
DC Clarke tells Ann Eaton that Nevills body was found by the AGA near the mantle shelf.
August 8th:
Ann Eaton takes Julie to the mortuary and notes down Nevills injuries after talking to Julie.
Jeremy provides a witness statement saying he left the rifle in the kitchen without the silencer on.
August 9th:
After visiting the accountant, Jeremy asks Ann Eaton to pay back the loan for the farmland that she is living on. In order to pay death duties.
Ann Eaton visits WHF with DCI and DS Jones. While there she would have seen the blue coat obscuring a certain area of the mantle shelf.
August 10th:
Relatives visit WHF again and collected the silencer and also take back home Sheila's blood stained clothing. David Boutflour does not recall seeing any blood, paint or hair on the silencer while at WHF at this stage.
Ann Eaton contacts Whitam police station about the silencer later that evening. It stays in Ann bedroom cupboard for the next two days.
August 13th:
Stan Jones collects the silencer and gives it to DI Cook.
August 14th:
Ann Eaton alerts DI Cook to the scratch marks under the mantle shelf.
The above events are all factual. Not speculative.
Factoring in the conflicting statements, testimony and lies she told. It can be inferred that it was Ann Eaton who fabricated the silencer.
According to AE's trial testimony the bloodstained clothing went in the kitchen bin at Oak Farm. The jury was aware AE had access to SC's mesntrual stained knickers
-
According to AE's trial testimony the bloodstained clothing went in the kitchen bin at Oak Farm. The jury was aware AE had access to SC's mesntrual stained knickers
A bit careless of the police to leave blood stained clothing for JB to find Cutie!
Not very nice for the poor chap!
-
A bit careless of the police to leave blood stained clothing for JB to find Cutie!
Not very nice for the poor chap!
Huh? They were in the buckets and nothing to do with the murders!
-
I uploaded the 2002 appeal judgment to Claude 3.5 AI and asked it "If the silencer in the Jeremy Bamber case is a fabrication. Who was most likely responsible for its contamination? The police or the extended family?"
This is what it produced.
"The following points are essential in evaluating the question of potential contamination and the responsibility for any such contamination:
Key Points to Consider:
The Discovery by the Family:
The silencer was discovered by David Boutflour in the gun cupboard on 10 August 1985, several days after the murders, and witnessed by other family members.
The fact that the family, not the police, found the silencer raises questions about whether it was tampered with or mishandled between the discovery and the point at which it was turned over to the police.
Handling by the Family:
After being found, the silencer was taken to Ann Eaton's home for "safekeeping." During this period, members of the family examined it and noted what they perceived as damage to the surface, red paint, and blood.
The family examining the silencer without forensic supervision could have resulted in unintentional contamination. Without proper protective measures, handling could have transferred biological material onto the object.
Blood and Paint Observations:
The family observed red paint and what appeared to be blood, and when it was later examined by police, blood was confirmed, but there was insufficient quantity for grouping analysis. This raises doubts about the significance of the blood traces and whether they were present from the start or introduced during handling.
Loss of Key Evidence (Grey Hair):
A grey hair, about an inch long, was noted by DS Jones upon collection but was lost before it reached the Forensic Science Service. This loss of potentially vital evidence highlights potential mishandling or a lapse in the police's chain of custody, which further complicates determining the origins of the contamination.
Timing and Chain of Custody:
The silencer was recovered on 10 August but not collected by the police until 12 August, leaving a window of time during which the family had full access to it. This gap in the chain of custody between discovery and forensic analysis presents an opportunity for accidental or deliberate contamination.
Analysis:
Given the facts presented, two main considerations stand out:
Family's Access and Handling: The family’s involvement in both discovering and examining the silencer, without immediate police oversight, creates the possibility of unintentional contamination. The family members who were suspicious of Jeremy Bamber could also have been motivated, consciously or unconsciously, to interpret or present evidence in a way that pointed toward his guilt. If the silencer had red paint and blood on it when they found it, handling it could have disturbed or altered these traces.
Police Mishandling: The loss of the grey hair, the fact that there was only a small amount of blood that couldn't be grouped, and potential issues with the chain of custody also point to possible police mishandling or oversight. The grey hair, if retained, could have been crucial in determining the involvement of Sheila Caffell or Jeremy Bamber. The police might have compounded issues by failing to safeguard critical evidence after collection.
Conclusion:
Based on the judgment, the extended family’s initial handling of the silencer poses a more significant risk of contamination before the police took possession of it. While the police's loss of evidence (the grey hair) and gaps in proper forensic procedures are concerning, the opportunity for contamination seems highest when the silencer was in the possession of the family, examined without forensic expertise, and stored outside of police control.
That said, it's important to consider that any mishandling, whether by the family or the police, could have compromised the integrity of the evidence."
-
This was policing in the 70s and 80s. How times have changed!
1984. 16. St James Park Newcastle I was arrested at half time during a football match for " behaviour likely to cause breach of the peace, I was built like a matchstick. This is a one of many instances in my memories of police in the 80s ( although most of my trouble was with south yorkshire police back then )On the way to the police station two constables kicked me incessantly. Jeering, jiving etc etc. Once we got the custody suite I complained to the desk sergeant what had happened, merely peered over at me, and then just carried on with paperwork before a cell was allocated. This is just how it was. It was pretty much carte blanche.
I agree ILB, they did and got away with anything, they were never held to account. Not many Police were sacked for Misconduct in those days.
-
If you refer to AE's wit stats she met DS Jones and DCI Jones at WHF as the light was fading. She said there was no need to turn the kitchen light on. PE was also with her. Anyway it matters not he had the wherewithal and opportunity to enter during the hours of darkness regardless of his shift finishing at 11.15pm.
What, like through the Kitchen window when everyone had gone?
-
According to AE's trial testimony the bloodstained clothing went in the kitchen bin at Oak Farm. The jury was aware AE had access to SC's mesntrual stained knickers
I made a mistake above by referring to Oak Farm when in fact it was WHF. According to AE's trial testimony the bloodstained clothing went in the kitchen bin at WHF and was not taken to Oak Farm as David claims.
-
I uploaded the 2002 appeal judgment to Claude 3.5 AI and asked it "If the silencer in the Jeremy Bamber case is a fabrication. Who was most likely responsible for its contamination? The police or the extended family?"
This is what it produced.
Conclusion:
Based on the judgment, the extended family’s initial handling of the silencer poses a more significant risk of contamination before the police took possession of it. While the police's loss of evidence (the grey hair) and gaps in proper forensic procedures are concerning, the opportunity for contamination seems highest when the silencer was in the possession of the family, examined without forensic expertise, and stored outside of police control.
That said, it's important to consider that any mishandling, whether by the family or the police, could have compromised the integrity of the evidence.[/b][/i][/size]"
I would agree more with this than the accusation what Cutie made, there are a lot of Red Flags for me regarding the Families possesion of the silencer, not so much the finding, but the actual length of time they had it in their Possesion? Some could possibly be explained away by the fact the Police wasn't interested though.
Cutie's accusation about Stan just doesn't hold up, she changed from Stan doing the deed in the Office, to now saying Stan went in at night and Fabricated the silencer.
-
What, like through the Kitchen window when everyone had gone?
It was difficult for the firearms team to enter because the occupant(s) bolted the doors before going to bed. When DS Jones entered under stealth he did not need to contend with bolts/doors locked from within. We know he was present when the keys were handed over to the Eatons and the newly fitted alarm explained. Bottom line is that at the time of WHF he had worked in policing for nearly a quarter of a century and would have been well versed in breaking and entering.
-
I uploaded the 2002 appeal judgment to Claude 3.5 AI and asked it "If the silencer in the Jeremy Bamber case is a fabrication. Who was most likely responsible for its contamination? The police or the extended family?"
This is what it produced.
"The following points are essential in evaluating the question of potential contamination and the responsibility for any such contamination:
Key Points to Consider:
The Discovery by the Family:
The silencer was discovered by David Boutflour in the gun cupboard on 10 August 1985, several days after the murders, and witnessed by other family members.
The fact that the family, not the police, found the silencer raises questions about whether it was tampered with or mishandled between the discovery and the point at which it was turned over to the police.
Handling by the Family:
After being found, the silencer was taken to Ann Eaton's home for "safekeeping." During this period, members of the family examined it and noted what they perceived as damage to the surface, red paint, and blood.
The family examining the silencer without forensic supervision could have resulted in unintentional contamination. Without proper protective measures, handling could have transferred biological material onto the object.
Blood and Paint Observations:
The family observed red paint and what appeared to be blood, and when it was later examined by police, blood was confirmed, but there was insufficient quantity for grouping analysis. This raises doubts about the significance of the blood traces and whether they were present from the start or introduced during handling.
Loss of Key Evidence (Grey Hair):
A grey hair, about an inch long, was noted by DS Jones upon collection but was lost before it reached the Forensic Science Service. This loss of potentially vital evidence highlights potential mishandling or a lapse in the police's chain of custody, which further complicates determining the origins of the contamination.
Timing and Chain of Custody:
The silencer was recovered on 10 August but not collected by the police until 12 August, leaving a window of time during which the family had full access to it. This gap in the chain of custody between discovery and forensic analysis presents an opportunity for accidental or deliberate contamination.
Analysis:
Given the facts presented, two main considerations stand out:
Family's Access and Handling: The family’s involvement in both discovering and examining the silencer, without immediate police oversight, creates the possibility of unintentional contamination. The family members who were suspicious of Jeremy Bamber could also have been motivated, consciously or unconsciously, to interpret or present evidence in a way that pointed toward his guilt. If the silencer had red paint and blood on it when they found it, handling it could have disturbed or altered these traces.
Police Mishandling: The loss of the grey hair, the fact that there was only a small amount of blood that couldn't be grouped, and potential issues with the chain of custody also point to possible police mishandling or oversight. The grey hair, if retained, could have been crucial in determining the involvement of Sheila Caffell or Jeremy Bamber. The police might have compounded issues by failing to safeguard critical evidence after collection.
Conclusion:
Based on the judgment, the extended family’s initial handling of the silencer poses a more significant risk of contamination before the police took possession of it. While the police's loss of evidence (the grey hair) and gaps in proper forensic procedures are concerning, the opportunity for contamination seems highest when the silencer was in the possession of the family, examined without forensic expertise, and stored outside of police control.
That said, it's important to consider that any mishandling, whether by the family or the police, could have compromised the integrity of the evidence."
Given AI was so wrong about Curiosity and Cambridgecutie being one and the same why are we going to put any weight on the above?
-
I made a mistake above by referring to Oak Farm when in fact it was WHF. According to AE's trial testimony the bloodstained clothing went in the kitchen bin at WHF and was not taken to Oak Farm as David claims.
Youv'e made quite a few mistakes haven't you, you said Basil Cock wasn't the Executor, Basil Cock was the Accountant and the Executor of the Bamber Estate. When a will is made out, the Executor is always named in the Will as the person dealing witht he estate.
-
I would agree more with this than the accusation what Cutie made, there are a lot of Red Flags for me regarding the Families possesion of the silencer, not so much the finding, but the actual length of time they had it in their Possesion? Some could possibly be explained away by the fact the Police wasn't interested though.
Cutie's accusation about Stan just doesn't hold up, she changed from Stan doing the deed in the Office, to now saying Stan went in at night and Fabricated the silencer.
I haven't seen any audit trail about the phone call from the relatives to EP. I think we agree DS Jones was off duty over the weekend? The relatives may have wanted to deal with DS Jones (who according to Zoso was the family FLO) hence he went on the day he returned to duty.
Did the deed in the office? Well he must have scratched the silencer at WHF.
-
Youv'e made quite a few mistakes haven't you, you said Basil Cock wasn't the Executor, Basil Cock was the Accountant and the Executor of the Bamber Estate. When a will is made out, the Executor is always named in the Will as the person dealing witht he estate.
No I didn't say BC wasn't the executor. I referred to him as the accountant and you said you thought he was the executor. I replied that it was usual for accountants to take on the role of executor.
-
I haven't seen any audit trail about the phone call from the relatives to EP. I think we agree DS Jones was off duty over the weekend? The relatives may have wanted to deal with DS Jones (who according to Zoso was the family FLO) hence he went on the day he returned to duty.
Did the deed in the office? Well he must have scratched the silencer at WHF.
Who? DB noticed a scratch on the silencer.
-
Who? DB noticed a scratch on the silencer.
Scratched the AGA.
-
Scratched the AGA.
Oh right, i thought you meant the scratch on the silencer itself.
-
Huh? They were in the buckets and nothing to do with the murders!
Wasn't there a missing shell casing in the kitchen Zoso?
-
I would agree more with this than the accusation what Cutie made, there are a lot of Red Flags for me regarding the Families possesion of the silencer, not so much the finding, but the actual length of time they had it in their Possesion? Some could possibly be explained away by the fact the Police wasn't interested though.
Cutie's accusation about Stan just doesn't hold up, she changed from Stan doing the deed in the Office, to now saying Stan went in at night and Fabricated the silencer.
It would be interesting to upload the trial transcripts to various AI models and see what feedback they give.
-
Wasn't there a missing shell casing in the kitchen Zoso?
No.
-
It would be interesting to upload the trial transcripts to various AI models and see what feedback they give.
I always found the cross examination between Arlidge and Jeremy quite benign under the circumstances.
-
Wasn't there a missing shell casing in the kitchen Zoso?
Don't get it, how's it missing if it's in the Kitchen?
-
Don't get it, how's it missing if it's in the Kitchen?
NB sustained 4 gunshot wounds in the kitchen with only 3 casings recovered.
-
NB sustained 4 gunshot wounds in the kitchen with only 3 casings recovered.
Oh, so it's missing FROM the Kitchen and not Missing in the Kitchen.
-
NB sustained 4 gunshot wounds in the kitchen with only 3 casings recovered.
Thanks Cutie!
So why didn't SOCO search the buckets for it?
-
Oh, so it's missing FROM the Kitchen and not Missing in the Kitchen.
I am not the best with grammar HB!
-
It would be interesting to upload the trial transcripts to various AI models and see what feedback they give.
I think this would be a Mamouth task for someone? Imagine missing one piece and it could throw the results, plus we don't have everything on here and Bambers trial transcript in Court is missing.
-
I am not the best with grammar HB!
No Problem, it just had me thinking that's all?
-
Thanks Cutie!
So why didn't SOCO search the buckets for it?
No Marigolds? Didn't think it was important? They are very tiny. It might just have been swept/vacuumed up. And the kitchen doesn't look fitted by today's standards so might well have slipped down a side/back. Maybe send Bill round to have a look for it.
-
No Marigolds? Didn't think it was important? They are very tiny. It might just have been swept/vacuumed up. And the kitchen doesn't look fitted by today's standards so might well have slipped down a side/back. Maybe send Bill round to have a look for it.
You misunderstand what I am getting at Cutie!
I am not really interested in what happened to the casing, I want to know why SOCO ignored the buckets?
What was in the buckets anyway?
-
You misunderstand what I am getting at Cutie!
I am not really interested in what happened to the casing, I want to know why SOCO ignored the buckets?
What was in the buckets anyway?
Why not? It does hold some importance.
I don't know if/why SOCO ignored the buckets. According to AE wit stat they contained stained and grubby clothing which had been left to soak. May I suggest you familiarise yourself with the case documents.
-
Why not? It does hold some importance.
I don't know if/why SOCO ignored the buckets. According to AE wit stat they contained stained and grubby clothing which had been left to soak. May I suggest you familiarise yourself with the case documents.
Thanks Cutie, but yes again I have some idea of the details in the case documents!
I know exactly what AE claimed was in the buckets!
And again your reply answers the question I had in mind, 'according to AE'!,
This was of course in her second statement once Vanezis had confirmed it was Sheila's time of the month!
I wonder if the buckets were mentioned by anyone who entered WHF on the day of the murders in the murder/suicide investigation?
-
Thanks Cutie, but yes again I have some idea of the details in the case documents!
I know exactly what AE claimed was in the buckets!
And again your reply answers the question I had in mind, 'according to AE'!,
This was of course in her second statement once Vanezis had confirmed it was Sheila's time of the month!
I wonder if the buckets were mentioned by anyone who entered WHF on the day of the murders in the murder/suicide investigation?
You seem to be placing importance on the contents of the buckets?
I believe the buckets are mentioned in an officers stat from firearms.
-
You seem to be placing importance on the contents of the buckets?
I believe the buckets are mentioned in an officers stat from firearms.
Thanks Cutie,I will take a look!
The TFG statements you say?
By the way,the question should be, why did AE place so much importance on the contents of the buckets?
In fact, why did she see a need to mention the buckets at all in her second statement?
-
You seem to be placing importance on the contents of the buckets?
I believe the buckets are mentioned in an officers stat from firearms.
I cant see any mention of the buckets in the TFG statements Cutie!
I will check out others statements who entered that morning!