Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on January 17, 2011, 09:10:PM
-
This is one of the secrets Essex police did not want anyone to find out about - but I take great pride in drawing everyones attention to it, and pose the question, how did it happen?
(1) Why did Essex police deny to Paul Terzean (Bambers solicitor) that they had any pictures of the bible?
(2) why did they tell him, that the bible had been destroyed?
(3) Why did police cut out bedroom carpet and destroy it?
Now you don't see the blood on the carpet (1)
Angle of victims head is prevented from coming into alignment by bedside cabinet, to have allowed the barrel of the rifle to inflict the shot under the chin, and the fatal bullet (PV/19) to take the path and trajectory it took...
Please click on image to enlarge...
-
Now you see the blood - but where did it come from(2)
Please click on image to enlarge...
-
The blood on the carpet is different in both pictures maybe difficult in these photos but when analysed by an expert it is different .
-
How do you know it's different Jon? It's too difficult to tell.
-
How do you know it's different Jon? It's too difficult to tell.
Use the zoom and compare , but these photos have been examined by an expert and he claims they are different , i believe this is part of the appeal. The same expert who as shown the body had been moved , the body the police said had not been touched , all 20 odd who made statements that they entered the house,let alone the 20 odd who entered and didnt declare they entered the house .
-
Obviously, there appears to be more blood in the second picture, but I can see some drops in the first one which match the second picture. I just can't see it well enough to judge really.
-
You have to remember Kaldin if there is any difference in the blood on the carpet Jeremy is innocent !!
-
You have to remember Kaldin if there is any difference in the blood on the carpet Jeremy is innocent !!
Possibly, but then how did the extra blood get there?
-
You have to remember Kaldin if there is any difference in the blood on the carpet Jeremy is innocent !!
Possibly, but then how did the extra blood get there?
Somebody moved the body the blood was wet and the blood dripped so she hadnt been dead 7 hours .
-
Was Ralph Bamber's body moved too? And did the blood drip?
-
Was Ralph Bamber's body moved too? And did the blood drip?
I have not seen any photos of RB body . But all photos have been re examined by the photo expert and not all what he found is yet in the public domain .
-
You have to remember Kaldin if there is any difference in the blood on the carpet Jeremy is innocent !!
Possibly, but then how did the extra blood get there?
Somebody moved the body the blood was wet and the blood dripped so she hadnt been dead 7 hours .
Maybe. I would expect the blood to smear rather than drip if the body was moved, but it's an interesting theory.
-
There both photographs of photographs.. And not great quality as you say. I just put both images in Photoshop and inverted as well as boasting contrast on the first image to make light and dark stand out more.. I can circle 12+ blood spots that appear in both images posted above.
They are just differently angled original shots.. I can post my circled spots if you like.
-
Post them pls
-
This is my take... happily concede to be wrong if someone thinks I've circled incorrectly...
I've cropped the body out as its hosted on a public image site and i dont want to distress anyone.
(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a362/Floydeh/comparison.jpg)
-
Great job, thanks for that. That's what this forum needs more of.
-
This is my take... happily concede to be wrong if someone thinks I've circled incorrectly...
I've cropped the body out as its hosted on a public image site and i dont want to distress anyone.
(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a362/Floydeh/comparison.jpg)
Great job, thanks for that. That's what this forum needs more of.
I do want to make clear I'm not trying to disprove anything anyone is saying... but also that if I can't understand or initially agree with what is being presented I will look at it until I can.. or except that I never will :)
These 2 pictures were posted with a statement of now you see the blood and pic 2 of now you don't.
A simple 5 minute Photoshop job to make lights and darks appear more vibrant (purely levels adjustments.. no minipulation) shows that both images show the same blood spots.. just taken from different angles.
So in reply to the opening post - I see the same blood in image two that is apparent in image 1.
-
Nice job Pete. The fact that the pictures are at different angles, show different bits of carpet, and are of different qualities makes it all difficult to compare them.
-
Nice job Pete. The fact that the pictures are at different angles, show different bits of carpet, and are of different qualities makes it all difficult to compare them.
While I agree that comparison is difficult. Pete has done enough to persuade me that these are the same areas of carpet.
-
Nice job Pete. The fact that the pictures are at different angles, show different bits of carpet, and are of different qualities makes it all difficult to compare them.
While I agree that comparison is difficult. Pete has done enough to persuade me that these are the same areas of carpet.
I agree. I have no reason to think that the blood on the carpet is different in the photos. One photo shows a larger area of carpet so it shows more blood. It's also a clearer picture.
-
Mike - I was wondering if my 5 minute circling exercise (i admit quite roughly done) on the photo's you posted shed any more light on what you initially thought.
Thanks
Pete
-
Any thoughts? I might have missed something.
-
Any thoughts? I might have missed something.
Good work Pete but can you sit the photos on top of each other , i believe JB team think they are different .
-
Any thoughts? I might have missed something.
Good work Pete but can you sit the photos on top of each other , i believe JB team think they are different .
That would be difficult as they are taken from different angles, both vertically and horizontally, if that makes sense.
-
So are the pictures of SC body but experts can line them up somehow , dont ask me how mind.
-
Hmm they could be placed on top of each other but there would be a degree of "adding" information to one of the pictures.
The pictures are totally different angles, focal lengths and focus points. You would have to majorly change the information within one of the pictures to make them line up one on top of the other... and I think any lawyer would argue the photo is no longer original.
The key point in what I did is circle patterns that appear in both shots regardless of angles, focus etc..
-
Hmm they could be placed on top of each other but there would be a degree of "adding" information to one of the pictures.
The pictures are totally different angles, focal lengths and focus points. You would have to majorly change the information within one of the pictures to make them line up one on top of the other... and I think any lawyer would argue the photo is no longer original.
The key point in what I did is circle patterns that appear in both shots regardless of angles, focus etc..
-----------------------------------------
My understanding, is that in one of the pictures, an attempt may have been made to clean the bloodstains up, but that whoever tried to do it with a view to trying to eradicate the blood evidence, did not make a very good job of it...
Hence...
The very light traces of where the blood staining, originally existed...
Let us also not forget, that Essex police cut this piece of carpet out from the remainder of the bedroom carpet, and they burned it on a bonfire in the grounds at whf...
-
I don't really understand this business of cutting up carpets. I could understand it if they got rid of all the carpets where there was blood, but not bits of them.
-
I don't really understand this business of cutting up carpets. I could understand it if they got rid of all the carpets where there was blood, but not bits of them.
I guess initially they would have cut a section of carpet that showed the blood spatter/pooling etc as part of evidence. I can't imagine they would have the time/man power to remove the whole bedroom carpet.
-
I don't really understand this business of cutting up carpets. I could understand it if they got rid of all the carpets where there was blood, but not bits of them.
I guess initially they would have cut a section of carpet that showed the blood spatter/pooling etc as part of evidence. I can't imagine they would have the time/man power to remove the whole bedroom carpet.
------------------------------------------
If you cut the carpet, which contains the very bloodstains by which it would have been possible to reconstruct what took place leading up to, and during, and after the time of Sheila's death, the fact that you then seek to burn and destroy such a vital piece of evidence, suggests to me, that the police who destroyed it, did not want anyone to come along at a later date, to reconstruct what had actually taken place, as alleged...
-
On innocent.org.uk site theres a section on JB and in one of the news articles posted back in 2001 is stated...
Bamber, who had warned police about his unstable sister, broke down and was offered tea and whisky by a kindly sergeant. He appeared to be highly upset and persuaded police to burn bedding and carpets, even though they might have contained further evidence.
Source: http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/jeremybamber/ (http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/jeremybamber/) 8th paragraph from bottom.
-
Pete, can we be sure this is what happened - would the police really do this on the instructions of Jeremy, if they new it might contain valuable evidence? It's what I wondered at the time, and I still do!
I suppose they might do it if they believed that Sheila had done it. It does seem sloppy but ...
-
It is sloppy... but at the time I guess the Police are pretty confident Sheila did it. They've already told Colin Caffell what has happened. JB is now hands on with family affairs/business (i.e. having access to office,vehicles, paperwork etc)... they probably have no reason to think anything is wrong..
example..
JB: Please burn all these things here that are a constant reminder of the horrific night at this house.
COP: Ermm sorry can't do that, its evidence.
JB: Evidence of what? you know who did it!
COP: Good point.. oh well, got any matches.
I'm not saying thats what happened... :)
-
It is sloppy... but at the time I guess the Police are pretty confident Sheila did it. They've already told Colin Caffell what has happened. JB is now hands on with family affairs/business (i.e. having access to office,vehicles, paperwork etc)... they probably have no reason to think anything is wrong..
example..
JB: Please burn all these things here that are a constant reminder of the horrific night at this house.
COP: Ermm sorry can't do that, its evidence.
JB: Evidence of what? you know who did it!
COP: Good point.. oh well, got any matches.
I'm not saying thats what happened... :)
Yes, I can see that happening. I'm not convinced that the burning of the carpet and bedding is any indication of a conspiracy to hide the truth on Jeremy's side or the police's side.
-
Just a thought on looking at the picture of sheila, if you were going to kill yourself would you close your eyes, and if someone was killing you would your eyes be wide open with fear. Understanding that your eyes stay as when you are dead? does that make sense.
-
Just a thought on looking at the picture of sheila, if you were going to kill yourself would you close your eyes, and if someone was killing you would your eyes be wide open with fear. Understanding that your eyes stay as when you are dead? does that make sense.
Yes it does, and I've wondered why she looks so peaceful too.
-
So is the inference here that the defence suspect the blood spots are from SC, while she was mobile between the two shots? Or am I missing something?
-
That photos horrific of Sheila, so sad to see someone like that!
Wish id not looked!
-
That photos horrific of Sheila, so sad to see someone like that!
Wish id not looked!
There aught to be a warning. Seriously.
On another note, I don´t understand the "route" of the blood from her neck-wounds to the large, triangular stain at her armpit - and then from that the two streams on her upper arm with direction to the floor. She should have been sitting up or standing, slanting to the right for blood to get there, but the streams directly from her neck-wonds indicate that she was lying down while being shot - or at least have fallen into a lying position right after. Just don´t get it.
-
I am interested in this eyes shut or eyes opened if you were about to be murdered I have never heard this before does anyone else know anything about this?
-
I have read in a book of an M.E finding a body with one eye open and one closed. In violent death eyes being opened or closed is very irregular. i don't think anything can be determined.
-
On innocent.org.uk site, there's a section . . .
The information you quoted presumably came from the police, and what MT has posted implied that JB hadn't "persuaded police to burn bedding and carpets"; rather, it was the police that had persuaded JB to sign a consent form.
-
From the pictures shown on this thread there should have been two bloodstains on one of the pages of the bible to correspond with the two blood flows on Shiela's upper right arm outer surface.
The page concerned is clearly the front pages of the bible.
What evidence do we have here on the actual bible as being recorded. Were the stains on the bible indicating its resting against the arm when the blood was still wet. The absence of stains would suggest the lower amount of blood involved could have dried before the bible came into contact with Shiela's arm.
-
Poor young woman.
-
When looking on another thread of the X ray photograph showing the fragmented bullet...it was also clear that the necklace pendant also appeared in the x ray.
I am no x ray expert so cannot say wether the x ray was taken from Sheila's front or rear . It does appear to me that the pendant part of the necklace had moved between crime scene and x ray being taken and that the pendant was more or less centrally to the rear...as a consequence of being moved.
My attention had thus been drawn to the pendant.
Look at the first photograph in the thread and you can make out the weighty pendant part to be to the left side of the victims neck. This is not right as we should expect it to be centrally placed at the front due to gravity from when in an upright position.
Unless Sheila or the killer deliberately placed this pendant for which there seems to be no reason to think this then to me it indicates the pendant slipped round to the position shown in the photograph in the course of her body being moved by someone post death.
There are no drag marks recorded.
In my view the pendant moved due to its weight when the body was being carried to the position it was placed in and was carried most likely by two people.
-
When looking on another thread of the X ray photograph showing the fragmented bullet...it was also clear that the necklace pendant also appeared in the x ray.
I am no x ray expert so cannot say wether the x ray was taken from Sheila's front or rear . It does appear to me that the pendant part of the necklace had moved between crime scene and x ray being taken and that the pendant was more or less centrally to the rear...as a consequence of being moved.
My attention had thus been drawn to the pendant.
Look at the first photograph in the thread and you can make out the weighty pendant part to be to the left side of the victims neck. This is not right as we should expect it to be centrally placed at the front due to gravity from when in an upright position.
Unless Sheila or the killer deliberately placed this pendant for which there seems to be no reason to think this then to me it indicates the pendant slipped round to the position shown in the photograph in the course of her body being moved by someone post death.
There are no drag marks recorded.
In my view the pendant moved due to its weight when the body was being carried to the position it was placed in and was carried most likely by two people.
It is a mystery to me why they took x-rays with the pendant still round her neck? But then this case has so many anomalies that you'd think you were watching an episode of Primeval.
-
If they ever make a film of this they need you lot as technical directors the way you analyse everything guns, bullets etc the police must have absolute nightmares going on here is better than any book I ever read without knowing the ending.
-
When looking on another thread of the X ray photograph showing the fragmented bullet...it was also clear that the necklace pendant also appeared in the x ray.
I am no x ray expert so cannot say wether the x ray was taken from Sheila's front or rear . It does appear to me that the pendant part of the necklace had moved between crime scene and x ray being taken and that the pendant was more or less centrally to the rear...as a consequence of being moved.
My attention had thus been drawn to the pendant.
Look at the first photograph in the thread and you can make out the weighty pendant part to be to the left side of the victims neck. This is not right as we should expect it to be centrally placed at the front due to gravity from when in an upright position.
Unless Sheila or the killer deliberately placed this pendant for which there seems to be no reason to think this then to me it indicates the pendant slipped round to the position shown in the photograph in the course of her body being moved by someone post death.
There are no drag marks recorded.
In my view the pendant moved due to its weight when the body was being carried to the position it was placed in and was carried most likely by two people.
Interesting post. I hadn't considered the position of the pendant.
-
If they ever make a film of this they need you lot as technical directors the way you analyse everything guns, bullets etc the police must have absolute nightmares going on here is better than any book I ever read without knowing the ending.
Yes, it's absolutely riveting
(I've pm'd you, btw, Jackie)
-
Sheila Caffell couldn't possibly have shot herself and ended up in this position with her hand actually still clutching the rifle.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=168.0;attach=243;image)