Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Blodwynflower on January 18, 2012, 02:33:PM
-
Good afternoon all
The photograph I am referring to, which has a pair of leggings/tights/trousers hanging over the bannister - I think that it has been discussed on here that they were damp. If these photographs were taken after 10am, and it was August, a (usually) particularly warm month, then wouldn't they be dry. I'm assuming that they were placed there the evening before?
-
Correct...
It is not clear when this photograph was taken?
Some believe this particular picture was taken before the raid team got into the bedroom, and the rifle which was leaning against the bedroom window in the background, was the rifle which WPC Jeapes saw at the bedroom window before the raid team went to get into the farmhouse. Furthermore, that when this picture was taken Sheila`s body had already been found downstairs, and information broadcast over the telephone link passed to the effect that Sheila had committed suicide...
Alternatively...
I think it more likely that PI Montgomery took rifle from somewhere in bedroom and positioned the rifle so that it was leaning against bedroom window where WPC Jeapes had seen it resting long before the raid team went to get in the house. Montgomery had the benefit of PS Woodcock's presence at the scene to help him to pinpoint where the rifle was when the raid team first got into the bedroom. As I say, I think Montgomery simply placed the rifle back at the window so that when PC Bird took picture 23, it afforded the view seen by the raid team from the vantage point of the middle landing of the main stairs...
PS Woodcock later removed the rifle from Sheila's body at 11:10am, after police put rifle back onto body, after rifle was photographed at bedroom window...
Two photographs exist which show the position of the rifles barrel in different locations against Sheila`S neck - each of these photographs may have been taken either side of photograph 23, checkable by reference to the photographic negatives, showing the sequence with which these three photographs had been and were taken?
According to the contents of police statements nobody moved or touched anything save for DI Cook (SOC) who said he only moved Sheila`s hand so that he could photograph bloodstains on the nightdress?
But...
Surprise, surprise, police moved rifle about, off the body to the window, and then back onto the body, and these activities took place either side of the occasion when PC Bird took photograph 23...
At long last we are close to forcing Essex police to admit that its officers compromised the crime scene, which they blamed Jeremy for doing...
-
Photograph 23?
-
I have received information that the following three photographs were taken in the following order, and that this is significant in helping to prove that police stage managed Sheila's body in the bedroom by manipulating the rifle, onto the body, off the body to the window, back onto the body, and off the body again, involving PI Montgomery, SOCO's, and PS Woodcock...
Stage managing involved training activities involving Sheila's body, and rifle, etc...
The following three photographs were taken in this order:-
-
Whilst testifying at Jeremy's trial, PC Bird told the court that he took pictures of Sheila and June in the bedroom, then the photographs which shows the rifle leaning up against the bedroom window, and that he later returned to the same bedroom to take further photographs of Sheila - these three pictures are a true representation of that testimony...
-
Actually people just need to look at Cooks statements and trial evidence, and Birds statements, to see the actual truth. Which includes reference to photograph 23 which has a rifle leaning against the window.
-
When PC Bird was asked if he witnessed who moved the rifle from Sheila's body to the window, he said that he wasn't present in the bedroom when the rifle was moved, and so he did not know who had actually moved it from the body to the window in time for him to photograph it against the window in photograph 23...
-
Actually people just need to look at Cooks statements and trial evidence, and Birds statements, to see the actual truth. Which includes reference to photograph 23 which has a rifle leaning against the window.
No offence Hartley, but your above instruction presupposes that Cook / Bird were telling the truth. I'm not saying they weren't mind.
-
These three photographs and the time they were taken, exposes the case against Jeremy as nothing less than a complete sham...
-
No offence Hartley, but your above instruction presupposes that Cook / Bird were telling the truth. I'm not saying they weren't mind.
Nothing suggests that they were lying. You can't just make things up and accuse other people of lying without some sort of supporting evidence.
It's ridiculous anyway, the defence are fully aware of the order photographs were taken in, from the negatives.
And Rochy, no I am not offended.
-
Nothing suggests that they were not
Tell that to Mr. Tesko :D
-
Tell that to Mr. Tesko :D
I just did. ;D
-
Lets get the facts right, police deny moving anything other than DI Cook claiming he moved Sheila's hand so that PC Bird could take pictures of the bloodied fingermarks on the nightdress...
Er...
But the gun was moved...
-
Lets put other thyings into persoective...
DC Hammersley blurted out to COLP in 1991, that he didn't find it?
He was referring to the rifle, since PI 'Monty' Montgomery, took possession of that at the scene., followed by the handling of it by PS Woodcock at 11:10am...
-
Correct...
It is not clear when this photograph was taken?
Some believe this particular picture was taken before the raid team got into the bedroom, and the rifle which was leaning against the bedroom window in the background, was the rifle which WPC Jeapes saw at the bedroom window before the raid team went to get into the farmhouse. Furthermore, that when this picture was taken Sheila`s body had already been found downstairs, and information broadcast over the telephone link passed to the effect that Sheila had committed suicide...
Alternatively...
I think it more likely that PI Montgomery took rifle from somewhere in bedroom and positioned the rifle so that it was leaning against bedroom window where WPC Jeapes had seen it resting long before the raid team went to get in the house. Montgomery had the benefit of PS Woodcock's presence at the scene to help him to pinpoint where the rifle was when the raid team first got into the bedroom. As I say, I think Montgomery simply placed the rifle back at the window so that when PC Bird took picture 23, it afforded the view seen by the raid team from the vantage point of the middle landing of the main stairs...
PS Woodcock later removed the rifle from Sheila's body at 11:10am, after police put rifle back onto body, after rifle was photographed at bedroom window...
Two photographs exist which show the position of the rifles barrel in different locations against Sheila`S neck - each of these photographs may have been taken either side of photograph 23, checkable by reference to the photographic negatives, showing the sequence with which these three photographs had been and were taken?
According to the contents of police statements nobody moved or touched anything save for DI Cook (SOC) who said he only moved Sheila`s hand so that he could photograph bloodstains on the nightdress?
But...
Surprise, surprise, police moved rifle about, off the body to the window, and then back onto the body, and these activities took place either side of the occasion when PC Bird took photograph 23...
At long last we are close to forcing Essex police to admit that its officers compromised the crime scene, which they blamed Jeremy for doing...
Mike if the rifle was moved to check for signs of life that i can understand, what possible reason is there to replace the rifle in a different position, a crime scene contaminated by blundering idiots.
-
Mike if the rifle was moved to check for signs of life that i can understand, what possible reason is there to replace the rifle in a different position, a crime scene contaminated by blundering idiots.
Well...
I can assure you and everyone else that I have (seen) a photograph of Sheila on the bed with only a solitary wound to her throat at a time when no rifle was on her body. I have also seen a different photograph of Sheila on the bed at a time when the was no blood running from the corners of her mouth - again, there was no rifle on the body at this time...
It should be clear to everybody and anybody, therefore, that somewhere in the chain of events which took place after the two photographs I have been speaking about were taken, Sheila sustained or received the second fatal shot under the chin, which according to the pathologist, Peter Venezis, was the shot that killed her, instantaneously. It should also be clear that it was the pathologists opinion that the other lower wound was non fatal in nature, and that there was or had been opportunity for a substantial bloodloss before the second fatal chin shot was inflicted. He qualified this during his trial testimony by drawing attention to the considerable amount of blood which stained the upper right part of her nightdress, adding that Sheila could have walked around for sometime, in between both shots being sustained, or he used words to that effect, adding that there was evidence of a delay (as described) between both shots by reference to bruising of the skin around the lower entry wound which informed him that Sheila survived the initial shot to the neck and that she only died once the fatal shot beneath the chin was sustained. I feel I should also draw attention to how the pathologist accounted for how the bloodstain on the front upper part of Sheila`s nightdress got there? He suggested that the use of her arm and right hand had contributed to it.. .
He also commented on the lack or absence of any vertical trails of blood on the nightdress which suggests that she had not been walking immediately around much after receiving the original shot? I would just like to say that I agree with his interpretation, but I would seek to give a reason for this which was/ is that as soon as Sheila received the first shot she. Fell down and brougjt the fingers of her right hand to her neck and fell slightly on her right side which enabled the bloostain on the front upper right hand side to be created or generated. It is quite possible that Sheila remained in that position for quite some time, long enough for the police yto think that she had committed suicide, and long enough for the blood on the nighjtdress to have dried, so tjat when she regained consciousness and walked aout blood did not run vertically down the front of her nightdress..
-
That's the thing Mike, you can't assure us, nobody believes you anymore.
Therefore you either need to produce this mythical photograph, or provide other concrete evidence that it's not just a figment of your imagination.
The main problem is that you have lied to people before, so why should anybody believe you now? On the other hand, there is also no evidence that the people you are accusing of lying (Cook for example) have ever lied.
There's only so many times you can cry wolf.
-
Mike, you do realise what you have actually written in the first sentence of your post? Have as opposed to the usual have seen.
Hartley, it appears Mike is not a lone voice in questioning whether the role of Cook was an altogether honest one in these proceedings. The defence have cast their eye over his role also.
-
Well...
I can assure you....... that I have a photograph of Sheila on the bed with only a solitary wound to her throat at a time when no rifle was on her body. I have also seen a different photograph of Sheila on the bed at a time when the was no blood running from the corners of her mouth - again, there was no rifle on the body at this time...
Any chance you could provide proof of your statement in red? - Thanks
-
Any chance you could provide proof of your stament in red? - Thanks
I saw that but put it down to a typo due to being flustered after being chased in a helicopter.
-
Mike, you do realise what you have actually written in the first sentence of your post? Have as opposed to the usual have seen.
Hartley, it appears Mike is not a lone voice in questioning whether the role of Cook was an altogether honest one in these proceedings. The defence have cast their eye over his role also.
For some reason, the crucial word "seen” is omitted from the text - it has happened on other occasions in other posts I made on other threads. I normally check all my posts to try to ensure that words in my posts have not been changed or omitted altogether, as has happened in this particular instance, so there is no mystery about me having the copy of Sheila on the bed, since I do not, as I say for some reason the crucial word "seen” has gone missing from the text, which changes the information considerably. I will edit the post now to save further misunderstanding...
-
For some reason, the crucial word "seen” is omitted from the text - it has happened on other occasions in other posts I made on other threads. I normally check all my posts to try to ensure that words in my posts have not been changed or omitted altogether, as has happened in this particular instance, so there is no mystery about me having the copy of Sheila on the bed, since I do not, as I say for some reason the crucial word "seen” has gone missing from the text, which changes the information considerably. I will edit the post now to save further misunderstanding...
Okay Mike, its just that I believe you have stated that Z has a copy and I thought he might have given it to you (for passing on to JB's legal team) - never mind.
-
Okay Mike, its just that I believe you have stated that Z has a copy and I thought he might have given it to you (for passing on to JB's legal team) - never mind.
CPS are in possession of the photographs and negatives of Sheila on the bed, at least this is what I have been told recently...