Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on January 26, 2012, 05:18:AM
-
I think there are grounds for believing that DCI 'Taff` Jones could have been murdered to prevent him spilling the beans about the existence of a second silencer and involvement of scenes of crimes officers acting under an influence from ACC Peter Simpson, and DCS 'Mick` Ainsley, to deliberately contaminate the crime scene, involving one of the silencers...
-
Tragic death, or murder?
-
I have received information that just prior to his death that DCI 'Taff` Jones, submitted a report for the attention of ACc Peter Simpson and with a view to bringing its contents to the attention of the DPP. His death followed shortly afterwards...
-
I have received information that just prior to his death that DCI 'Taff` Jones, submitted a report for the attention of ACc Peter Simpson and with a view to bringing its contents to the attention of the DPP. His death followed shortly afterwards...
The contents of this report, focussed upon the silencer, and deliberate contamination of it at whf involving police officers and scenes of crime officers involved in the new (SC/786/85) investigation...
-
What is really odd though, is that none of the police officers, or any relative, or any expert, involved in the silencers find, retention or examination of it, brings it or mentions it, or shows it to DCI Jones, yet one of these silencers ended up on his desk, in his office at Witham police station?
-
What is really odd though, is that none of the police officers, or any relative, or any expert, involved in the silencers find, retention or examination of it, brings it or mentions it, or shows it to DCI Jones, yet one of these silencers ended up on his desk, in his office at Witham police station?
Yet...
PC 'Christopher` Whiddon, was the very officer who went into DCI Jones office when he was not on duty, and he took away the silencer in question, took it to the force amoury and he screwed it directly onto the barrel of the gun (this exercise was videod and photographed), and therefore, the silencer you see in PC Whiddons possession on this occasion, is the actual silencer kept by DCI Jones on his desk?
-
For 26 years PC Whiddon has kept the details of this exercise a closely guarded secret - the actual date when Whiddon performed these duties, and the date he was filmed screwing this silencer onto the barrel of the rifle, occurred when the other silencer was already at the lab'. For this reason PC Whiddons goose is well and truly cooked. He has some explaing to do regarding the existence of this second silencer?
-
I've always considered the "accidental" death of Taff Jones a bit too much of a coincidence.
-
I've always considered the "accidental" death of Taff Jones a bit too much of a coincidence.
Well...
As a result of information received recently, I have been directed towards documentation currently in my possession and told that there should be some reference to a report that was made by DCI Jones about the silencer evidence, and scenes of crimes activities, which `Taff` Jones submitted prior to his untimely death? I can confirm that upon conducting such a search since I received information on Saturday, that I found one of the documents proving the existence of DCI Jones making such a report...
It may be pivotal that DCI Jones submitted this report about the silencer which he supposedly had no involvement with and no knowledge about, followed soon afterwards by his death?
I do not have the actual report, only documentation referring to it - but it would be of great significance for Jeremy. To seize control or obtain possession of this report for obvious reasons...
-
It is almost certain that in his report (aforementioned) DCI Jones would have made some mention of the silencer he kept on his desk, at Witham police station, how it came into his possession, and who took possession of it, and when it was sent to the lab' etc?
-
It is almost certain that in his report (aforementioned) DCI Jones would have made some mention of the silencer he kept on his desk, at Witham police station, how it came into his possession, and who took possession of it, and when it was sent to the lab' etc?
These references to this silencer which had been in his possession and control, until PC Whiddon took it and screwed it onto the rifles barrel, cannot be the same silencer DI Cook had in his possession from morning of 13th August 1985 through to 30th August 1985, for two reasons, (1) Cook has made statements sayIng silencer was in personal possession of that silencer at all times between those dates, and therefore it could not have been the same silencer under the control of DCI Jones, and (2) the silencer Cook had personal control over was sent to the lab` on 30th August 1985, and therefore it could not be the silencer which PC Whiddon took from 'Taff` Jones desk and screwed onto the barrel of the gun, because PC Wgiddon did not officially have anything at all to do with the silencer which had been in Cooks possession and control?
-
It may well be the case that the silencer used to make the additional marks on the kitchen aga, in mid September 1985, was the silencer under the control of DCI Jones, since from 30th August 1985, the other silencer was already at the lab'...
-
i don't see that the any evidence to say he was murdered acedents like that do happen
-
Imagine the turmoil that the existence of this second silencer causes to the case against Jeremy, and the effect it has on the credibility of all the prosecution witnesses...
-
i don't see that the any evidence to say he was murdered acedents like that do happen
Yes they do. It is just the timing of the accident that makes you think. Accidents on farms incidentally (completely nothing to do with this) are quite common. A farmer I used to do work for dowm Beckingham Street Tolleshunt Major fell from a ladder and was killed a few years ago. Anyone who lives in the district will know who I am talking about? But yes accidents in and around the home are very common as well.
-
I will be posting a copy of the document which confirms the existence of `Taff' Jones report on the silencer and scenes of crime later today. It is imperative that Jeremy's legal team obtain a copy of this as soon as possible, since the contents of this report are capable of seriously undermining the silencer evidence...
-
I will be posting a copy of the document which confirms the existence of `Taff' Jones report on the silencer and scenes of crime later today. It is imperative that Jeremy's legal team obtain a copy of this as soon as possible, since the contents of this report are capable of seriously undermining the silencer evidence...
Mike - as you say this could be of critical importance to the defence. It is no secret that a key focus of the defence is the silencer evidence since if that is undermined the prosecution case will be left in tatters. Time is now of the essence as the submissions to the CCRC have to be finalised withing the next few days so the sooner you can provide this material the better will be the chance of including it within the submissions.
-
Mike - as you say this could be of critical importance to the defence. It is no secret that a key focus of the defence is the silencer evidence since if that is undermined the prosecution case will be left in tatters. Time is now of the essence as the submissions to the CCRC have to be finalised withing the next few days so the sooner you can provide this material the better will be the chance of including it within the submissions.
I am currently in Birmingham but I expect to be home by 7pm, or there abouts, and I will post a copy of this document so that you can forward it for the consideration of Simon M...
-
I am currently in Birmingham but I expect to be home by 7pm, or there abouts, and I will post a copy of this document so that you can forward it for the consideration of Simon M...
Thanks Mike.
-
Yes they do. It is just the timing of the accident that makes you think. Accidents on farms incidentally (completely nothing to do with this) are quite common. A farmer I used to do work for dowm Beckingham Street Tolleshunt Major fell from a ladder and was killed a few years ago. Anyone who lives in the district will know who I am talking about? But yes accidents in and around the home are very common as well.
coincidences do happen as well
-
Thanks Mike.
Do you think it will do any harm to the impact this document reference can do regarding the existence of this report by 'Taff` Jones to do with the silencer and scenes of crime, if I post a copy on our forum, or do you think I should post you a copy for you to forward on to SM?
-
Do you think it will do any harm to the impact this document reference can do regarding the existence of this report by 'Taff` Jones to do with the silencer and scenes of crime, if I post a copy on our forum, or do you think I should post you a copy for you to forward on to SM?
Mike - it is difficult for me to judge without seeing the document. Perhaps you could scan and email it to me?
-
It is no secret that DCI Jones was convinced that Sheila shot the others, then herself, and that Jeremy did not kill anyone, in fact, he was of the firm belief that Sheila had tried to lure Jeremy to the farm, by forcing Ralph to make the call to Jeremy, so that if he had come to the farm Sheila had intended to shoot him as well, making him the sixth victim of the tragedy...
-
Mike - it is difficult for me to judge without seeing the document. Perhaps you could scan and email it to me?
Perhaps I should post you a copy first by email, I think this information is significant and that it establishes the existence of a report that has a bearing on the integrity of the silencer., which has for the past 26 years remained hidden. At least now the existence of this report has come to light, and if SM can take steps to obtain the actual contents of this report, it could make a big difference...
-
Perhaps I should post you a copy first by email, I think this information is significant and that it establishes the existence of a report that has a bearing on the integrity of the silencer., which has for the past 26 years remained hidden. At least now the existence of this report has come to light, and if SM can take steps to obtain the actual contents of this report, it could make a big difference...
Mike - you are quite right about this. The silencer has always been central to this case and it remains a key focus of defence attention.
-
Mike - you are quite right about this. The silencer has always been central to this case and it remains a key focus of defence attention.
I am currently in Chesterfield, I will post you the document in question later tonight, so you can forward it on to SM and his team...
-
I am currently in Chesterfield, I will post you the document in question later tonight, so you can forward it on to SM and his team...
Thanks Mike.
-
What has been discovered so late in the day, in the form of this report could prove to be so pivotal in sending this case back to appeal - in a nutshell, a report made by a senior officer who was head of the investigation at the time it was being treated as four murders and a suicide, where Sheila shot the others and then herself. He had thrown the relatives out of the police station on at least one occasion telling them not to come to Witham police station trying to tell the police how to do police business? The relatives and DS Jones were at the heart of the silencer evidence, nd 'Taff` had had words with all concerned parties, telling them all at one time or another that they were wrong about Jeremy...
Since, DCI `Taff` Jones held head position of the original investigation at a time when the relatives and DS `Stan` Jones, were trying to put Jeremy in the frame, and he had told them all in as many words, that they were barkjing up the wrong tree, and he had compiled a report about the silencer and scenes of crime, the contents of the said report needed to have been disclosed because its contents almost certainly in all the circumstances of the case had a bearing on the silencers integrity and all the persons who introduced it into evidence as part of the prosecutions case...
-
coincidences do happen as well
Only by coincidence. ;D
-
So this is a document that refers to a report about a silencer? Where do you think that report may be? Held under pii? I listened to the six odd minute of Guardian interview today via the twitter feed,I think JB threatening to release material if he is unsuccesfull is daft. I would want to get every bit of proof of innocence to be available to my defence.
-
Neil...
I have sent the document reference to the report re DCI Jones, silencer and scenes of crime...
-
In 2003, Ewen Smith was contacted by police officer who used the Christian name 'David', who said that the silencer found by the relatives was kept by DCI 'Taff' Jones on his desk at Witham police station for a very long time, and that it was PC Whiddon who had gone along into 'Taffs' office when he was not on duty and taken possession of this silencer and took it along to the force armoury where Whiddon screwed the silencer onto the barrel of the anshulz rfile to see if it fitted? Once Whiddon disco vered it did fit the rifles barrel, he arranged for that silencer to be sent to the lab' to be checked...
Now...
This does not equate with the official version of events of what is supposed to have happened with the silencer which the relatives found on 10th August 1985?
-
In 2003, Ewen Smith was contacted by police officer who used the Christian name 'David', who said that the silencer found by the relatives was kept by DCI 'Taff' Jones on his desk at Witham police station for a very long time, and that it was PC Whiddon who had gone along into 'Taffs' office when he was not on duty and taken possession of this silencer and took it along to the force armoury where Whiddon screwed the silencer onto the barrel of the anshulz rfile to see if it fitted? Once Whiddon disco vered it did fit the rifles barrel, he arranged for that silencer to be sent to the lab' to be checked...
Now...
This does not equate with the official version of events of what is supposed to have happened with the silencer which the relatives found on 10th August 1985?
According to the official version of events, relatives found silencer in gun cupboard on 10th August 1985, after police had given keys to whf back to family on 9th. The silencer was supposedly taken back to Ann Eatons home and examined in the kitchen before being put into storage for a couple of days until DS ' Stan' Jones came to collect it on the evening of 12th August 1985, who in turn took it away and placed it in a secure drawer in the scenes of crime department overnight. On the following morning he was supposed to have showed this silencer to PI 'Bob' Miller who advised him to give it to DCI 'Ron' Cook, who took it along to Huntingdon Lab' that morning and allowed Glyinis Howard to provisionally examine it. She in turn gave the silencer back to Cook, who took it away because it needed to be fingerprinted, which was carried out on 15th August 985 (oblique light test) and on 23rd August 1985 (superglue). Cook retained possession and control of the silencer at all times throughout this period, until 29th August 1985, at which stage he dismantled the silencer by removing its baffle plates and separating the first five baffles, top washer and end cap. He then rebuilt the silencer and screwed it directly onto the barrel of the anshulz rifle (and took pictures of this exercise). On the following day (30thy August 1985) Cook sent the silencer to the lab' for the attention of the ballistic expert Malcolm Fletcher (MDF), where the silencer remained until it was produced at the trial in October 1986...
-
Once this silencer was at the lab' there came a time when MDF dismantled the silencer (which Cook had previously done) and the ballistic expert found a small flake of dried blood between either the first two baffles, or between baffles five and six (depending upon which version of events you choose to accept as being true). What MDF then did (according to him) is hand the silencer and the flake over to the blood expert, John Hayward, who in turn set about analysing the flake of blood which produced the blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1 aqnd HP 2-1 - this activity was obtained from examination of the blood from this flake between 12th to 19th September 1985...
-
The blood group activity (A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1) was later attributed by the blood expert (Hayward) as being unique and exclusive to Sheila Caffel, although tests also established that one of the relatives also had the same combination of blood groups as Sheila (Robert Boutflour)...
-
Now...
none of this equates with the fact that DCI 'Taff' Jones had the silencer which the relatives found, on his desk at Witham police station for a very long time before it was eventually sent to the lab' by PC Whiddon (in all the circumstances described previously)?
-
Now...
none of this equates with the fact that DCI 'Taff' Jones had the silencer which the relatives found, on his desk at Witham police station for a very long time before it was eventually sent to the lab' by PC Whiddon (in all the circumstances described previously)?
According to the information which the police officer (David) told Ewen Smith in 2003, DCI Jones was using the silencer in question s a paper weight...
-
According to the information which the police officer (David) told Ewen Smith in 2003, DCI Jones was using the silencer in question s a paper weight...
Now...
Ewen Smiths informant, also told him that there were two other police officers who could vouch for the fact that the silencer in question was kept on 'Taff' Jones desk in his office, and that PC Whiddon took possession of it as described and took it along to the force armoury where the rifle was being kept at that time, and had screwed it onto the barrel of the rifle - one of the named police officers who David identified was PC Whiddon himself...
-
Now...
Ewen Smiths informant, also told him that there were two other police officers who could vouch for the fact that the silencer in question was kept on 'Taff' Jones desk in his office, and that PC Whiddon took possession of it as described and took it along to the force armoury where the rifle was being kept at that time, and had screwed it onto the barrel of the rifle - one of the named police officers who David identified was PC Whiddon himself...
I do not know the name of the second officer, but if I had to hazard a guess, it would have had to be either PI 'Bob' Miller, or DI 'Ron' Cook...
-
One thing is certain, and that is that the silencer which DCI Jones had control and possession of, could not have been the same silencer that all the other witnesses have referred to (in the official version of events) since if it was the same silencer how would it have been subject of the facts as relied upon in the official version of events, and those of DCI Jones account?
-
One thing is certain, and that is that the silencer which DCI Jones had control and possession of, could not have been the same silencer that all the other witnesses have referred to (in the official version of events) since if it was the same silencer how would it have been subject of the facts as relied upon in the official version of events, and those of DCI Jones account?
It is also known that the anshulz rifle remained in the force armoury until 20th September 1985, at which stage it was submitted to the lab' for the attention of MDF, and so any activity involving PC Whiddon screwing the silencer onto the barrel of that rifle, had to have occurred before the occasion the rifle was sent to the lab' on that occasion...
-
It is also known that the anshulz rifle remained in the force armoury until 20th September 1985, at which stage it was submitted to the lab' for the attention of MDF, and so any activity involving PC Whiddon screwing the silencer onto the barrel of that rifle, had to have occurred before the occasion the rifle was sent to the lab' on that occasion...
Therefore...
the photographs of PC Whiddon screwing the aforementioned silencer onto the barrel of the rifle must have been taken on a date prior to or on 20th September 1985:-
-
Note...
that there was no exhibit label attached to the silencer at the time PC Whiddon performed these duties?
-
Since the anshulz rifle was kept in the force armoury until 20th September 1985, PC Whiddons involvement with it and the silencer he took from 'Taff' Jones desk, he must have performed the exercise of screwing the silencer onto the rifle prior to the rifles submission to the lab' on that occasion?
We also now know...
that on 20th September 1985, a silencer was also sent along to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres...
-
Since the anshulz rifle was kept in the force armoury until 20th September 1985, PC Whiddons involvement with it and the silencer he took from 'Taff' Jones desk, he must have performed the exercise of screwing the silencer onto the rifle prior to the rifles submission to the lab' on that occasion?
We also now know...
that on 20th September 1985, a silencer was also sent along to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres...
The silencer sent to the lab' on 20th September 1985, to be checked for blood and fibres, was not examined until 25th September 1985, at which point paint from the aga surround was detected to be present upon it?
-
What we have at this point then, are two different identical looking silencers at the lab' - one which had been there from 30th August 1985, and a second one sent there on 20th September 1985...
-
How could both silencers be the one which the relatives found inside the gun cupboard on 10th August 1985?
-
How could both silencers be the one which the relatives found inside the gun cupboard on 10th August 1985?
How could both silencers have Sheila's blood found inside it in the form of the flake...
-
How could both silencers have Sheila's blood found inside it in the form of the flake...
How could both of these identical silencers have paint ingrained into the same areas upon them?
-
Why would junior officers be doing things with the silencer behind DCI 'Taff' Jones back, if the official version of events is to be believed? Surely, DS 'Stan' Jones, and PI 'Bob' Miller, and DI 'Ron' Cook, would not be sending a silencer to the lab' on 13th august 1985, and performing all manner of tests and examinations upon a silencer without informing the head of the investigation? Remember, the relatives were not exactly flavour of the month in the mind of 'Taff' Jones when he was head of the investigation, so I doubt very much that the official version of events is true or the only version of events - it is much more likely that there existed two identical looking silencers which have for one reason or another, become merged into one and the same...
-
The points Mike has made about the silencer are very sound points and they go to the heart of this case. Although it is complex and difficult to follow at times, I urge forum members to take the time to read Mike's posts on this subject carefully and follow the logic of his arguments.
There is confirmation that the former Essex Police officer "David" exists and he has given an account exactly as Mike describes.
-
I will be posting a copy of the document which confirms the existence of `Taff' Jones report on the silencer and scenes of crime later today. It is imperative that Jeremy's legal team obtain a copy of this as soon as possible, since the contents of this report are capable of seriously undermining the silencer evidence...
I appreciate Mike may be busy, but it would be be interesting to see the document Mike has referred to, and said he would post yesterday!
-
I appreciate Mike may be busy, but it would be be interesting to see the document Mike has referred to, and said he would post yesterday!
Mike initially said he would post it, but then very sensibly asked whether it should be sent to Simon McKay rather than be posted on the forum. Mike agreed to send it to me, which he did as promised yesterday evening. I do not see any harm in Mike posting the document here.
-
The points Mike has made about the silencer are very sound points and they go to the heart of this case. Although it is complex and difficult to follow at times, I urge forum members to take the time to read Mike's posts on this subject carefully and follow the logic of his arguments.
There is confirmation that the former Essex Police officer "David" exists and he has given an account exactly as Mike describes.
ngb - the silencer issue is something I believe is an issue. The Sutherst report in relation to the scratch marks upon the Aga surround (or not at the time) support Mike's in depth analysis.
Was the silencer ever used!
However, and I think you know my take on this, was an non silencered gun used by SC or JB?
SC would not need to fit a silencer - OK, but nor would JB. I believe we have established the gun rapport is not loud and a silencer used on the rifle would be cumbersome. Looking at the photos of the rifle with a silencer fitted it looks very unwieldy.
The silencer story I believe may have been manufactured and the blood flake doctored, but done to convince the court that JB did it, as EP came to believe JB did do it and the prosecution needed further "evidence" to clinch it (and just for clarification fabricating evidence, even for ncc, is not something I support or believe in)
My concern is, and I am sure it's been covered before, but how is JB' legal team approaching this subject, indeed are they pursuing this line at all.
Has the silencer issue been covered in previous appeals or is there new stuff?
If it been used before won't it be rejected again?
-
ngb - the silencer issue is something I believe is an issue. The Sutherst report in relation to the scratch marks upon the Aga surround (or not at the time) support Mike's in depth analysis.
Was the silencer ever used!
However, and I think you know my take on this, was an non silencered gun used by SC or JB?
SC would not need to fit a silencer - OK, but nor would JB. I believe we have established the gun rapport is not loud and a silencer used on the rifle would be cumbersome. Looking at the photos of the rifle with a silencer fitted it looks very unwieldy.
The silencer story I believe may have been manufactured and the blood flake doctored, but done to convince the court that JB did it, as EP came to believe JB did do it and the prosecution needed further "evidence" to clinch it (and just for clarification fabricating evidence, even for ncc, is not something I support or believe in)
My concern is, and I am sure it's been covered before, but how is JB' legal team approaching this subject, indeed are they pursuing this line at all.
Has the silencer issue been covered in previous appeals or is there new stuff?
If it been used before won't it be rejected again?
Nick - you make some very good points.
JB's legal team are certainly pursuing the silencer issue. There is new material which has not been presented before.
-
As the poor twins were shot lying down in bed, has it been recorded what angle the shots were made at?
The twins were not moved in anyway and therefore the position they were in and the angle of the head shots could be significant.
Could the possible height of the murderer be established this way at all?
This of course applies to all possible scenarios
SC with or without silencer fitted / JB with or without silencer fitted.
Apologies for the mental pictures created by the next bit.
I have looked at the forum diagrams and Daniel had 5 shots to the back of his head and Nicholas had 3 shots to the face. Has it ever been established where the killer stood in the room and how the shots were dispatched i.e. the killer standing betwen the twin beds shooting one and then turning around and shooting the other, and I assume they were shot in that part of the body that simply faced the killer?
Were some of these shots contact shots and if so did any of the boys blood appear on or in the silencer - I don't think so?
-
As the poor twins were shot lying down in bed, has it been recorded what angle the shots were made at?
The twins were not moved in anyway and therefore the position they were in and the angle of the head shots could be significant.
Could the possible height of the murderer be established this way at all?
This of course applies to all possible scenarios
SC with or without silencer fitted / JB with or without silencer fitted.
Apologies for the mental pictures created by the next bit.
I have looked at the forum diagrams and Daniel had 5 shots to the back of his head and Nicholas had 3 shots to the face. Has it ever been established where the killer stood in the room and how the shots were dispatched i.e. the killer standing betwen the twin beds shooting one and then turning around and shooting the other, and I assume they were shot in that part of the body that simply faced the killer?
Were some of these shots contact shots and if so did any of the boys blood appear on or in the silencer - I don't think so?
I have not seen any evidence relating to the points you raise about the twins. I doubt if it would have been possible to judge the height of the murderer as other factors, in particular the way in which the rifle was held, would affect the angle of the shots. I do not believe the order of shots was established. Since it appears that (fortunately) both twins were asleep when shot my guess is that all shots were fired in rapid succcession, possibly alternating between the two between shots.
-
I thought the facial shots were exit wounds? i was under the impression that both twins were shot to the back of the head.
-
Yes they do. It is just the timing of the accident that makes you think. Accidents on farms incidentally (completely nothing to do with this) are quite common. A farmer I used to do work for dowm Beckingham Street Tolleshunt Major fell from a ladder and was killed a few years ago. Anyone who lives in the district will know who I am talking about? But yes accidents in and around the home are very common as well.
How many people are actually killed as a result of an accident in their own home, i think the numbers are quite high, its where most accidents take place.
It could simply be a matter of Taff falling off the ladder, an accident and nothing more, in my opinion.
Grahame where is the spellchecker? i have seen people using it, but i cant seem to find it. :)
-
As the poor twins were shot lying down in bed, has it been recorded what angle the shots were made at?
The twins were not moved in anyway and therefore the position they were in and the angle of the head shots could be significant.
Could the possible height of the murderer be established this way at all?
This of course applies to all possible scenarios
SC with or without silencer fitted / JB with or without silencer fitted.
Apologies for the mental pictures created by the next bit.
I have looked at the forum diagrams and Daniel had 5 shots to the back of his head and Nicholas had 3 shots to the face. Has it ever been established where the killer stood in the room and how the shots were dispatched i.e. the killer standing betwen the twin beds shooting one and then turning around and shooting the other, and I assume they were shot in that part of the body that simply faced the killer?
Were some of these shots contact shots and if so did any of the boys blood appear on or in the silencer - I don't think so?
I see you've been watching CSI on TV.? :D
-
Grahame where is the spellchecker? i have seen people using it, but i cant seem to find it. :)
After you make your post it should be at the right hand end of the same line of the word "post"?
-
I thought the facial shots were exit wounds? i was under the impression that both twins were shot to the back of the head.
sorry to bump this up, are they exit wounds or not?
-
sorry to bump this up, are they exit wounds or not?
Daniel's are exit wounds, Nicholas's are entry wounds.
-
Daniel's are exit wounds, Nicholas's are entry wounds.
Were the twins facing each other, or facing the same way?
-
Were the twins facing each other, or facing the same way?
I have not seen any witness statement dealing with that. It should be shown in the crime scene photographs.
-
How many people are actually killed as a result of an accident in their own home, i think the numbers are quite high, its where most accidents take place.
It could simply be a matter of Taff falling off the ladder, an accident and nothing more, in my opinion.
Grahame where is the spellchecker? i have seen people using it, but i cant seem to find it. :)
Just a coincidence , policeman just about to give evidence for the defense , fall's of step ladder at home and kill's himself , another coincidence Jeremy Bamber kill's four people , while his his paranoid schizophrenic sister is at home , both would be a first in British history , but both just coincidence's !!
-
I see you've been watching CSI on TV.? :D
Yes, the CSI bit did cross my mind; however modern CSI & EP (80's style) don't really go together do they ;D
-
Mike initially said he would post it, but then very sensibly asked whether it should be sent to Simon McKay rather than be posted on the forum. Mike agreed to send it to me, which he did as promised yesterday evening. I do not see any harm in Mike posting the document here.
Sorry I have not been at home all day, so I have not had opportunity to post the document which mentions this report re DCI Jones and the silencer/scenes of crime...
So...
Here it is:-
-
The full contents of this report about the silencer and scenes of crime, should be requested because its contents will have a significant bearing on the information which has been released or which has come forward concerning the second silencer, which was under the control of DCI 'Taff' Jones, and PC 'Christopher Whiddon...
According to the official version of events, neither of these two police officers (DCI 'Taff' Jones and PC 'Christopher Whiddon) had any involvement with the silencer before it went to the lab?
-
Since it has now come to light that a second silencer did exist, which was sent to the lab' on 20th September 1985, even though another silencer had been at the lab' sine 30th August 1985, information which was provided to Ewen Smith in 2003 by a police officer by the Christian name of Dave, or David, everyone will be trying to fathom out who that officer (Dave/David) could be/was?
Let me start the ball rolling, with a suggestion...
DC David Robert Hammersley (SOC)?
-
The following information should be helpful to all those who genuinely want to know the truth about the silencer, blood and paint evidence. There were in fact two identical looking Parker Hale silencers, which for simplistic reasons I shall refer to as, silencer (1) and silencer (2)...
Silencer (2) was the one found by the relatives, it did not get sent to the lab` to be checked for blood and fibres, until 20th September 1985. It was not actually examined for the very first time until 25th September 1985. Paint from the aga surround was found to be ingrained into its end cap. No blood which was unique and exclusive to Sheila was found inside this (2) silencer. It originally had a grey hair stuck to it when Peter Eaton handed it over to DS 'Stan` Jones on evening of 12th August. It also had a distinctive shiny scratch mark along its edge when examined by David Boutflour at Ann Eatons house on 10th August...
Silencer (2) did not get sent to the lab` on 13th August. It was not fingerprinted by oblique light test on 15th August, nor by superglue on 23rd August. It was not dismantled, rebuilt, and screwed onto the barrel of the rifle by DI 'Ron` Cook, on 29th August, and it was not sent to the lab' for the attention of MDF on 30th August...
A flake of blood was not found inside silencer (2) that was the blood of Sheila...
-
The following information should be helpful to all those who genuinely want to know the truth about the silencer, blood and paint evidence. There were in fact two identical looking Parker Hale silencers, which for simplistic reasons I shall refer to as, silencer (1) and silencer (2)...
Silencer (2) was the one found by the relatives, it did not get sent to the lab` to be checked for blood and fibres, until 20th September 1985. It was not actually examined for the very first time until 25th September 1985. Paint from the aga surround was found to be ingrained into its end cap. No blood which was unique and exclusive to Sheila was found inside this (2) silencer. It originally had a grey hair stuck to it when Peter Eaton handed it over to DS 'Stan` Jones on evening of 12th August. It also had a distinctive shiny scratch mark along its edge when examined by David Boutflour at Ann Eatons house on 10th August...
Silencer (2) did not get sent to the lab` on 13th August. It was not fingerprinted by oblique light test on 15th August, nor by superglue on 23rd August. It was not dismantled, rebuilt, and screwed onto the barrel of the rifle by DI 'Ron` Cook, on 29th August, and it was not sent to the lab' for the attention of MDF on 30th August...
A flake of blood was not found inside silencer (2) that was the blood of Sheila...
Silencer (1) was the other silencer sent to the lab` on 13th August and 30th August. It got fingerprinted on 15th and 23rd August, and it was dismantled, rebuilt and screwed onto the barrel of the rifle on 29th August 1985...
-
Essex police were faced with the following dilemma, two different identical looking silencers (1) and ( 2), where blood was associated with (1) and paint from the aga surround associated with the (2) other?
-
Essex police were faced with the following dilemma, two different identical looking silencers (1) and ( 2), where blood was associated with (1) and paint from the aga surround associated with the (2) other?
They got around this problem by seeking to merge (1 and 2) into the same silencer, which from that point onward became referred to by the identifying mark, DRB/1, and adopting the following course of action:-
-
They got around this problem by seeking to merge (1 and 2) into the same silencer, which from that point onward became referred to by the identifying mark, DRB/1, and adopting the following course of action:-
Deny the existence of two silencers, and do not disclose any information about who took silencer (2) to lab` on 20th September 1985?
-
Since it has now come to light that a second silencer did exist, which was sent to the lab' on 20th September 1985, even though another silencer had been at the lab' sine 30th August 1985, information which was provided to Ewen Smith in 2003 by a police officer by the Christian name of Dave, or David, everyone will be trying to fathom out who that officer (Dave/David) could be/was?
Let me start the ball rolling, with a suggestion...
DC David Robert Hammersley (SOC)?
PC David Bird (SOC)...
-
Deny the existence of two silencers, and do not disclose any information about who took silencer (2) to lab` on 20th September 1985?
Deny that anyone other than David Boutflour found a silencer at the scene...
-
It was also necessary to deny that DS 'Stan' Jones had seized any exhibits from the scene from an early stage, so that although he took possession of items, SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and by implication item SBJ/1, when the case (SC/688/85) was one of four murders and a suicide, these had to be discarded altogether once the nature of the investigation changed (SC/786/85) five murders - because to leave them (SBJ exhibits) un hidden, would expose how many silencers really existed...
-
I am sorry if I am repeating ground which has already been covered on this thread. I haven't had time to read in detail, just to skim over it. But what immediately came to mind was this clip that I saw on the ITV website.
http://www.itnsource.com/shotlist//ITN/1986/10/28/AS281086002/?s=jeremy+bamber&st=0&pn=1
Have a look at about 27 seconds. Is this the PC Whiddon that you are talking about? Is this the same occasion that you are referring to when he screws the silencer onto the rifle? If so this looks like an official press conference. ITV have original footage of this. They must be able to tell us the date it took place. Just an idea.
-
I am sorry if I am repeating ground which has already been covered on this thread. I haven't had time to read in detail, just to skim over it. But what immediately came to mind was this clip that I saw on the ITV website.
http://www.itnsource.com/shotlist//ITN/1986/10/28/AS281086002/?s=jeremy+bamber&st=0&pn=1
Have a look at about 27 seconds. Is this the PC Whiddon that you are talking about? Is this the same occasion that you are referring to when he screws the silencer onto the rifle? If so this looks like an official press conference. ITV have original footage of this. They must be able to tell us the date it took place. Just an idea.
PC 'Christopher' Whiddon, was photographed and videoed on different occasions with the rifle and silencer - see these two examples:-
-
On each of these occasions the silencer did not have any exhibit label attached to it, nor was its integrity being safeguarded...
-
Although the silencer has had three different exhibit references at different stages of the investigations, (1) SBJ/1, (2) DB/1 and (3) DRB/1, only two exhibit labels bearing signatures have been disclosed:-
The signature of (a) DCI 'Taff' Jones, (b) PI 'Bob' Miller, or (c) PC Whiddon, do not appear on either for some reason...
-
Where is the missing exhibit label bearing the identifying mark of (SC/688/85) SBJ/1?
-
If DCI 'Taff' Jones had possession of a silencer for a considerable length of time until PC Whiddon came along to take control of it, why is DCI Jones signature missing from either of these exhibit labels?
-
If DCI 'Taff' Jones had possession of a silencer for a considerable length of time until PC Whiddon came along to take control of it, why is DCI Jones signature missing from either of these exhibit labels?
Who gave the silencer to DCI 'Taff' Jones, to allow him to keep it on his desk in his office at Witham police station?
-
How could DCI 'Taff' Jones, and DI Cook both have control and possession of the same silencer, at the same time?
-
Now it is a well known secret that DCI 'Taff' Jones did not take too kindly to the relatives trying to interfere with the investigation, especially during the early stages when he was head of the investigation (SC/688/85) and that he in fact threw the relatives out of the police station on one occasion, and so bearing in mind the timing of the alleged find of the silencer by the relatives in the gun cupboard at whf on 10th August 1985, this silencer which was handed to DS 'Stan' Jones by Peter Eaton on evening of 12th August 1985, must have been brought to the attention of DCI Jones, by DS 'Stan' Jones. It is unthinkable that DS Jones would not inform DCI Jones that the relatives had found such a silencer? It is even more unthinkable that because of the attitude that DCI Jones had regarding the interfering nature of the relatives who were hell bent on trying to put Jeremy in the frame, that DCI Jones would allow DI Cook to take that silencer to the lab' without he (DI Cook) bringing this to his attention?
DCI Jones, thought the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for these murders, and he would have suspected that any find of a silencer or attempt to introduce such a silencer into the investigation by the relatives was nothing but a ruse to pin the blame on Jeremy. In my view, he would have proceeded with extreme caution once the relatives sought to introduce the silencer evidence into the investigation. This is why I think the silencer kept on DCI 'Taff' Jones desk was the one introduced by the relatives with the help of DS 'Stan' Jones...
Why would DCI Jones allow a silencer that was introduced by the relatives, to be sent to the lab' on 13th August 1985, and keep the other silencer found by DS Jones on his desk in his office at Witham police station?
He wouldn't, and he didn't...
The silencer kept on 'Taff' Jones office desk was the one introduced by the relatives, and the one sent to the lab' on 13th August 1985, was the one found at the scene (SBJ/1) by DS 'Stan' Jones...
-
If I am wrong...
Then a number of police officers were conspiring behind the back of DCI 'Taff' Jones, from a very early stage, at a time when the relatives were not flavour of the month in the mind of DCI 'Taff' Jones (head of the investigation at that time) which included (1) DS 'Stan' Jones, (2) PI 'Bob' Miller, and (3) DI 'Ron' Cook...
-
If I am wrong...
Then a number of police officers were conspiring behind the back of DCI 'Taff' Jones, from a very early stage, at a time when the relatives were not flavour of the month in the mind of DCI 'Taff' Jones (head of the investigation at that time) which included (1) DS 'Stan' Jones, (2) PI 'Bob' Miller, and (3) DI 'Ron' Cook...
Why from such an early stage would DS 'Stan' Jones, PI 'Bob' Miller, and DI 'Ron' Cook, be conspiring behind the back of DCI 'Taff' jones relating to a silencer that was being introduced by the relatives who were considered to be interfering with the original investigation?
They wouldn't, and they didn't...
-
The silencer (1) took to the lab' by DI 'Ron' Cook was the one (SBJ/1), which DS 'Stan' Jones took from the scene along with three other exhibits (SBJ/4, SBJ/3, and SBJ/2) from an early stage...
-
The silencer (1) took to the lab' by DI 'Ron' Cook was the one (SBJ/1), which DS 'Stan' Jones took from the scene along with three other exhibits (SBJ/4, SBJ/3, and SBJ/2) from an early stage...
Once DS 'Stan' Jones took possession of the silencer which the relatives sought to introduce into the investigation, it is almost certain that he brought this to the attention of his senior officer, DCI 'Taff' Jones, and that this was how DCI Jones ended up with it in his possession, so that as of 13th August 1985, one silencer (SBJ/1) was taken to the lab' by DI 'Ron' Cook, and the other was retained by DCI 'Taff' Jones on his desk in his office at Witham police station...
-
The silencer (1) took to the lab' by DI 'Ron' Cook was the one (SBJ/1), which DS 'Stan' Jones took from the scene along with three other exhibits (SBJ/4, SBJ/3, and SBJ/2) from an early stage...
The other silencer (2) introduced by the relatives as part of their scheme to pin the blame on Jeremy, remained on DCI 'Taff' Jones desk at Witham police station until PC Whiddon stepped in, and took it along to the force armoury and screwed it into the barrel of the anshulz rifle. Then it was eventually submitted to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres on 20th September 1985, and not actually examined for the very first time until 25th September 1985, at which point paint from the aga surround was found ingrained upon it...
-
Once the nature of the investigation changed from SC/688/85 into SC/786/85, both silencers and the blood evidence from one (1) and the paint evidence from the other (2) were merged into being found in the same silencer...
-
Once the nature of the investigation changed from SC/688/85 into SC/786/85, both silencers and the blood evidence from one (1) and the paint evidence from the other (2) were merged into being found in the same silencer...
This came about because of the relationship between the heads of investigation and the relatives, where DCI 'Taff' Jones did not particular get on well with the relatives because of their interfering natures, when the investigation was SC/688/85, whereas, when the natuire of the investigation changed into SC/786/85, DCS 'Mick' Ainsley became their best friend...
-
PC 'Christopher' Whiddon, was photographed and videoed on different occasions with the rifle and silencer - see these two examples:-
What dates are the two occasions Mike & also are they the actual items used in the murder.im pretty sure looking at the photo it's the actual rifle as it seems to have stock damage.if it is so I can't see the law showing the murder weapon pre trial. The act of screwing the silencer on for the cameras would of been to show SC couldn't of shot herself "silencer on" so to speak.i would of thought the jury would of seen that demonstration first,before the general public. Wouldn't a demonstration of this kind prejudice a trial if it shown Pre Verdict?
-
What dates are the two occasions Mike & also are they the actual items used in the murder.im pretty sure looking at the photo it's the actual rifle as it seems to have stock damage.if it is so I can't see the law showing the murder weapon pre trial. The act of screwing the silencer on for the cameras would of been to show SC couldn't of shot herself "silencer on" so to speak.i would of thought the jury would of seen that demonstration first,before the general public. Wouldn't a demonstration of this kind prejudice a trial if it shown Pre Verdict?
Yes if that was so, that the silencer was screwed onto the gun for that reason the judge would have ruled a mistrial. So I should thin the photo was taken after the trial?
-
Yes if that was so, that the silencer was screwed onto the gun for that reason the judge would have ruled a mistrial. So I should thin the photo was taken after the trial?
So. With respect.whats all the song and dance about?
-
So. With respect.whats all the song and dance about?
Not sure?
-
Not sure?
I'm sure time won't tell.... ;)
-
I'm sure time won't tell.... ;)
Don't count on it - fact is that PC Whiddon did take the silencer from DCI 'Taff' Jones desk, and he did take it along to the force armoury, and he did screw it onto the barrel of the anshulz rifle, and he did all these things before that silencer (2) and the anshulz rifle, were both sent along to the lab' on 20th September 1985...
Now if he did that before silencer (2) and the anshulz rifle were sent to the lab' on 20th September 1985, then he obviously put the silencer at risk of being contaminated. This becomes important if we go along with the one silencer in existence approach, since it provides a legitimate opportunity for blood that was dried into and onto the thread on the end of the rifles barrel, to be forced by dynamic process back into the silencer when PC Whiddon screwed that silencer onto the barrel of the gun before 20th September 1985. The barrel of that rifle was pho0tograihed at the scene resting against the neck of Sheila in close proximity to running and leaking blood, and so it would not be too difficult to imagine how some of Sheila's blood could have got onto and into the thread of the rifles barrel at that point. If you then get two or more police officers screwing a silencer onto the thread of that rifle, then the consequences could be catastrophic in so far as contamination or the risk of contamination having occurred by these events having taken place...
-
Why did DCI 'Taff' Jones submit a report re the silencer and scenes of crime, if he had nothing whatsoever to do with it, or know nothing at all about it?
-
So when are the pictures dated Mike?
-
Why did DCI 'Taff' Jones submit a report re the silencer and scenes of crime, if he had nothing whatsoever to do with it, or know nothing at all about it?
For some as yet unexplained unknown reason, DCI 'Taff' Jones has been written out of the script as far as the silencer is/was concerned - DS 'Stan' Jones don't mention him, PI 'Bob' Miller don't mention him, DI 'Ron' Cook, don't mention him, its thought Essex police did not want any reference to the involvement of 'Taff' Jones with the silencer, once he was dead and out of the way...
-
What is the date of the report you have loaded Mike?
-
So when are the pictures dated Mike?
That information, should be in the possession of those representing Jeremy's interests, There are two photographs which show the silencer fitted to the barrel of the rifle, one which was taken by DI 'Ron' Cook, on 29th August 1985, and the other when PC Whiddon took the silencer from the desk of DCI ;'Taff' Jones along to the force armoury to screw it onto9 the barrel of the rifle...
To date...
neither Di 'Ron' Cook, nor PC 'Chris' Whiddon, have denied taking the silencer and screwing it onto the barrel of the gun in the circumstances which my informants have said they undertook such action...
-
What is the date of the report you have loaded Mike?
I have been informed that the date of this report is dated after the nature of the investigation altered from SC/688/85 to SC/786/85, after DCS 'Mick' Ainsley took over as head of the new investigation. I have not yet seen the actual report, I have only been told about it, and I have looked for and found the reference to it, which my informant told me should exist in the file...
Obviously...
Those representing Jeremy and the CCRC will have to request not only the exerts from this report that are mentioned, but also the full report since its contents may have a significant bearing upon the credibility and integrity of the silencer evidence and how scenes of crime officers deliberately contaminated the crime scene by scratching the aga surround inside the kitchen at whf on 12th September 1985...
Are you trying to suggest that no such report exists?
-
That information, should be in the possession of those representing Jeremy's interests, There are two photographs which show the silencer fitted to the barrel of the rifle, one which was taken by DI 'Ron' Cook, on 29th August 1985, and the other when PC Whiddon took the silencer from the desk of DCI ;'Taff' Jones along to the force armoury to screw it onto9 the barrel of the rifle...
To date...
neither Di 'Ron' Cook, nor PC 'Chris' Whiddon, have denied taking the silencer and screwing it onto the barrel of the gun in the circumstances which my informants have said they undertook such action...
If that's the case, JB defence team must of been shockingly bad. Photographic evidence that showed silencer and rifle connected would of shown to any jury member the possibility of contamination. That is of course if it is the "case" silencer and not an example silencer, which would also explain no exhibit label,I would suggest. Of course,common sense would have you paint it yellow to identify it as such, but as we know, not a lot of common sense in this case....
-
"no report" Mike.
I don't know mike,so I couldn't say.
I dont think it's going to make any diference however
To little,Much to late
-
If that's the case, JB defence team must of been shockingly bad. Photographic evidence that showed silencer and rifle connected would of shown to any jury member the possibility of contamination. That is of course if it is the "case" silencer and not an example silencer, which would also explain no exhibit label,I would suggest. Of course,common sense would have you paint it yellow to identify it as such, but as we know, not a lot of common sense in this case....
Silencer sent to lab' on 13th August 1985, was the same silencer which DI 'Ron' Cook, dismantled, rebuilt ans screwed onto the barrel of the gun on 29th August 1985, you can tell this by the marks on the end of its end cap, as shown in the lab' general Examination Record, dated, 13th August 1985, and the photographs of the exercises performed by 'Ron' Cook on 29th August 1985...
The photographs taken by Cook of his exercises on 29th August 1985, were not made available in time for the jury to be shown them - and so your point would then be?
-
Silencer sent to lab' on 13th August 1985, was the same silencer which DI 'Ron' Cook, dismantled, rebuilt ans screwed onto the barrel of the gun on 29th August 1985, you can tell this by the marks on the end of its end cap, as shown in the lab' general Examination Record, dated, 13th August 1985, and the photographs of the exercises performed by 'Ron' Cook on 29th August 1985...
The photographs taken by Cook of his exercises on 29th August 1985, were not made available in time for the jury to be shown them - and so your point would then be?
No mike. The photo of wittam(?) with rifle and silencer. You said it doesn't show an exhibit label. Surely the jury saw this photo. This is the photo to which I refer. No other
-
No mike. The photo of wittam(?) with rifle and silencer. You said it doesn't show an exhibit label. Surely the jury saw this photo. This is the photo to which I refer. No other
Sorry. Widdon
-
No mike. The photo of wittam(?) with rifle and silencer. You said it doesn't show an exhibit label. Surely the jury saw this photo. This is the photo to which I refer. No other
No, they didn't...
Police did not make this picture available to the defence or to the jury who tried this case...
-
No, they didn't...
Police did not make this picture available to the defence or to the jury who tried this case...
PC Whiddons involvement with the silencer did not come to light until 2003 when Ewen Smith's informant (named Dave, or David) came forward...
-
PC Whiddons involvement with the silencer did not come to light until 2003 when Ewen Smith's informant (named Dave, or David) came forward...
If it had been known that PC 'Christopher Whiddon, had been involved with the possibility of contaminating the silencer by him screwing that silencer directly onto the barrel of the rifle which had been photographed at the scene resting against the bloodstained neck/throat of Sheila, then of course that would have been dynamite, it would have enabled the defence or those representing Jeremy at the time of his trial to give a perfectly reasonable or acceptable account for how a small flek of dried blood which had to all intents and purposes been found inside the silencer which belonged exclusively to Sheila, had got into the silencer - by a process of contamination, attributable to the actions of PC Whiddon, as described...
-
If it had been known that PC 'Christopher Whiddon, had been involved with the possibility of contaminating the silencer by him screwing that silencer directly onto the barrel of the rifle which had been photographed at the scene resting against the bloodstained neck/throat of Sheila, then of course that would have been dynamite, it would have enabled the defence or those representing Jeremy at the time of his trial to give a perfectly reasonable or acceptable account for how a small flek of dried blood which had to all intents and purposes been found inside the silencer which belonged exclusively to Sheila, had got into the silencer - by a process of contamination, attributable to the actions of PC Whiddon, as described...
There would have been no need for the defence to argue that the blood found in the silencer could have been an intimate mixture of the parents blood types, they would almost certainly have argued that Sheila's blood got into the silencer as a result of contamination, brought about by the actions of PC Whiddon...
-
PC Whiddons involvement with the silencer did not come to light until 2003 when Ewen Smith's informant (named Dave, or David) came forward...
You sure this isn't a Press Confrence photo Mike
Looks like a camera lens in the top left corner?
-
If it had been known that PC 'Christopher Whiddon, had been involved with the possibility of contaminating the silencer by him screwing that silencer directly onto the barrel of the rifle which had been photographed at the scene resting against the bloodstained neck/throat of Sheila, then of course that would have been dynamite, it would have enabled the defence or those representing Jeremy at the time of his trial to give a perfectly reasonable or acceptable account for how a small flek of dried blood which had to all intents and purposes been found inside the silencer which belonged exclusively to Sheila, had got into the silencer - by a process of contamination, attributable to the actions of PC Whiddon, as described...
that must be why there's no exhibit label. It's a 4th silencer. For press photo purposes ?
-
You sure this isn't a Press Confrence photo Mike
Looks like a camera lens in the top left corner?
Well, fact of the matter is, Ewen Smiths informant told him in 2003 that PC Whiddon had gione a,long to the desk of DCI 'Taff' Jones, and took possession of a silencer which 'Taff' had been keeping and using as a paper weight and that Whiddon took it along to the force armoury to see if it fitted the guns barrel,and when he carried that exercise out and he found that it did fit, the silencer in question along with the rifle were sent off to the lab' on 20th September 1985...
Now, you only have to use a little bit of common sense, and you must surely realize that Whiddon did screw the rifle onto the barrel of the gun at that time, on that occasion, and that this action could have been the source from which a small flek of Sheila's blood got into the silencer. Whiddon has not yet denied that he did it...
-
that must be why there's no exhibit label. It's a 4th silencer. For press photo purposes ?
You see. That's the answer to any questions relating to this photo. It's a press photo with example firearm & silencer Judge."are you sure officer Widdon"
Widdon."certainly your honour,otherwise there would be an exhibit label"
-
that must be why there's no exhibit label. It's a 4th silencer. For press photo purposes ?
Whiddon took possession of the silencer from 'Taff' Jones desk, and he took it along to the force armoury where he screwed it onto the barrel of the rifle - that is what Ewen Smiths informant told Ewen Smith in 2003, you are free to make of that what you will...
Are you also going to be suggesting that the silencer which DI ;'Ron' Cook dismantled and rebuilt which he then screwed onto the barrel of the rifle, which also does not have a signed exhibit label attached to it, was also a duplicate?
You can believe what you want to, but use a bit of common sense...
-
You see. That's the answer to any questions relating to this photo. It's a press photo with example firearm & silencer Judge."are you sure officer Widdon"
Widdon."certainly your honour,otherwise there would be an exhibit label"
Why would the silencer which was being used as a paper weight on DCI 'Taff' Jones desk, have an exhibit label attached to it?
-
Why would the silencer which was being used as a paper weight on DCI 'Taff' Jones desk, have an exhibit label attached to it?
If it had got an exhibit label attached to it, it wouldn't have been on 'Taff' Jones desk, and he would not have been using it as a paper weight...
-
Therefore...
the photographs of PC Whiddon screwing the aforementioned silencer onto the barrel of the rifle must have been taken on a date prior to or on 20th September 1985:-
Mike,you cannot however link this photo to any silencer in the case. Can you not see that? If there is no label you cannot prove it and Widdon would not of checked they fitted together whilst posing for a photo.
-
If it had got an exhibit label attached to it, it wouldn't have been on 'Taff' Jones desk, and he would not have been using it as a paper weight...
So we have a piece of evidence,used as a paper weight. Taff should of entered it as Evidence. Do you think he may have been removed from the case because of incompetent handling of evidence?
-
Mike,you cannot however link this photo to any silencer in the case. Can you not see that? If there is no label you cannot prove it and Widdon would not of checked they fitted together whilst posing for a photo.
You don't know that...
But what we now know is that Whiddon did go along to 'Taff' Jones desk at Witham police station, and he did take possession of that silencer and he did take it along to the force armoury and he did screw it onto the barrel of the gun, and because he did that he put the silencer at risk of being contaminated with some of Sheila's blood. For some as yet unexplained reason, PC Whiddon has omitted these activities so that the court could be deceived about the integrity of the silencer evidence, and in particular how Sheila's blood could have got into the silencer?
-
So we have a piece of evidence,used as a paper weight. Taff should of entered it as Evidence. Do you think he may have been removed from the case because of incompetent handling of evidence?
I am only reporting what Ewen Smiths informant told him in 2003, but I should think it must be obvious why 'Taff' Jones, treated this (2) silencer as he did, by keeping it on his desk at Witham police station and using it as a paper weight? It was obvious that he strongly suspected the relatives of trying to pin these murders on Jeremy, and that the introduction of the silencer was part of that attempt to pin the blame on him, so that must have been the reason why DCI Jones did what he did with that (2) silencer. Now you and everybody else can criticize 'Taff' Jones all you want to, perhaps he didn't treat that silencer as he should have done, but at the end of the day it was the silencer which the relatives introduced into the investigation, and it was not at the lab' on the occasion when the ballistic expert said he found that crucial flake of blood inside it, which allowed the blood expert (John Hayward) to analyse it as belonging exclusive, and uniquely to Sheila...
Therefore, the relatives did not find a silencer in the gun cupboard which had Sheila's blood inside it...
That is the most significant feature which comes out of this escapade...
-
You don't know that...
But what we now know is that Whiddon did go along to 'Taff' Jones desk at Witham police station, and he did take possession of that silencer and he did take it along to the force armoury and he did screw it onto the barrel of the gun, and because he did that he put the silencer at risk of being contaminated with some of Sheila's blood. For some as yet unexplained reason, PC Whiddon has omitted these activities so that the court could be deceived about the integrity of the silencer evidence, and in particular how Sheila's blood could have got into the silencer?
So why didn't Taff introduce the paperweight silencer as evidence instead of leaving it on his desk
-
Look...
Ewen Smiths informant told him what he told him, in 2003, and my informant has told me recently that Sheila's blood was not found inside the silencer found by the relatives in the gun cupboard, he has told me that blood from Sheila was originally attributed to one silencer, and paint from the aga attributed to the other, and that this evidence was merged together into the same silencer by a process of falsification...
Now...
I'm not particularly bothered if you believe what Ewen Smith's informant told him, or what my informant told me, or both, I am only reporting the facts, as told to him in 2003, and told to me recently...
-
So why didn't Taff introduce the paperweight silencer as evidence instead of leaving it on his desk
He obviously thought that it was evidence of little or no value, because the relatives were hell bent at that stage of pining the blame for the shootings on Jeremy, and he knew that no such silencer was present inside the gun cupboard on the morning of 7th August 1985, because his officers had looked in there on the morning of 7th August 1985. I should think the real reason why he kept that (2) silencer on his desk as he did, was because he thought the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders by reliance upon it. Perhaps the answer to this question you raise is contained in the report, which has very recently been identified?
-
He obviously thought that it was evidence of little or no value, because the relatives were hell bent at that stage of pining the blame for the shootings on Jeremy, and he knew that no such silencer was present inside the gun cupboard on the morning of 7th August 1985, because his officers had looked in there on the morning of 7th August 1985. I should think the real reason why he kept that (2) silencer on his desk as he did, was because he thought the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders by reliance upon it. Perhaps the answer to this question you raise is contained in the report, which has very recently been identified?
'Taff' had literally thrown the relatives out of Witham police station around the time the silencer came into 'Taff' Jones possession, so he had a low opinion of the relatives and their beliefs at that time...
-
Rightly, or wrongly, I think 'Taff' Jones has been proven to be correct in his opinion of the relatives, because if what Ewen Smiths informant told him in 2003, and what my informant has told me recently is true, then the silencer evidence which was introduced primarily by the relatives and DS 'Stan' Jones, has been falsified...
-
mike. I don't think you are absorbing my posts on this thread and it seems to be winding you up! I don't disagree with the blood transfer theory you forward, just the presentation of the two Photos as you describe, when they obviously are not taken as or when you suggest. They are posed photos for the press. To describe them as anything else is simply untrue IMO. As we are not getting any where with this exchange I think we'll difer on this one mike.
-
Rightly, or wrongly, I think 'Taff' Jones has been proven to be correct in his opinion of the relatives, because if what Ewen Smiths informant told him in 2003, and what my informant has told me recently is true, then the silencer evidence which was introduced primarily by the relatives and DS 'Stan' Jones, has been falsified...
FACT - blood which has been attributed to Sheila, was not found inside the same silencer upon which was found paint from the aga, yet at the time of trial it was the prosecutions case that blood from Sheila and paint from the aga was found inside and upon the same silencer, but newly discovered evidence confirms that this could not possibly have been the case, blood from Sheila was attributed to one silencer (1) and paint from the aga to the other(2)...
As a result of this, the convictions can no longer be sustained, since these convictions were secured by a reliance upon falsified evidence of blood and paint and a couple of silencers, not one...
-
He obviously thought that it was evidence of little or no value, because the relatives were hell bent at that stage of pining the blame for the shootings on Jeremy, and he knew that no such silencer was present inside the gun cupboard on the morning of 7th August 1985, because his officers had looked in there on the morning of 7th August 1985. I should think the real reason why he kept that (2) silencer on his desk as he did, was because he thought the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders by reliance upon it. Perhaps the answer to this question you raise is contained in the report, which has very recently been identified?
Sorry. Had to reply
"little or no value"
Just shows how poor a copper he was
2 silencers officially tagged
Explain that one....
-
"explain that one" I refer that to the prosecution not you Mike. It looked a little ambitious on re reading it. Sorry
-
mike. I don't think you are absorbing my posts on this thread and it seems to be winding you up! I don't disagree with the blood transfer theory you forward, just the presentation of the two Photos as you describe, when they obviously are not taken as or when you suggest. They are posed photos for the press. To describe them as anything else is simply untrue IMO. As we are not getting any where with this exchange I think we'll difer on this one mike.
Why would PC Whiddon be demonstrating how the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the rifle, if he was not reproducing what he had done previously with the silencer and gun after he took the silencer from the desk of DCI 'Taff' Jones?
-
What we have here, is clear evidence that there were two different identical looking silencers, one (1) inside which was attributed blood belonging to Sheila, and the other (2) to which was attributed paint from the aga in the kitchen at whf...
Relatives did not find the silencer inside which was found Sheila's blood, so the prosecutions argument that Sheila had been shot and killed and that whoever killed her must have removed the silencer from the gun and taken it all the way downstairs to hide it in the gun cupboard was a false proposition, because clearly the relatives did not find two silencers in the gun cupboard, they claim to have only found one...
The silencer (SBJ/1/DB/1) inside which was found Sheila's blood must have been found by someone other than the relatives...
That somebody was DS 'Stan' Jones who took possession of a silencer SBJ/1 at the scene from a very early stage...
-
The silencer (2) found by the relatives was used to make the deliberate scratch marks on the left hand side of the aga surround on 12th September 1985, and this explains why on 25th September 1985, paint from the aga was matched to paint found on that silencer (2)...
-
Why would PC Whiddon be demonstrating how the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the rifle, if he was not reproducing what he had done previously with the silencer and gun after he took the silencer from the desk of DCI 'Taff' Jones?
So now you saw he's REPRODUCING what he had done previously.you sure the silencer is in the right position Mike,his figure on the trigger guard in the same place? The length of the beard the same... Stop bloody guessing Mike it does you no favours. I'm obviously correct that the photos are press photos.Mike if you are happy to rely on photos from reconstructed scenes I reckon most of your arguments will collapse. Think about it.
-
So now you saw he's REPRODUCING what he had done previously.you sure the silencer is in the right position Mike,his figure on the trigger guard in the same place? The length of the beard the same... Stop bloody guessing Mike it does you no favours. I'm obviously correct that the photos are press photos.Mike if you are happy to rely on photos from reconstructed scenes I reckon most of your arguments will collapse. Think about it.
Stop being an idiot, and fuck off..
-
I am fucking sick to death of idiots and morons..
Fuck off the lot of you...
-
If nobody wants to talk sensibly, then don't bother posting, find something else to do in your spare time...
-
It really makes me fucking angry when Jeremy is suffering at the hands of the police, the relatives and the criminal justice system in general and you get some fucker coming on here taking the piss...
Fuck off and find something else to do..
-
These photographs taken of PC Whiddon, helps to explain at the very least how Sheila Caffells DNA could have got into the silencer...
-
Whiddon is a scum bag inspector in Essex police, who misled the CCRC in 2002 by claiming he was an exhibits officer in the case, but the real exhibits officers were DC Hammersley and DS Davidson...
Why didn't Whiddon tell the CCRC what he did with the silencer he took from DCI 'Taff' Jones desk?
-
Hang on. So there not a re enactment portrayed in these photos?
-
Seems to me, the only copper you could have trusted in this investigation was DCI 'taff' Jones, and he is now dead...
-
Stop being an idiot, and fuck off..
Ui don't mind being called an idiot and being told to fuck off, just as long as I've exposed mike for what he really is
-
DCI Jones did the right thing not to treat the silencer found by the relatives as evidence in my opinion, because they (the relatives) had demonstrated that they were prepared to do anything to implicate Jeremy in the murders. They wanted the silencer evidence in, and it did not have any blood from Sheila found inside it, until the police merged both silencers together to make them one and the same. The truth of the matter is that the silencer evidence was dodgy, and DCI 'Taff' Jones, knew it was dodgy...
-
Ui don't mind being called an idiot and being told to fuck off, just as long as I've exposed mike for what he really is
Fuck off you fucking idiot, scumbag clown..
-
DCI 'Taff' Jones, was a copper from the old school, he bent the rules on occasions, but stopped short of framing an innocent person for a crime he knew they had not committed...
That's my opinion...
-
Mike... You got me. I do admit I did attend stage school
-
At the end of the day, nobody was really interested at all in the silencer found by the relatives, until the nature of the investigation changed and DCS 'Mick' Ainsley was put in charge of the second part of the investigation, at that stage suddenly the find of the silencer by the relatives became important and started to get documented, and the silencer in question was sent to the lab' for the first time on 20th September 1985. Suddenly, the newly appointed head of the investigation was the best friend of the relatives and accommodated their theories out of hand...
-
At the end of the day, nobody was really interested at all in the silencer found by the relatives, until the nature of the investigation changed and DCS 'Mick' Ainsley was put in charge of the second part of the investigation, at that stage suddenly the find of the silencer by the relatives became important and started to get documented, and the silencer in question was sent to the lab' for the first time on 20th September 1985. Suddenly, the newly appointed head of the investigation was the best friend of the relatives and accommodated their theories out of hand...
Quite right Mike. That is exactly what happened and there are several aspects of the evidence which support this.
-
At the end of the day, nobody was really interested at all in the silencer found by the relatives, until the nature of the investigation changed and DCS 'Mick' Ainsley was put in charge of the second part of the investigation, at that stage suddenly the find of the silencer by the relatives became important and started to get documented, and the silencer in question was sent to the lab' for the first time on 20th September 1985. Suddenly, the newly appointed head of the investigation was the best friend of the relatives and accommodated their theories out of hand...
At that stage, DCI 'Taff' Jones submitted a report to undermine the silencer evidence which the new investigation based its case upon. 'Taff' knew that the blood attributed to Sheila was not found inside the silencer found by the relatives...
it could have cost him his life...
-
Mike do you think Taff Jones was bumped off?
-
Mike do you think Taff Jones was bumped off?
Yeah...
I think they took him out...
His death needs looking into...
-
Quite right Mike. That is exactly what happened and there are several aspects of the evidence which support this.
But what do you think of the 2 Widden with rifle & silencer photos. Do you think they were took in the armoury by his mates, or at a press conference where he recreated how he put the two parts together to see if they fitted.
-
Now, if 'Taff' was married, and his wife witnessed the accident, then I will suck my thumb, and concede I was/am wrong...
-
Now, if 'Taff' was married, and his wife witnessed the accident, then I will suck my thumb, and concede I was/am wrong...
Is she still alive mike?
-
So was taff alone at home when he died? or dont you know?
-
'Taff' Jones, was the kind of senior officer that any criminal would have respect for, if he had handled their case, because 'Taff' Jones was from the old school, where the rules could be bent, but only so far, and by so much - this copper was a good one, and did things his own way, for the public good, no matter what they have said about him since...
Things were different back in the mid 1980's, but 'taff' was one of those officers that would only go so far over the white line...
-
'Taff' Jones, was the kind of senior officer that any criminal would have respect for, if he had handled their case, because 'Taff' Jones was from the old school, where the rules could be bent, but only so far, and by so much - this copper was a good one, and did things his own way, for the public good, no matter what they have said about him since...
Things were different back in the mid 1980's, but 'taff' was one of those officers that would only go so far over the white line...
You must miss him mike. We're you close?
-
Is she still alive mike?
I don't know, I'd like to know the true circumstances of how he supposedly died, my informant says there are suspicious circumstances surrounding his death, but I do not yet know what he means by the suggestion that there are suspicious circumstances?
But i will try to find out one way or another...
-
You must miss him mike. We're you close?
I didn't know him, so stop taking the piss, I am only repeating what I have been told about him from my informant...
-
At the end of the day, the silencer found by the relatives did not get sent to the lab' on 13th or 30th August 1985, and blood belonging to Sheila was not found inside it...
'Taff' knew the truth, and he apparently produced a report outlining these facts, and how the marks on the aga surround appeared later on, after the morning of the shootings, and he explained how paint from the aga ended up on the end of the silencer by 25th September 1o985, at least that is what my informant has told me......
-
I didn't know him, so stop taking the piss, I am only repeating what I have been told about him from my informant...
Sorry Mike. Not taking the piss. Knowing your past dealings so to speak I thought your paths had crossed. So to speak. No offence intended
-
Sorry Mike. Not taking the piss. Knowing your past dealings so to speak I thought your paths had crossed. So to speak. No offence intended
No, our paths never crossed, but I know enough about the man, from what I am being told, to know that he was capable of bending the rules a little, but only enough to ensure that justice was seen to be done, but I am assured that he would never have crossed the white line and get an innocent person convicted of something that he ('Taff') knew was innocent...
I have met and come across others who wouldn't think twice about crossing that white line, these other individuals should be taken to the gallows, and hung without mercy, and without the blessing of the law..
-
If 'Taff' Jones was murdered, his killer(s) need to be brought to justice...
-
Who killed 'Taff' Jones, (if he was murdered) and why?
-
It was probably an accident in my opinion.
The timing of it just being a coincidence. We spoke about this the other day, how many people are killed each year in their own homes due to accidents, falling down the steps or from ladders etc.
-
It should be possible for any member of the public to obtain a copy of his death certificate from I think, St Catherines house (London)?
That would be a good starting point...
But need date of death.
-
It was probably an accident in my opinion.
The timing of it just being a coincidence. We spoke about this the other day, how many people are killed each year in their own homes due to accidents, falling down the steps or from ladders etc.
But your just guessing without any access to any of the facts, am I right?
I listen to what your saying, but I have my informant saying something entirely different, so why should I choose to rely on what you say as opposed to what he says, without looking more into the circumstances of his death, and finding out more about it?
-
yes you are right, but do you know the facts surrounding his death? we can only speculate and give our opinions mike, unless we know the truth.
As far as Taff jones death goes, you can only speculate too unless you know for certain what happened, and you have evidence.
-
No, our paths never crossed, but I know enough about the man, from what I am being told, to know that he was capable of bending the rules a little, but only enough to ensure that justice was seen to be done, but I am assured that he would never have crossed the white line and get an innocent person convicted of something that he ('Taff') knew was innocent...
I have met and come across others who wouldn't think twice about crossing that white line, these other individuals should be taken to the gallows, and hung without mercy, and without the blessing of the law..
Mike"bending the rules to ensure justice is done"
Rules are rules,not to be bent or broken.leaving a critical piece of evidence on your desk and using it as a paperweight is definitely breaking the rules. If that had of been correctly admitted to evidence a 2 silencer scenario would be very much easier to prove, don't you think?
-
You dont have to listen to what i think mike, im just expressing an opinion.
-
yes you are right, but do you know the facts surrounding his death? we can only speculate and give our opinions mike, unless we know the truth.
As far as Taff jones death goes, you can only speculate too unless you know for certain what happened, and you have evidence.
That is right, we can only speculate, but it does not mean he wasn't murdered, or that his death was just an accident - but it seems to me that someone ought to take a closer look at the true circumstances surrounding his death in view of the fact his involvement with a silencer found by the relatives that according to the official version of events he did not have possession of, since at the time he fell to be in possession of it, that silencer (if there was only one), was already at the lab' and blood from Sheila Caffell was already found inside it)?
-
yes you are right, but do you know the facts surrounding his death? we can only speculate and give our opinions mike, unless we know the truth.
As far as Taff jones death goes, you can only speculate too unless you know for certain what happened, and you have evidence.
You have a point Andrea
There must be a statistic of the number of people who fall of ladders at home and result in death and serious injury. Back soon
-
Taff fell from a ladder, am i correct?
If so, then how do you think it was murder, do you think someone wobbled the ladder and made taff fall off, then whoever it was does a runner? What do you think happened? Did they tamper with the rungs?
-
You dont have to listen to what i think mike, im just expressing an opinion.
I take note of what everybody says, even if I might not agree with it, everybodies opinion is important...
-
It was probably an accident in my opinion.
The timing of it just being a coincidence. We spoke about this the other day, how many people are killed each year in their own homes due to accidents, falling down the steps or from ladders etc.
I believe various papers/ journalists (pro Bamber) have looked over this story with a fine tooth comb and nothing suspicious has ever materialised!
-
You have a point Andrea
There must be a statistic of the number of people who fall of ladders at home and result in death and serious injury. Back soon
The numbers are quite large i believe, lots of people die each year due to an accident that happened in the home, alot of them can be prevented.
At the moment my stairs are an accident waiting to happen, the carpet has come loose because the tacks i used werent good enough for the job!
-
986 male 15 - 64 year olds year 2000. Doesn't differentiate cause (rospa)
-
Taff fell from a ladder, am i correct?
If so, then how do you think it was murder, do you think someone wobbled the ladder and made taff fall off, then whoever it was does a runner? What do you think happened? Did they tamper with the rungs?
I am told that he did not fall off a ladder, although the official version of events is that he had probably fallen off a ladder because he broke his neck. What I am asked to believe is that he may not have fell off a ladder - now what other method could have resulted in him breaking his neck?
-
But what do you think of the 2 Widden with rifle & silencer photos. Do you think they were took in the armoury by his mates, or at a press conference where he recreated how he put the two parts together to see if they fitted.
These particular photographs appear to be news conference photographs following the trial. However Mike has posted information that much earlier PC Whidden took the silencer from the desk of DCI Jones and fitted it to the rifle. I have no reason to doubt that information. The silencer seems only to have become of interest when the focus of police changed, some time after the events at WHF.
-
I take note of what everybody says, even if I might not agree with it, everybodies opinion is important...
Even fucking idiot clowns Mike. Don't worry. I'm thick skinned and you've called me much worse in the past
-
Even fucking idiot clowns Mike. Don't worry. I'm thick skinned and you've called me much worse in the past
Being a fucking idiot clown could be a compliment...
-
You can break your neck falling from a ladder, depends how you land.
I know its no comparison, but my mum broke her foot on a kerb that was uneven, it was sticking up about 2inch above the others, shes now in pot up to her knee.
Some trivial things, can cause sever injury or death.
-
These particular photographs appear to be news conference photographs following the trial. However Mike has posted information that much earlier PC Whidden took the silencer from the desk of DCI Jones and fitted it to the rifle. I have no reason to doubt that information. The silencer seems only to have become of interest when the focus of police changed, some time after the events at WHF.
Thanks NGB. I knew I was right. Your expert view confirms my view
-
Has anyone got any idea what its like running a forum, and trying to stimulate debate on one topic or another?
-
Being a fucking idiot clown could be a compliment...
Touché mike. That a fuckin classic. If you don't mind I'll use that myself.....
-
Touché mike. That a fuckin classic. If you don't mind I'll use that myself.....
I like clowns, they make me laugh, although sometimes, they make me fell saddened ...
-
Has anyone got any idea what its like running a forum, and trying to stimulate debate on one topic or another?
Difficult?
-
I like clowns, they make me laugh ...
They used to make me laugh when I was a child
-
I'm probably going to get jumped on for saying this but...Its all a little far fetched in my opinion. Mike, can you appreciate where some of us are coming from? Its all well and good that you say you've seen evidence of such and such but you haven't shown us any evidence. We have to take you at your word. Do you not think all this "Z" business and "Taff Jones was murdered" stuff might be harming the good work you've done so far? Can we not just look at what there is evidence of instead of relying on heresay from an "informant"??
-
Has anyone got any idea what its like running a forum, and trying to stimulate debate on one topic or another?
I cant imagine it being easy mike, i was a moderator on here once remember.
But people opinions will differ and change, we have to accept it, and realise that it makes debate more interesting. If everyone agreed it would become boring, and acheive nothing.
-
They used to make me laugh when I was a child
Aaagh...
being a child, such a long time ago, happier times...
-
Aaagh...
being a child, such a long time ago...
Getting a little off post now. Don't you think?
-
Getting a little off post now. Don't you think?
Yeah...
But, I think the circumstances of 'taff' Jones death, need looking into, in the public interest, so to speak?
-
Yeah...
But, I think the circumstances of 'taff' Jones death, need looking into, in the public interest, so to speak?
What if any investigation took place at his time of death. There must of at least been an inquest?
-
What if any investigation took place at his time of death. There must of at least been an inquest?
There was an inquest but all the papers relating to it have been withheld under PII.
-
What if any investigation took place at his time of death. There must of at least been an inquest?
Yes, an inquest, but the public are not being allowed access to the detail or circumstances of his death...
Think about it?
-
If the circumstances of DCI 'Taff' Jones death are being withheld under pii, what does that suggest to members of the public?
-
I cant imagine it being easy mike, i was a moderator on here once remember.
But people opinions will differ and change, we have to accept it, and realise that it makes debate more interesting. If everyone agreed it would become boring, and acheive nothing.
I have not forgotten the duties you (and others) have performed on behalf of this forum, and its members...
-
Yes, an inquest, but the public are not being allowed access to the detail or circumstances of his death...
Think about it?
So did taff fall from a ladder doing some d.i.y? was he inside the house or out in the garden?
-
If the circumstances of DCI 'Taff' Jones death are being withheld under pii, what does that suggest to members of the public?
Are the results of an inquest usually available to the public?
-
So did taff fall from a ladder doing some d.i.y? was he inside the house or out in the garden?
Found dead, circumstances warranted it not be disclosed under pii, it seems?
-
Are the results of an inquest usually available to the public?
Yes...
-
Why would the circumstances surrounding the death of DCi 'Taff' Jones be withheld under pii, if his death was just an accident?
-
Are the results of an inquest usually available to the public?
To an extent, yes. The press can report what is said openly at the inquest. However the coroner's papers and a lot of the evidence (such as reports of pathologists) are not made public.
-
Here is a report about death of DCI 'Taff' Jones, in 'THE LAW', Newspaper of Essex police, Dated, May 1986, issue 181:-
-
A 10 times commended CID officer with 22 years CID experience, stubbornly refuses to accept Jeremy Bamber had any involvement with the killings.
-
A 10 times commended CID officer with 22 years CID experience, stubbornly refuses to accept Jeremy Bamber had any involvement with the killings.
He also commissioned a report about the silencer and scenes of crime which has been suppressed and withheld from Jeremy's legal team, and the court which tried him, and subsequent appeals, and the CCRC...
-
I have just read an article on the net from David James Smith who interviewed Jeremy in prison. He refers to the death of Taff Jones and says he investigated the death thoroughly and that his death was a genuine accident and that this was confirmed at the inquest. How would he have been able to do this if the information regarding his death is held under PII? Would he have information which could be relevant to this discussion?
-
There was an inquest but all the papers relating to it have been withheld under PII.
Tonyb, why do you think the papers from Taff Jones' inquest were/ are withheld under a PII secrecy order?
-
Tonyb, why do you think the papers from Taff Jones' inquest were/ are withheld under a PII secrecy order?
I don't know they are,or are not. I don't know why they would or would not be. I have had no issue with 95% of this thread.only the 5% that relates to the 2 Widdem Pictures with the rifle and silencer.
So I ask in reply, Why do you think Mike persisted in stating the photos were taken in the armoury Pre Lab examination,changed it to a restaging the photos to the conclusion it's a press photo(what I'd been saying but MT had been taking umbridge with) and saying it was acceptable to use photos that have been re enacted. When I pointed the error of his ways with that statement he certainly lost his cool.thats MTs biggest failing. He can't admit when he's wrong and he tries to bullshit his way out of it. Therefore until MT can PROVE that Taff was murdered I think I'll go with the Official Explaination
-
I don't know they are,or are not. I don't know why they would or would not be. I have had no issue with 95% of this thread.only the 5% that relates to the 2 Widdem Pictures with the rifle and silencer.
So I ask in reply, Why do you think Mike persisted in stating the photos were taken in the armoury Pre Lab examination,changed it to a restaging the photos to the conclusion it's a press photo(what I'd been saying but MT had been taking umbridge with) and saying it was acceptable to use photos that have been re enacted. When I pointed the error of his ways with that statement he certainly lost his cool.thats MTs biggest failing. He can't admit when he's wrong and he tries to bullshit his way out of it.
Therefore until MT can PROVE that Taff was murdered I think I'll go with the Official Explaination
That's a complicated question, Tonyb, which I can't possibly answer because I'm not Mike. You'll have to ask Mike that one ;D
-
986 male 15 - 64 year olds year 2000. Doesn't differentiate cause (rospa)
Sorry, Tonyb, but that can't possibly be correct, the figures for deaths from ladders are substantially lower than this.
-
986 male 15 - 64 year olds year 2000. Doesn't differentiate cause (rospa)
I've just realised, this is the ROSPA - Royal Society for Prevention of Accidents - figure, isn't it? This is the number of falls from ladders, not the number of deaths.
I posted the following on a thread on this topic some months ago:
The chances of Taff Jones meeting his Maker by falling off a ladder were so tiny because so few deaths happen that way. See the following statistics from a Daily Mirror article:
Chance of dying
300,000,000/1 SHARK ATTACK (c 40 deaths per year)
300,000,000/1 FAIRGROUND ACCIDENT
250,000,000/1 FALLING COCONUT (c 150 deaths per year)
11,000,000/1 PLANE CRASH (c 1,300 deaths per year)
10,000,000/1 LIGHTNING (c 5 deaths per year)
10,000,000/1 BY THE ESCAPE OF RADIATION
9,300,000/1 DYING IN TERRORIST ATTACK
5,000,000/1 SCALDED BY HOT TAP WATER. (c 126 deaths per year)
4,400,000/1 LEFT-HANDED PEOPLE USING A RIGHT-HANDED PRODUCT
3,500,000/1 SNAKE BITES (c 25,000 deaths per year)
3,000,000/1 FOOD POISONING (c 200 deaths per year)
2,300,000/1 FALLING OFF A LADDER (c 15 deaths per year)
2,000,000/1 FALLING OUT OF BED (c 20 deaths)
685,000/1 DROWNING IN THE BATH (25 deaths per year)
500,000/1 TRAIN CRASH (c 13 deaths per year)
43,500/1 ACCIDENT AT WORK (c 300 deaths)
8,000/1 A ROAD ACCIDENT (c 1,500 per year)
5/1 CANCER ( c 130,000 deaths per year)
2.5/1 HEART ATTACK OR STROKE (c200,000 deaths per year)
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-world/2008/05/30/scientists-calculate-odd-ways-to-die-115875-17495916/
-
Before someone objects that these are the Daily Mirror's figures, the figure for ladders agrees with that of the Health & Safety Executive.
-
So, we have more chance of dying from falling out of bed than by falling from a ladder.
-
Quote from: tonyb on Yesterday at 03:58 PM
986 male 15 - 64 year olds year 2000. Doesn't differentiate cause (rospa)
Sorry, Tonyb, but that can't possibly be correct, the figures for deaths from ladders are substantially lower than this.
Tonyb, please remind me, what were you were saying about Mike making errors and failing to post the data from his sources...?
-
Here is PC Whiddon in possession of the silencer found by the relatives which did not get sent to the lab' until 20th September 1985. As can be seen, this silencer does not have any signed exhibit label attached to it bearing the signatures of the experts at the lab' who handled and dealt with a silencer on 13th and 30th August 1985, onwards...
The silencer in this photograph was the one PC Whiddon took from 'Taff' Jones desk at Witham police station, as described earlier...
-
This thing about Taff Jones and the ladder accident. If it had have been Ainsley who had died in a mirror image of Taff's accident, there wouldn't be any suspicions at all. Ainsley was of course, pulling in the same direction as the team in general, by that stage. I could have picked any 'on message' member of the team but picked Ainsley because he also became head of the investigation.
But because Taff Jones was the original HEAD if the investigation, had been at SOC on the morning of the killings, had refused to have any truck with the relatives who pushed so hard for JB to be investigated, refused to back down to junior officers, was removed from the case with first hand knowledge of what had actually taken place at SOC...
I'm afraid it does become suspicious, albeit subjectively and regardless of statistics re ladder accidents. His connection to the case places his death slightly adrift from that of a careless window cleaner, imo.
-
Once silencer (1) was sent to lab' on 13th and 30th August 1985, it would at all times have had a signed exhibit label attached to it, but in the case of the other silencer (2) which 'Taff' Jones kept on his desk at Witham police station, no such label was attached, because 'Taff' Jones did not treat the silencer found by the relatives seriously. This silencer (2) was taken by PC Whiddon along to the force armoury and screwed onto the barrel of the rifle. His actions and those of DCI Jones have not officially been reported on or properly disclosed. One thing is certain, and that is that Sheila's blood could not have been found inside the silencer found by the relatives, because the blood has been attributed to the the silencer (1) which was at the lab' from 30th August 1985...
-
I believe a silencer was found at the scene,but unfortunately nobody seems to want to admit to having found it.Due to the 4 murders/1 suicide conclusion,I think that it was just not deemed relevant.That was,until someone came up with the bright idea of introducing another silencer and merging the two,and the rest,as they say,is history.
-
So, we have more chance of dying from falling out of bed than by falling from a ladder.
Unless it is a top bunk bed. ;D
-
Sorry, Tonyb, but that can't possibly be correct, the figures for deaths from ladders are substantially lower than this.
Never said it was rospa. (accident)
-
Therefore...
the photographs of PC Whiddon screwing the aforementioned silencer onto the barrel of the rifle must have been taken on a date prior to or on 20th September 1985:-
See. I'm happier now mike has corrected the post of the photos from this mis informed comment that is obviously incorrect
-
Here is PC Whiddon in possession of the silencer found by the relatives which did not get sent to the lab' until 20th September 1985. As can be seen, this silencer does not have any signed exhibit label attached to it bearing the signatures of the experts at the lab' who handled and dealt with a silencer on 13th and 30th August 1985, onwards...
The silencer in this photograph was the one PC Whiddon took from 'Taff' Jones desk at Witham police station, as described earlier...
Thanks for the correction Mike. Apology for your rant and calling me a fucking idiot clown wouldn't go amiss now .....
-
Quote from: tonyb on Yesterday at 03:58 PM
986 male 15 - 64 year olds year 2000. Doesn't differentiate cause (rospa)
Tonyb, please remind me, what were you were saying about Mike making errors and failing to post the data from his sources...?
I think your being a little ridiculous choc. I googled some very basic info and posted it between posts quite quickly,I didn't research it for 50 minutes,maybe I should of. But at the time I wanted to show how many people fell of ladders in a particular period,that's all.i suppose with more effort I could of found a sample from 1986 when different technology was used in ladder technology as they must be safer now?
-
Never said it was rospa. (accident)
Apologies, Tonyb, I don't understand your reply, what does it mean?
-
Apologies, Tonyb, I don't understand your reply, what does it mean?
apologies not reqd. missed the comma.
Never said it was,rospa a = accident. ie i was specific that the sample i gave was for 15 - 64 year olds who had suffered from falling from ladders but from the quick view i gave it was unable to give specific details of extent of injuries. I do think i condensed the post quite well Choc,Ive only had one complaint.re-read the entire tread .it gets interesting from about 30,of course you will need an open mind and be able to see the way MT tries to manipulate the photo evidence. Of course hes rectified that now so I'm fairly Happy ;D
-
Here is PC Whiddon in possession of the silencer found by the relatives which did not get sent to the lab' until 20th September 1985. As can be seen, this silencer does not have any signed exhibit label attached to it bearing the signatures of the experts at the lab' who handled and dealt with a silencer on 13th and 30th August 1985, onwards...
The silencer in this photograph was the one PC Whiddon took from 'Taff' Jones desk at Witham police station, as described earlier...
Is this also the actual murder weapon? It would seem a little insensitive if so
-
Is this also the actual murder weapon? It would seem a little insensitive if so
Yes, it is the actual weapon, you can see the damage and in the video clip it has got an exhibit label attached to it bearing signatures from when it was initially sent to the lab' on 9th August 1985...
-
You only have to look at the grip in her left hand which is frozen by cadaveric spasm to realize that Sheila did shoot herself, the grip of her left hand is consistent with her shooting herself, rather than trying to use her hand to ward off the barrel from being pushed into her neck...
-
The shape of her left hand would have been the opposite way around if she had been trying to prevent anyone from shooting her...
-
Yes, it is the actual weapon, you can see the damage and in the video clip it has got an exhibit label attached to it bearing signatures from when it was initially sent to the lab' on 9th August 1985...
we still friends Mike?....
-
How would the death of Taff Jones have affected the other officers involved in the case? If EP are involved in a cover up as to the circs in which Sheila died and the provenance of the intruduced silencer evidence, then regardless of whether Taff's death was suspcious or a tragic accident, perhaps it was perceived by other officers as a warning?
If I was a waverer among that team, maybe I'd be thinking 'it doesn't pay to waver'.
-
apologies not reqd. missed the comma.
Never said it was,rospa a = accident. ie i was specific that the sample i gave was for 15 - 64 year olds who had suffered from falling from ladders but from the quick view i gave it was unable to give specific details of extent of injuries. I do think i condensed the post quite well Choc,Ive only had one complaint.re-read the entire tread .it gets interesting from about 30,of course you will need an open mind and be able to see the way MT tries to manipulate the photo evidence. Of course hes rectified that now so I'm fairly Happy ;D
Yes, but this part of the debate concerns the incidence of deaths resulting from falls from ladders, not the incidence of accidents. Taff didn't merely have a serious accident, he died. I have a shown that the incidence of deaths from ladder falls is tiny, that we are more likely to die as a result of falling out of bed than we are due to falling off a ladder.
-
To be honest Keira I believe this was a tragic accident, and not part of a conspriracy.
It would be nice to think that, but IMO it is a step too far.
-
Yes, but this part of the debate concerns the incidence of deaths resulting from falls from ladders, not the incidence of accidents. Taff didn't merely have a serious accident, he died. I have a shown that the incidence of deaths from ladder falls is tiny, that we are more likely to die as a result of falling out of bed than we are due to falling off a ladder.
like i said i found and posted in 5, not 50 minutes. I,however ,thank you for taking the time to do the required research. it didnt alter the debate that myself and mike were having at the time which was about his incorrect statement regards the 2 widden photo's.however,MT seems to agree they were produced post conviction. I await conformation however he doesn't regard me as a moronic,idiotic fucking scumbag clown who can piss off....
-
I get censored if I mention anything concerning waterfowl !!!!
-
we still friends Mike?....
yeah...
-
Tonyb,
1. What the data you've posted was meant to show was not clarified.
2. The data was not properly attributed as all data posted here should be, or the lack
of attribution should be explained.
3. This data, of the incidence of accidents due to falls from ladders does not support
your claim that there were numerous deaths due to falls form ladders in the 80s.
4. Deaths due to falls from ladders were and are quite rare.
5. When faced with the real data of the tiny incidence of deaths from ladder falls, which
undermines your case, you bluster that it's wrong without providing any alternative
data.
6. You've basically done exactly what you repeatedly accuse Mike of doing.
I'm not my intention to have a go at you about this. You were tired when you posted these figures, just as I would think Mike is often tired when he posts.
What I am saying is that we all make mistakes, even you, so please be a little more tolerant and respectful when you take issue with Mike's claims.
-
I get censored if I mention anything concerning waterfowl !!!!
I was going to reply to that one Campion, but I would be censored also.
Methinks some are not ofay with watersport ;)
-
like i said i found and posted in 5, not 50 minutes. I,however ,thank you for taking the time to do the required research. it didnt alter the debate that myself and mike were having at the time which was about his incorrect statement regards the 2 widden photo's.however,MT seems to agree they were produced post conviction. I await conformation however he doesn't regard me as a moronic,idiotic fucking scumbag clown who can piss off....
Thank you for you reply. The post of yours that I commented on was your post in respect of this topic:
"Suspicious death of DCI Jones - motives for murder?"
It's hardly my fault if you are going off topic in this thread with a debate about something else altogether, is it?
-
To be honest Keira I believe this was a tragic accident, and not part of a conspriracy.
It would be nice to think that, but IMO it is a step too far.
I don't know if it was an accident or not, Cliff. What I do know is that the PII secrecy order slapped on the Coroner's report of Taff Jones' death is odd and might lead any reasonable person to wonder if there may have been more to this death than met the eye.
-
Thank you for you reply. The post of yours that I commented on was your post in respect of this topic:
"Suspicious death of DCI Jones - motives for murder?"
It's hardly my fault if you are going off topic in this thread with a debate about something else altogether, is it?
i didnt go off topic. MT posted the pictures that were incorrectly discribed Not me,I just objected to them.I also didnt say 900 odd people had died falling from a ladder in 1986, and didn't argue that less than 20 died in whatever year you reaserched for 50 mins.
-
I don't know if it was an accident or not, Cliff. What I do know is that the PII secrecy order slapped on the Coroner's report of Taff Jones' death is odd and might lead any reasonable person to wonder if there may have been more to this death than met the eye.
I can see where you are coming from Keira. I think it may be covered by PII because of Taffs family feelings, which I think is understandable.
-
Tonyb,
1. What the data you've posted was meant to show was not clarified.
2. The data was not properly attributed as all data posted here should be, or the lack
of attribution should be explained.
3. This data, of the incidence of accidents due to falls from ladders does not support
your claim that there were numerous deaths due to falls form ladders in the 80s.
4. Deaths due to falls from ladders were and are quite rare.
5. When faced with the real data of the tiny incidence of deaths from ladder falls, which
undermines your case, you bluster that it's wrong without providing any alternative
data.
6. You've basically done exactly what you repeatedly accuse Mike of doing.
I'm not my intention to have a go at you about this. You were tired when you posted these figures, just as I would think Mike is often tired when he posts.
What I am saying is that we all make mistakes, even you, so please be a little more tolerant and respectful when you take issue with Mike's claims.
i know see how you have got confused with my post regards the rospa figures.It is posted directly below andreas post who is quoteing a previous post of mine.Andrea talks of death from falling,I talk of death and serious injury.... that explains it i hope. Of course,rospa's figures only relate to reported injury so i assume there are many minor accidents that are not reported
-
i didnt go off topic. MT posted the pictures that were incorrectly discribed Not me,I just objected to them.I also didnt say 900 odd people had died falling from a ladder in 1986, and didn't argue that less than 20 died in whatever year you reaserched for 50 mins.
Information about PC Whiddon going along to 'Taff' Jones desk and taking possession of the silencer and going along to the force armoury to see if it screwed onto the anshulz rifle barrel, is absolutely true and accurate, why doesn't somebody contact him and ask him about it?
-
Information about PC Whiddon going along to 'Taff' Jones desk and taking possession of the silencer and going along to the force armoury to see if it screwed onto the anshulz rifle barrel, is absolutely true and accurate, why doesn't somebody contact him and ask him about it?
Photograph of PC Whiddon screwing silencer (2) onto barrel of gun, demonstrates exactly what he did at the material time, which if true is a significant piece of evidence because police were not supposed to have possession of any silencer by that stage, since the other (1) which had the blood attributed to Sheila, had been sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985...
-
Photograph of PC Whiddon screwing silencer (2) onto barrel of gun, demonstrates exactly what he did at the material time, which if true is a significant piece of evidence because police were not supposed to have possession of any silencer by that stage, since the other (1) which had the blood attributed to Sheila, had been sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985...
Relatives did not find silencer (1) with the blood attributed to Sheila inside it, relatives found the other silencer (2) which eventually had the paint from the aga once the aga was deliberately scratched by use of silencer (2) on 12th September 1985, as per the crime scene photographs, taken by PC Bird, whilst DI 'Ron' Cook was in attendance at the scene...
-
Photograph of PC Whiddon screwing silencer (2) onto barrel of gun, demonstrates exactly what he did at the material time, which if true is a significant piece of evidence because police were not supposed to have possession of any silencer by that stage, since the other (1) which had the blood attributed to Sheila, had been sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985...
Mike I had no beef about that,just you saying it WAS a picture of him screwing together the two items before 28(?)sept. Besides as Choc points out,the picture is off topic?
-
Relatives did not find silencer (1) with the blood attributed to Sheila inside it, relatives found the other silencer (2) which eventually had the paint from the aga once the aga was deliberately scratched by use of silencer (2) on 12th September 1985, as per the crime scene photographs, taken by PC Bird, whilst DI 'Ron' Cook was in attendance at the scene...
How did 'Ron' Cook end up in possession of silencer (2) to enable him to deliberately mark the aga at the scene on 12th September 1985, if that was the same silencer (2) which PC Whiddon had taken from desk of 'Taff' Jones, and which he had screwed onto the barrel of the gun? 'Ron' Cook could not have had the other silencer (1) since by 12th September 1985, when the additional marks were made on the aga surround, that silencer (1) had already been at the lab' since and from 30th August 1985?
If Cook didn't have silencer (10 to enable him to deliberately mark the aga surround on 12th September 1985, which silencer did he actually have and where did he get it from?
Silencer (2), of course...
-
Relatives did not find silencer (1) with the blood attributed to Sheila inside it, relatives found the other silencer (2) which eventually had the paint from the aga once the aga was deliberately scratched by use of silencer (2) on 12th September 1985, as per the crime scene photographs, taken by PC Bird, whilst DI 'Ron' Cook was in attendance at the scene...
So, do you accept that a silencer was found that had Sheila's blood in it?
-
Mike I had no beef about that,just you saying it WAS a picture of him screwing together the two items before 28(?)sept. Besides as Choc points out,the picture is off topic?
You did right to point out that anomaly, but it doesn't prove that PC Whiddon did not do what Ewen Smiths informant said he did, or where the second silencer had been kept for all that length of time, or even if 'Taff' used it as a paper weight or not? For what its worth, I have been assured by my informant that once PC Whiddon screwed the silencer onto the barrel of the gun, photographs were taken of that event, although I myself have not yet set eyes upon such a photograph. Now, you can choose to ignore what I am saying or not, but I can assure you that I have asked my informant on two specific occasions to show me a photograph of that event, but to date he has resisted producing it for my benefit telling me that there exist other pictures which depict what PC Whiddon had done, and what he did, and that if I was desperate to make any point about it, I should rely on those. This was the reason behind why I posted those pictures along with what I said, and I am not bothered if you and nobody else believes what I am saying, its the truth as far as I am concerned, and i will stick to that explanation, until my death...
-
So, do you accept that a silencer was found that had Sheila's blood in it?
I believe that a silencer may have been fitted to the barrel of the gun that fired the non fatal shot to the side of Sheila's neck (downstairs) and I know that DS 'Stan' Jones took possession of this silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene that morning along with three other exhibits bearing his identifying mark of SBJ/4, SBJ/3 and SBJ/2 (under the SC/688/85 investigation), yes...
Although I am not 100% sure that Sheila's blood got inside that (1) silencer at that time, I still believe very strongly that the small flek of Sheila's blood could have been forced into the silencer during the mishandling of the rifle and silencer by DI Cook, PC Whiddon and the ballistic expert, MDF, in particular during the unofficial test fire of the rifle and silencer (1)...
-
Tonyb,
1. What the data you've posted was meant to show was not clarified.
2. The data was not properly attributed as all data posted here should be, or the lack
of attribution should be explained.
3. This data, of the incidence of accidents due to falls from ladders does not support
your claim that there were numerous deaths due to falls form ladders in the 80s.
4. Deaths due to falls from ladders were and are quite rare.
5. When faced with the real data of the tiny incidence of deaths from ladder falls, which
undermines your case, you bluster that it's wrong without providing any alternative
data.
6. You've basically done exactly what you repeatedly accuse Mike of doing.
I'm not my intention to have a go at you about this. You were tired when you posted these figures, just as I would think Mike is often tired when he posts.
What I am saying is that we all make mistakes, even you, so please be a little more tolerant and respectful when you take issue with Mike's claims.
choc, I dint normally sleep in the afternoon and remember awaking at 9.30 am yesterday, so i wasn't tired... also "tolerant and respectful"... you earn respect, mike didn't do himself with his foul mouth tirade of abuse toward me for pointing out the truth.I would think everyone deserves to be shown the truth, don't you agree. I don't take the piss out of MT for the mystry meetings.I just take issue with obviously misleading information that is easy to spot. He's changed his stance on the photo's in question,don't keep dragging it up. Also,mine and Andrea's post were both at 3.58 so it's pretty obvious I'm not replying to it.
-
I believe that a silencer may have been fitted to the barrel of the gun that fired the non fatal shot to the side of Sheila's neck (downstairs) and I know that DS 'Stan' Jones took possession of this silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene that morning along with three other exhibits bearing his identifying mark of SBJ/4, SBJ/3 and SBJ/2 (under the SC/688/85 investigation), yes...
Although I am not 100% sure that Sheila's blood got inside that (1) silencer at that time, I still believe very strongly that the small flek of Sheila's blood could have been forced into the silencer during the mishandling of the rifle and silencer by DI Cook, PC Whiddon and the ballistic expert, MDF, in particular during the unofficial test fire of the rifle and silencer (1)...
So if this was a different silencer, where was it found?
Why would Sheila have removed it before the final shot?
Why does Jeremy not accept this theory?
If it could be proved that this was the same silencer that the relatives found then would you agree it highly unlikely that Sheila put it there?
-
So, do you accept that a silencer was found that had Sheila's blood in it?
Which silencer are you refering to Vic? You see I still think that the Pargeter silencer was still at the house.
One of the silencers was recovered by the police on the day of the murders, and taken away.
There is no doubt in my mind that there were two silencers at the farm.
Pargeter said that JB was no slouch when it came to shootinmg, and he was a good shot.
He also said that JB showed no interest in guns. Now it is one or the other. Pargeter said that JB was only interested in the 22 pellet gun, Quite a step up to a .22 IMO.
Without naming names, someone was lying their arse off.IMO JB was the scape goat.
If I was a cop I would look very carefully at the statements of Pargenter, as I truly think he is the weak link in this.
-
So if this was a different silencer, where was it found?
Why would Sheila have removed it before the final shot?
Why does Jeremy not accept this theory?
If it could be proved that this was the same silencer that the relatives found then would you agree it highly unlikely that Sheila put it there?
I think silencer (1) was Pargeters silencer, and that the blood found upon its end cap and inside was primarily animals blood...
-
I don't know if it was an accident or not, Cliff. What I do know is that the PII secrecy order slapped on the Coroner's report of Taff Jones' death is odd and might lead any reasonable person to wonder if there may have been more to this death than met the eye.
Just to set the cat among the pigeons, so to speak, this topic was discussed way back in July 11 in the thread 'The odds of dying by falling off a stepladder'.
On there it says Taff Jones was 35 when he died and he fell from at step-ladder.
I guess a step-ladder can be any height, but I often assummed he was up really high to fall and break his neck.
-
Just to set the cat among the pigeons, so to speak, this topic was discussed way back in July 11 in the thread 'The odds of dying by falling off a stepladder'.
On there it says Taff Jones was 35 when he died and he fell from at step-ladder.
I guess a step-ladder can be any height, but I often assummed he was up really high to fall and break his neck.
Ifg he was 35 HM he had a hard life. Mind you if his wife was like mine he could have been in his twenties. ;D
-
DS 'Stan' Jones took possession of silencer (1) from the scene along with three other exhibits, all marked SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and SBJ/1, and Pargeters silencer (1) was that silencer. DCI 'Taff' Jones knew all about the find of Pargeters silencer (1) and the other DS Jones exhibits (SBJ/4, SBJ/3 and SBJ/2). He knew this was the silencer (1) which had been sent to the lab' on 13th August 1985, and he knew all about DI 'Ron' Cooks experiments and dealings with that silencer (1) during that 18 day or so period - he knew it was a different silencer to the one found by the relatives, and 'Taff' Jones did not like the relatives, he did not trust them, and that was one of the reasons why he held onto the second silencer (2) which he kept on his desk until PC Whiddon came along, and so on, and so forth...
-
Ifg he was 35 HM he had a hard life. Mind you if his wife was like mine he could have been in his twenties. ;D
Now, now, Buddy! ::)
-
Whilst ever the investigation (SC/688/85) was one of four murders and a suicide, under leadership of DCI 'Taff' Jones, the relatives attempts to influence the investigation were relatively ignored and put on the back burner, until the nature of the investigation changed (SC/786/85) into five murders with DCS 'Mick' Ainsley at the helm - from that point on he was their best friend and did everything he could to accommodate everything they said and did...
So close were the relatives and DCS Ainsley that upon his retirement they offered him a job as security advisor at Osea Road caravan park, a business which Jeremy had legitimate shares and interests in...
-
Now, now, Buddy! ::)
I will delete this later. She is out at the moment, so I am feeling confident.
Wait a minute, I hear a car! Oh f***. Got to put the kettle on.
-
Whilst ever the investigation (SC/688/85) was one of four murders and a suicide, under leadership of DCI 'Taff' Jones, the relatives attempts to influence the investigation were relatively ignored and put on the back burner, until the nature of the investigation changed (SC/786/85) into five murders with DCS 'Mick' Ainsley at the helm - from that point on he was their best friend and did everything he could to accommodate everything they said and did...
So close were the relatives and DCS Ainsley that upon his retirement they offered him a job as security advisor at Osea Road caravan park, a business which Jeremy had legitimate shares and interests in...
What DCI 'Taff' Jones knew about the two silencers was a threat to the case which DCS Ainsley and the relatives were bringing against Jeremy...
-
choc, I dint normally sleep in the afternoon and remember awaking at 9.30 am yesterday, so i wasn't tired... also "tolerant and respectful"... you earn respect, mike didn't do himself with his foul mouth tirade of abuse toward me for pointing out the truth.I would think everyone deserves to be shown the truth, don't you agree. I don't take the piss out of MT for the mystry meetings.I just take issue with obviously misleading information that is easy to spot. He's changed his stance on the photo's in question,don't keep dragging it up. Also,mine and Andrea's post were both at 3.58 so it's pretty obvious I'm not replying to it.
Hi Tonyb,
I think some of the questions you ask raise important issues that require addressing. I'm glad that you raise these issues. My problem is with the manner with which you raise your points. You tend to come across as quite hostile to Mike. I would accept that Mike is hostile to you at times, but from where I'm sitting, it looks to me as though Mike is responding in kind to your initial hostility towards him. I feel that Mike is due the same kind of respect and tolerance that we expect for ourselves, plus a little more because he's the forum owner. I want to read your points, but I just wish you would raise them in a kinder manner, that's all.
-
So, do you accept that a silencer was found that had Sheila's blood in it?
I think you misinterpreted what Mike wrote? He used the words "attributed to".
-
I believe that a silencer may have been fitted to the barrel of the gun that fired the non fatal shot to the side of Sheila's neck (downstairs) and I know that DS 'Stan' Jones took possession of this silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene that morning along with three other exhibits bearing his identifying mark of SBJ/4, SBJ/3 and SBJ/2 (under the SC/688/85 investigation), yes...
Although I am not 100% sure that Sheila's blood got inside that (1) silencer at that time, I still believe very strongly that the small flek of Sheila's blood could have been forced into the silencer during the mishandling of the rifle and silencer by DI Cook, PC Whiddon and the ballistic expert, MDF, in particular during the unofficial test fire of the rifle and silencer (1)...
I don't believe that this happened at all. There was no mention of a silencer as being very significant until the relatives allegedly found it in the gun cupboard.
-
I don't believe that this happened at all. There was no mention of a silencer as being very significant until the relatives allegedly found it in the gun cupboard.
I am 100% certain that police took possession of Pargeters silencer (1) from the scene and that it had got animals bloods in and on it...
-
I am 100% certain that police took possession of Pargeters silencer (1) from the scene and that it had got animals bloods in and on it...
Animals blood perhaps? But not Sheila's blood?
-
Animals blood perhaps? But not Sheila's blood?
Yes, animals blood, that is what I think can be seen on the face of the silencers end cap in the general examination record, dated, 13th August 1985, and the pictures which DI Cook took on 29th august...
-
Hi Tonyb,
I think some of the questions you ask raise important issues that require addressing. I'm glad that you raise these issues. My problem is with the manner with which you raise your points. You tend to come across as quite hostile to Mike. I would accept that Mike is hostile to you at times, but from where I'm sitting, it looks to me as though Mike is responding in kind to your initial hostility towards him. I feel that Mike is due the same kind of respect and tolerance that we expect for ourselves, plus a little more because he's the forum owner. I want to read your points, but I just wish you would raise them in a kinder manner, that's all.
Sorry choc,just back in."initial hostility"? Sorry choc, if I seem hostile in questioning MT it is only after he's referred to me as a fucking moronic scumbag clown. I'll try not to offend him in future. I have never used offensive language against MT and have PM'd him messages of support on a few occasions I thought warranted it.but as I've said Mike and myself have kissed and made up so you need not trouble yourself any further,I'm thick skinned and he's called me worse in the past.
-
The reference to the report reads "82/17 Typed exerpt from a report re DCI Jones, The Sound Moderator and Scenes of Crime". Ignore the incorrect spelling of "excerpt". The word "re" means "regarding", so it seems the excerpt was about DCI Jones, not necessarily written by DCI Jones. If the report was produced shortly after DCI Jones was removed from the enquiry, it was possibly written by (or for) Jim Kenneally or Mick Ainsley.
-
The reference to the report reads "82/17 Typed exerpt from a report re DCI Jones, The Sound Moderator and Scenes of Crime". Ignore the incorrect spelling of "excerpt". The word "re" means "regarding", so it seems the excerpt was about DCI Jones, not necessarily written by DCI Jones. If the report was produced shortly after DCI Jones was removed from the enquiry, it was possibly written by (or for) Jim Kenneally or Mick Ainsley.
Why would DCI Jones or somebody else be writing a report re the silencer and scenes of crime, if officially he had no involvement with the silencer? Unless, unofficially he did...
-
Now I may well be wrong on this. But the farmers I have seen when they are shooting rabbits use a shotgun? I don't know any of them who'd ponce around with a .22 sporting rifle? The reason being that you would rarely have to go up to the animal to put it out of its misery.
They are counted by farmers as a pest. They are quickly dispatched and then taken up to one of the butchers in Maldon for resale. Killing rabbits is not a sport it's a necessity with farmers.
And I can't see any of them buggering about with useless silencers which only serve to make the gun more unwealdy.
-
Sorry choc,just back in."initial hostility"? Sorry choc, if I seem hostile in questioning MT it is only after he's referred to me as a fucking moronic scumbag clown. I'll try not to offend him in future. I have never used offensive language against MT and have PM'd him messages of support on a few occasions I thought warranted it.but as I've said Mike and myself have kissed and made up so you need not trouble yourself any further,I'm thick skinned and he's called me worse in the past.
Well done, Tonyb! You're not so bad after all :D
-
Now I may well be wrong on this. But the farmers I have seen when they are shooting rabbits use a shotgun? I don't know any of them who'd ponce around with a .22 sporting rifle? The reason being that you would rarely have to go up to the animal to put it out of its misery.
They are counted by farmers as a pest. They are quickly dispatched and then taken up to one of the butchers in Maldon for resale. Killing rabbits is not a sport it's a necessity with farmers.
And I can't see any of them buggering about with useless silencers which only serve to make the gun more unwealdy.
Grahame
Farmers use either a shotgun or a rimfire rifle (usually a .22) to kill rabbits. When lamping at night a rifle is more commonly used. When the rabbits are to be resold for food rifle shot rabbits are preferred. The advantage of the rifle is longer range, a cleaner kill and less noise. The cartridges are also much cheaper.
-
Now I may well be wrong on this. But the farmers I have seen when they are shooting rabbits use a shotgun? I don't know any of them who'd ponce around with a .22 sporting rifle? The reason being that you would rarely have to go up to the animal to put it out of its misery.
They are counted by farmers as a pest. They are quickly dispatched and then taken up to one of the butchers in Maldon for resale. Killing rabbits is not a sport it's a necessity with farmers.
And I can't see any of them buggering about with useless silencers which only serve to make the gun more unwealdy.
.22 rifles are used quite a lot Grahame. The use of a silencer is so it doesn't panic other rabbits.
Once you fire a shotgun the noise scares the rabbits, and you would be unlikely to see another rabbit for some time.
If a rabbit is hit by a hollow point round, it unlikely that there would be a need to finish it off.
-
Sorry neil. Cross posted :-[
-
If a rabbit is hit by a hollow point round, it unlikely that there would be a need to finish it off.
Except apparently in the case of the explanation of rabbit's blood on the silencer?
-
Except apparently in the case of the explanation of rabbit's blood on the silencer?
As Cliff says a hollowpoint bullet is very effective and a rabbit or rat will normally be cleanly killed if hit by one. However if the shot is badly placed (normally with a rabbit a head shot is taken so accuracy is important) the animal can be left incapacitated but still alive. It then needs to be dispatched quickly and humanely. There are different ways of achieving this but a second shot as close range is possible.
We should remember here that the quantities of blood we are talking about are very small. They were not necessarily deposited on and in the silencer at the same time. A likely source of blood contamination is by transfer from the shooter himself. For example a rabbit or rat of fox is shot, the body is then picked up by the shooter, who continues to handle the rifle and sound moderator. If the sound moderator is dismantled to clean or check for fouling of the baffles the components have to be handled by the shooter.
When the sound moderator was dismantled by the police before it was forwarded to the laboratory there was a further opportunity for contamination, particular if (as seems likely) the sound moderator was handled on the same bench or surface as the rifle.
-
Mike I had no beef about that,just you saying it WAS a picture of him screwing together the two items before 28(?)sept. Besides as Choc points out,the picture is off topic?
I would never suggest that Mike is off topic, Tonyb. This is Mike's forum, he can post about whatever he likes, it's you and I that were going off topic.
-
As Cliff says a hollowpoint bullet is very effective and a rabbit or rat will normally be cleanly killed if hit by one. However if the shot is badly placed (normally with a rabbit a head shot is taken so accuracy is important) the animal can be left incapacitated but still alive. It then needs to be dispatched quickly and humanely. There are different ways of achieving this but a second shot as close range is possible.
We should remember here that the quantities of blood we are talking about are very small. They were not necessarily deposited on and in the silencer at the same time. A likely source of blood contamination is by transfer from the shooter himself. For example a rabbit or rat of fox is shot, the body is then picked up by the shooter, who continues to handle the rifle and sound moderator. If the sound moderator is dismantled to clean or check for fouling of the baffles the components have to be handled by the shooter.
When the sound moderator was dismantled by the police before it was forwarded to the laboratory there was a further opportunity for contamination, particular if (as seems likely) the sound moderator was handled on the same bench or surface as the rifle.
Was it actually known by the court that the policeman took the silencer to bits? If not where is the documented information that shows he did?
-
I would never suggest that Mike is off topic, Tonyb. This is Mike's forum, he can post about whatever he likes, it's you and I that were going off topic.
Surely I can respond to aspects of mikes post in this thread? Mike intro'd the photos and I replied to it.i never thought it was off topic but I was trying to draw a line under it.i was hoping you were too....
-
Surely I can respond to aspects of mikes post in this thread? Mike intro'd the photos and I replied to it.i never thought it was off topic but I was trying to draw a line under it.i was hoping you were too....
I suppose so... :D
-
I suppose so... :D
Thank choc xx
-
Thank choc xx
You're welcome, Tonyb xx
-
Was it actually known by the court that the policeman took the silencer to bits? If not where is the documented information that shows he did?
Is this the sort of 'documented information' you are looking for Grahame?
It was posted by Mike on page 8 of this thread. He also states that the photograph was not made available to the defense or the jury.
-
Is this the sort of 'documented information' you are looking for Grahame?
It was posted by Mike on page 8 of this thread. He also states that the photograph was not made available to the defense or the jury.
Thanks Janet. The fate on that photo is 29-8-85. When was the silencer sent to the lab?
-
Thanks Janet. The fate on that photo is 29-8-85. When was the silencer sent to the lab?
You're welcome Grahame. Again according to Mikes information, the silencer was sent to the lab for the first time on 30th August 1985.
-
You're welcome Grahame. Again according to Mikes information, the silencer was sent to the lab for the first time on 30th August 1985.
Of course I meant date and not fate. ;D So this copper took it to bits before it was sent to the lab? Well this is just one more reason why the silencer should never have been accepted as evidence. One more thing that was hidden from the defence and of course the court? Must we now assume that the legal bods in charge of these things have a policy that it only employs registered blind people to look at these case?
-
So, we have more chance of dying from falling out of bed than by falling from a ladder.
Why did you not also include my response in that thread in which I pointed out the statistical flaw in your thinking?