Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on May 14, 2012, 08:33:PM
-
Due to meet informant in Glasgow tomorrow:-
I will update thread during the course of tomorrow morning...
-
Photograph of Sheila on the bed with only one wound to her neck will be top of the agenda...
-
Due to meet informant in Glasgow tomorrow:-
I will update thread during the course of tomorrow morning...
Mike
Do you expect to be followed given you have just reveal what you will be doing or is 'Glasgow' a false bait diversion which would be understandable given what you have alleged previously.
However, on the other hand if it is a diversion would such information not be a lie.
-
Mike
Do you expect to be followed given you have just reveal what you will be doing or is 'Glasgow' a false bait diversion which would be understandable given what you have alleged previously.
However, on the other hand if it is a diversion would such information not be a lie.
If it was intended as a diversion it would amount to a lie, and I do not tell lies - I am off to Glasgow, to take part in a meeting with one of my informants, the stakes are high, a lot is riding on the outcome of that / this meeting. I feel that if at any stage I am being followed the meeting will not go ahead. According to the prosecutions case at my trials at Sheffield Crown court in 1988 and 1994, I am supposed to be a master at counter surveillance techniques, so if there is any truth in that it will be put to good use, although I expect to be tracked by mobile phone signal, of course...
trust me, I am not lying...
-
Photograph of Sheila on the bed with only one wound to her neck will be top of the agenda...
Is the informant the one you got the USB-HDD lead delivered to then Mike?
Surely it would have been quicker to get it delivered directly from Amazon to your house so you could have published the "Photograph of Sheila on the bed with only one wound to her neck" 3 weeks ago?
-
Due to meet informant in Glasgow tomorrow:-
I will update thread during the course of tomorrow morning...
You be carefully Mike
They have bars on the inside of the pub windows to stop people getting thrown out!
Spent some time in Greenock in the mid 90's... Think I'd of arranged it in Edinburgh. Much nicer scenery to photograph too.
-
You be carefully Mike
They have bars on the inside of the pub windows to stop people getting thrown out!
Spent some time in Greenock in the mid 90's... Think I'd of arranged it in Edinburgh. Much nicer scenery to photograph too.
I know Glasgow like the back of my informants hand...
-
I know Glasgow like the back of my informants hand...
Mike
You are not meeting yourself in Glasgow are you?
-
Mike
You are not meeting yourself in Glasgow are you?
Oops, my cover has been blown...
Damn it...
-
I know Glasgow like the back of my informants hand...
so you won't be needing an A to Z then Mike.....
dont tell me your "informant" goes by a number !! ;D
-
Good luck Mike and have a nice day !!!!!
-
Good luck Mike and have a nice day !!!!!
Just leaving Edinburgh airport in company of informant, en route to Glasgow meeting...
-
Just leaving Edinburgh airport in company of informant, en route to Glasgow meeting...
turning phone off, and removing battery to prevent tracking...
-
turning phone off, and removing battery to prevent tracking...
Watch out for the helicopters, they have these new thermal and infra red cameras which can see through the really dense foliage. :P
-
turning phone off, and removing battery to prevent tracking...
Who is tracking who? Why would anyone be tracking you?
If anyone was tracking you, I suppose they would have started from right outside your house, then used your mobile phone signal to follow you to Edinburgh or wherever where they would have someone waiting for you and your informant at the airport. Your trackers probably watched you taking the battery out. They could have intervened once they had you and your informant together.
You should probably check your house out as well when you get home in case those that are tracking you have set up any surveillance equipment. I guess you also need to check your car thoroughly too before you next drive it.
-
Mike may also need the house checked out incase of listening devices. Also the garden just incase there are cameras hid in the plant pots.
-
sagar you are so naughty.
-
Aye ;D
-
Why the need for anyone to track at all.? This isn't GCHQ we're talking about.
-
Abort the Highland meeting Mike - they're onto you...
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sfdZs8m0BFY/ThNlGCZCkWI/AAAAAAAACXA/QmbGCY9eqgA/s1600/%2BWeb-Wk6-0-Canada%2BMoose-Binoculars-BlLuc-Funny-4369.jpg)
-
Was Mike stopping off in Leeds at some point on his journey?
-
bob you are so funny I have not laughed as much for along time tears running down my face taking massacre with it what a sight I look. I shall have to keep this on my screen because I have not seen anything as funny for so long. Wonder what Mike will say bet he has a good laugh. Thank you for making my day.
-
sagar starting his journey I think in Leeds he is a Yorkshire lad.
-
sagar starting his journey I think in Leeds he is a Yorkshire lad.
Sheffield I think.
Too funny bob!!!
-
Hi Bridget is Mike from Sheffield or have I missed the joke again. Maybe Sheffield is nice I have never ventured so far still laughing at Bob,s pic I am suppose to be going out to weed the garden but I am getting addicted to the forum.
-
Hi Bridget is Mike from Sheffield or have I missed the joke again. Maybe Sheffield is nice I have never ventured so far still laughing at Bob,s pic I am suppose to be going out to weed the garden but I am getting addicted to the forum.
I think he's from Sheffield, yes, could be wrong.
-
elphick have you not seen Bob,s photo they are on to Mike they don,t need mobiles to track you down in the Highlands they just use Rheindeer.
-
Hi Bridget is Mike from Sheffield or have I missed the joke again. Maybe Sheffield is nice I have never ventured so far still laughing at Bob,s pic I am suppose to be going out to weed the garden but I am getting addicted to the forum.
Sheffield is built on 7 hills, which is close to the Peak District of Derbyshire. It is more of a modern city, with glass buildings and looks rather strange alongside the more architectural old buildings, which are pleasent to look at.
Sheffield was a thriving city at one time and produced the finest steel....but, sadly all the steel works have gone and so unemployment in the city became rife.......The city is slowly losing it's shopping traditions and, most large shops have been closed....It is a city for the young and comes alive at night time......The city provides fantastic leisure facilities......
I live about 9 miles form the place...I dislike city life, I am more at home in the country.....:)
Off topic I know.....sorry... :-[
-
Sheffield is built on 7 hills, which is close to the Peak District of Derbyshire. It is more of a modern city, with glass buildings and looks rather strange alongside the more architectural old buildings, which are pleasent to look at.
Sheffield was a thriving city at one time and produced the finest steel....but, sadly all the steel works have gone and so unemployment in the city became rife.......The city is slowly losing it's shopping traditions and, most large shops have been closed....It is a city for the young and comes alive at night time......The city provides fantastic leisure facilities......
I live about 9 miles form the place...I dislike city life, I am more at home in the country.....:)
Off topic I know.....sorry... :-[
Unfortunately, it sounds like a lot of places, Patti! They're all becoming one :(
-
Bob's making me laugh I can't help it....hahahahahah ;D
-
Patti I have been working in my garden on and off this afternoon and suddenly I would start roaring with laughter (good thing I have no near neighbours) at the post Bob sent it is so funny I think I will laugh about it for months to come he must have a great sense of humour bet he comes from Yorkshire!!!
-
Patti I have been working in my garden on and off this afternoon and suddenly I would start roaring with laughter (good thing I have no near neighbours) at the post Bob sent it is so funny I think I will laugh about it for months to come he must have a great sense of humour bet he comes from Yorkshire!!!
I perceive bob as bob milleresque in appearance but in a lab coat. cockney accent. It's all in my head mind. He could be entirely different from that.
-
Hi Patti If the whole of the forum members met in a big room I bet their would be some big shocks!!!
-
Hi Patti If the whole of the forum members met in a big room I bet their would be some big shocks!!!
Are you condemning us all to the electric chair? ???
-
NewChilledOutHartley I don,t think is would be that bad but I bet we would have alot to discuss on the forum afterwards.
-
NewChilledOutHartley I don,t think is would be that bad but I bet we would have alot to discuss on the forum afterwards.
Yes, you are probably right. ;)
-
I perceive bob as bob milleresque in appearance but in a lab coat. cockney accent. It's all in my head mind. He could be entirely different from that.
Cockney accent Roch?
I be from zummerzet young'un!
I only come up big London to deliver some 'ay bales for the Horse o'the Year Show, an I been lost ever since :-\
-
Welcome back Mike, I see you're logged in - how did today go?
-
Cockney accent Roch?
I be from zummerzet young'un!
I only come up big London to deliver some 'ay bales for the Horse o'the Year Show, an I been lost ever since :-\
bob... you mean like this?
-
bob... you mean like this?
Oooh Arrrr........!
-
Welcome back Mike, I see you're logged in - how did today go?
it went well...
Informant pointed out the significance of the two photographs taken at the scene by DS 'Stan' Jones, the one he took in the downstairs toilet, and the other in the kitchen? He told me that it is not just a coincidence that these photographs were taken, and that any reference is not made to them in PC Birds photographic schedules, namely, (a) master copy album, and (b) court albums? He tells me that DS Jones deliberately returned to the scene at around 11 o' clock from Jeremy's cottage, as a result of being told by DC Clarke that Sheila's body had been found on the bed in the main bedroom...
-
Thanks Mike. What did you think of the information? And, what are your plans to take matters forward?
-
it went well...
Informant pointed out the significance of the two photographs taken at the scene by DS 'Stan' Jones, the one he took in the downstairs toilet, and the other in the kitchen? He told me that it is not just a coincidence that these photographs were taken, and that any reference is not made to them in PC Birds photographic schedules, namely, (a) master copy album, and (b) court albums? He tells me that DS Jones deliberately returned to the scene at around 11 o' clock from Jeremy's cottage, as a result of being told by DC Clarke that Sheila's body had been found on the bed in the main bedroom...
He said that actually DS Jones overheard DC Clarke telling Ann Eaton, that the bodies of June Bamber and Sheila had been found on the bed, and that afterwards when Jones spoke to Clarke about this, Clarke told him that the two bodies were on the bed when he accompanied DCI "Taff" Jones around the house. It was DC Clarke who told Ann Eaton and the other relatives that all the victims had been shot just the once, at which the relatives expressed surprise, saying that they did not believe that Sheila could have been so accurate with a gun considering that non of them knew she had ever handled a gun at all? Informant told me that this was what caused DS Jones to rush off back to the scene at about 11am - he went there to see everything for himself, but all was not as described by DC Clarke, since upon arrival back at the scene DS Jones discovered that June's body had been moved from the bed to its final resting place against the bedroom door, and Sheila was laid out on the bedroom floor parallel with the left hand edge of the bed (as viewed from the vantage point of the observer being stood at the foot of the bed), with a rifle atop her body. DS Jones noticed two wounds on Sheila's neck at this stage, and queried what DC Clarke had recounted to Ann Eaton and himself back at Jeremy's cottage about her only having the one wound? At that stage DS Jones was not overly concerned with the fact that the bodies of June and Sheila had been moved from the bed to the floor in different areas of the bedroom, because SOC and other officers were milling around checking the bed for bullet cases, and anything else of evidential interest. Jones must have thought by that stage that photographs had already been taken with the two bodies in situ on the bed, which was in fact correct, and so when Jones saw PC Bird taking additional photographs he just thought these were being taken for continuity purposes, not because the police were deliberately stage managing the scene. It was at this point that Jones overheard one of the officers inside the premises express concern about the possible use of a second weapon in the shootings, which caused Jones to go downstairs to the downstairs toilet where he took a photograph there, showing all the guns and accessories in storage there. According to my informant Jones photographed the other rifle belonging to Anthony Pargeter in the toilet, he took possession of it, but the rifle was later handed back to Pargeter. Police also seized a .22 air rifle from the vicinity of the kitchen which was taken away to be fingerprinted as it was suspected that it had been used in the initial shooting of Sheila downstairs. Police also later handed the .22 air rifle back to the relatives in time for them to hand it back over to Jeremy on 12th August 1985...
-
So your photo,the one your withholding of SC on the bed, is pivitol Mike.
What on earth has JB done to incur your wrath......?
-
He said that actually DS Jones overheard DC Clarke telling Ann Eaton, that the bodies of June Bamber and Sheila had been found on the bed, and that afterwards when Jones spoke to Clarke about this, Clarke told him that the two bodies were on the bed when he accompanied DCI "Taff" Jones around the house. It was DC Clarke who told Ann Eaton and the other relatives that all the victims had been shot just the once, at which the relatives expressed surprise, saying that they did not believe that Sheila could have been so accurate with a gun considering that non of them knew she had ever handled a gun at all? Informant told me that this was what caused DS Jones to rush off back to the scene at about 11am - he went there to see everything for himself, but all was not as described by DC Clarke, since upon arrival back at the scene DS Jones discovered that June's body had been moved from the bed to its final resting place against the bedroom door, and Sheila was laid out on the bedroom floor parallel with the left hand edge of the bed (as viewed from the vantage point of the observer being stood at the foot of the bed), with a rifle atop her body. DS Jones noticed two wounds on Sheila's neck at this stage, and queried what DC Clarke had recounted to Ann Eaton and himself back at Jeremy's cottage about her only having the one wound? At that stage DS Jones was not overly concerned with the fact that the bodies of June and Sheila had been moved from the bed to the floor in different areas of the bedroom, because SOC and other officers were milling around checking the bed for bullet cases, and anything else of evidential interest. Jones must have thought by that stage that photographs had already been taken with the two bodies in situ on the bed, which was in fact correct, and so when Jones saw PC Bird taking additional photographs he just thought these were being taken for continuity purposes, not because the police were deliberately stage managing the scene. It was at this point that Jones overheard one of the officers inside the premises express concern about the possible use of a second weapon in the shootings, which caused Jones to go downstairs to the downstairs toilet where he took a photograph there, showing all the guns and accessories in storage there. According to my informant Jones photographed the other rifle belonging to Anthony Pargeter in the toilet, he took possession of it, but the rifle was later handed back to Pargeter. Police also seized a .22 air rifle from the vicinity of the kitchen which was taken away to be fingerprinted as it was suspected that it had been used in the initial shooting of Sheila downstairs. Police also later handed the .22 air rifle back to the relatives in time for them to hand it back over to Jeremy on 12th August 1985...
Use this schedule for reference purposes when dealing with what is to follow in the coming days:-
Time table schedule
03:15
03:26
03:35
03:36
03:48
03:52
04:02
05:00
05:25
07:00
07:15
07:30
07:37
07:38
07:41
07:45
08:10
08:44
09:00
09:05
09:10
09:20
09:25
10:00
11:15
-
Approximate time:-
03:15 - Ralph Bamber makes call from whf to Jeremy at his cottage
-
Approximate time:-
03:26
03:35
03:36
Ralph called the police, Jeremy called the police, police officers were dispatched to the scene, and so was Jeremy...
-
Approximate time:-
03:48 - police arrive at the scene
03:52 - Jeremy arrives at the scene
-
Approximate time:-
04:02 - police return from recce of the grounds of the farmhouse along with Jeremy in tow
-
Approximate time:-
05:00 - first group of firearms officers arrive at the scene led by PS Adams
-
Approximate time:-
05:25 - Police at the scene are in conversation with a person from inside the premises, at a time when Jeremy is no longer at the scene, since he was taken away to a nearby village to make a phone call in a public payphone to his then girlfriend Julie Mugford
-
Approximate time:-
07:00 - 2nd group of firearms officers arrive at scene
07:15 - WPC Julia Jeapes spots rifle leaning up against bedroom window
07:30 - six man raid team prepare to force entry into farmhouse
-
Appropriate time:-
07:37 - Bodies of Ralph and Sheila found upon entry
07:38 - confirmation of above
07:41 - request for coroners officer and police surgeon, to attend scene regarding the two aforementioned bodies found in region of kitchen by raid team upon entry
-
Appropriate time:-
07:45 - SOC called onto duty because police at whf are dealing with a murder, and a suicide
-
Appropriate time:-
08:10 - the other three bodies of victims, June and the two children are found upstairs in the bedrooms
-
Approximate time:-
08:44 - police surgeon, Dr Craig, is accompanied by PI Miller, at which point Dr Craig pronounces Sheila as being dead in the bedroom with only one shot to the neck, he and Miller describes Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed, without actually saying her body was on the bedroom floor
-
Approximate time:-
09:00 - training exercise commences at the scene with bodies of victims still insitu
-
Approximate time:-
09:05
09:10
Arrival of DCI "Taff" Jones, and DC Clark at the scene. When shown around house bodies of June and Sheila are on the bed. Jones asks Clarke to go along with Jeremy to his cottage to take a witness statement from him, and whilst there Clarke informs Ann Eaton that bodies of June and Sheila found on bed
-
Approximate time:-
09:20 - SOC arrive at the scene but they are prevented from taking control of the scene because senior officers and other officers are taking part in a training exercise inside the premises, moving the bodies of victims around and re-arranging furniture and items
-
Approximate time:-
09:25 - arrival of coroners officer, PC Wright at the scene, when he views body of Sheila in the bedroom, there is no rifle present upon her body
-
Approximate time:-
10:00 - training exercise being wound up inside premises, bodies have all been positioned in the locations that PC Bird (SOC) then proceeds to take photographs of. By this stage, Sheila's body is on the bedroom floor and she has got two wounds to her neck
-
Approximate time:-
11:15 - PS Woodcock removes rifle from atop Sheila's body and he makes it safe
-
The photograph of Sheila on the bed which I first saw in Ewen Smiths office in Birmingham at the beginning of 2004, was taken to a very similar angle as the following crime scene image:-
-
Person who took picture was standing more to the left, and closure to the railings at the foot of the bed, providing a birds eye view of Sheila on the bed...
-
Approximate time:-
08:44 - police surgeon, Dr Craig, is accompanied by PI Miller, at which point Dr Craig pronounces Sheila as being dead in the bedroom with only one shot to the neck, he and Miller describes Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed, without actually saying her body was on the bedroom floor
This is actually correct?
On the far side of the bed?
Not on the bed?
Doesn't say it's on the bed then either...
When I'm standing by my wardrobe,my Radiator is on the far side of the bed,not my side of the bed,if you see what I mean.
-
This is actually correct?
On the far side of the bed?
Not on the bed?
Doesn't say it's on the bed then either...
When I'm standing by my wardrobe,my Radiator is on the far side of the bed,not my side of the bed,if you see what I mean.
The only way to convince me and the rest ( I imagine ) of the forum is to post the photo you claim to have in your possession Mike.
-
The photograph of Sheila on the bed which I first saw in Ewen Smiths office in Birmingham at the beginning of 2004, was taken to a very similar angle as the following crime scene image:-
Mike
The image / photograph you have posted in #62 is appears to be a left to right reverse image of the bedroom with Sheila on the floor next to a blue bible which is on the floor.
If own look closely Sheila can be seen on the right hand side of the bed, on the floor, with an uptgurned blue bible positioned next to Sheila's body.
However, other photographs of Sheila that are available on the forum Sheila appears on the left hand side of the bed with a 'blue bioble' face down on the floor and next to her.
Also the image you have posted includes a view of the sole's of Sheila's feet. I thought there were not any photographs where the sole's of Sheila feet can be seen.
-
Do you know, I've looked at that photo lots of times and never noticed the feet!
-
Do you know, I've looked at that photo lots of times and never noticed the feet!
Hi ajross....I'd like to now what the long jaggered line is that appears to go across her foot? :)
-
Mike
The image / photograph you have posted in #62 is appears to be a left to right reverse image of the bedroom with Sheila on the floor next to a blue bible which is on the floor.
If own look closely Sheila can be seen on the right hand side of the bed, on the floor, with an uptgurned blue bible positioned next to Sheila's body.
However, other photographs of Sheila that are available on the forum Sheila appears on the left hand side of the bed with a 'blue bioble' face down on the floor and next to her.
Also the image you have posted includes a view of the sole's of Sheila's feet. I thought there were not any photographs where the sole's of Sheila feet can be seen.
Attached is the image 'flipped back'
-
Hi ajross....I'd like to now what the long jaggered line is that appears to go across her foot? :)
The one that stretches up the length of the photo? Yes, very interesting
-
Aye ;D
Aye, just as I thought.
-
Hero Member
Posts: 643
Re: Due to meet informant in Glasgow tomorrow
« Reply #64 on: May 16, 2012, 09:48:PM »
Quote
Modify
Remove
Quote from: mike tesko on May 16, 2012, 08:27:PM
Approximate time:-
08:44 - police surgeon, Dr Craig, is accompanied by PI Miller, at which point Dr Craig pronounces Sheila as being dead in the bedroom with only one shot to the neck, he and Miller describes Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed, without actually saying her body was on the bedroom floor
This is actually correct?
On the far side of the bed?
Not on the bed?
Doesn't say it's on the bed then either...
When I'm standing by my wardrobe,my Radiator is on the far side of the bed,not my side of the bed,if you see what I mean.
The picture on the bed is now crucial to progress this forward.Neither Miller or Craig state SC was on the bed so there is absolutly no evidence available to show otherwise,only speculation, imo.
-
Attached is the image 'flipped back'
Given it appears there is an image available which displays the underside of Sheila's feet.
Given Peter Suthurst was the expert who was given the job, by the defence, of trying to identify minute / small flecks of paint on the carpet under the mantelpiece in the kitchen. As I understand it such evidence / reports were being commissioned in order to disprove the scratch marks were made / happened at the time of the murders in WHF. Such evidence would potentially undermine the case of the prosecution re the silencer. No felcks of paint on the carpet = no scratch marks at the time of the killings given it is accepted the photographs were taken before any clean up in the kitchen.
Given Peter Suthurst's evidence was not accepted by the CCRC because the methods that were used in order to find / report his expert conclusions. In justifying such a rejections of the expert evidence the CCRC, would presumably, have identified what methods are acceptable to them.
Is there not some logic in getting Peter Suthurst to examine the photographs which depict the undersides of Sheila's feet.
If it is the case Sheila's feet are soiled or there is evidence of blood staining on the undersides of Sheila's feet then the 'spotlessly' clean case of the prosecution would be undermined.
Surely Peter Suthurst, from the experience and feedback on the previous submission could adopt an approach in examining the photographs which would be acceptable to the CCRC. I also seem to recall Keira offered to pay for some things in the aftrmath of the CCRC.
Who thinks the above suggestion of Suthurst being commissioned to examine the photograph which displays the undersides of Sheila's feet would be a worthwhile punt?
-
Given it appears there is an image available which displays the underside of Sheila's feet.
Given Peter Suthurst was the expert who was given the job, by the defence, of trying to identify minute / small flecks of paint on the carpet under the mantelpiece in the kitchen. As I understand it such evidence / reports were being commissioned in order to disprove the scratch marks were made / happened at the time of the murders in WHF. Such evidence would potentially undermine the case of the prosecution re the silencer. No felcks of paint on the carpet = no scratch marks at the time of the killings given it is accepted the photographs were taken before any clean up in the kitchen.
Given Peter Suthurst's evidence was not accepted by the CCRC because the methods that were used in order to find / report his expert conclusions. In justifying such a rejections of the expert evidence the CCRC, would presumably, have identified what methods are acceptable to them.
Is there not some logic in getting Peter Suthurst to examine the photographs which depict the undersides of Sheila's feet.
If it is the case Sheila's feet are soiled or there is evidence of blood staining on the undersides of Sheila's feet then the 'spotlessly' clean case of the prosecution would be undermined.
Surely Peter Suthurst, from the experience and feedback on the previous submission could adopt an approach in examining the photographs which would be acceptable to the CCRC. I also seem to recall Keira offered to pay for some things in the aftrmath of the CCRC.
Who thinks the above suggestion of Suthurst being commissioned to examine the photograph which displays the undersides of Sheila's feet would be a worthwhile punt?
It's a shame the image is so bad as there is clearly dark staining of some description on the underside of her foot.
Mike - is this a photo of a photo? do you have the original?
-
It's a shame the image is so bad as there is clearly dark staining of some description on the underside of her foot.
Mike - is this a photo of a photo? do you have the original?
There is a question mark hanging over whether or not the exposed foot you are referring to, belonged to June Bamber, not to Sheila?
-
There is a question mark hanging over whether or not the exposed foot you are referring to, belonged to June Bamber, not to Sheila?
There's no question in my mind mike, why do you say that?
-
There's no question in my mind mike, why do you say that?
Well, I should think its obvious - how do you explain spots of Junes blood underneath the body of Sheila on the rug, considering that June was later placed on the opposite side of the bed, resting against the bedroom door. The foot in question, therefore could be Junes foot, not Sheila's - before they moved June and Sheila's bodies to their last resting places, so that PC Bird could photograph them there...
-
Well, I should think its obvious - how do you explain spots of Junes blood underneath the body of Sheila on the rug, considering that June was later placed on the opposite side of the bed, resting against the bedroom door. The foot in question, therefore could be Junes foot, not Sheila's - before they moved June and Sheila's bodies to their last resting places so that PC Bird could photograph them there...
Why would they move June from the floor on one side of the bed to the floor on the other side though?
-
Why would they move June from the floor on one side of the bed to the floor on the other side though?
I should think the reason for doing such a thing would be obvious...
I think DC Clarke told Ann Eaton that the bodies of June and Sheila were found on the bed. The photo's of Sheila on the bed which I have seen show her slightly left of centre (as viewed from the vantage point at the foot of the bed) therefore, insufficient room on the left side of the bed for the bodies of June and Sheila to be laid aside one another on the same bed, unless Junes body was laid to the right of Sheila's body. Police must have carried Junes body or moved it by some means from the right hand side of the bed to the left side of the bedroom floor so that her blood could stain the rug there, and then they moved June to the bedroom door on the far side of the room...
-
Sheila on left of bed, June on right - as described by DC Clarke to Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985...
-
Can you just post the picture? it will save lots of time if you just post it.
If you dont have it then say so.
-
Sheila on left of bed, June on right - as described by DC Clarke to Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985...
so not
Approximate time:-
08:44 - police surgeon, Dr Craig, is accompanied by PI Miller, at which point Dr Craig pronounces Sheila as being dead in the bedroom with only one shot to the neck, he and Miller describes Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed, without actually saying her body was on the bedroom floor
So which account is correct ?
-
Can you just post the picture? it will save lots of time if you just post it.
If you dont have it then say so.
forget the picture
it doesnt exist
its smoke,mirrors and bullshit im afraid...
-
Yes, youre right tonyb.
Time this was put to bed (no pun intended)
-
forget the picture
it doesnt exist
its smoke,mirrors and bullshit im afraid...
Forget what DC Clarke told Ann Eaton on the morning of 7th August 1985, about body of Sheila being on the bed with only one wound...
-
Sheila on left of bed, June on right - as described by DC Clarke to Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985...
The foot is Sheila's of that there is no doubt.
The face down blue bible is visible and the end of the rifle butt can be seen laying just below Sheila's knee of her right leg.
The image included in your post (number 62) was a mirrored left to right flipped image and was corrected a few posts later (number 70) by 'elphick'.
Additional edit
Plus the socks that are on the floor laying beside Sheila are also clearly visible.
-
According to the police surgeon, Dr Craig, and PI Miller, Sheila's body was on the far side of the bed at 8:44am, and by the time DCI "Taff" Jones, and DC Clarke arrive at the scene at about 9:05am, Sheila's body is on the bed, which forces DC Clarke to recount the position of Sheila's body on the bed, when he speaks to Ann Eaton later that morning at Jeremys cottage. In the mean time, Sheila's body is on the floor in time for DC Bird to photograph it there, from 10 O'clock onwards...
-
Forget what DC Clarke told Ann Eaton on the morning of 7th August 1985, about body of Sheila being on the bed with only one wound...
????????????? WHAT? do you now say the body was on floor,moved to bed,moved back to floor????
-
Forget what DC Clarke told Ann Eaton on the morning of 7th August 1985, about body of Sheila being on the bed with only one wound...
But the bed and one wound, youve got the picture Mike... keep the faith Mike. If you dont believe yourself how can we?
-
Sheila on left of bed, June on right - as described by DC Clarke to Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985...
Mike
The latest, now reduced / cropped, picture you have now posted remains a mirrored flipped image of a photograph.
As such your left and rights are interchanged depending upon what you are quoting.... and from what perspective referenced i.e looking out from the headboard or looking towards the head board from the end of the bed.
What DC Clarke describes i.e Sheila on the left of the bed and June on the right of the bed is correct in my opinion and is supported by the photographic evidence that is available and has been posted on the forum.
-
????????????? WHAT? do you now say the body was on floor,moved to bed,moved back to floor????
Choose to ignore what DC Clarke observed when he attended the scene, and what he told Ann Eaton he had seen, for example, that Sheila's boy was on the bed before DC Clarke left the scene to go to Jeremys cottage, at your peril...
I am not saying anything, other than pointing out to you and to everyone else who says that Sheila's body was on the bedroom floor when the police surgeon, Craig, and PI Miller viewed Sheila's body at 8:44am, and Craig pronounced her as being dead - her body being as it were on the far side of the bed...
Now...
if her body was on the bedroom floor at 8:44am, as alleged by your good-self and others, then how come that by the time DC Clarke and Taff Jones arrive at the scene at around 9:05am, Sheila's body is now on the bed, a fact which Clarke recounted to Ann Eaton later that same morning, and then by 10 O'clock Sheila's body is back on the bedroom carpet...
Now...
which is it to be, in your version of events?
On the bedroom floor, on the bed, then back onto the floor?
Or...
On the bed, then moved to the floor?
Or...
just on the floor all of the time?
-
Choose to ignore what DC Clarke observed when he attended the scene, and what he told Ann Eaton he had seen, for example, that Sheila's boy was on the bed before DC Clarke left the scene to go to Jeremys cottage, at your peril...
I am not saying anything, other than pointing out to you and to everyone else who says that Sheila's body was on the bedroom floor when the police surgeon, Craig, and PI Miller viewed Sheila's body at 8:44am, and Craig pronounced her as being dead - her body being as it were on the far side of the bed...
Now...
if her body was on the bedroom floor at 8:44am, as alleged by your good-self and others, then how come that by the time DC Clarke and Taff Jones arrive at the scene at around 9:05am, Sheila's body is now on the bed, a fact which Clarke recounted to Ann Eaton later that same morning, and then by 10 O'clock Sheila's body is back on the bedroom carpet...
Now...
which is it to be, in your version of events?
On the bedroom floor, on the bed, then back onto the floor?
Or...
On the bed, then moved to the floor?
Or...
just on the floor all of the time?
In my opinion....... just on the floor all of the time.
Unless of course you can post the photgraph that proves otherwise. This I believe would be the alleged photgraph you stole / borrowed from the photgraph album that you were left alone with in Ewen Smiths office.
-
Mike
The latest, now reduced / cropped, picture you have now posted remains a mirrored flipped image of a photograph.
As such your left and rights are interchanged depending upon what you are quoting.... and from what perspective referenced i.e looking out from the headboard or looking towards the head board from the end of the bed.
What DC Clarke describes i.e Sheila on the left of the bed and June on the right of the bed is correct in my opinion and is supported by the photographic evidence that is available and has been posted on the forum.
I have used the images of the bed to try to give everyone a better understanding of what it shows with Sheila on the bed, I do not deny that the images I have posted have been flipped left to right, or vice versa, I am just trying to give everyone a better insight into what the photograph of Sheila on the bed, portrays...
-
In my opinion....... just on the floor all of the time.
Unless of course you can post the photgraph that proves otherwise. This I believe would be the alleged photgraph you stole / borrowed from the photgraph album that you were left alone with in Ewen Smiths office.
On the basis of your view, then why did DC Clarke lie to Ann Eaton about the position where Sheila's body had been found (on the bed)?
Why would Clarke make up such a malicious lie, and feed Ann Eaton a pack of lies about this, on the very morning of the shootings, after he had been at the scene and in particular, inside the very bedroom inside which was found her body? Why would Clarke make something like that up (Sheila's body found on the bed)??
-
Choose to ignore what DC Clarke observed when he attended the scene, and what he told Ann Eaton he had seen, for example, that Sheila's boy was on the bed before DC Clarke left the scene to go to Jeremys cottage, at your peril...
I am not saying anything, other than pointing out to you and to everyone else who says that Sheila's body was on the bedroom floor when the police surgeon, Craig, and PI Miller viewed Sheila's body at 8:44am, and Craig pronounced her as being dead - her body being as it were on the far side of the bed...
Now...
if her body was on the bedroom floor at 8:44am, as alleged by your good-self and others, then how come that by the time DC Clarke and Taff Jones arrive at the scene at around 9:05am, Sheila's body is now on the bed, a fact which Clarke recounted to Ann Eaton later that same morning, and then by 10 O'clock Sheila's body is back on the bedroom carpet...
Now...
which is it to be, in your version of events?
On the bedroom floor, on the bed, then back onto the floor?
Or...
On the bed, then moved to the floor?
Or...
just on the floor all of the time?
if her body was on the bedroom floor at 8:44am, as alleged by your good-self and others
again inaccurate Mike. Ive never said her body was on the floor or bed. You state you have the evidence,Im just telling you i dont think you have
-
I have used the images of the bed to try to give everyone a better understanding of what it shows with Sheila on the bed, I do not deny that the images I have posted have been flipped left to right, or vice versa, I am just trying to give everyone a better insight into what the photograph of Sheila on the bed, portrays...
Mike
Thank you for clarifying the above.
Therefore the photographic images which include the sole's of Sheila's feet could thus be analysed by Peter Suthurst or someone similar who could determine whether Sheila's feet were 'spotlessly' clean as is the case for the prosecution.
-
On the basis of your view, then why did DC Clarke lie to Ann Eaton about the position where Sheila's body had been found (on the bed)?
Why would Clarke make up such a malicious lie, and feed Ann Eaton a pack of lies about this?
Lies?.... maybe chinese wispers... accurate information easily gets corrupted with the slightest confusion. im not saying thats what happened, but it may of happened.
-
if her body was on the bedroom floor at 8:44am, as alleged by your good-self and others
again inaccurate Mike. Ive never said her body was on the floor or bed. You state you have the evidence,Im just telling you i dont think you have
In your opinion...
where was the body of Sheila, at 8:44am, 9:05am, and 10 O'clock?
Just say what you think, why are you being so evasive and frightened to commit yourself on such a simple matter?
-
On the basis of your view, then why did DC Clarke lie to Ann Eaton about the position where Sheila's body had been found (on the bed)?
Why would Clarke make up such a malicious lie, and feed Ann Eaton a pack of lies about this, on the very morning of the shootings, after he had been at the scene and in particular, inside the very bedroom inside which was found her body? Why would Clarke make something like that up (Sheila's body found on the bed)??
You ask a question and I posted an answer to your question.
I do not think it has been clarified Clarke has made up a malicious lie and fed Ann Eaton a pack of lies on the very morning of the shootings.
Are you able to point to anything which clarifies / confirms this?
-
Lies?.... maybe chinese wispers... accurate information easily gets corrupted with the slightest confusion. im not saying thats what happened, but it may of happened.
Clarke was there at the scene with DCI "Taff" Jones, at around 9:05am, then he was sent by Taff to go long with Jeremy to his cottage to take a witness statement from him, where Clarke bumped into Ann Eaton and told her that the bodies of June and Sheila had been on the bed. Under such circumstances, it could-hardly be described as a case of Chinese whispers...
-
Clarke was there at the scene with DCI "Taff" Jones, at around 9:05am, then he was sent by Taff to go long with Jeremy to his cottage to take a witness statement from him, where Clarke bumped into Ann Eaton and told her that the bodies of June and Sheila had been on the bed. Under such circumstances, it could-hardly be described as a case of Chinese whispers...
In any event...
Sheila's body was photographed on the bed, and thn on th bedroom floor - in that order...
-
In your opinion...
where was the body of Sheila, at 8:44am, 9:05am, and 10 O'clock?
Just say what you think, why are you being so evasive and frightened to commit yourself on such a simple matter?
au contrare...
I do not have an opinion on the location of the body,thats the truth
as for evasive & frightened to commit on a simple matter, 2 thing come to mind, itemissed bill and photo on the bed.
youve said youll produce them yet......... nothing
pot & kettle Mike
I'm not a guilty camp member mike, I like to fence sit and snipe at the shit.
-
Mike
Thank you for clarifying the above.
Therefore the photographic images which inclue the sole's of Sheila's feet could thus be analysed by Peter Suthurst or someone similar who could determine whther Sheila's feet were 'spotlessly' clean as is the case for the defence.
If you look at the photograph near the window in the main bedroom there appears to be what looks like a large red stain on the carpet.....I posted this ages ago, but was told it was the edge of an additional carpet....
-
Lies?.... maybe chinese wispers... accurate information easily gets corrupted with the slightest confusion. im not saying thats what happened, but it may of happened.
Chinese whispers by police?!! They'd have to be worse than Keystone Cops.
Was Clarke there or not then do you think?
-
Clarke was there at the scene with DCI "Taff" Jones, at around 9:05am, then he was sent by Taff to go long with Jeremy to his cottage to take a witness statement from him, where Clarke bumped into Ann Eaton and told her that the bodies of June and Sheila had been on the bed. Under such circumstances, it could-hardly be described as a case of Chinese whispers...
How about "junes dead on the bed and sheilas on the far side of the bed"?
-
Chinese whispers by police?!! They'd have to be worse than Keystone Cops.
Was Clarke there or not then do you think?
Clarke ? no idea.
-
au contrare...
I do not have an opinion on the location of the body,thats the truth
as for evasive & frightened to commit on a simple matter, 2 thing come to mind, itemissed bill and photo on the bed.
youve said youll produce them yet......... nothing
pot & kettle Mike
I'm not a guilty camp member mike, I like to fence sit and snipe at the shit.
You misunderstood or misinterpreted what I actually said about posting the item in question, the key phrase I used was "once the CCRC gives its final decision" - which as things stand may not yet have come to pass, and I will not bow to pressure from anyone to go against the plans I have set into motion regarding the same...
Now, it follows that either Sheila's body was on the bed, or on the bedroom floor, when Craig and Miller describe in their statements that "Sheila's body was on the far side of the bed", at 8:44am, when Craig pronounced Sheila's death. Then when DC Clarke visits the scene at 9:05am, he sees Sheila's body on the bed and then he leaves the scene acting on instruction from "Taff" Jones, and once he bumps into Ann Eaton at Jeremy's cottage, he recounts the sighting of Sheila's body on the bed whilst he had earlier been present at the scene? Then unbeknown to Clarke by 10 O'clock DC Bird photographed Sheila's body on the bedroom floor...
Three key timed events, therefore, involving the position of Sheila's body either on the floor, on the bed, and vice versa, at 8:44am, 9:05am and 10 am?
-
You misunderstood or misinterpreted what I actually said about posting the item in question, the key phrase I used was "once the CCRC gives its final decision" - which as things stand may not yet have come to pass, and I will not bow to pressure from anyone to go against the plans I have set into motion regarding the same...
Now, it follows that either Sheila's body was on the bed, or on the bedroom floor, when Craig and Miller describe in their statements that "Sheila's body was on the far side of the bed", at 8:44am, when Craig pronounced Sheila's death. Then when DC Clarke visits the scene at 9:05am, he sees Sheila's body on the bed and then he leaves the scene acting on instruction from "Taff" Jones, and once he bumps into Ann Eaton at Jeremy's cottage, he recounts the sighting of Sheila's body on the bed whilst he had earlier been present at the scene? Then unbeknown to Clarke by 10 O'clock DC Bird photographed Sheila's body on the bedroom floor...
Three key timed events, therefore, involving the position of Sheila's body either on the floor, on the bed, and vice versa, at 8:44am, 9:05am and 10 am?
Key times agreed. 8.44 body not stated on bed
9.05 body may of been reported as on the bed.this by Clark to AE.doesn't prove the body on the bed though.
10.00 body on floor, i think that's agreed by all
as you say, your photo will prove this,as it would of done after you relieved Ewan smith of it many years ago...... photo in pubic domain & case against JB collapses. that's why you havent got the Photo IMHO...
-
You misunderstood or misinterpreted what I actually said about posting the item in question, the key phrase I used was "once the CCRC gives its final decision" - which as things stand may not yet have come to pass, and I will not bow to pressure from anyone to go against the plans I have set into motion regarding the same...
Now, it follows that either Sheila's body was on the bed, or on the bedroom floor, when Craig and Miller describe in their statements that "Sheila's body was on the far side of the bed", at 8:44am, when Craig pronounced Sheila's death. Then when DC Clarke visits the scene at 9:05am, he sees Sheila's body on the bed and then he leaves the scene acting on instruction from "Taff" Jones, and once he bumps into Ann Eaton at Jeremy's cottage, he recounts the sighting of Sheila's body on the bed whilst he had earlier been present at the scene? Then unbeknown to Clarke by 10 O'clock DC Bird photographed Sheila's body on the bedroom floor...
Three key timed events, therefore, involving the position of Sheila's body either on the floor, on the bed, and vice versa, at 8:44am, 9:05am and 10 am?
One thing we can all be certain about, and that is that once DC Clarke told Ann Eaton that Sheila's body was found on the bed, the relatives treat this as a true description of how the police had discovered her body upon entry into the premises. Imagine, if the police had disclosed the contents of the radio message logs to the relatives, where it describes the find of two bodies downstairs upon entry to the premises, at 7:37am, imagine what sort of vibes that would have generated between the relatives and the police?
-
One thing we can all be certain about, and that is that once DC Clarke told Ann Eaton that Sheila's body was found on the bed, the relatives treat this as a true description of how the police had discovered her body upon entry into the premises. Imagine, if the police had disclosed the contents of the radio message logs to the relatives, where it describes the find of two bodies downstairs upon entry to the premises, at 7:37am, imagine what sort of vibes that would have generated between the relatives and the police?
It gets worse...
Since, by the time the case comes to trial in October 1986, the body of Sheila is photographed on the bedroom floor...
Two bodies found downstairs in region of kitchen upon entry at 7:37am, Sheila's body on bed at 9:05am, and then body of Sheila photographed on bedroom floor at 10 am - yet relatives do not seek to make any waves over these very serious discrepancies in the police investigation...
How could Sheila's body have been found in three totally different locations and positions by police once they entered the premises?
-
just reviewed your post#81 mike
makes sense to me
as you walk in the door June is closest to you. therefore sheila is on the far side of the bed, ie the left hand side of the bed as you say. Im sure that information can easily be mis-comunicated if not very carefully worded. I would say someone got the wrong end of the stick but as i say,the photo will prove it.
-
Key times agreed. 8.44 body not stated on bed
9.05 body may of been reported as on the bed.this by Clark to AE.doesn't prove the body on the bed though.
10.00 body on floor, i think that's agreed by all
as you say, your photo will prove this,as it would of done after you relieved Ewan smith of it many years ago...... photo in pubic domain & case against JB collapses. that's why you havent got the Photo IMHO...
You missed something important out...
Ewen Smiths, visit to see Dr Craig, and Craigs acknowledgement that Sheila's body was on the bed when he pronounced her as being dead at 8:44am, with only one wound to her neck. Are you suggesting that Craig has lied about what he saw and are you suggesting that Ewen Smith who is now a Commissioner at the CCRC, extracted a false statement from Dr Craig, on that occasion?
-
It gets worse...
Since, by the time the case comes to trial in October 1986, the body of Sheila is photographed on the bedroom floor...
Two bodies found downstairs in region of kitchen upon entry at 7:37am, Sheila's body on bed at 9:05am, and then body of Sheila photographed on bedroom floor at 10 am - yet relatives do not seek to make any waves over these very serious discrepancies in the police investigation...
How could Sheila's body have been found in three totally different locations and positions by police once they entered the premises?
trust me Mike,it couldnt get worse than the "body on the bed"..... ;)
2 bodies in kitchen,kick off a new thread with that one, i think thats a more profitable arguement/discussion imo
-
You missed something important out...
Ewen Smiths, visit to see Dr Craig, and Craigs acknowledgement that Sheila's body was on the bed when he pronounced her as being dead at 8:44am, with only one wound to her neck. Are you suggesting that Craig has lied about what he saw and are you suggesting that Ewen Smith who is now a Commissioner at the CCRC, extracted a false statement from Dr Craig, on that occasion?
"statement"? written or verbal
-
You missed something important out...
Ewen Smiths, visit to see Dr Craig, and Craigs acknowledgement that Sheila's body was on the bed when he pronounced her as being dead at 8:44am, with only one wound to her neck. Are you suggesting that Craig has lied about what he saw and are you suggesting that Ewen Smith who is now a Commissioner at the CCRC, extracted a false statement from Dr Craig, on that occasion?
Mike
Reading between the lines I think what Tonyb is effectively asking you to do is to post an image of the photograph you say you have which will confirm that Sheila was in fact on the bed with a single gun shot wound to her neck.
A simple request which, one would have thought, should have a simple solution.
-
just reviewed your post#81 mike
makes sense to me
as you walk in the door June is closest to you. therefore sheila is on the far side of the bed, ie the left hand side of the bed as you say. Im sure that information can easily be mis-comunicated if not very carefully worded. I would say someone got the wrong end of the stick but as i say,the photo will prove it.
I sent the original photograph to Jeremy under a privileged rule at the beginning of 2004, which was intercepted by the prison authorities, and put on Jeremy's prison file. This communication between Myself and Jeremy caused all sorts of problems not least of which served to interfere with Jeremy's communications with GDS who had started to represent Jeremy's interests at around that time...
-
"statement"? written or verbal
Verbal communications assisted with help and interpretation from Dr Craigs, wife...
-
I sent the original photograph to Jeremy under a privileged rule at the beginning of 2004, which was intercepted by the prison authorities, and put on Jeremy's prison file. This communication between Myself and Jeremy caused all sorts of problems not least of which served to interfere with Jeremy's communications with GDS who had started to represent Jeremy's interests at around that time...
i know
-
Verbal communications assisted with help and interpretation from Dr Craigs, wife...
Ewen Smith could confirm what I am saying as being true...
-
i know
dont forget the hard drive you scanned it onto
-
I sent the original photograph to Jeremy under a privileged rule at the beginning of 2004, which was intercepted by the prison authorities, and put on Jeremy's prison file. This communication between Myself and Jeremy caused all sorts of problems not least of which served to interfere with Jeremy's communications with GDS who had started to represent Jeremy's interests at around that time...
And you have also previously posted you have a copy of the picture on one of your computers i.e you still have access to it.............
As such you can clarify the situation rather than spend endless hours debating and going round in circles.
-
Ewen Smith could confirm what I am saying as being true...
Why would Ewen Smith tell me that Dr Craig had confirmed to him that when he saw Sheila's body at 8:44am, her body was not on the floor but upon the bed and that he only saw one wound on her neck by that stage?
-
Ewen Smith could confirm what I am saying as being true...
so is that what they call "hearsay"?
-
And you have also previously posted you have a copy of the picture on one of your computers i.e you still have access to it.............
As such you can clarify the situation rather than spend endless hours debating and going round in circles.
Electronic image on I think two hard drives from different computers I was using at the material time, and since...
-
And you have also previously posted you have a copy of the picture on one of your computers i.e you still have access to it.............
As such you can clarify the situation rather than spend endless hours debating and going round in circles.
With the added bonus you would secure Jeremy a referral to the Court of Appeal, in my opinion.
-
Why would Ewen Smith tell me that Dr Craig had confirmed to him that when he saw Sheila's body at 8:44am, her body was not on the floor but upon the bed and that he only saw one wound on her neck by that stage?
It has no bearing what ewan smith said in this case
-
so is that what they call "hearsay"?
If it falls into that category, it does not necessarily mean that it cannot be admissible evidence, since there are certain circumstances where hearsay evidence can be allowed to be taken into account legally...
-
Electronic image on I think two hard drives from different computers I was using at the material time, and since...
now "i think"
i can see where this is going
-
If it falls into that category, it does not necessarily mean that it cannot be admissible evidence, since there are certain circumstances where hearsay evidence can be allowed to be taken into account legally...
I doubt in this case of EW though ill stand to be professionally corrected
-
Electronic image on I think two hard drives from different computers I was using at the material time, and since...
I thought you posted pictures of the hard drives upon which the photgraphs are stored? (To protect their integrity)
Are you now saying such photographs are only of the two hard drives you think the images are stored on.
I am afraid.............Bang goes your continuity of something that could be treated as new evidence.
Unfortunatley, in my opinion, you have just opened the door for an accusation that any photographs that may be produced in future will be open to a suggestion that such a photograph is not an original copy and therefore could have been tampered with.............. sounds all too familiar.
-
It has no bearing what ewan smith said in this case
Of course it does...
He interviewed the police surgeon, Dr Craig about the contents of a witness statement he had made previously where Craig had described "Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed", and found that in fact what Craig meant was that Sheila's body was on the bed...
I believe that the revelation made by Craig given to Smith to the effect that Sheila's body was on the bed at 8:44am, not on the bedroom floor, is admissible under the hearsay rule, since its inclusion would tend to show that police stage managed Sheila's body on the bedroom floor and blamed Jeremy for doing it, and that the police had done this at some point after Dr Craig had pronounced her as being dead at 8:44am...
-
I doubt in this case of EW though ill stand to be professionally corrected
Would Hearsay evidence be allowed from a barrister/solicitor in favor of his own client ?
NGB?
-
Of course it does...
He interviewed the police surgeon, Dr Craig about the contents of a witness statement he had made previously where Craig had described "Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed", and found that in fact what Craig meant was that Sheila's body was on the bed...
I believe that the revelation made by Craig given to Smith to the effect that Sheila's body was on the bed at 8:44am, not on the bedroom floor, is admissible under the hearsay rule, since its inclusion would tend to show that police stage managed Sgeila's body on the bedroom floor and blamed Jeremy for doing it, and that the police had done this at some point after Dr Craig had pronounced her as being dead at 8:44am...
your wrong Mike.
A picture paints a thousand words...
what EW says is totally imaterial if the photo exists
-
I thought you posted pictures of the hard drives upon which the photgraphs are stored? (To protect their integrity)
Are you now saying such photographs are only of the two hard drives you think the images are stored on.
I am afraid.............Bang goes your continuity of something that could be treated as new evidence.
Unfortunatley, in my opinion, you have just opened the door for an accusation that any photographs that may be produced in future will be open to a suggestion that such a photograph is not an original copy and therefore could have been tampered with.............. sounds all too familiar.
That is a matter of interpretation...
-
Of course it does...
He interviewed the police surgeon, Dr Craig about the contents of a witness statement he had made previously where Craig had described "Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed", and found that in fact what Craig meant was that Sheila's body was on the bed...
I believe that the revelation made by Craig given to Smith to the effect that Sheila's body was on the bed at 8:44am, not on the bedroom floor, is admissible under the hearsay rule, since its inclusion would tend to show that police stage managed Sheila's body on the bedroom floor and blamed Jeremy for doing it, and that the police had done this at some point after Dr Craig had pronounced her as being dead at 8:44am...
again, interviewed
can we see the notes on this interview?
-
your wrong Mike.
A picture paints a thousand words...
what EW says is totally imaterial if the photo exists
I do not believe I am wrong, on the contrary I am right, and yes, the photographs of Sheila on the bed do exist, and at the right moment and in favourable circumstances they will be produced...
-
That is a matter of interpretation...
interpretation
be carefull nothing gets lost in translation....
-
That is a matter of interpretation...
An extremely high risk attitude, in my opinion.
The 12 members of the jury at Jeremy's trial had a matter of interpretation to consider over 26 years ago.......
-
again, interviewed
can we see the notes on this interview?
Rather than question me about these matters, why don't you direct your questions to Ewen Smith at the CCRC since he was the person who conducted the interview of Dr Craig, not me...
-
An extremely high risk attitude, in my opinion.
The 12 members of the jury at Jeremy's trial had a matter of interpretation to consider over 26 years ago.......
Judgement of the jury over 26 years ago was clouded by introduction of the silencer evidence and all its component evidential parts, which ought not really to have been admissible due to the very strong possibility that it was tainted...
-
I do not believe I am wrong, on the contrary I am right, and yes, the photographs of Sheila on the bed do exist, and at the right moment and in favourable circumstances they will be produced...
Mike,Im very happy if you have the photo you will produce it when you see fit. I object to you asking us to rely on a photo youve "had" for 9(?) years to reinforce your theories. tick tock though mike,tick tock...
-
Rather than question me about these matters, why don't you direct your questions to Ewen Smith at the CCRC since he was the person who conducted the interview of Dr Craig, not me...
sorry Mike. you bought it up,not Ewan....
-
Rather than question me about these matters, why don't you direct your questions to Ewen Smith at the CCRC since he was the person who conducted the interview of Dr Craig, not me...
Or to Mat, as he says he has spoken to Ewen Smith about this very issue.
-
Rather than question me about these matters, why don't you direct your questions to Ewen Smith at the CCRC since he was the person who conducted the interview of Dr Craig, not me...
whats his email adress mike pm it if you want
-
Or to Mat, as he says he has spoken to Ewen Smith about this very issue.
what did ewan say choc?
-
Mike,Im very happy if you have the photo you will produce it when you see fit. I object to you asking us to rely on a photo youve "had" for 9(?) years to reinforce your theories. tick tock though mike,tick tock...
There are forces at play in this case, which effect what is, what has been, and what might be, which for the time being I am trying to steer clear of, until certain conditions are met that will allow me to progress matters...
-
sorry Mike. you bought it up,not Ewan....
Again, it is a matter of opinion as to who brought this matter up, you say me, but I say Ewen did back in 2004...
-
Again, it is a matter of opinion as to who brought this matter up, you say me, but I say Ewen did back in 2004...
tonight Mike.you did tonight.
post # 113
-
whats his email adress mike pm it if you want
Try this link:-
Ewen Smith:
was a partner at a nationally-respected firm of solicitors where he practised exclusively in criminal defence work for many years and was involved in many high-profile trials and appeals. He was Chairman of the Serious Fraud Association, Vice-Chairman of the Criminal Appeals Lawyers Association and has been involved in many applications to the Commission which have resulted in referrals to the appeal courts. He is a Member of the Crown Court Rules Committee and a Part-Time Immigration and Asylum Judge. Ewen brings to the Commission a wealth of experience in criminal defence and appeal work. He joined the Commission in November 2006.
(1) - http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/criminal-cases-review-commission/commissioners
-
well,we seem to have reached yet another impasse. I don't post to wind you up mike. have a good nights sleep God Bless
thanks for the link
i'll try that tommorow
-
There are forces at play in this case, which effect what is, what has been, and what might be, which for the time being I am trying to steer clear of, until certain conditions are met that will allow me to progress matters...
In the interest of understanding please can you elaborate and explain
(i) What forces are at play?
(ii) What conditions have to be met?
(iii) Are you demanding conditions?
-
An extremely high risk attitude, in my opinion.
The 12 members of the jury at Jeremy's trial had a matter of interpretation to consider over 26 years ago.......
And you believe they were presented with a genuine portrayal of the incident and evidence?
-
And you believe they were presented with a genuine portrayal of the incident and evidence?
Roch
In all honesty it does not matter what I think.
And in a way I could also say 'exactly' as it could be argued you have indirectly identified / summarised my point.
Mike claims to have something (for over 8 years) which can prove the trial was not a genuine portrayal of both the incident and the evidenced as presented............... and yet Mike does nothing with it despite all his representations of Jeremy being innocent of the crimes he has been charged with and found guilty of committing.
This I do not understand and appears totally illogical to me.
-
what did ewan say choc?
Unfortunately Mat posted in a rather heated thread that he will not reveal on this forum what Ewan said as he is subjected to abuse over many of his posts. (Mat - I hope that is correct, I am obviously only paraphrasing and do not intend to mislead, misquote or cause offence.)
-
In the interest of understanding please can you elaborate and explain
(iii) Are you demanding conditions?
I am demanding nothing, just waiting for certain conditions to materialize, then prepare for all hell to break loose...
-
I am demanding nothing, just waiting for certain conditions to materialize, then prepare for all hell to break loose...
Mike
If you say so.
However, I have to say at this point in time I am not convinced that will happen.
-
I am demanding nothing, just waiting for certain conditions to materialize, then prepare for all hell to break loose...
Pray tell, what conditions?
-
Would Hearsay evidence be allowed from a barrister/solicitor in favor of his own client ?
NGB?
It would be a highly unusual situation but there are circumstances in which such evidence would be admitted, although as with all hearsay evidence it would be treated with caution.
-
Unfortunately Mat posted in a rather heated thread that he will not reveal on this forum what Ewan said as he is subjected to abuse over many of his posts. (Mat - I hope that is correct, I am obviously only paraphrasing and do not intend to mislead, misquote or cause offence.)
That means he doesn't know and that Ewen Smith told him nothing. How do I know that? Because it would have been unethical for Ewen Smith to have done that.
-
Susan I agree this is the funniest thing I've seen/read on the forum. Absolutely hilarious. I've even found it in myself to forgive Bob for being unwelcoming and rude to me when I joined the forum. Think he can't be that bad if he has such a gsoh.
(Re your mascara running, check out tinting, clear mascara, with fibres for bulk if needed, and eyelash curlers or perming. Tinting and perming last 4 - 6 wks saves on time and I think is cheaper overall.)
Thanks egap. Sorry I was rude to you when you joined - must have been having a bad day :-[
-
It would be a highly unusual situation but there are circumstances in which such evidence would be admitted, although as with all hearsay evidence it would be treated with caution.
Thank you.
-
egap1 I was really taken aback when you said bob had been rude to you I have always found him such a delightful person and even with some of my annoying posts he has not given me a row. The post of the picture of the Reindeer was so funny I laugh everytime I think about it.
-
That means he doesn't know and that Ewen Smith told him nothing. How do I know that? Because it would have been unethical for Ewen Smith to have done that.
I am not arguing just asking, would it still be unethical, 8 years down the line and if, as has been suggested, that the photo does exist but doesn't depict exactly what Mike thinks it does?
-
I am not arguing just asking, would it still be unethical, 8 years down the line and if, as has been suggested, that the photo does exist but doesn't depict exactly what Mike thinks it does?
A solicitor's duty of confidentiality to his client continues indefinitely even after the solicitor has ceased to act for that client.
-
That means he doesn't know and that Ewen Smith told him nothing. How do I know that? Because it would have been unethical for Ewen Smith to have done that.
I would guess that me asking ES about an interview he allegedly had with Dr Craig and police officer Clarke will also be unethical and therefore pointless asking.
I already know the answer I just thought it would be usefull if Mike also knew.
But,anything to deflect the truth,eh Mike.....
-
I would guess that me asking ES about an interview he allegedly had with Dr Craig and police officer Clarke will also be unethical and therefore pointless asking.
I already know the answer I just thought it would be usefull if Mike also knew.
But,anything to deflect the truth,eh Mike.....
I'm just taking Mat down a peg or two. He professes to know much, but in actual fact knows very little. Work it out. The company he is supposed to work for would haul him over the coals for divulging such confidential information. They are probably asking themselves right now, "Do we sack the tea boy or not?" ::)
-
Don't seem so sure of yourself, mate. It would be unethical for Ewen to have talked with me about the Bamber case, sure. But speaking about allegations that were made against Ewen in an unofficial capacity - no problem with that at all.
That's a fair point!
-
That's a fair point!
Blimey I can't get past this fellow even if I put him on ignore. It isn't a fair point. He's a liar pure and simple. He's having you on. I don't believe he has spoken to Ewen Smith.
Edit: let's keep this as civil as possible lads, please.
-
Blimey I can't get past this fellow even if I put him on ignore. It isn't a fair point. He's a liar pure and simple. He's having you on. I don't believe he has spoken to Ewen Smith.
Edit: let's keep this as civil as possible lads, please.
Damn. I thought you'd be down the pub tonight? ::)
-
Damn. I thought you'd be down the pub tonight? ::)
I am tempted but have eaten half a curry :D
-
Blimey I can't get past this fellow even if I put him on ignore. It isn't a fair point. He's a liar pure and simple. He's having you on. I don't believe he has spoken to Ewen Smith.
Edit: let's keep this as civil as possible lads, please.
No Grahame,sorry, what I mean is that a discussion could be had (hypothetically speaking) about said photograph without breaking any actual client confidentiality as it is could be done in away to not directly speak about the case. That could be possible?
-
egap1 I was really taken aback when you said bob had been rude to you I have always found him such a delightful person and even with some of my annoying posts he has not given me a row. The post of the picture of the Reindeer was so funny I laugh everytime I think about it.
Susan - I think I was dismissive and unpleasant in my posts to egap when she first joined.
I regret that and can't excuse myself :(
-
bob you must have just been having a bad day as you have always come over as a really nice kind friendly person with a great sense of humour. I am sure you will be forgiven that is why I,m not sending you to the naughty step.
-
No Grahame,sorry, what I mean is that a discussion could be had (hypothetically speaking) about said photograph without breaking any actual client confidentiality as it is could be done in away to not directly speak about the case. That could be possible?
How?
-
Should I answer?
Yes.
-
Was he given a photo with orders he can't show it to anyone else - something held under PII.
Is there a chance that anything related to the cases was stolen out of your office.
How did Ewen Smith respond?
-
How did Ewen Smith respond?
Dont think he needs to, don't you think?
-
I'd get banned.
Why?
-
I kept notes of all the occasions I visited Ewen Smiths office and what was talked about, what was done, and what was planned to be done. I also wrote to Jeremy to keep him updated and kept copies of the letters I wrote to Jeremy about the same, and I also corresponded by email with others on the internet covering the same...
-
Out of interest Mike, when was the last time you met with Ewen? It isn't an important fact so don't reserach it if you do not remember of the top of your head.
At his office in Birmingham, just before Jeremy sacked him, and took on the services of GDS, Ewen told GDS that I might be able to assist in the transfer of all the material held at Birmingham, to his office in London - but I did not take up the offer...
-
How?
What I was suggesting is that there are ways of having conversations about certain topics and getting information without breaching confidentiality or speaking directy about a topic. I don't mean this subject in particular, I mean very generally. If somebody wants information (not necessarily Mat) they will find a way of getting it.
-
Here's another from the greatest hits album....read it from the beginning....hillarious
-
I do not believe I am wrong, on the contrary I am right, and yes, the photographs of Sheila on the bed do exist, and at the right moment and in favourable circumstances they will be produced...
Come on then.... produce it.
-
Come on then.... produce it.
Good heavens, that was 3 years and 4 months ago.
-
Good heavens, that was 3 years and 4 months ago.
You would think that he would have dug it out by now, seeing it gets 'Jerry' out of jail.
-
You would think that he would have dug it out by now, seeing it gets 'Jerry' out of jail.
I did voice my concern at the time -I was then a supporter- because I felt that rather than talking about it, he should be doing something about it but apparently the time wasn't right. It occurred to me that if I was in prison for something I hadn't done and a "friend" was withholding information that could free me, it would cause me to wonder just how much of a friend that person was. As I now believe him to be guilty, it's just as well, if such a picture ever existed, that it wasn't handed lover.
-
This is what I can't understand with the OS as to why they don't publicise via the media the information that's been tweeted and put it to a public vote if they want more signatures/votes.
-
I did voice my concern at the time -I was then a supporter- because I felt that rather than talking about it, he should be doing something about it but apparently the time wasn't right. It occurred to me that if I was in prison for something I hadn't done and a "friend" was withholding information that could free me, it would cause me to wonder just how much of a friend that person was. As I now believe him to be guilty, it's just as well, if such a picture ever existed, that it wasn't handed lover.
It only exists in his imagination.
-
I wonder if Dr. Hugh Cameron Ferguson has changed his mind since the 1986 trial when he stated he didn't think Sheila was capable of killing her children. If the Defence could get a statement from him to that effect it would be on a par with the Dean Cottle evidence in the David Bain trial or even more so. http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/60642/cottle-well-aware-duty-testify-investigator
-
I wonder if Dr. Hugh Cameron Ferguson has changed his mind since the 1986 trial when he stated he didn't think Sheila was capable of killing her children. If the Defence could get a statement from him to that effect it would be on a par with the Dean Cottle evidence in the David Bain trial or even more so. http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/60642/cottle-well-aware-duty-testify-investigator
CAL acknowledges him in her book by saying that he and his wife welcomed her into their home when they discussed his care of Sheila and June in St Andrews.
-
I wonder if Dr. Hugh Cameron Ferguson has changed his mind since the 1986 trial when he stated he didn't think Sheila was capable of killing her children. If the Defence could get a statement from him to that effect it would be on a par with the Dean Cottle evidence in the David Bain trial or even more so. http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/60642/cottle-well-aware-duty-testify-investigator
Ferguson changing his mind means nothing. A new assessment of old evidence is not new evidence. The defense tried to get his change of heart in by saying he was not provided access to Colin's letter and thus didn't have all the facts. That failed though because the letter was never sent so it is impossible for the parents to have brought up such letter to Sheila.
-
Ferguson changing his mind means nothing. A new assessment of old evidence is not new evidence. The defense tried to get his change of heart in by saying he was not provided access to Colin's letter and thus didn't have all the facts. That failed though because the letter was never sent so it is impossible for the parents to have brought up such letter to Sheila.
As both psychiatry and psychology have moved on apace since the 70's/80's it would be truly surprising had not some of his thinking been revised.
-
As both psychiatry and psychology have moved on apace since the 70's/80's it would be truly surprising had not some of his thinking been revised.
Psychological assessments mean little, they can' impact the evidence which convicted Jeremy. The main evidence that convicted Jeremy is evidence that he was planning to frame her, a lack of physical evidence that would have been present on her body had she killed the others and evidence proving she can't have killed herself someone else murdered her. The only way to get a new trial is to find something that undermines this.
Let's pretend they found evidence she threatened to kill her mother. Would such establish she could have killed the others without getting evidence on herself or could have killed herself? No! So it's not able to warrant a new trial. It is not an accident that they keep trying to find a way to undermine the moderator evidence and Julie's testimony. This is the evidence hey have to undermine in order to get a new trial. Concentrating on other aspects is not going to accomplish a thing.
-
Psychological assessments mean little, they can' impact the evidence which convicted Jeremy. The main evidence that convicted Jeremy is evidence that he was planning to frame her, a lack of physical evidence that would have been present on her body had she killed the others and evidence proving she can't have killed herself someone else murdered her. The only way to get a new trial is to find something that undermines this.
Let's pretend they found evidence she threatened to kill her mother. Would such establish she could have killed the others without getting evidence on herself or could have killed herself? No! So it's not able to warrant a new trial. It is not an accident that they keep trying to find a way to undermine the moderator evidence and Julie's testimony. This is the evidence hey have to undermine in order to get a new trial. Concentrating on other aspects is not going to accomplish a thing.
What on earth are you assuming I said to warrant such a lecture? ALL I said was that psychiatry and psychology have moved on since the time of the trial so it would be surprising if he hadn't revised his thinking. I was neither hinting nor suggesting a new trial and I don't believe Ferguson said anything new which could point in that direction, either.
-
What on earth are you assuming I said to warrant such a lecture? ALL I said was that psychiatry and psychology have moved on since the time of the trial so it would be surprising if he hadn't revised his thinking. I was neither hinting nor suggesting a new trial and I don't believe Ferguson said anything new which could point in that direction, either.
The point is they are barking up the wrong tree entirely. Anytime they say that mental health records or the like could free him it amounts to them talking out of their butts.
-
The point is they are barking up the wrong tree entirely. Anytime they say that mental health records or the like could free him it amounts to them talking out of their butts.
I never said they weren't. My interest, as you must by now, be aware, is mental health and the advancement of the care and treatment of those who are mentally ill. Without such advancements we'd still be keeping patients in chains and leaving them in ice cold baths.
-
Psychological assessments mean little, they can' impact the evidence which convicted Jeremy. The main evidence that convicted Jeremy is evidence that he was planning to frame her, a lack of physical evidence that would have been present on her body had she killed the others and evidence proving she can't have killed herself someone else murdered her. The only way to get a new trial is to find something that undermines this.
Let's pretend they found evidence she threatened to kill her mother. Would such establish she could have killed the others without getting evidence on herself or could have killed herself? No! So it's not able to warrant a new trial. It is not an accident that they keep trying to find a way to undermine the moderator evidence and Julie's testimony. This is the evidence hey have to undermine in order to get a new trial. Concentrating on other aspects is not going to accomplish a thing.
I look at it this way:David Bain was convicted of murdering five members of his family just as Jeremy Bamber was. He spent 13 years in jail before the Establishment got sick of the campaign led principally by Joe Karam. So they came up with the ridiculous hearsay evidence story of Dean Cottle. David Bain received a retrial and was released. Just imagine how much more the evidence of a Harley Street doctor would count for testifying that he believed Sheila was capable of murdering her children than the evidence of a nonentity like Cottle,especially when you consider that two jurors were already not convinced at Bamber's original trial of his guilt.
Of course you take Dean Cottle's evidence coming from Laniet with a pinch of salt. http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/doubtful-proof-of-incest
-
I look at it this way:David Bain was convicted of murdering five members of his family just as Jeremy Bamber was. He spent 13 years in jail before the Establishment got sick of the campaign led principally by Joe Karam. So they came up with the ridiculous hearsay evidence story of Dean Cottle. David Bain received a retrial and was released. Just imagine how much more the evidence of a Harley Street doctor would count for testifying that he believed Sheila was capable of murdering her children than the evidence of a nonentity like Cottle,especially when you consider that two jurors were already not convinced at Bamber's original trial of his guilt.
Of course you take Dean Cottle's evidence coming from Laniet with a pinch of salt. http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/doubtful-proof-of-incest
Unless Jeremy can find evidence to prove he's innocent, he won't get a retrial.