Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on July 24, 2012, 01:21:PM
-
Position of rifle when Sheila shot under chin - clue...
-------------------------------------------------------------
-
Position of rifle wben Sheila shot under chin - clue...
-------------------------------------------------------------
rifle was rested flush with body and tip of barrel was almost in contact with the underside of chin - when a finger touched the trigger and sent bullet PV/19 thundering up into her brain through the roof of her mouth...
-
rifle was rested flush with body and tip of barrel was almost in contact with the underside of chin - when a finger touched the trigger and sent bullet PV/19 thundering up into her brain through the roof of her mouth...
That's right,Mike. Lying prostrate would have caused both wounds,,except that the second one was " accidental ". Why nobody has admitted that,,I don't know because the first bullet would have eventually killed her. I often wonder if Sheila uttered anything before that second bullet was fired. We'll never know.
-
That's right,Mike. Lying prostrate would have caused both wounds,,except that the second one was " accidental ". Why nobody has admitted that,,I don't know because the first bullet would have eventually killed her. I often wonder if Sheila uttered anything before that second bullet was fired. We'll never know.
That's a very sad thought lookout :(
-
That's right,Mike. Lying prostrate would have caused both wounds,,except that the second one was " accidental ". Why nobody has admitted that,,I don't know because the first bullet would have eventually killed her. I often wonder if Sheila uttered anything before that second bullet was fired. We'll never know.
What makes the second wound accidental ? Maybe it was fired because the first did not kill her....
-
What makes the second wound accidental ? Maybe it was fired because the first did not kill her....
Because the second wound appears to have occurred much much later? Hence the blood still being wet in the crime scene photos? Unless Jeremy crept in whilst the raid team were in situ around the farm,and administered the 2nd shot? ::)
-
Because the second wound appears to have occurred much much later? Hence the blood still being wet in the crime scene photos? Unless Jeremy crept in whilst the raid team were in situ around the farm,and administered the 2nd shot? ::)
That's right,,,while Jeremy was outside with the cops,,,he told them to hang on while he made sure she was dead.
-
The two shots were not fired close together in time - you can work this out by reference to the verticle blood which ran from the lower wound, which was not duplicated at the upper wound...
-
That's right,Mike. Lying prostrate would have caused both wounds,,except that the second one was " accidental ". Why nobody has admitted that,,I don't know because the first bullet would have eventually killed her. I often wonder if Sheila uttered anything before that second bullet was fired. We'll never know.
I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Police moved the body slightly which would have set off a further outpouring of blood from her face from the congealed blood. However I believe Jeremy panicked when he realized the first shot had not killed Sheila and had no option but to shoot her again. He would have left her still unaware as to whether she was dead( unlike the other victims whom he had shot to overkill) which is why he delayed in his telephone call to the Police,he delayed in his driving to the farm and he delayed by putting the story about to the Police that Sheila was still inside the farm,hoping that by the time her body was discovered she too would have expired.
-
Like I said,we'll never know,,and your theory doesn't hold water either.
-
Like I said,we'll never know,,and your theory doesn't hold water either.
Of course his theory holds water-if the killer wanted it to look like a suicide he could hardly have plugged her with bullets...
-
I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Police moved the body slightly which would have set off a further outpouring of blood from her face from the congealed blood. However I believe Jeremy panicked when he realized the first shot had not killed Sheila and had no option but to shoot her again. He would have left her still unaware as to whether she was dead( unlike the other victims whom he had shot to overkill) which is why he delayed in his telephone call to the Police,he delayed in his driving to the farm and he delayed by putting the story about to the Police that Sheila was still inside the farm,hoping that by the time her body was discovered she too would have expired.
You forgot to mention that DS "Stan" Jones, delayed in reporting that he took possession of the Pargeter silencer (SBJ/1) from the scene on 7th August 1985...
-
I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Police moved the body slightly which would have set off a further outpouring of blood from her face from the congealed blood. However I believe Jeremy panicked when he realized the first shot had not killed Sheila and had no option but to shoot her again. He would have left her still unaware as to whether she was dead( unlike the other victims whom he had shot to overkill) which is why he delayed in his telephone call to the Police,he delayed in his driving to the farm and he delayed by putting the story about to the Police that Sheila was still inside the farm,hoping that by the time her body was discovered she too would have expired.
A very interesting theory Steve,
some very good points. I am not certain that a killer would risk leaving the scene with one of his victims still alive and able to positively identify him? If it was Jeremy then I am sure he would have to be certain that Sheila was, in fact, dead. If you take the view that Jeremy was responsible then his slow car journey to White House Farm was an attempt to arrive after the police as he would have wanted to make it abundantly clear that he was not present at the farm when the murders took place. He would also have time to prime the police and ensure they accepted his version of events.
However, if you take the view that he is innocent then this slow journey may have been due to his apprehension about driving to the farmhouse in the middle of the night on his own with a deranged woman inside with a loaded rifle.
-
I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Police moved the body slightly which would have set off a further outpouring of blood from her face from the congealed blood.
Could there be different photos from different time periods? There are crime scene photos with oxygenated blood, vivid red, including thin pools of blood.... and there are crime scene photos where the blood is more congealed and therefore matt in appearance. Some crime scene pics might have been taken initially, then superceded by photos taken considerably later? The crime scene pics used by the prosecution will have been the later semi congealed blood pics. The pic leaked to the press in 2004, which made front page news, would therefore be one of the earlier, oxygenated blood batch of photographs.
-
I think there were two sets of photographs Roch. I can't understand why some photographs had been hidden from the Defence until 2004 which is unacceptable,as is the destruction of other forensic evidence such as Sheila's nightie which I think was in 1996.
As for Jeremy and his shooting of Sheila,he can't hang around and wait until he knows she is dead because the clock is on him and this is one part of the plan which he couldn't rehearse. He just has to get back to Goldhanger through farmland,erase the tape which has the phone call he made to himself from the kitchen at White House Farm,then waste as much time as he can hoping that by the time the Police enter that Sheila is dead.
-
A very interesting theory Steve,
some very good points. I am not certain that a killer would risk leaving the scene with one of his victims still alive and able to positively identify him? If it was Jeremy then I am sure he would have to be certain that Sheila was, in fact, dead. If you take the view that Jeremy was responsible then his slow car journey to White House Farm was an attempt to arrive after the police as he would have wanted to make it abundantly clear that he was not present at the farm when the murders took place. He would also have time to prime the police and ensure they accepted his version of events.
However, if you take the view that he is innocent then this slow journey may have been due to his apprehension about driving to the farmhouse in the middle of the night on his own with a deranged woman inside with a loaded rifle.
Jeremy was frightened at what he was going to be faced with at the farmhouse. That lad was scared of his own shadow,,,so how he got blamed for the murders,I'll never know,,except that there was a conspiracy going on between the police and the relatives at a later date.
-
Jeremy was frightened at what he was going to be faced with at the farmhouse. That lad was scared of his own shadow,,,so how he got blamed for the murders,I'll never know,,except that there was a conspiracy going on between the police and the relatives at a later date.
Lookout you're completely disregarding Julie Mugford's statement to the Police,which I would urge you and other Jeremy supporters to scrutinize and discuss,before telling us why you think it is that none of Julie's social circle at the time or 27 years later even after she received a £25,000 cheque from the News of the World have ever impugned the integrity of.
-
Lookout you're completely disregarding Julie Mugford's statement to the Police,which I would urge you and other Jeremy supporters to scrutinize and discuss,before telling us why you think it is that none of Julie's social circle at the time or 27 years later even after she received a £25,000 cheque from the News of the World have ever impugned the integrity of.
Steve,,,I'm not the least interested in Julie Mugfords' statements. 32 were there.? All different.
What makes you think that I'm going to listen to what you have to say,anyway.?
-
Jeremy was frightened at what he was going to be faced with at the farmhouse. That lad was scared of his own shadow,,,so how he got blamed for the murders,I'll never know,,except that there was a conspiracy going on between the police and the relatives at a later date.
OK......an interesting idea. How come you choose to believe a complex conspiracy amongst the relatives AND police but aspects of the case that are far more plausible, you dont?
I am just asking this out of interest Lookout. Your views are your views and I respect that.
:)
-
OK......an interesting idea. How come you choose to believe a complex conspiracy amongst the relatives AND police but aspects of the case that are far more plausible, you dont?
I am just asking this out of interest Lookout. Your views are your views and I respect that.
:)
Moe Cassini,,,don't think for one minute that I'm " blinkered " about this case,,because I'm not. You see,,I remember this case on television and also the newspapers back in 1985. I had made up my mind then that Jeremy wasn't the killer,,,and thinking how easy it was for the police to blame him because he was the only one left out of that immediate family.
I was of the same belief as " Taff " Jones,,the officer leading the enquiry,,that it was a case of 4 murders and a suicide and that was that.
What followed was a complete conspiracy and a means to justify the fact that this case wasn't going to " slip through their fingers " like the Diane Jones murder,which had happened a couple of years before and which the police bungled.
However,,if Jeremy had pleaded guilty,,he'd have been out of prison now,,,so why do you think,,after all these years,he hasn't wanted to.? He knows himself,,that he could possibly have been free,,,but on principle,,because of his continued pleas of innocence,he's chosen to be honest to the point of risking further sentencing. Does this sound like a murderer.?
-
As for Jeremy and his shooting of Sheila,he can't hang around and wait until he knows she is dead because the clock is on him and this is one part of the plan which he couldn't rehearse. He just has to get back to Goldhanger through farmland,erase the tape which has the phone call he made to himself from the kitchen at White House Farm,then waste as much time as he can hoping that by the time the Police enter that Sheila is dead.
Jeremy had no control over the time it would take the police to force their way in to the farmhouse - if they had gone in straight away and Jeremy had long since already killed all his family the evidence would have been there for all to see. There is no way on gods green earth that Jeremy had a say in when the police went in, or what they might find if the went in early rather than later...
-
As for Jeremy and his shooting of Sheila,he can't hang around and wait until he knows she is dead because the clock is on him and this is one part of the plan which he couldn't rehearse. He just has to get back to Goldhanger through farmland,erase the tape which has the phone call he made to himself from the kitchen at White House Farm,then waste as much time as he can hoping that by the time the Police enter that Sheila is dead.
You forget that there existed a metered call log for the calls made from whf and that the call made by Ralph to Jeremy's cottage is recorded and documented in that log? What significance then if there was any such evidence that the tape to his answer phone had been wiped as alleged by you, since if this was true the detail in the metered call log, and the fact that the tape had been wiped from his answer machine would have been evidence which the prosecution would have sought to rely upon during the trial, but since no such wiping of the tape took place, there was no desire to bring attention to the existence of the metered call log from whf which proved such a call was made...
-
What you have in this case is a key exhibit (DRH/15) that was nkt anywhere near Sheila's body at about 7:15am, or to be as specific as I can be, the rifle which fired the fatal shot under the chin, was resting up against the bedroom window before poluce set foot into the premises. Bearing this in mind, who moved the rifle which fired fatal bullet PV/19, from the window onto Sheila's body? Exactly how did Jeremy manage to pull that little miracle off then?
-
You forget that there existed a metered call log for the calls made from whf and that the call made by Ralph to Jeremy's cottage is recorded and documented in that log? What significance then if there was any such evidence that the tape to his answer phone had been wiped as alleged by you, since if this was true the detail in the metered call log, and the fact that the tape had been wiped from his answer machine would have been evidence which the prosecution would have sought to rely upon during the trial, but since no such wiping of the tape took place, there was no desire to bring attention to the existence of the metered call log from whf which proved such a call was made...
Hi Mike
As I have previously indicated, if the phone logs show a phone call made from WHF in the middle of the night and also show a phone call made from Jeremy's residence a few minutes later (within the time period a motor car could drive between the properties), Jeremy will walk free.
Please, please, please forward the phone logs to Jeremy's legal team
Jim
-
Moe Cassini,,,don't think for one minute that I'm " blinkered " about this case,,because I'm not. You see,,I remember this case on television and also the newspapers back in 1985. I had made up my mind then that Jeremy wasn't the killer,,,and thinking how easy it was for the police to blame him because he was the only one left out of that immediate family.
I was of the same belief as " Taff " Jones,,the officer leading the enquiry,,that it was a case of 4 murders and a suicide and that was that.
What followed was a complete conspiracy and a means to justify the fact that this case wasn't going to " slip through their fingers " like the Diane Jones murder,which had happened a couple of years before and which the police bungled.
However,,if Jeremy had pleaded guilty,,he'd have been out of prison now,,,so why do you think,,after all these years,he hasn't wanted to.? He knows himself,,that he could possibly have been free,,,but on principle,,because of his continued pleas of innocence,he's chosen to be honest to the point of risking further sentencing. Does this sound like a murderer.?
Lookout please dont think that I assume that you were 'blinkered' in any way. I do however, find it a little strange that you had already made up your mind from television and newspaper reports, before the case was tried. However, your reasoning I agree with.
However, you have not really given me a reason for a wholesale police conspiracy concerning the case. Conspiracies are always difficult to keep under wraps, but this does not feel like a conspiracy to me. To blame him because he was the sole survivor has no substance. Why would they want to blame him when they had a perfectly good suspect in Sheila Caffell? I dont get it? Please explain and I hope that this can enlighten me somewhat as to your reasoning.
Thanks again :)
-
I think there were two sets of photographs Roch. I can't understand why some photographs had been hidden from the Defence until 2004 which is unacceptable,as is the destruction of other forensic evidence such as Sheila's nightie which I think was in 1996.
As for Jeremy and his shooting of Sheila,he can't hang around and wait until he knows she is dead because the clock is on him and this is one part of the plan which he couldn't rehearse. He just has to get back to Goldhanger through farmland,erase the tape which has the phone call he made to himself from the kitchen at White House Farm,then waste as much time as he can hoping that by the time the Police enter that Sheila is dead.
I understand this Steve, but what time frame is he working to? Surely if he is guilty HE would set the time frame. Theoretically he could have waited all night - who was to know? He didnt need to get back to his house in Goldhanger at any specific time. The phone call came to the police station at 3:26am That was surely the time that he had finished his grisly work - however if not it could be a few hours later - why not?
-
I think there were two sets of photographs Roch. I can't understand why some photographs had been hidden from the Defence until 2004 which is unacceptable,as is the destruction of other forensic evidence such as Sheila's nightie which I think was in 1996.
Steve, are you in agreement that if the same stream of blood from the wound is photographed both wet and matt, it must follow that original photographs must have been the wet ones?
-
Steve,,,I'm not the least interested in Julie Mugfords' statements. 32 were there.? All different.
What makes you think that I'm going to listen to what you have to say,anyway.?
Well as I said a few days ago this conviction rests on two pillars: the silencer evidence and Julie Mugford's evidence. Having trawled through Andrew Hunter's book draft which is not an easy read I have to admit that people on this site have not done a bad job in relation to that first "pillar" of evidence. If only you and other individuals worked just as diligently on the Julie Mugford statement which is shocking in demonstrating a sustained wish on behalf of Jeremy in the last year running up to the murders to cause harm to his family you might find that the key to opening Jeremy's cell door is opened that bit quicker.
-
Steve, are you in agreement that if the same stream of blood from the wound is photographed both wet and matt, it must follow that original photographs must have been the wet ones?
No because it was suggested by forensics that Sheil's blood had congealed or caked and that when Police took the rifle from the body Sheila's head might have tipped slightly thereby disturbing the plugs of blood which then began streaming again sideways down her face.
-
Having trawled through Andrew Hunter's book draft which is not an easy read
Fair play to you for bothering to read it.
-
No because it was suggested by forensics that Sheil's blood had congealed or caked and that when Police took the rifle from the body Sheila's head might have tipped slightly thereby disturbing the plugs of blood which then began streaming again sideways down her face.
Where is this suggested by forensics?
The thing is, according to the police they didn't take the rifle from her body... until it was finally removed and made safe.... at which time?
Also, if the wet blood stream is merely a secondary release of blood caused by the movement of her head, why does the stream follow the exact path of the initial stream which supposedly proceeded it? Did police accidentally move her head in exactly the same direction as it moved upon her receiving the second shot?
-
You forget that there existed a metered call log for the calls made from whf and that the call made by Ralph to Jeremy's cottage is recorded and documented in that log? What significance then if there was any such evidence that the tape to his answer phone had been wiped as alleged by you, since if this was true the detail in the metered call log, and the fact that the tape had been wiped from his answer machine would have been evidence which the prosecution would have sought to rely upon during the trial, but since no such wiping of the tape took place, there was no desire to bring attention to the existence of the metered call log from whf which proved such a call was made...
All the metered call log would show was that a telephone call had been made from White House Farm to Jeremy's cottage at Goldhanger;it would not prove that Ralph(Nevill) was the instigator nor that Jeremy was sitting at home whilst the call was made as there was an answerphone in place at Jeremy's end during which the alleged call took place. As for Jeremy having wiped the tape,how do we know he didn't just destroy the tape with the telephone call he made and substitute a blank tape into the answerphone? I might also say it's suspicious that Jeremy answered a call in the middle of the night anyhow if he'd had such a hard day harvesting at the farm,I know I would either have been fast asleep or just wouldn't have bothered to pick up,but of course this was all part of Jeremy's plan to use the Police as his alibi..
-
No because it was suggested by forensics that Sheil's blood had congealed or caked and that when Police took the rifle from the body Sheila's head might have tipped slightly thereby disturbing the plugs of blood which then began streaming again sideways down her face.
A very good point Steve,
Well worthy of consideration. The whole police conspiracy theory may be built on this very point.
-
Moe slapping Steve's back already? That didn't take long. You two don't already know each other by any chance do you? ;)
-
Where is this suggested by forensics?
The thing is, according to the police they didn't take the rifle from her body... until it was finally removed and made safe.... at which time?
Also, if the wet blood stream is merely a secondary release of blood caused by the movement of her head, why does the stream follow the exact path of the initial stream which supposedly proceeded it? Did police accidentally move her head in exactly the same direction as it moved upon her receiving the second shot?
It may not have been suggested by forensics..I'm looking.. there is a suggestion on the Crime,Hearts,and Coronets article by Police so sorry if I misled. The relevant part by Police not forensics is here:
"A consistent feature of objections to the Crown case is that they rest upon arguments from personal incredulity. Surely the blood on Sheila’s neck couldn’t look as “fresh” as it does in the photographs if she’d been dead for at least six hours?
Well, yes, it could. Officers observed that wet blood had pooled in the crook of Sheila’s right arm. Congealed blood had also formed in the aperture of the lower neck wound. One possibility is that when Sheila was moved by officers at the scene, this plug became detached, and allowed blood accumulated within Sheila’s neck, viscous but not yet congealed, to run thickly beyond the entrance of the wound."
-
Moe slapping Steve's back already? That didn't take long. You two don't already know each other by any chance do you? ;)
No I do not know Steve. I am intrigued by his viewpoint and it does make some sense. I was under the impression that this was a forum for discussion about the case and I would like to hear the viewpoints from both sides.
-
It may not have been suggested by forensics..I'm looking.. there is a suggestion on the Crime,Hearts,and Coronets article by Police so sorry if I misled. The relevant part by Police not forensics is here:
"A consistent feature of objections to the Crown case is that they rest upon arguments from personal incredulity. Surely the blood on Sheila’s neck couldn’t look as “fresh” as it does in the photographs if she’d been dead for at least six hours?
Well, yes, it could. Officers observed that wet blood had pooled in the crook of Sheila’s right arm. Congealed blood had also formed in the aperture of the lower neck wound. One possibility is that when Sheila was moved by officers at the scene, this plug became detached, and allowed blood accumulated within Sheila’s neck, viscous but not yet congealed, to run thickly beyond the entrance of the wound."
So they photographed her initially with semi-congealed blood, then moved her... and then photographed her again with wet blood, which just happened to take the exact same path as the initial flow? Why does the first wound not follow suit?
-
No I do not know Steve. I am intrigued by his viewpoint and it does make some sense. I was under the impression that this was a forum for discussion about the case and I would like to hear the viewpoints from both sides.
The whole police conspiracy theory
Your use of this phrase is quite telling.
-
So they photographed her initially with semi-congealed blood, then moved her... and then photographed her again with wet blood, which just happened to take the exact same path as the initial flow? Why does the first wound not follow suit?
Well I'm checking..remember it's the Jeremy supporters' claim that Sheila is running amok in a house full of blood,shooting herself once in the kitchen,, reloading rifles,bashing Ralph(Nevill) over the head, running upstairs for ablutions,smoking cigars,writing suicide notes..for my part it looks like she's unaware of everything that morning and lies down by the bedside cabinet where Jeremy shoots her,then realizing that he hadn't killed her outright with a rifle meant to shoot rabbits had to ensure that the second shot was fatal.
-
Well I'm checking..remember it's the Jeremy supporters' claim that Sheila is running amok in a house full of blood,shooting herself once in the kitchen,running upstairs for ablutions, reloading rifles,bashing Ralph(Nevill) over the head,smoking cigars,writing suicide notes..for my part it looks like she's unaware of everything that morning and lies down by the bedside cabinet where Jeremy shoots her,then realizing that he hadn't killed her outright with a rifle meant to shoot rabbits had to ensure that the second shot was fatal.
Steve why should Sheila lie down and be unaware of anything? She wasnt drugged, why would she do that. A paranoid scizophrenic would very likely be extremely withdrawn , as described by various people the evening before, that is usual behaviour before a psychotic episode as the pressure is building.
-
Well I'm checking..remember it's the Jeremy supporters' claim that Sheila is running amok in a house full of blood,shooting herself once in the kitchen,, reloading rifles,bashing Ralph(Nevill) over the head, running upstairs for ablutions,smoking cigars,writing suicide notes..for my part it looks like she's unaware of everything that morning and lies down by the bedside cabinet where Jeremy shoots her,then realizing that he hadn't killed her outright with a rifle meant to shoot rabbits had to ensure that the second shot was fatal.
Jeremy Bamber supporters club? You are beginning to get insulting. Why would anyone other than those more inclined towards defence arguments, 'support' Jeremy Bamber?
Would it be better if we were in the Starryian supporters club? Then we could wax lyrical about how a man planned to obtain inheritance by manipulating his trainee junior school teacher, first in to ignoring his overtures about killing his family, then allow her to inspect his handiwork at the mortuary, yet still remain unconcerned / unenlightened? Some plan that isn't it? Perhaps he realised she was so thick skulled, that she would (a) not cotton on; b) not care; c) not say a dickie bird? At no point when hatching this master plan does he conceive that there is a risk of category A prison, with the added bonus of 'child killer' hung around his neck?
-
Steve why should Sheila lie down and be unaware of anything? She wasnt drugged, why would she do that. A paranoid scizophrenic would very likely be extremely withdrawn , as described by various people the evening before, that is usual behaviour before a psychotic episode as the pressure is building.
The last external witness to have spoken to Sheila was Pamela Boutflour(Auntie Pam)who she did not as usual say goodnight to on the telephone(Pamela described Sheila as a "zombie"). I think that when Jeremy realized that Sheila was in such a state(she still had traces of Haloperidol in her system so she was drugged)he took advantage,telephoned Julie that "it's now or never" and put the plan into operation.
-
The last external witness to have spoken to Sheila was Pamela Boutflour(Auntie Pam)who she did not as usual say goodnight to on the telephone(Pamela described Sheila as a "zombie"). I think that when Jeremy realized that Sheila was in such a state(she still had traces of Haloperidol in her system so she was drugged)he took advantage,telephoned Julie that "it's now or never" and put the plan into operation.
No steve it is a fact that a warning sign of a psychotic episode approaching for a paranoid schizophrenic is withdrawal from life. Sheila was possibly exhibiting classic signs. Jeremy had been harvesting for days why on earth would he choose a time when he was no doubt physically shattered to stay up all night and execute this physically and mentally exhausting crime. If you look at it holistically, it just simplt makes no sense.
-
Jeremy Bamber supporters club? You are beginning to get insulting. Why would anyone other than those more inclined towards defence arguments, 'support' Jeremy Bamber?
Would it be better if we were in the Starryian supporters club? Then we could wax lyrical about how a man planned to obtain inheritance by manipulating his trainee junior school teacher, first in to ignoring his overtures about killing his family, then allow her to inspect his handiwork at the mortuary, yet still remain unconcerned / unenlightened? Some plan that isn't it? Perhaps he realised she was so thick skulled, that she would (a) not cotton on; b) not care; c) not say a dickie bird? At no point when hatching this master plan does he conceive that there is a risk of category A prison, with the added bonus of 'child killer' hung around his neck?
Well I invented the phrase "Jeremy supporters" to counter the acronym BGB(Bamber Guilty Brigade) which suggests similar malfeasance.As for Jeremy himself,he was not an intellectual as he failed his O Levels on his first attempt from all the small group teaching and privilege access to a public school brought.
-
Your use of this phrase is quite telling.
Well it is a theory isnt it?
-
Well I invented the phrase "Jeremy supporters" to counter the acronym BGB(Bamber Guilty Brigade) which suggests similar malfeasance.As for Jeremy himself,he was not an intellectual as he failed his O Levels on his first attempt from all the small group teaching and privilege access to a public school brought.
Ok, fair point about the BGB. Bamber would have to have graduated with at least 2:1 from Oxbridge in gross stupidity, to have executed the plan he is supposed to have done.
-
Ok, fair point about the BGB. Bamber would have to have graduated with at least 2:1 from Oxbridge in gross stupidity, to have executed the plan he is supposed to have done.
Not at all;even with the silencer evidence which may or may not be genuine and the Julie Mugford evidence which Jeremy gambled would not be believed in court the jury split 10:2..he almost got away with it.
-
Not at all;even with the silencer evidence which may or may not be genuine and the Julie Mugford evidence which Jeremy gambled would not be believed in court the jury split 10:2..he almost got away with it.
Indeed if he was guilty. I have read many articles claiming that Bamber is a psychopath. (despite his being tested to the contrary in prison many times) If this is true then psychopaths crave excitement and are incredibly impulsive and reckless. They cannot anticipate consequences of their own actions. So this may explain why things he did were ill-thought out and appear to be incredibly stupid.
Of course this is presuming that he is a psychopath.
-
Indeed if he was guilty. I have read many articles claiming that Bamber is a psychopath. (despite his being tested to the contrary in prison many times) If this is true then psychopaths crave excitement and are incredibly impulsive and reckless. They cannot anticipate consequences of their own actions. So this may explain why things he did were ill-thought out and appear to be incredibly stupid.
Of course this is presuming that he is a psychopath.
Why do people insist hes a psychopath when its been proven at least 27times that he isnt in anyway shape or form apsychpath, sociopath or have any borderline personality dissorders and is in fact extremely sane. I just dont get it.
-
Why do people insist hes a psychopath when its been proven at least 27times that he isnt in anyway shape or form apsychpath, sociopath or have any borderline personality dissorders and is in fact extremely sane. I just dont get it.
I think it is because only a psychopath or someone with some type of personaluty disorder or mental illness could have perpetrated that crime. Jeremy therefore HAS to be of that ilk because these people have already decided he's guilty. Jeremy Bamber has a sense of humour. Cold blooded inadequate people lack humour.
-
So they photographed her initially with semi-congealed blood, then moved her... and then photographed her again with wet blood, which just happened to take the exact same path as the initial flow? Why does the first wound not follow suit?
Compelling argument, Roch. If Sheila had been dead for over six hours, but after that length of time had been moved causing pooled blood to leak, there would be an old dry stream as well as the stream with fresh blood. Where is it?
-
I think it is because only a psychopath or someone with some type of personaluty disorder or mental illness could have perpetrated that crime. Jeremy therefore HAS to be of that ilk because these people have already decided he's guilty. Jeremy Bamber has a sense of humour. Cold blooded inadequate people lack humour.
I think Maggie that it is a debatable area. Have you actually seen the reports that say he is not a psychopath? Who were they done by? under what conditions? What kind of test was performed?
The answers to these would make things a little clearer. Why would someone need to get checked 27 times? This has always puzzled me.
Incidently psychopaths do have a sense of humour. What they lack is empathy, sympathy or any sense of guilt. They do not feel any pangs of conscience when they commit atrocious crimes. However, they do feel anger, frustration and have a very normal sense of humour. Ted Bundy apparently had a great sense of humour.
-
It may not have been suggested by forensics..I'm looking.. there is a suggestion on the Crime,Hearts,and Coronets article by Police so sorry if I misled. The relevant part by Police not forensics is here:
"A consistent feature of objections to the Crown case is that they rest upon arguments from personal incredulity. Surely the blood on Sheila’s neck couldn’t look as “fresh” as it does in the photographs if she’d been dead for at least six hours?
Well, yes, it could. Officers observed that wet blood had pooled in the crook of Sheila’s right arm. Congealed blood had also formed in the aperture of the lower neck wound. One possibility is that when Sheila was moved by officers at the scene, this plug became detached, and allowed blood accumulated within Sheila’s neck, viscous but not yet congealed, to run thickly beyond the entrance of the wound."
Steve, I'm confused. I thought that that article was written by a blogger with the username Israel Rank who has also posted on this forum. I just took him to be representing his own opinion. You make it sound as if it's an article commissioned by the police, or have I misunderstood?
-
I understand this Steve, but what time frame is he working to? Surely if he is guilty HE would set the time frame. Theoretically he could have waited all night - who was to know? He didnt need to get back to his house in Goldhanger at any specific time. The phone call came to the police station at 3:26am That was surely the time that he had finished his grisly work - however if not it could be a few hours later - why not?
Call timed at 3:26a.m from whf refers to, "daughter has got one of my guns"...
If quote had been from what Jeremy is quoted as saying to PC West, it would have read differently and been recorded differently, " daughter has got one of his guns"...
-
No because it was suggested by forensics that Sheil's blood had congealed or caked and that when Police took the rifle from the body Sheila's head might have tipped slightly thereby disturbing the plugs of blood which then began streaming again sideways down her face.
Under what general circumstances would there be an opportunity to to tip Sheila's head simply by removing the rifle from her body? I cannot for the life of me imagine any scenario where as a result of removing a rifle from the body tgat the head moved from left to right, then backward and forwards, to allow blood to run from either side of the mouth, and the region of her left nostril into her left eye socket?
-
Steve, I'm confused. I thought that that article was written by a blogger with the username Israel Rank who has also posted on this forum. I just took him to be representing his own opinion. You make it sound as if it's an article commissioned by the police, or have I misunderstood?
Martin you may well be right. I have quoted verbatim from that article and when I read "officers observed that wet blood had pooled in the crook of Sheila's right arm" I assumed that this was referring to the Police. I am entirely dependent on internet sources such as this as I don't have any of the books associated with the case yet;as I said in one of my previous posts I have still much to plough through,and maybe I do tend to take some at face value when really I should be more sceptical. Is Israel Rank a current member and has he posted recently? If so we could maybe clear this matter up.
-
Call timed at 3:26a.m from whf refers to, "daughter has got one of my guns"...
If quote had been from what Jeremy is quoted as saying to PC West, it would have read differently and been recorded differently, " daughter has got one of his guns"...
Mike the Police involved PC West and PC Bonnett insist that neither spoke to Nevill personally. The logs were allegedly written up retrospectively.
-
Hi Mike
As I have previously indicated, if the phone logs show a phone call made from WHF in the middle of the night and also show a phone call made from Jeremy's residence a few minutes later (within the time period a motor car could drive between the properties), Jeremy will walk free.
Please, please, please forward the phone logs to Jeremy's legal team
Jim
Jim the Prosecution case as we know was that there was no such telephone call made from White House Farm,but even if there was it would not prove that Ralph(Nevill) made it. It could just as well have been Jeremy telephoning his own number at Goldhanger cottage which would register on the answerphone and therefore appear on any itemized bill as a call which would be chargeable.
-
Martin you may well be right. I have quoted verbatim from that article and when I read "officers observed that wet blood had pooled in the crook of Sheila's right arm" I assumed that this was referring to the Police. I am entirely dependent on internet sources such as this as I don't have any of the books associated with the case yet;as I said in one of my previous posts I have still much to plough through,and maybe I do tend to take some at face value when really I should be more sceptical. Is Israel Rank a current member and has he posted recently? If so we could maybe clear this matter up.
Steve
Israel Rank still has an account and you can find his posts where he is debating with Mike Tesko and others on the alledged Ralph Bamber phonecalls. There are only nine posts from a while back. He sounded familiar with the case.
-
Under what general circumstances would there be an opportunity to to tip Sheila's head simply by removing the rifle from her body? I cannot for the life of me imagine any scenario where as a result of removing a rifle from the body tgat the head moved from left to right, then backward and forwards, to allow blood to run from either side of the mouth, and the region of her left nostril into her left eye socket?
Again this is from Israel Rank's article whom I would like to chat to if he is still a current member. Remember that the Police did say they disturbed the body slightly and I took this to mean that the Police might have come into contact with one of Sheila's hands which is evidenced by the different hand position on the two photographs.
As far as forensic pathologist Dr. Martin Ismael is concerned his evidence is that someone pulled her feet as could be demonstrated by the different positions the material in the back and the front of Sheila's nightdress lay. I can't imagine that the Police would pull her legs and I thought this might well have been Jeremy doing this to check if in fact,he had actually killed her.
-
Steve
Israel Rank still has an account and you can find his posts where he is debating with Mike Tesko and others on the alledged Ralph Bamber phonecalls. There are only nine posts from a while back. He sounded familiar with the case.
Well if I could just make it clear that I was not passing that article off as my own. In my original post on this subject I clearly stated the name of the article and put quotation marks round the relevant section. There has already been one insinuation of plagiarism on my person and I would not like this allegation to gain ground.
-
I understand this Steve, but what time frame is he working to? Surely if he is guilty HE would set the time frame. Theoretically he could have waited all night - who was to know? He didnt need to get back to his house in Goldhanger at any specific time. The phone call came to the police station at 3:26am That was surely the time that he had finished his grisly work - however if not it could be a few hours later - why not?
Because he had to get back to Goldhanger in the dark and thinking about it it's the only logical scenario even though I rejected it on first thought. Reading some of the other comments this may be an obvious thing to say but it is suspicious that all the family members died in that house with not one witness left to report first hand. Thinking of the thread on Sheila which still has not been removed I could think of one equally abhorrent concerning Jeremy blowing the brains out of his nephews but common decency constrains me.
-
Mike the Police involved PC West and PC Bonnett insist that neither spoke to Nevill personally. The logs were allegedly written up retrospectively.
Bonnett was a civilian, but yes you are right that neither refer to a call from Ralph, although neither have actually been asked, I'm sure they would have mentioned it if it took place.
At one stage Mike tried to pass off Bonnetts log in it's entirety as coming from Ralph, now he's just trying to attribute a single line to Ralph. Pure fantasy imho.
-
Jim the Prosecution case as we know was that there was no such telephone call made from White House Farm,but even if there was it would not prove that Ralph(Nevill) made it. It could just as well have been Jeremy telephoning his own number at Goldhanger cottage which would register on the answerphone and therefore appear on any itemized bill as a call which would be chargeable.
Hi Steve
But if the 2 phone calls were only minutes apart, both calls could not have been made by Jeremy - of course, Jeremy was the only person who could have made the phone call from his house but Jeremy could not have made the call from WHF!!
-
Because he had to get back to Goldhanger in the dark and thinking about it it's the only logical scenario even though I rejected it on first thought. Reading some of the other comments this may be an obvious thing to say but it is suspicious that all the family members died in that house with not one witness left to report first hand. Thinking of the thread on Sheila which still has not been removed I could think of one equally abhorrent concerning Jeremy blowing the brains out of his nephews but common decency constrains me.
I still believe someone else killed the family, this person rang JB from WHF to tell him the job was done and JB called Mugford first and then the Police - JB could not wait too long as he knew that the calls would be logged, he had to make a delay to allow the killer to escape and he also gained extra time by calling the police station and not 999, driving slowly to WHF.... However the killer was still in the house when they arrived as observed by Bews and JB in the bedroom window. If JB had waited until the bodies were discovered the next day his alibi of the phone call from his Father to implicate Sheila could obviously not have worked. The killer then slipped away only to be seen leaving the area, being described as a scruffy male. The timing is important as there could not be a delay between killing Ralf and calling the Police as JB would have assumed that the doctor would estimate the time of deaths, showing how long Sheila had been dead before the Police arrived - his whole plan revolved around the fact that it was 4 murders and a suicide, the suicide had to look instant - if they waited longer to kill Sheila it would not work as the crucial alibi call from Ralf would require an instant response from JB.... In my opinion this is how it was organised, JB did not kill them, he did not have to return to Goldhanger by bicycle, he was already there since the time he left WFH the evening before. The silencer, mantlepiece scratches etc. were used to frame JB, he had no signs of being in a fight etc. because he did not kill them, it was more convenient for the family and the Police to accuse him while the real killer was never found and probably never will be. I think he told Mugford Mathew did it to avoid identifying the real killer, just in case she did go to the Police, as of course the killer would have brought JB down with him. To this day JB cannot give this information.....he just has to try and discredit the fabricated evidence such as the silencer etc. which is his only hope of release... all this is of course just my opinion.
-
Hi Steve
But if the 2 phone calls were only minutes apart, both calls could not have been made by Jeremy - of course, Jeremy was the only person who could have made the phone call from his house but Jeremy could not have made the call from WHF!!
Jim it takes 10 minutes from White House Farm to Goldhanger Cottage cutting across farmland on the bicycle.
-
Hi Jim 10 minutes to Goldhanger on a motorbike ;)
-
Jim it takes 10 minutes from White House Farm to Goldhanger Cottage cutting across farmland on the bicycle.
Steve, in the pitchblack without a light?....really? :o :o
-
Jim it takes 10 minutes from White House Farm to Goldhanger Cottage cutting across farmland on the bicycle.
Would this be Junes bicycle?The one that was forensically tested and eliminated?
-
Hi boheme, that is the only scenario I could contemplate if Jeremy was involved.
However, the killer would have needed more than £2000 because only a professional hitman would contemplate such a killing. Where did Jeremy get the money, there was no trace of £2000 never mind the massive amount needed for 2 children and three adults. It would have cost him a huge lump of what he hoped to inherit, it doesn't even make financial sense. None of it makes financial sense anyway as he was in Granny Speakman's Will which would have improved his financial situation....even in 1985 £500,000 wasn't worth the effort and the trouble imho.
-
I still believe someone else killed the family, this person rang JB from WHF to tell him the job was done and JB called Mugford first and then the Police - JB could not wait too long as he knew that the calls would be logged, he had to make a delay to allow the killer to escape and he also gained extra time by calling the police station and not 999, driving slowly to WHF.... However the killer was still in the house when they arrived as observed by Bews and JB in the bedroom window. If JB had waited until the bodies were discovered the next day his alibi of the phone call from his Father to implicate Sheila could obviously not have worked. The killer then slipped away only to be seen leaving the area, being described as a scruffy male. The timing is important as there could not be a delay between killing Ralf and calling the Police as JB would have assumed that the doctor would estimate the time of deaths, showing how long Sheila had been dead before the Police arrived - his whole plan revolved around the fact that it was 4 murders and a suicide, the suicide had to look instant - if they waited longer to kill Sheila it would not work as the crucial alibi call from Ralf would require an instant response from JB.... In my opinion this is how it was organised, JB did not kill them, he did not have to return to Goldhanger by bicycle, he was already there since the time he left WFH the evening before. The silencer, mantlepiece scratches etc. were used to frame JB, he had no signs of being in a fight etc. because he did not kill them, it was more convenient for the family and the Police to accuse him while the real killer was never found and probably never will be. I think he told Mugford Mathew did it to avoid identifying the real killer, just in case she did go to the Police, as of course the killer would have brought JB down with him. To this day JB cannot give this information.....he just has to try and discredit the fabricated evidence such as the silencer etc. which is his only hope of release... all this is of course just my opinion.
I initially favoured this view boheme but eventually dismissed it. There were two patrol cars dispatched by Police after two calls which in my opinion were both made by Jeremy to the Police,not to 999 numbers which he thought might have been recorded by the BT operator,but to Chelmsford and Witham Police stations. The nearest Police station was Witham which was 7 miles away from White House Farm so any hitman would have had ample time to scarper before they arrived. I also think the hitman plan was just too risky for Jeremy as he would have had to pay him off for life,and anyway in Jeremy's thinking it wasn't necessary as he knew the layout of the farm and could do the job better than anybody. I think Jeremy sensed a hesitation in Julie and made up the hitman theory to spare her feelings(he was still helping her to move flat even after the argument they had).
The point about the telephone calls was that Jeremy in devising the wording used in the calls limits the suspects to either Sheila or himself-if you believe that Ralph(Nevill) was in the kitchen,unarmed and staying that way whilst Sheila was running amok with a gun around the farmhouse and his two grandchildren asleep upstairs, telephones Jeremy first before the Police then it is Sheila who is the culprit. If you think that there's no physical evidence that Nevill did make the call then you're back to suspecting Jeremy. I think Jeremy tried to keep it as simple as possible,hence the planted gun,the telephones mysteriously going dead after just a few words. I also think that had Jeremy used a hitman he didn't need to be at Goldhanger cottage at all that night-why not arrange to spend the night with a friend in London and just wait by a telephone box every half hour say for a call to come through saying the deed had been done?
I don't quite follow your timing theory because had a hitman been primed by Jeremy about where the rifle was,layout of the farm and so on there didn't need to be a telephone call to the Police at all. Jeremy saw a window of opportunity to commit the murders between the Sunday and the Wednesday,hence his call to Julie "tonight's the night",cynically knowing that it would be his last chance for some time to do away with his family and thus becoming the sole beneficiary of his parents' estate.
-
Steve, in the pitchblack without a light?....really? :o :o
Yes that was the simplicity of it..darkness,nobody around,a woman's bicycle,how could anyone suspect?
-
Steve why a 'window of opportunity' between the sunday and wednesday.? Why would he choose the busiest few days of the year when he would be exhausted to carry out such a demanding crime?
Have you eve considered Caroline's discovery about the transfiguration of christ and the connection between the bible being open at that page, the association that it was the day of celebration ie 6th August and that the transfiguration is about death an cleansing before everlasting life.
-
Steve why a 'window of opportunity' between the sunday and wednesday.? Why would he choose the busiest few days of the year when he would be exhausted to carry out such a demanding crime?
Have you eve considered Caroline's discovery about the transfiguration of christ and the connection between the bible being open at that page, the association that it was the day of celebration ie 6th August and that the transfiguration is about death an cleansing before everlasting life.
Yes and it's a red herring if ever there was one. Any religious person knows that committing suicide is a sin,let alone killing four other people. There was a window of opportunity for Jeremy because he had quizzed Colin Caffell about when the twins would be arriving at the farm and knew it had to be those dates,hence his telephone call to Julie Mugford "it's now or never".
-
Yes and it's a red herring if ever there was one. Any religious person knows that committing suicide is a sin,let alone killing four other people. There was a window of opportunity for Jeremy because he had quizzed Colin Caffell about when the twins would be arriving at the farm and knew it had to be those dates,hence his telephone call to Julie Mugford "it's now or never".
Steve, if Sheila was rational it would be a sin, Sheila was far from rational, that has to be faced, her attitude to religion was very questionable. I don't understand why you dismiss her illness which was proven and no doubt believe Jeremy was a psychopath although that is disproven. You just want to make the facts fit your theory, Jeremy is guilty, end of story that's your opinion and your sticking to it whatever. imo
-
Yes that was the simplicity of it..darkness,nobody around,a woman's bicycle,how could anyone suspect?
I think the fact it was a 'woman's' bicycle is an irrelevance, surely a bike's a bike but it was pretty old fashioned and basic. Have you tried to ride across arable farming land at night without any light? It's pretty much impossible, apart from damage to yourself the chain would be off in no time.
-
Hi Maggie think the relatives checked the bike for any evidence it had been used cross country and if it had have been they would have found traces of matching soil they were very good at detective work :) and if they had found traces they would have had it tested by a forensic expert. ;)
-
Help Come Back Grahame We Need You :) ;) ;)
-
Hi Maggie think the relatives checked the bike for any evidence it had been used cross country and if it had have been they would have found traces of matching soil they were very good at detective work :) and if they had found traces they would have had it tested by a forensic expert. ;)
[/quoteIt is so true susie, the slightest speck would have been examined. ;D
-
Hi Mags if evidence had been traced on June's bike it certainly would have been presented in Court with the other evidence and I use that term very loosely.
-
I initially favoured this view boheme but eventually dismissed it. There were two patrol cars dispatched by Police after two calls which in my opinion were both made by Jeremy to the Police,not to 999 numbers which he thought might have been recorded by the BT operator,but to Chelmsford and Witham Police stations. The nearest Police station was Witham which was 7 miles away from White House Farm so any hitman would have had ample time to scarper before they arrived. I also think the hitman plan was just too risky for Jeremy as he would have had to pay him off for life,and anyway in Jeremy's thinking it wasn't necessary as he knew the layout of the farm and could do the job better than anybody. I think Jeremy sensed a hesitation in Julie and made up the hitman theory to spare her feelings(he was still helping her to move flat even after the argument they had).
The point about the telephone calls was that Jeremy in devising the wording used in the calls limits the suspects to either Sheila or himself-if you believe that Ralph(Nevill) was in the kitchen,unarmed and staying that way whilst Sheila was running amok with a gun around the farmhouse and his two grandchildren asleep upstairs, telephones Jeremy first before the Police then it is Sheila who is the culprit. If you think that there's no physical evidence that Nevill did make the call then you're back to suspecting Jeremy. I think Jeremy tried to keep it as simple as possible,hence the planted gun,the telephones mysteriously going dead after just a few words. I also think that had Jeremy used a hitman he didn't need to be at Goldhanger cottage at all that night-why not arrange to spend the night with a friend in London and just wait by a telephone box every half hour say for a call to come through saying the deed had been done?
I don't quite follow your timing theory because had a hitman been primed by Jeremy about where the rifle was,layout of the farm and so on there didn't need to be a telephone call to the Police at all. Jeremy saw a window of opportunity to commit the murders between the Sunday and the Wednesday,hence his call to Julie "tonight's the night",cynically knowing that it would be his last chance for some time to do away with his family and thus becoming the sole beneficiary of his parents' estate.
OK, yes its possible, but how do you account for the person in the window seen by Bews and JB, if it was not the killer who was it ? If it was Sheila JB could not have killed them all.... this is my sticking point to the JB did it theory, plus the lack of damage to him..
In his plan there had to be a call to the Police, thats the whole point, someone had to provide the Police with proof that it was 4 murders and a suicide, otherwise they would think it was 5 murders, the fact that it took 2 shots to kill Sheila was already suspicious, that call was made to reinforce the idea that she had gone crazy and killed everyone including herself....
As for who and why JB managed to persuade someone to do the deed we may never know... I don't believe the 2000 GBP payout for a minute, there must have been a lot more to it than that....
-
OK, yes its possible, but how do you account for the person in the window seen by Bews and JB, if it was not the killer who was it ? If it was Sheila JB could not have killed them all.... this is my sticking point to the JB did it theory, plus the lack of damage to him..
In his plan there had to be a call to the Police, thats the whole point, someone had to provide the Police with proof that it was 4 murders and a suicide, otherwise they would think it was 5 murders, the fact that it took 2 shots to kill Sheila was already suspicious, that call was made to reinforce the idea that she had gone crazy and killed everyone including herself....
As for who and why JB managed to persuade someone to do the deed we may never know... I don't believe the 2000 GBP payout for a minute, there must have been a lot more to it than that....
I'd be interested in Steve's opinions of why EP have stated that the first page of the event log, which includes the alleged sighting / trick of the light incident has been lost. Very convenient. It was only a trick of the light but the first page relating to it only being a trick of the light, has had to be ditched?
-
I'd be interested in Steve's opinions of why EP have stated that the first page of the event log, which includes the alleged sighting / trick of the light incident has been lost. Very convenient. It was only a trick of the light but the first page relating to it only being a trick of the light, has had to be ditched?
Where has that been stated Roch? Just so we can see the source.
Obviously Rivlin referred to the trick of light at the original trial whilst cross examining PS Myall, indeed Rivlin actually came up with the "trick of light" description. Where do you think he got the information from? Myalls statement perhaps?
-
Jim it takes 10 minutes from White House Farm to Goldhanger Cottage cutting across farmland on the bicycle.
hi steve
that's why i said that if the phone calls were only a FEW (ie (say) 3) minutes minutes apart!!!
jim
-
Where has that been stated Roch? Just so we can see the source.
Obviously Rivlin referred to the trick of light at the original trial whilst cross examining PS Myall, indeed Rivlin actually came up with the "trick of light" description. Where do you think he got the information from? Myalls statement perhaps?
(b18)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2441.0.html
Jam, I do not know where Rivlin got his info from. Is Myall's statement one of the statements that you have asked Mike for?
-
(b18)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2441.0.html
Jam, I do not know where Rivlin got his info from. Is Myall's statement one of the statements that you have asked Mike for?
Thanks, I'm guessing you meant page B19.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2441.0;attach=18536;image)
Forgive me for being pedantic, but that hardly equates to what you posted:
I'd be interested in Steve's opinions of why EP have stated that the first page of the event log, which includes the alleged sighting / trick of the light incident has been lost. Very convenient. It was only a trick of the light but the first page relating to it only being a trick of the light, has had to be ditched?
I'd hazard a guess that the detailed logs simply didn't start until CA07 conveyed their preliminary assessment of the scene back to HQ, rather than a page going missing.
I'd also take an unpublished defence biased manuscript with a certain amount of salt, unless particular details could be corroborated elsewhere.
The defence can request that something should be released, but if that 'something' doesn't exist then the request can't really be complied with. It could be convenient for the defence, or rather supporters of the defence to play on this and cry conspiracy. Of course if the item in question does or did exist, and that could be proven, then there would quite rightly be grounds for concern.
Yes, Myalls statement is one of the ones I've requested from Mike on several occasions, I'd suggest that it is a little concerning that he is reluctant to post the statements of the first police officers to attend the scene. I can't think of a legitimate reason for keeping them hidden from members of the forum.
Just to pre-empt, a response that he is just doing what the CCRC are doing by withholding documents, simply doesn't cut it for me.
-
Hi Maggie think the relatives checked the bike for any evidence it had been used cross country and if it had have been they would have found traces of matching soil they were very good at detective work :) and if they had found traces they would have had it tested by a forensic expert. ;)
Yes they would have been as thorough forensically as they had been with all the other evidence. Wasn't there a sea wall whereby no soil would be present..don't forget the time Jeremy was allegedly flicking through the Yellow Pages to find a Police number..he could have washed himself and the bicycle with time to spare.
-
OK, yes its possible, but how do you account for the person in the window seen by Bews and JB, if it was not the killer who was it ? If it was Sheila JB could not have killed them all.... this is my sticking point to the JB did it theory, plus the lack of damage to him..
In his plan there had to be a call to the Police, thats the whole point, someone had to provide the Police with proof that it was 4 murders and a suicide, otherwise they would think it was 5 murders, the fact that it took 2 shots to kill Sheila was already suspicious, that call was made to reinforce the idea that she had gone crazy and killed everyone including herself....
As for who and why JB managed to persuade someone to do the deed we may never know... I don't believe the 2000 GBP payout for a minute, there must have been a lot more to it than that....
Well Jeremy was stuck with the telephone idea which gave him his alibi at the expense of the Police because he was tied to working at the farm for those days whilst they were harvesting. If you think about it there didn't really need to be a telephone call otherwise as the scene was obviously going to be examined forensically and it was not the Police's job to go around pinning blame on Jeremy,who would have been a suspect simply because he was the main beneficiary of the estate.
-
Thanks, I'm guessing you meant page B19.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2441.0;attach=18536;image)
Forgive me for being pedantic, but that hardly equates to what you posted:
I'd hazard a guess that the detailed logs simply didn't start until CA07 conveyed their preliminary assessment of the scene back to HQ, rather than a page going missing.
I'd also take an unpublished defence biased manuscript with a certain amount of salt, unless particular details could be corroborated elsewhere.
The defence can request that something should be released, but if that 'something' doesn't exist then the request can't really be complied with. It could be convenient for the defence, or rather supporters of the defence to play on this and cry conspiracy. Of course if the item in question does or did exist, and that could be proven, then there would quite rightly be grounds for concern.
I think I've pretty much portrayed accurately the meaning of what Hunter states in the above relevant para. If people want to go along with the concept of Hunter making up that an official response was that the page has been lost, then that is up to them. Personally I don't go along with the idea that he would do so, merely because he supports the defence. In fact I think the suggestion is insulting. I asked Mike if there was a source document that accompanied Hunter's manuscript and he said he might be able to find one. No offence but it's a pity you don't apply the same skeptical scrutiny to edited, composite, unsigned and changing prosecution witness statements. They seem to be the gospel truth.
There is no way the police can allow the radio message relating to a potential sighting of a figure at the window, to be available. it would simply undermine their prosecution of Bamber. We have seen another document not supportive to their prosecution of Bamber, crossed in ink with the word "NO" written across it. So I don't have much faith in the idea that the police didn't filter out anything that would cause real problems to their case.
-
Wow steve I never thought of that he could have had a shower flicked through the yellow pages disposed of his clothes so the police could not find them then take the bike and really wash it down flicked through the yellow pages sorry he did that earlier he would need to dry the bike off do you know if Jeremy had neighbours at Goldhanger.
-
Though I accept that EP didn't state what I stated, merely that the first page has been lost.
-
hi steve
that's why i said that if the phone calls were only a FEW (ie (say) 3) minutes minutes apart!!!
jim
I think the telephone calls were ten minutes apart,but in any case neither Police Officer recalls speaking personally to Ralph(Nevill) Bamber.
-
I'd be interested in Steve's opinions of why EP have stated that the first page of the event log, which includes the alleged sighting / trick of the light incident has been lost. Very convenient. It was only a trick of the light but the first page relating to it only being a trick of the light, has had to be ditched?
I've no doubt there was some concealment of evidence to try and simplify matters in front of a jury. Wasn't all the evidence garnered against Sheila stolen in a burglary whilst it was in the loft..as for the trick of the light and the other "male" shadow being seen,I can't believe that with those Police Officers having surrounded the house that someone would escape from the skylight as was suggested by a local workman,and the Jeremy supporters should get their theory straight as to whether it was Sheila they think was wandering around the house having shot herself once with no forensic evidence that she was doing so,or whether it was this male figure who presumably was the hitman whom Jeremy hired and yet who lingered inside the property unnecessarily until the Police arrived.
-
I've no doubt there was some concealment of evidence to try and simplify matters in front of a jury. Wasn't all the evidence garnered against Sheila stolen in a burglary whilst it was in the loft..as for the trick of the light and the other "male" shadow being seen,I can't believe that with those Police Officers having surrounded the house that someone would escape from the skylight as was suggested by a local workman,and the Jeremy supporters should get their theory straight as to whether it was Sheila they think was wandering around the house having shot herself once with no forensic evidence that she was doing so,or whether it was this male figure who presumably was the hitman whom Jeremy hired and yet who lingered inside the property unnecessarily until the Police arrived.
We all have our own opinions that differ, even amongst Jeremy supporters
-
I think I've pretty much portrayed accurately the meaning of what Hunter states in the above relevant para. If people want to go along with the concept of Hunter making up that an official response was that the page has been lost, then that is up to them. Personally I don't go along with the idea that he would do so, merely because he supports the defence. In fact I think the suggestion is insulting. I asked Mike if there was a source document that accompanied Hunter's manuscript and he said he might be able to find one. No offence but it's a pity you don't apply the same skeptical scrutiny to edited, composite, unsigned and changing prosecution witness statements. They seem to be the gospel truth.
There is no way the police can allow the radio message relating to a potential sighting of a figure at the window, to be available. it would simply undermine their prosecution of Bamber. We have seen another document not supportive to their prosecution of Bamber, crossed in ink with the word "NO" written across it. So I don't have much faith in the idea that the police didn't filter out anything that would cause real problems to their case.
With all due respect Rochy, that's rubbish, Hunters work features more unsubstantiated accusations than it does facts, also as an unpublished work, he commands no responsibility for it's accuracy. Unlike sworn statements for example.
In any event, you stated that the police had lost the front page of a log, where as you would have been more accurate to state that a supporter of Jeremy alleges that the police withheld and then mislaid a page of the log.
With regards to your scutiny comment, I'm quite certain that you are mistaken, I apply the same reasoning regardless of the direction that a particular theory or document points in. I reference things rather than citing what others have said as fact.
Like the allegations of statement editing, nothing indicates that to be the case, nothing at all. The memo describing the abridged typed statements, bears no resemblence to what is actually being alleged.
-
I've no doubt there was some concealment of evidence to try and simplify matters in front of a jury. Wasn't all the evidence garnered against Sheila stolen in a burglary whilst it was in the loft..as for the trick of the light and the other "male" shadow being seen,I can't believe that with those Police Officers having surrounded the house that someone would escape from the skylight as was suggested by a local workman,and the Jeremy supporters should get their theory straight as to whether it was Sheila they think was wandering around the house having shot herself once with no forensic evidence that she was doing so,or whether it was this male figure who presumably was the hitman whom Jeremy hired and yet who lingered inside the property unnecessarily until the Police arrived.
I do not believe for one minute that Sheila got up after she was first shot. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support this. In fact the evidence shows that she did not. I also do not believe the police were in a conversation with someone inside the house either. I have looked closely at the evidence and it does not suggest either of these ideas. However, this does not mean that Jeremy definitely did it. It just removes that particular theory for me.
-
Well done Moe I like a person who will stand up and speak their mind especially when they have studied the evidence. Must dash now off pole dancing :)
-
Well done Moe I like a person who will stand up and speak their mind especially when they have studied the evidence. Must dash now off pole dancing :)
Break a leg susie ;D ;D
-
I do not believe for one minute that Sheila got up after she was first shot. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support this. In fact the evidence shows that she did not. I also do not believe the police were in a conversation with someone inside the house either. I have looked closely at the evidence and it does not suggest either of these ideas. However, this does not mean that Jeremy definitely did it. It just removes that particular theory for me.
Any person shot in the neck with a rifle would have had blood all over there hands and neck if they were still conscious. As Sheila didn't have this secondary blood staining on her hands and neck she must have been unconscious throughout. IMO Sheila was given something to temporarily render her unconscious such as a general anaesthetic. This would not have been found in her bloodstream or urine.
-
Absolute nonsense.
If I am standing beside my car for instance and I am shot by a rifle, a revolver or even a machine gun then why on earth would I have blood on my hands ? I would be most probably dead.
-
Absolute nonsense.
If I am standing beside my car for instance and I am shot by a rifle, a revolver or even a machine gun then why on earth would I have blood on my hands ? I would be most probably dead.
Yes you would be dead and totally incapable of shooting yourself twice. ;D
-
I do not believe for one minute that Sheila got up after she was first shot. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support this. In fact the evidence shows that she did not. I also do not believe the police were in a conversation with someone inside the house either. I have looked closely at the evidence and it does not suggest either of these ideas. However, this does not mean that Jeremy definitely did it. It just removes that particular theory for me.
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but it differs from what the pathologist Peter Venezis said, and from what the defence expert Professor Knight said...
The opinion of Venezis, differed from the opinion of Knight...
And then of course...
Enter the fray, Professor Herbert Leon McDonnel (New York, backspatter and bloodstain expert), who concluded after seeing all the crime scene photographs (senior investigating officers album 581 pictures) that the fingers of Sheila Caffells right hand had been pressed or position against one of the upper entry wounds and blood had pooled in the fold of her right arm which was the principle cause of the large triangular bloodstain on the front upper right hand side of her nightdress. Now, please educate me and try to persuade me exactly how that large bloodstain managed to get there on that part of her nightdress, and more importantly you tell me in clear, unambiguous, and precise terms, which of the two wounds that triangular bloodstain got there, and at what time? How for example, did the blood retained in the tyriangular shaped stain that we are talking about, manage to run horizontally in the fold of her arm and cause that bloodstain there, and why didn't the police at the scene upon finding or discovering Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, with her right hand upon or around the trigger mechanism of the rifle, and the muzzle of the rifle under or against her chin, conclude as they surely must have done (for gods sake) that somebody must have stage managed Sheila's body there on the bedroom floor, in order for that triangular shaped bloodstain to be there for all to see on the front upper right of the nightdress?
Which wound did the blood in that triangular stain on her nightdress originate from, non fatal (bullet PV/20), or fatal (bullet PV/19)?
-
With all due respect Rochy, that's rubbish, Hunters work features more unsubstantiated accusations than it does facts, also as an unpublished work, he commands no responsibility for it's accuracy. Unlike sworn statements for example.
In any event, you stated that the police had lost the front page of a log, where as you would have been more accurate to state that a supporter of Jeremy alleges that the police withheld and then mislaid a page of the log.
With regards to your scutiny comment, I'm quite certain that you are mistaken, I apply the same reasoning regardless of the direction that a particular theory or document points in. I reference things rather than citing what others have said as fact.
Like the allegations of statement editing, nothing indicates that to be the case, nothing at all. The memo describing the abridged typed statements, bears no resemblence to what is actually being alleged.
What a load of garbage...
Of course statements were edited, there is a document from the DPP's office confirming this - Jesus Christ, these perople will twist everything and anything...
What the fuck does "Abridged typed statements" mean?
-
With all due respect Rochy, that's rubbish, Hunters work features more unsubstantiated accusations than it does facts, also as an unpublished work, he commands no responsibility for it's accuracy. Unlike sworn statements for example.
In any event, you stated that the police had lost the front page of a log, where as you would have been more accurate to state that a supporter of Jeremy alleges that the police withheld and then mislaid a page of the log.
With regards to your scutiny comment, I'm quite certain that you are mistaken, I apply the same reasoning regardless of the direction that a particular theory or document points in. I reference things rather than citing what others have said as fact.
Like the allegations of statement editing, nothing indicates that to be the case, nothing at all. The memo describing the abridged typed statements, bears no resemblence to what is actually being alleged.
I'm not going to get in to an argument with you but I will give my opinions straight.
If you want to run with Essex Police benignly misplacing the front page of a document, then that's up to you. If you want to trash Hunter, out of loyalty to certain prosecution witnesses, then that is also up to you. Hunter scrutinised the case very deeply and had access to numerous sources. I do not believe that Hunter was in any way incorrectly motivated in carrying out his studies. His unpublished work is out of date, which is in keeping with the momentum and dynamics of this particular case, where so much has been withheld. The purpose of withholding is not designed to aid the defence, it is designed to impede it. So in this case, the defence is definitely the under dog.
But as the saying goes, every dog has his day.
I find your opinion that no editing of statements has taken place both staggering yet predictable.
-
I'm not going to get in to an argument with you but I will give my opinions straight.
If you want to run with Essex Police benignly misplacing the front page of a document, then that's up to you. If you want to trash Hunter, out of loyalty to certain prosecution witnesses, then that is also up to you. Hunter scrutinised the case very deeply and had access to numerous sources. I do not believe that Hunter was in any way incorrectly motivated in carrying out his studies. His unpublished work is out of date, which is in keeping with the momentum and dynamics of this particular case, where so much has been withheld. The purpose of withholding is not designed to aid the defence, it is designed to impede it. So in this case, the defence is definitely the under dog.
But as the saying goes, every dog has his day.
I find your opinion that no editing of statements has taken place both staggering yet predictable.
You're crediting me with views and intentions that I do not have.
Hunter, like Shaw, is not a reliable source of information, just because you agree with their claims, it doesn't make them any more real. The same logic should be equally applied to people making claims in support of the prosecutions case.
I'm not putting a missing front page of a log down to some minor irrelevance, I'm questioning whether a first page of a log even existed, you on the other hand are quick to simply accept that it did without any actual indication that it did. You try and suggest that such an item was withheld to try and hide the "trick of light" incident, yet you fail to accept that Jeremy was there in person, or was his memory also erased in an attempt to hide this?
Again, with editing of statements, where is the evidence that statements were edited in an attempt to mislead the defence? Surely the inconsistancies between statements clearly show that no straightening out of stories took place, or at least not in the sinister manner that you allege. I'd suggest that it is your own, unsupported views on this which are more predictable than me merely questioning these accusations. I'm not simply dismissing them without a second thought, I am asking for proof.
Obtuse?
-
You're crediting me with views and intentions that I do not have.
Hunter, like Shaw, is not a reliable source of information, just because you agree with their claims, it doesn't make them any more real. The same logic should be equally applied to people making claims in support of the prosecutions case.
I'm not putting a missing front page of a log down to some minor irrelevance, I'm questioning whether a first page of a log even existed, you on the other hand are quick to simply accept that it did without any actual indication that it did. You try and suggest that such an item was withheld to try and hide the "trick of light" incident, yet you fail to accept that Jeremy was there in person, or was his memory also erased in an attempt to hide this?
Again, with editing of statements, where is the evidence that statements were edited in an attempt to mislead the defence? Surely the inconsistancies between statements clearly show that no straightening out of stories took place, or at least not in the sinister manner that you allege. I'd suggest that it is your own, unsupported views on this which are more predictable than me merely questioning these accusations. I'm not simply dismissing them without a second thought, I am asking for proof.
Obtuse?
I think it's unduly dismissive to suggest that Hunter is not a reliable source. I don't think do your self much credit on this forum when you take such an approach. You seem to be inferring that he invented an official response from EP regarding the front page of that document.
If no editing of statements has taken place, how have excerpts come to light many years after the event, such as the ones on here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1916.0.html
I cant access this site from the computer I'm on today.
When police or DPP edit statements, do you think they annotate them Look!... this is where we removed a chunk... because it wasn't helpful to our case? You keep banging on about unsupported this or supported that. I will never rate anything that has been in any way edited, no matter who swore it, in whatever court room. Edited means bits left out as well as something being potentially rewritten.
If I shoot a dog in a street but then sign a sworn testimony that I didn't, which a court / jury then accepts, does that mean I didn't shoot the dog?
-
I think it's unduly dismissive to suggest that Hunter is not a reliable source. I don't think do your self much credit on this forum when you take such an approach. You seem to be inferring that he invented an official response from EP regarding the front page of that document.
If no editing of statements has taken place, how have excerpts come to light many years after the event, such as the ones on here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1916.0.html
I cant access this site from the computer I'm on today.
When police or DPP edit statements, do you think they annotate them Look!... this is where we removed a chunk... because it wasn't helpful to our case? You keep banging on about unsupported this or supported that. I will never rate anything that has been in any way edited, no matter who swore it, in whatever court room. Edited means bits left out as well as something being potentially rewritten.
If I shoot a dog in a street but then sign a sworn testimony that I didn't, which a court / jury then accepts, does that mean I didn't shoot the dog?
I'm not doing myself any favours by questioning the uncorroberated, unsupported, second hand word of a supporter of a convicted multiple murderer?
On the contrary, I'd suggest that your willingness to blindly swallow anything put before you as long as it fits your views about the case, actually does yourself no favours.
I don't doubt that Hunter believes what he's written, but I question the source and the interpretation and implications of any information he has used to come the the conclusions that he has.
Again, returning to edited statements, there is no evidence that anything untowards has taken place, it is in my opinion nothing more than a bout of defence propaganda, however I am happy and open to being shown actual evidence which shows my opinion to be incorrect.
Just like the erasing of Jeremys memory, you seem to be selectively ignoring the original signed statements which should have accompanied any abridged unsigned statements.
There is no justification for the accusations, that is all I am asking for.
Also, another attempt to pre-empt the predictable response that I am being hypocritical by following the official prosecution version of events, well that simply isn't the case at all, I'm not blindly following anything, I'm not trying to prove guilt or even change anybodies mind from innocent to guilty, what I am trying to do, is see if there is any truth to the various accusations put foward, either officially or just theories voiced on this forum. There is an overwhelming pattern forming, and that is that when I look into any of these theories/allegations/accusations in detail, it quickly becomes apparent that they are more often than not, unjustified and infused with premeditated attempts of deception, this is not only irritating but also reflects very, very badly on those who put the theory/allegation/accusation forward.
Another common pattern is that unsubtantiated theories are often used to try and support another unsubstantiated theory, an example of this is the use of an alleged sighting of a figure to support the alleged withholding of a page of a log which may not exist and if it does, may or may not have any reference to the incident. I'd suggest that Myalls and Bews statements would be a more readily available source of information, the information was clearly documented somewhere as Rivlin questioned Myall about it at the original trial.
-
I'm not doing myself any favours by questioning the uncorroberated, unsupported, second hand word of a supporter of a convicted multiple murderer?
On the contrary, I'd suggest that your willingness to blindly swallow anything put before you as long as it fits your views about the case, actually does yourself no favours.
I don't doubt that Hunter believes what he's written, but I question the source and the interpretation and implications of any information he has used to come the the conclusions that he has.
Again, returning to edited statements, there is no evidence that anything untowards has taken place, it is in my opinion nothing more than a bout of defence propaganda, however I am happy and open to being shown actual evidence which shows my opinion to be incorrect.
Just like the erasing of Jeremys memory, you seem to be selectively ignoring the original signed statements which should have accompanied any abridged unsigned statements.
There is no justification for the accusations, that is all I am asking for.
Also, another attempt to pre-empt the predictable response that I am being hypocritical by following the official prosecution version of events, well that simply isn't the case at all, I'm not blindly following anything, I'm not trying to prove guilt or even change anybodies mind from innocent to guilty, what I am trying to do, is see if there is any truth to the various accusations put foward, either officially or just theories voiced on this forum. There is an overwhelming pattern forming, and that is that when I look into any of these theories/allegations/accusations in detail, it quickly becomes apparent that they are more often than not, unjustified and infused with premeditated attempts of deception, this is not only irritating but also reflects very, very badly on those who put the theory/allegation/accusation forward.
Another common pattern is that unsubtantiated theories are often used to try and support another unsubstantiated theory, an example of this is the use of an alleged sighting of a figure to support the alleged withholding of a page of a log which may not exist and if it does, may or may not have any reference to the incident. I'd suggest that Myalls and Bews statements would be a more readily available source of information, the information was clearly documented somewhere as Rivlin questioned Myall about it at the original trial.
According to PS Adams, when he visited the main bedroom scene at about 9am, he saw Sheila's body with no rifle upon it, or near to it? Wonder where the rifle was at this stage? Could it have still been resting up against the bedroom window where WPC Julia Jeapes saw it at 7:15am? If so, then how did it end up on Sheila's body in time for it to be photographed there from about 9:30am, onwards? Somebody obviously moved the rifle from the bedroom window onto Sheila's body, and that somebody could only have been a police officer - I wonder which one?
The only persons responsible for trying to deceive anyone was / is the police / relatives, and those who we have labelled BIGB - they don't want anyone to get any ideas that this is a MOJ. They are very selective about evidence they choose to rely upon, yet argue that anything else which others might seek to rely upon to support counter arguments is not evidence. It does not seem to matter that police officers did not make their own statements, and that these were either edited or edited and retyped by a representative of the DPP. It does not seem to matter that police are responsible for stage managing the scene. It does not seem to matter that one of the relatives has deliberately interfered with and tampered with an exhibit (silencer) in the case. It does not seem to matter that police created a false photographic schedule suggesting that police only took 223 pictures as part of the investigation when all along they took 581. It does not seem to matter that police substituted an original fragmented (PV/20) bullet and replaced it with a whole one from the batch of control ammunition, so that a false scenario could be presented suggesting that the same rifle) was used to fire both bullets? On and on the list of irregularities, and inconsistencies, and ambiguities go, none of it is evidence say those from the BIGB, but the truth is that police shot and killed Sheila in the bedroom, not Jeremy or any as yet unidentified killer or hitman...
She was not shot under the chin by members of the raidf team during the first phase of the operation inside the farmhouse, she was shot by a police officer during the crucial second phase, which commenced from 9am, onwards...
-
According to PS Adams, when he visited the main bedroom scene at about 9am, he saw Sheila's body with no rifle upon it, or near to it? Wonder where the rifle was at this stage? Could it have still been resting up against the bedroom window where WPC Julia Jeapes saw it at 7:15am? If so, then how did it end up on Sheila's body in time for it to be photographed there from about 9:30am, onwards? Somebody obviously moved the rifle from the bedroom window onto Sheila's body, and that somebody could only have been a police officer - I wonder which one?
Those from the Bamber is guilty brigade (BIGB) are very selective about what they want to talk about, and rely upon - but the sad truth is that there was no rifle at all on Sheila's body when the commander of the firearms operation (PS Adams) viewed Sheila's body (9;am) in the bedroom, yet by 9:30am the rifle (Y) was photographed in different positions upon Sheila's body, so work that out for yourselves and ask yourself why did the police feel it was necessary to move the rifle from the bedroom window (after 7:15am) onto Sheila's body?
-
Those from the Bamber is guilty brigade (BIGB) are very selective about what they want to talk about, and rely upon - but the sad truth is that there was no rifle at all on Sheila's body when the commander of the firearms operation (PS Adams) viewed Sheila's body (9;am) in the bedroom, yet by 9:30am the rifle (Y) was photographed in different positions upon Sheila's body, so work that out for yourselves and ask yourself why did the police feel it was necessary to move the rifle from the bedroom window (after 7:15am) onto Sheila's body?
Worse still...
Lets give the BIGB a swift kick between the legs and ask them why photographs which show rifle (Y) on Sheila's body in various positions, on the bedroom floor, after 9am, do the police insist that they found Sheila's body like that, when they could not have done so? How can rifle "Y" be on the body when police first enter the bedroom, and then not be on the body when PS Adams sees the body at about 9am, and then PC Bird photographed rifle "Y" on Sheila's body from 9:30am, onward, when all along rifle "Y" was leaning up against the bedroom window at about 7:15am? If nobody touched or moved anything at all, as insisted by the police, how did rifle "Y" get from the window onto the body after PS Adams visited the main bedroom at about 9am?
-
Worse still...
Lets give the BIGB a swift kick between the legs and ask them why photographs which show rifle (Y) on Sheila's body in various positions, on the bedroom floor, after 9am, do the police insist that they found Sheila's body like that, when they could not have done so? How can rifle "Y" be on the body when police first enter the bedroom, and then not be on the body when PS Adams sees the body at about 9am, and then PC Bird photographed rifle "Y" on Sheila's body from 9:30am, onward, when all along rifle "Y" was leaning up against the bedroom window at about 7:15am? If nobody touched or moved anything at all, as insisted by the police, how did rifle "Y" get from the window onto the body after PS Adams visited the main bedroom at about 9am?
Does the moving of the gun,which many now accept may well have taken place affect materially this case?
-
I'm not doing myself any favours by questioning the uncorroberated, unsupported, second hand word of a supporter of a convicted multiple murderer?
If you want to pretend that only Bamber works on his case and that no others linked to the defence are capable of an indpendent, rational consideration of facts / evidence / information... there's not a lot I can do about it. He may be a supporter of a convicted multiple murderer (a phrase you seem to be over using as some kind of attempt to goad?) but at least he's a supporter of a polygraphed convicted multiple murderer who has never given up fighting against underhand tactics, for the right to clear his own name. The bunch of people who years after the event were squabbling over the estate they grabbed, will never be voluntarily polygraphed. Ever.
On the contrary, I'd suggest that your willingness to blindly swallow anything put before you as long as it fits your views about the case, actually does yourself no favours.
That is a gross misrepresentation of my posting record on this forum, which questions both sides, roughly accordance with my stance on guilt / innocence.
I don't doubt that Hunter believes what he's written, but I question the source and the interpretation and implications of any information he has used to come the the conclusions that he has.
Hunter is obviously a thicko, like everyone else linked to the defence? Perhaps he blindly swallows also?
You question any source if it's linked to the defence or has helped the defence. Question away... If somebody wants to provide info, I very much doubt they care whether you would potentially 'question' their validity. Perhaps Hunter has just invented his sources because he is fond of a shaggy dog story?
Again, returning to edited statements, there is no evidence that anything untowards has taken place, it is in my opinion nothing more than a bout of defence propaganda, however I am happy and open to being shown actual evidence which shows my opinion to be incorrect.
That might require original statements for forensics? Just a thought. There is never any evidence of anything untoward having taken place in your stance on the case. For exactly the same reasons as you accuse me of. Untowardness on the part of police or prosecution doesn't fit in with your stance, so you reject it. I provided you with a link to Bambertwitpics in the archive. There may some excerpts of statements in there that did not previously come to light.
Just like the erasing of Jeremys memory, you seem to be selectively ignoring the original signed statements which should have accompanied any abridged unsigned statements.
I've questioned why Jeremy Bamber did not make more of the alleged sighting during his trial, so you cant pin that one on me. Rivlin must have questioned the window incident at trial for a reason. You've been informed a number of times by ngb that original signed statements were not made available to the defence.
There is no justification for the accusations, that is all I am asking for.
I think it's more the case that any justification simply isn't good enough for you.
Also, another attempt to pre-empt the predictable response that I am being hypocritical by following the official prosecution version of events, well that simply isn't the case at all, I'm not blindly following anything, I'm not trying to prove guilt or even change anybodies mind from innocent to guilty, what I am trying to do, is see if there is any truth to the various accusations put foward, either officially or just theories voiced on this forum. There is an overwhelming pattern forming, and that is that when I look into any of these theories/allegations/accusations in detail, it quickly becomes apparent that they are more often than not, unjustified and infused with premeditated attempts of deception, this is not only irritating but also reflects very, very badly on those who put the theory/allegation/accusation forward.
Another common pattern is that unsubtantiated theories are often used to try and support another unsubstantiated theory, an example of this is the use of an alleged sighting of a figure to support the alleged withholding of a page of a log which may not exist and if it does, may or may not have any reference to the incident. I'd suggest that Myalls and Bews statements would be a more readily available source of information, the information was clearly documented somewhere as Rivlin questioned Myall about it at the original trial.
By the time Bamber realised that a page was missing from the logs, it had been many years since he discussed with Mike Tesko in prison about the alleged window sighting. I doubt this was an attempt on his part to pre-arrange a future defence argument, for when the logs finally came to light, that a page was missing relating to incident he was questioned about in his polygraph. What price at Ladbrokes, for Bews & co to take a similar test about the same incident?
-
Does the moving of the gun,which many now accept may well have taken place affect materially this case?
Yes, I think it does. Movement of rifle "Y" from the bedroom window where it was spotted, by WPC Julia Jeapes, before the raid team entered the farmhouse, at about 7:30am, gives an enormous clue regarding Jeremy Bambers purported guilt or innocence in this case. This sighting by Jeapes of rifle "Y" leaning up against the bedroom window, affords Bamber the perfect alibi that / which should serve to render his convictions unsafe. The key evidence concerns how and under what circumstances could / did rifle "Y" become displaced onto Sheila's body in the interim period between when WPC jeapes first saw rifle "Y" leaning against the bedroom window, and its arrival on the body at around 9:30am, when PC Bird took pictures of it there, in many different positions? Jeremy did not move rifle "Y" from the bedroom window onto the body, and what we have to remember is that at 9am, when PS Adams visited the bedroom there was no rifle atop Sheila's body at that stage, and no rifle (Y) anywhere near to her body at that time, so where was the rifle (Y) at that stage? Surely police inside the farmhouse must have known where rifle "Y" was?
Of course, we now know where it was, and where it had been from as early as about 7:15am, that same morning - it had been resting against the window...
Now...
If it had been leaning up against the bedroom window when WPC jeapes spotted it there, how could it have by that stage fired the fatal bullet (PV/19) under the chin which killed her instantaneously, so that Sheila ended up on the bedroom floor next to the bed, and the rifle was yards away stood leaning up against the bedroom window? None of this makes any sense whatsoever...
-
Yes, I think it does. Movement of rifle "Y" from the bedroom window where it was spotted, by WPC Julia Jeapes, before the raid team entered the farmhouse, at about 7:30am, gives an enormous clue regarding Jeremy Bambers purported guilt or innocence in this case. This sighting by Jeapes of rifle "Y" leaning up against the bedroom window, affords Bamber the perfect alibi that / which should serve to render his convictions unsafe. The key evidence concerns how and under what circumstances could / did rifle "Y" become displaced onto Sheila's body in the interim period between when WPC jeapes first saw rifle "Y" leaning against the bedroom window, and its arrival on the body at around 9:30am, when PC Bird took pictures of it there, in many different positions? Jeremy did not move rifle "Y" from the bedroom window onto the body, and what we have to remember is that at 9am, when PS Adams visited the bedroom there was no rifle atop Sheila's body at that stage, and no rifle (Y) anywhere near to her body at that time, so where was the rifle (Y) at that stage? Surely police inside the farmhouse must have known where rifle "Y" was?
Of course, we now know where it was, and where it had been from as early as about 7:15am, that same morning - it had been resting against the window...
Now...
If it had been leaning up against the bedroom window when WPC jeapes spotted it there, how could it have by that stage fired the fatal bullet (PV/19) under the chin which killed her instantaneously, so that Sheila ended up on the bedroom floor next to the bed, and the rifle was yards away stood leaning up against the bedroom window? None of this makes any sense whatsoever...
Rifle "Y" arrived on Sheila's body after the visit to the bedroom by PS Adams who told COLP in his 1991 interviews that there was no rifle at all on Sheila's body when he saw her at about 9am, that morning - what this establishes is that rifle "Y" was not on the body (undisturbed) when police first entered the main bedroom. How can it have remained there undisturbed if it was not on Sheila's body at around (9am), but there later on to allow PC Bird to take pictures of it there in different positions on the body?
-
Mike, some of our own forum members do not like the BGB label. I think some forum members prefer to be thought of as individuals with their own stance on the case / guilt. Just thought I'd mention it.
-
Mike, some of our own forum members do not like the BGB label. I think some forum members prefer to be thought of as individuals with their own stance on the case / guilt. Just thought I'd mention it.
Thank you for pointing this out to me...
-
It should be clear enough to anybody who is remotely interested in finding out the truth of this matter, that the position of Sheila's body on the bedroom floor with the rifle atop it, as photographed by PC Bird as shown in photographs which formed part and parcel of the COURT album relied upon during trial, that the position of her body and the rifle (Y) and the bible was / is not an undisturbed scene, but rather one which was / has been stage managed by the police...
-
Thank you for pointing this out to me...
No problem.
-
It should be clear enough to anybody who is remotely interested in finding out the truth of this matter, that the position of Sheila's body on the bedroom floor with the rifle atop it, as photographed by PC Bird as shown in photographs which formed part and parcel of the COURT album relied upon during trial, that the position of her body and the rifle (Y) and the bible was / is not an undisturbed scene, but rather one which was / has been stage managed by the police...
It's certainly clear to me. But I think a lot of people really struggle with the concept of police behaving in this manner.
-
Rifle "Y" arrived on Sheila's body after the visit to the bedroom by PS Adams who told COLP in his 1991 interviews that there was no rifle at all on Sheila's body when he saw her at about 9am, that morning - what this establishes is that rifle "Y" was not on the body (undisturbed) when police first entered the main bedroom. How can it have remained there undisturbed if it was not on Sheila's body at around (9am), but there later on to allow PC Bird to take pictures of it there in different positions on the body?
But wasn't there a picture of the rifle taken by the Police photographers of a rifle propped up against the window sill? Could there have been two rifles involved in the crime as has been suggested previously?
-
But wasn't there a picture of the rifle taken by the Police photographers of a rifle propped up against the window sill? Could there have been two rifles involved in the crime as has been suggested previously?
Yes, photograph 23 of 223 in the MASTERCOPY ALBUM. DI "Ron" Cook testified that he placed the rifle there after removing it from Sheila's body, But PS Woodcock was supposed to have done this at 11:15am - despite the fact that it ended up being given the exhibit reference DRH/15 in DC Hammersleys name?
You can rest assured that there were at least two different weapons used in the shootings, one of these rifles was found downstairs and according to DS Davidson whilst he was being interviewed by COLP (1991) that some red paint similar to that on the aga surround had been found on the end of a guns barrel which caused DI "Ron" Cook to take a paint sample (RC/1) for testing purposes. Sheila was shot by use of this rifle, downstairs in the region of the kitchen, and later police shot her when they used the rifle that WPC Julia Jeapes spotted at the bedroom window (7:15am), which was used to gauge the distance between the solitary entry wound upon her neck, and the height / distance away of where the fingers of her right hand could activate the trigger? For your information, Sheila got shot by the police during the training exercise when the rifle from the window was placed upon Sheila's body for the purpose of gauging the distance between the muzzle of the gun (when placed or positioned against that part of the neck where the solitary entry wound was situated) and the trigger mechanism (positioned near to her abdomen) with the rifle laid atop her body...
Rifle (Y) was the weapon used in this reconstruction, which had not been checked to see if it was still loaded and safe - when her fingers were placed in the region of the trigger guard the second fatal shot was discharged under her chin and killed her immediately...
-
Yes, photograph 23 of 223 in the MASTERCOPY ALBUM. DI "Ron" Cook testified that he placed the rifle there after removing it from Sheila's body, But PS Woodcock was supposed to have done this at 11:15am - despite the fact that it ended up being given the exhibit reference DRH/15 in DC Hammersleys name?
You can rest assured that there were at least two different weapons used in the shootings, one of these rifles was found downstairs and according to DS Davidson whilst he was being interviewed by COLP (1991) that some red paint similar to that on the aga surround had been found on the end of a guns barrel which caused DI "Ron" Cook to take a paint sample (RC/1) for testing purposes. Sheila was shot by use of this rifle, downstairs in the region of the kitchen, and later police shot her when they used the rifle that WPC Julia Jeapes spotted at the bedroom window (7:15am), which was used to gauge the distance between the solitary entry wound upon her neck, and the height / distance away of where the fingers of her right hand could activate the trigger? For your information, Sheila got shot by the police during the training exercise when the rifle from the window was placed upon Sheila's body for the purpose of gauging the distance between the muzzle of the gun (when placed or positioned against that part of the neck where the solitary entry wound was situated) and the trigger mechanism (positioned near to her abdomen) with the rifle laid atop her body...
Rifle (Y) was the weapon used in this reconstruction, which had not been checked to see if it was still loaded and safe - when her fingers were placed in the region of the trigger guard the second fatal shot was discharged under her chin and killed her immediately...
This was why the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) had to be / was swapped over with a whole control bullet fired via rifle (Y) during an unreported test fire of the gun and control ammunition, once the nature of the case changed and became SC/786/85 from SC/688/85...
-
Yes, photograph 23 of 223 in the MASTERCOPY ALBUM. DI "Ron" Cook testified that he placed the rifle there after removing it from Sheila's body, But PS Woodcock was supposed to have done this at 11:15am - despite the fact that it ended up being given the exhibit reference DRH/15 in DC Hammersleys name?
You can rest assured that there were at least two different weapons used in the shootings, one of these rifles was found downstairs and according to DS Davidson whilst he was being interviewed by COLP (1991) that some red paint similar to that on the aga surround had been found on the end of a guns barrel which caused DI "Ron" Cook to take a paint sample (RC/1) for testing purposes. Sheila was shot by use of this rifle, downstairs in the region of the kitchen, and later police shot her when they used the rifle that WPC Julia Jeapes spotted at the bedroom window (7:15am), which was used to gauge the distance between the solitary entry wound upon her neck, and the height / distance away of where the fingers of her right hand could activate the trigger? For your information, Sheila got shot by the police during the training exercise when the rifle from the window was placed upon Sheila's body for the purpose of gauging the distance between the muzzle of the gun (when placed or positioned against that part of the neck where the solitary entry wound was situated) and the trigger mechanism (positioned near to her abdomen) with the rifle laid atop her body...
Rifle (Y) was the weapon used in this reconstruction, which had not been checked to see if it was still loaded and safe - when her fingers were placed in the region of the trigger guard the second fatal shot was discharged under her chin and killed her immediately...
I have read that the Police stated that the .22 anschutz rifle was stiff and therefore not easy to fire by mistake. I don't understand what the Police are covering up,the reason for covering up and why if there was a cover-up nobody has yet come forward for the £1million reward claimable upon disclosing evidence proving Jeremy's innocence.
-
Hi steve perhaps for anyone to come forward to claim the reward they would have to incriminate themselves and could end up in prison this is just a theory of course.
-
Hi steve perhaps for anyone to come forward to claim the reward they would have to incriminate themselves and could end up in prison this is just a theory of course.
That's a possibility Susan but with so many people seemingly traipsing around the farm that morning one would have thought that a shot from a semi-automatic would have been clearly audible.
-
steve you are wondering if one of the neighbours heard a shot. I don't know anything about guns so would not know if they are easily heard.
-
steve you are wondering if one of the neighbours heard a shot. I don't know anything about guns so would not know if they are easily heard.
No I was thinking that we are constantly being told of the number of entrants into the farm that morning and I find it hard to believe that under those circumstances nobody heard an alleged shot emanating from the bedroom. On a separate point your post reminds me that a neighbour reported hearing a shot around 9-30pm and I'm wondering if this was Jeremy testing the murder weapon which may have been stiff in order that he could be sure it was in working order the following morning.
-
steve you are wondering if one of the neighbours heard a shot. I don't know anything about guns so would not know if they are easily heard.
Hi Susan. I thought I was the only person in England NOT watching the Olympics!!!!! I live ibn an Olympic free Zone!!! I asked the same question a while back and was told that a gun with silencer would have been barely audible, but nothing was said about a gun without one, and, like you, I know nothing about guns.
-
No I was thinking that we are constantly being told of the number of entrants into the farm that morning and I find it hard to believe that under those circumstances nobody heard an alleged shot emanating from the bedroom. On a separate point your post reminds me that a neighbour reported hearing a shot around 9-30pm and I'm wondering if this was Jeremy testing the murder weapon which may have been stiff in order that he could be sure it was in working order the following morning.
I suppose it's impossible for there to be another explanation. Sorry Steve, good evening, please forgive my temporary lack of good manners.
-
Worse still...
Lets give the BIGB a swift kick between the legs and ask them why photographs which show rifle (Y) on Sheila's body in various positions, on the bedroom floor, after 9am, do the police insist that they found Sheila's body like that, when they could not have done so? How can rifle "Y" be on the body when police first enter the bedroom, and then not be on the body when PS Adams sees the body at about 9am, and then PC Bird photographed rifle "Y" on Sheila's body from 9:30am, onward, when all along rifle "Y" was leaning up against the bedroom window at about 7:15am? If nobody touched or moved anything at all, as insisted by the police, how did rifle "Y" get from the window onto the body after PS Adams visited the main bedroom at about 9am?
Do you live in a parallel universe?? It does not take much imagination to realise that the rifle would have been lifted by the first police officers on the scene so as to make it safe. It was probably lifted a second time so that the doctor could examine the remains of Sheila. The rifle would have been set back for the purposes of the photography. Have you some problem with these events and the fact that the rifle would not have gone back exactly as it was each time??
-
Do you live in a parallel universe?? It does not take much imagination to realise that the rifle would have been lifted by the first police officers on the scene so as to make it safe. It was probably lifted a second time so that the doctor could examine the remains of Sheila. The rifle would have been set back for the purposes of the photography. Have you some problem with these events and the fact that the rifle would not have gone back exactly as it was each time??
John, please introduce your self in the foyer. Thanks.
-
Do you live in a parallel universe?? It does not take much imagination to realise that the rifle would have been lifted by the first police officers on the scene so as to make it safe. It was probably lifted a second time so that the doctor could examine the remains of Sheila. The rifle would have been set back for the purposes of the photography. Have you some problem with these events and the fact that the rifle would not have gone back exactly as it was each time??
Ok, birdbrain, so when police make witness statements saying they didn't do that, and they didn't move anything at all or touch anything, how does what you say support what the police have said, do you live in a parallel universe, yourself?
-
I have read that the Police stated that the .22 anschutz rifle was stiff and therefore not easy to fire by mistake. I don't understand what the Police are covering up,the reason for covering up and why if there was a cover-up nobody has yet come forward for the £1million reward claimable upon disclosing evidence proving Jeremy's innocence.
Armed police wouldn't ordinarily kill somebody via a contact shot under the chin. I think a few eyebrows might be raised, if they passed off such a shot as being ordinarily discharged in the line of duty?
-
Armed police wouldn't ordinarily kill somebody via a contact shot under the chin. I think a few eyebrows might be raised, if they passed off such a shot as being ordinarily discharged in the line of duty?
Also, I think I'm right in stating that they don't ordinarily use .22 weapons or ammunition. So at no point could police state that Sheila was shot by them in the line of duty. Therefore if Mike Tesko is correct in his assertion that the mishandling of the rifle is what caused the 2nd fatal shot, there is a big problem to be pondered by those at the scene. And the clock is ticking. And there's a lot of people outside.
-
Ok, birdbrain, so when police make witness statements saying they didn't do that, and they didn't move anything at all or touch anything, how does what you say support what the police have said, do you live in a parallel universe, yourself?
Well birdbrain...can you point me to such statements?? The statements which I have already read and which are posted on this forum clearly indicate that the rifle was moved to facilitate inspections.
I was told you are afraid to debate these issues on an open forum??
-
John, please introduce your self in the foyer. Thanks.
Are you referring to me??
-
Also, I think I'm right in stating that they don't ordinarily use .22 weapons or ammunition. So at no point could police state that Sheila was shot by them in the line of duty. Therefore if Mike Tesko is correct in his assertion that the mishandling of the rifle is what caused the 2nd fatal shot, there is a big problem to be pondered by those at the scene. And the clock is ticking. And there's a lot of people outside.
I believe you are ordinarily correct roch. If they had maybe jeremy would have heard the shot??
-
I believe you are ordinarily correct roch. If they had maybe jeremy would have heard the shot??
If fired from a police weapon? And from a distance of Pages Lane? Not sure. But certainly wouldn't hear .22.
-
Moe Cassini,,,don't think for one minute that I'm " blinkered " about this case,,because I'm not. You see,,I remember this case on television and also the newspapers back in 1985. I had made up my mind then that Jeremy wasn't the killer,,,and thinking how easy it was for the police to blame him because he was the only one left out of that immediate family.
I was of the same belief as " Taff " Jones,,the officer leading the enquiry,,that it was a case of 4 murders and a suicide and that was that.
What followed was a complete conspiracy and a means to justify the fact that this case wasn't going to " slip through their fingers " like the Diane Jones murder,which had happened a couple of years before and which the police bungled.
However,,if Jeremy had pleaded guilty,,he'd have been out of prison now,,,so why do you think,,after all these years,he hasn't wanted to.? He knows himself,,that he could possibly have been free,,,but on principle,,because of his continued pleas of innocence,he's chosen to be honest to the point of risking further sentencing. Does this sound like a murderer.?
I don't see what recalling the case first hand in 1985 as I similarly do has any bearing whatsoever on the merit of the individual in question's comments;one can just as well read the trial transcripts,the books and the internet sources oneself and reach just as valid an opinion 27 years later. The reasons for Jeremy Bamber not admitting his culpability are manifold: firstly he would lose all inheritance rights and any compensation which might accrue to him by taxpayers,secondly the stigma of having to admit to shooting five people dead in cold blood including twin infants would be palpable and send a new shock wave of revulsion among the British public,thirdly he might well be attacked again or murdered by fellow prison inmates,and fourthly he can't confess to unburden his soul to any religious personage frequenting prisons because due to the influence of his mother and sister religion is everything he despises with the concomitant thought that the here and now is the only thing that matters,which was one of the motives for the slayings in the first place.
-
If fired from a police weapon? And from a distance of Pages Lane? Not sure. But certainly wouldn't hear .22.
hmm dont know about that mate. In a still morning with everyone keeping perfectly quiet much can be heard. Wasn't the telephone line open as well?
-
I don't see what recalling the case first hand in 1985 as I similarly do has any bearing whatsoever on the merit of the individual in question's comments;one can just as well read the trial transcripts,the books and the internet sources oneself and reach just as valid an opinion 27 years later. The reasons for Jeremy Bamber not admitting his culpability are manifold: firstly he would lose all inheritance rights and any compensation which might accrue to him by taxpayers,secondly the stigma of having to admit to shooting five people dead in cold blood including twin infants would be palpable and send a new shock wave of revulsion among the British public,thirdly he might well be attacked again or murdered by fellow prison inmates,and fourthly he can't confess to unburden his soul to any religious personage frequenting prisons because due to the influence of his mother and sister religion is everything he despises with the concomitant thought that the here and now is the only thing that matters,which was one of the motives for the slayings in the first place.
I think he has told the same old lie for so long he believes it. Institutionalisation has a lot to answer for.
-
Well birdbrain...can you point me to such statements?? The statements which I have already read and which are posted on this forum clearly indicate that the rifle was moved to facilitate inspections.
You are the bird brain with little or no knowledge about what took place, or who said what?
So, you are saying police have lied about not moving or touching anything at all until after PC Bird completed taking all his crime scene photographs which he claims he did not start taking until 10am? Why would police lie about such a thing? Why would they say they didn't move or touch anything at all, until after Bird took his pictures, if as you are suggesting they removed the rifle (Y) from Sheila's body and put it back on the body countless times before PC Bird even started to take pictures? So, if you are correct, and I am wrong (which by the way I am not wrong) then when the prosecution produced photographs taken by PC Bird as part of the court album (50 pictures) and suggested that this was how police found the body of Sheila on the bedroom floor, it was a blatantly dishonest and totally falsified account...
If you take a gun / rifle off the body and put it back on the body, and remove the rifle, and put the rifle back on the body, and then along comes your good friend PC David Bird to take pictures showing the rifle (Y) on the body, it does not represent exactly how the police found the body upon entry into the bedroom, do you agree? At this point, the prosecutions case is a dishonest one, comprehende?
-
I believe you are ordinarily correct roch. If they had maybe jeremy would have heard the shot??
Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, so the sound of the shot from rifle "Y" would not have been recorded, on instruction from someone at the scene directed at the control room to the operator...
-
Mike could you just remind us of the timeline that morning as to when the doctor arrived,when the photographs were taken,particularly of the gun and when these training exercises took place and any other forensic activity?
-
Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, so the sound of the shot from rifle "Y" would not have been recorded, on instruction from someone at the scene directed at the control room to the operator...
If the police close down the open line (intercept) at about 8:15am, and the police did not shoot and kill Sheila by use of rifle "Y" until after 9am, there is no chance that there could be any recording of the event where the police shot and killed Sheila by firing rifle "Y" under Sheila's chin...
-
You are the bird brain with little or no knowledge about what took place, or who said what?
So, you are saying police have lied about not moving or touching anything at all until after PC Bird completed taking all his crime scene photographs which he claims he did not start taking until 10am? Why would police lie about such a thing? Why would they say they didn't move or touch anything at all, until after Bird took his pictures, if as you are suggesting they removed the rifle (Y) from Sheila's body and put it back on the body countless times before PC Bird even started to take pictures? So, if you are correct, and I am wrong (which by the way I am not wrong) then when the prosecution produced photographs taken by PC Bird as part of the court album (50 pictures) and suggested that this was how police found the body of Sheila on the bedroom floor, it was a blatantly dishonest and totally falsified account...
If you take a gun / rifle off the body and put it back on the body, and remove the rifle, and put the rifle back on the body, and then along comes your good friend PC David Bird to take pictures showing the rifle ((Y) on the body, it does not represent exactly how the police found the body upon entry into the bedroom, do you agree? At this point, the prosecutions case is a dishonest one, comprehende?
Neither do you as you weren't there.
Most of the cops would not have touched anything but they may have trod on the odd bullet case. Some coppers would have been tasked with removing weapons, making them safe, removing ammo etc. Others would have helped the doctor to examine the bodies. PC Bird didn't arrive until later on in the morning and the rifle was probably moved at least twice by them and replaced.
The pictures showed how they found the body but the position of the body and the rifle may have changed slightly. There is no other way for the police to do their job without moving things. Do you honestly think the police are going to leave a loaded mag in a rifle on a body? Just so happened the rifle was empty on that occasion.
Your idea of dishonesty in this situation is frankly absurd.
-
If the police close down the open line (intercept) at about 8:15am, and the police did not shoot and kill Sheila by use of rifle "Y" until after 9am, there is no chance that there could be any recording of the event where the police shot and killed Sheila by firing rifle "Y" under Sheila's chin...
Why on earth would a police officer want to shoot Sheila with a .22 rifle?? Do you know how stupid that sounds??
-
Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, so the sound of the shot from rifle "Y" would not have been recorded, on instruction from someone at the scene directed at the control room to the operator...
So according to your theory the cops waited until after 8.15 to shoot Sheila......nearly a full hour after they entered the house. Mindblowing stuff. ;D
-
Mike could you just remind us of the timeline that morning as to when the doctor arrived,when the photographs were taken,particularly of the gun and when these training exercises took place and any other forensic activity?
Rifle (Y) spotted leaning against bedroom window by WPC Julia Jeapes before raid team force their way into premises (a trained firearms instructor) police in house at just after 7:30am, two bodies found upon entry into kitchen (7:37am) the body of one dead male and the body of one dead female; a murder and a suicide (before 7;45am), a further three bodies found upstairs once the police get up there. Senior officers into house, discover body of dead female is missing. DCI Harris is asked to contact ACC Peter Simpson by land-line to update him of developments (how operation had just gone pear-shaped), police surgeon attends scene at 8:44am and pronounces Sheila as being dead on the far side of the bed, with a solitary wound to her neck. PS Adams enters bedroom at about 9am, there is no rifle on body. Coroners officer, PC Wright, arrives at the scene (about 9:25am), and confirms that he has no recollection of rifle on the body? Fro just after 9am, a training exercise is undertaken inside the farmhouse where new officers carry out at reconstruction of the forced entry into the farmhouse, but by this stage Sheila's body was upstairs in the bedroom. Someone took possession of rifle "Y" from its position of leaning up against the bedroom window, and they use it to gauge the distance between the solitary entry wound on Sheila's neck to see if she could have fired the trigger? The rest is history...
-
Why on earth would a police officer want to shoot Sheila with a .22 rifle?? Do you know how stupid that sounds??
But that is what they did, and that is how absurd your suggestion is?
When they found her she only had a solitary wound, but by the time PC Bird took his pictures of Sheila's body on the floor by the side of the bed she had two, each entry wound inflicted by a different weapon - which caused the police to replace the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) with a substituted whole control bullet which was later fired during unreported test firings of rifle "Y"...
You can choose to live in cloud cuckoo land, and believe what you want to, the facts speak for themselves...
You do not substitute a crime scene bullet (PV/20) which was badly fragmented when the pathologist removed it from her neck with a whole control bullet so that you can say that it was fired via and by use of rifle "Y", unless you are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes to cover up for the fact that two different weapons were used to shoot and kill Sheila? This is exactly what the police have done - why?
-
So according to your theory the cops waited until after 8.15 to shoot Sheila......nearly a full hour after they entered the house. Mindblowing stuff. ;D
I didn't say they waited until 8:15am to shoot and kill Sheila, those are your words, and as you say quite mind blowing. Police did not shoot Sheila under the chin until after 9am, actually. Telephone intercept was shut down at about 8:15am, as confirmed by police documents...
You decide whether or not you want to believe what is contained in these police documents, if you choose not to believe it then of course you leave yourself open to the suggestion that you are agreeing that police have lied over this / that matter...
-
Why on earth would a police officer want to shoot Sheila with a .22 rifle?? Do you know how stupid that sounds??
Not so absurd actually, in the circumstances it occurred in...
-
Hi Mike,
You have previously accepted that you do not have in your physical possession a photograph of Sheila which depicts a single bullet wound to her neck area but that said photograph is stored on the hard drive of your computer. I repeat my offer to you - I will personally pay the cost of a computer expert to examine the hard drive of your computer for the purpose of retrieving that photograph.
The existence of this photograph would go a long, long way of proving the truth of your contention that the Police (accidentally or otherwise) shot Sheila.
Will you accept my offer?
-
But that is what they did, and that is how absurd your suggestion is?
When they found her she only had a solitary wound, but by the time PC Bird took his pictures of Sheila's body on the floor by the side of the bed she had two, each entry wound inflicted by a different weapon - which caused the police to replace the original fragmented bullet (PV/2) with a substituted whole control bullet which was later fired during unreported test firings of rifle "Y"...
You can choose to live in cloud cuckoo land, and believe what you want to, the facts speak for themselves...
You do not substitute a crime scene bullet (PV/20) which was badly fragmented when the pathologist removed it from her neck with a whole control bullet so that you can say that it was fired via and by use of rifle "Y", unless you are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes to cover up for the fact that two different weapons were used to shoot and kill Sheila? This is exactly what the police have done - why?
Pure dribble man. You are inventing facts to fit your own theories which dont hold water for a moment. Sheila was unconscious from the moment she was shot...........she never moved from that moment on. Read the pathologists report.
Sheila was well dead by the time PC Bird got to the scene and had two bullet wounds to her neck. There are no photos showing one wound to her neck since the second shot was made within moments of the first shot. Again refer to the pathologists report.
The second bullet was fragmented but there was still a discernible mass left which was identifiable as a bullet. There was no need to fabricate anything.
Bottom line is Sheila was shot twice in quick succession leaving the rifle empty. The two empty shell casings lay alongside her body. The rifle was then placed on her body for the police to find. No mystery no conspiracy.
And further more nobody on the outside saw any rifle leaning against a window. Pure fiction as is the womans body lying in the kitchen as this was a simple mix up in identifying Ralph Bamber.
-
Hi Mike,
You have previously accepted that you do not have in your physical possession a photograph of Sheila which depicts a single bullet wound to her neck area but that said photograph is stored on the hard drive of your computer. I repeat my offer to you - I will personally pay the cost of a computer expert to examine the hard drive of your computer for the purpose of retrieving that photograph.
The existence of this photograph would go a long, long way of proving the truth of your contention that the Police (accidentally or otherwise) shot Sheila.
Will you accept my offer?
Jim, I do not have a photograph on my hard drive which shows only one wound on Sheila's neck / throat, I believe there has been a misunderstanding regarding this matter, I do have a photograph though of Sheila on the bed with no blood running, or leaking, or pouring from the corners of her mouth, and back into her left eye socket...
-
Hi Mike,
You have previously accepted that you do not have in your physical possession a photograph of Sheila which depicts a single bullet wound to her neck area but that said photograph is stored on the hard drive of your computer. I repeat my offer to you - I will personally pay the cost of a computer expert to examine the hard drive of your computer for the purpose of retrieving that photograph.
The existence of this photograph would go a long, long way of proving the truth of your contention that the Police (accidentally or otherwise) shot Sheila.
Will you accept my offer?
There is no photograph and never was one to begin with.
-
Pure dribble man. You are inventing facts to fit your own theories which dont hold water for a moment. Sheila was unconscious from the moment she was shot...........she never moved from that moment on. Read the pathologists report.
You are full of shit - I have copies of the reports from Venezis, from Knight, and from McDonnell, and you don't know jack shit, because you wouldn't be saying such things if you had access to the conclusions of all these experts. She displaced herself from the kitchen to the bedroom, in keeping with what Knight and McDonnell have said...
-
You are full of shit - I have copies of the reports from Venezis, from Knight, and from McDonnell, and you don't know jack shit, because you wouldn't be saying such things if you had access to the conclusions of all these experts. She displaced herself from the kitchen to the bedroom, in keeping with what Knight and McDonnell have said...
The pathologist stated that she would have been paralysed from the instant she was first shot and this is also evidenced by the total absence of any blood down the front of her neck or nightgown or that of secondary blood staining on her finger tips or neck. The evidence is always right I'm afraid.
Experts?? Thats cool.
-
There is no photograph and never was one to begin with.
Which just goes to show what you know about the case, of course there exists photographs of Sheila's body on the bed, why do you think police burnt the blankets and the mattress from the bed in the main bedroom? Where do you think the bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress came from, how could there not be a corresponding stain on the bedroom carpet beneath where PC Bird ended up photographing her body there on the floor next to the bed? There is / was no corresponding bloodstain on the carpet because she was laid on the bed and the corresponding blood stain was on the mattress and blankets of the bed...
How could Sheila have been shot an d killed there on the bedroom floor and all this blood be present on the back of her nightdress, but no such bloodstain on the bedroom carpet beneath where PC Bird took pictures of her body insitu?
Get a brain and stop being pathetic...
-
Jim, I do not have a photograph on my hard drive which shows only one wound on Sheila's neck / throat, I believe there has been a misunderstanding regarding this matter, I do have a photograph though of Sheila on the bed with no blood running, or leaking, or pouring from the corners of her mouth, and back into her left eye socket...
Hi Mike
For the purposes of clarification, where is this photograph of Sheila ON THE BED?
-
Which just goes to show what you know about the case, of course there exists photographs of Sheila's body on the bed, why do you think police burnt the blankets and the mattress from the bed in the main bedroom? Where do you think the bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress came from, how could there not be a corresponding stain on the bedroom carpet beneath where PC Bird ended up photographing her body there on the floor next to the bed? There is / was no corresponding bloodstain on the carpet because she was laid on the bed and the corresponding blood stain was on the mattress and blankets iof the bed...
How could Sheila have been shot an d killed there on the bedroom floor and all this blood be present on the back of her nightdress, but no such bloodstain on the bedroom carpet beneath where PC Bird took pictures of her body insitu?
Get a brain and stop being pathetic...
Sheilas body was probably lifted onto the bed before being removed from the house. No mystery there.
There is no reference in any report to any stain on the rear of the nightdress. The only staining was the neck and down the sides as she was lying to one side when she expired. It suits your argument to invent blood staining just as your reasons for having bedding burned when it was jerry who asked the police to clear the property.
-
Get a brain and stop being pathetic...
Mike, it's Lambo. I think he's had a few beers or something.
-
The pathologist stated that she would have been paralysed from the instant she was first shot and this is also evidenced by the total absence of any blood down the front of her neck or nightgown or that of secondary blood staining on her finger tips or neck. The evidence is always right I'm afraid.
What a load of codswallop...
Please don't make me laugh, Venezis allowed the police to substitute the original bullet (PV/20) by replacing it with a whole control bullet fired during unreported test firing of rifle "Y" and control ammunition, why should I listen and trust anything Venezis says or has said in this matter, as far as I am concerned he was part of the conspiracy for allowing the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) to be substituted just so Fletcher could argue that that bullet (the replaced PV/20) was fired via rifle "Y". ..
I prefer to trust and believe what professor Knight and Professor McDonnell have to say about the matter, and both conclude that it was possible for Sheila to walk about after the first shot was inflicted, indeed, despite what you are trying to suggest Venezis himself, conceded this possibility...
-
You are full of shit - I have copies of the reports from Venezis, from Knight, and from McDonnell, and you don't know jack shit, because you wouldn't be saying such things if you had access to the conclusions of all these experts. She displaced herself from the kitchen to the bedroom, in keeping with what Knight and McDonnell have said...
Mike do you expect us to believe that Sheila shot herself once in the kitchen,then proceeded upstairs yet with no traces of any of her blood in the kitchen,on the stairway or landing?
-
Sheilas body was probably lifted onto the bed before being removed from the house. No mystery there.
There is no reference in any report to any stain on the rear of the nightdress. The only staining was the neck and down the sides as she was lying to one side when she expired. It suits your argument to invent blood staining just as your reasons for having bedding burned when it was jerry who asked the police to clear the property.
Get a life, stop being so stupid, of course there was / is a bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress - if you do not know the basic facts about the so called evidence in this case, how the hell can you arrive at the conclusions and speculation that you have / do? I suggest you go back to the other forum and tell as many lies as you can think up...
-
Mike do you expect us to believe that Sheila shot herself once in the kitchen,then proceeded upstairs yet with no traces of any of her blood in the kitchen,on the stairway or landing?
Who's word have word have got for that?
-
To summarize. The evidence fits a murder and all this nonsense about Sheila being shot in the kitchen and walking upstairs is pure fiction as is the idea that a police officer shot her in the neck. Police marksmen dont shoot people in the neck and especially from such an awkard angle and they most certainly dont do it with someone elses gun. There wasnt a sound from the house from the moment the police arrived, no shouting no screaming no gunshots nothing. The whole proposition you have invented is ridiculous.
-
To summarize. The evidence fits a murder and all this nonsense about Sheila being shot in the kitchen and walking upstairs is pure fiction as is the idea that a police officer shot her in the neck. Police marksmen dont shoot people in the neck and especially from such an awkard angle and they most certainly dont do it with someone elses gun. There wasnt a sound from the house from the moment the police arrived, no shouting no screaming no gunshots nothing. The whole proposition you have invented is ridiculous.
You're comparing the shot to a deliberate shot.
-
Get a life, stop being so stupid, of course there was / is a bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress - if you do not know the basic facts about the so called evidence in this case, how the hell can you arrive at the conclusions and speculation that you have / do? I suggest you go back to the other forum and tell as many lies as you can think up...
The only blood staining was to the front and side as shown in the photos that are posted on this very forum. The pathologists report makes no mention of any rear blood staining either on the deceased or on her clothing. I dont do lies just evidence.
-
You're comparing the shot to a deliberate shot.
Do you think it was accidental?
-
Which just goes to show what you know about the case, of course there exists photographs of Sheila's body on the bed, why do you think police burnt the blankets and the mattress from the bed in the main bedroom? Where do you think the bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress came from, how could there not be a corresponding stain on the bedroom carpet beneath where PC Bird ended up photographing her body there on the floor next to the bed? There is / was no corresponding bloodstain on the carpet because she was laid on the bed and the corresponding blood stain was on the mattress and blankets of the bed...
How could Sheila have been shot an d killed there on the bedroom floor and all this blood be present on the back of her nightdress, but no such bloodstain on the bedroom carpet beneath where PC Bird took pictures of her body insitu?
Get a brain and stop being pathetic...
Why would there be blood on the back of Sheila's nightdress if she lay down by the bedside cabinet and shot herself in the neck? It was the bible and the notes which forensics claimed had been put there after her death.
-
Do you think it was accidental?
I don't think anything. Mike Tesko is referring to the mishandling of a rifle, during a training exercise.
-
Mike do you expect us to believe that Sheila shot herself once in the kitchen,then proceeded upstairs yet with no traces of any of her blood in the kitchen,on the stairway or landing?
You do not know what you are talking about, police refused to release the full SOC report (handwritten version), and so you do not know that what you are saying is true? The very same argument can be applied to the lack of blood from Ralph in those same locations? Blood which ran and flowed from the initial wound to the right side of her neck, became focussed in the fold of Sheila's right arm and caused the bloodstain on the upper right hand side of her nightdress. She walked out of the kitchen and up to the bedroom, and collapsed on the bed - you believe what you want to...
-
I don't think anything. Mike Tesko is referring to the mishandling of a rifle, during a training exercise.
So you think he thinks someone shot her when she was already dead? Excuse me for a moment. Do you really think trainee coppers would be allowed anywhere near a loaded rifle during a training exercise?? Thats funny. ;D
-
You do not know what you are talking about, police refused to release the full SOC report (handwritten version), and so you do not know that what you are saying is true? The very same argument can be applied to the lack of blood from Ralph in those same locations? Blood which ran and flowed from the initial wound to the right side of her neck, became focussed in the fold of Sheila's right arm and caused the bloodstain on the upper right hand side of her nightdress. She walked out of the kitchen and up to the bedroom, and collapsed on the bed - you believe what you want to...
Get a grip. Nobody and I mean nobody walks anywhere with a gunshot to their spine. That theory went out the window with noddy.
-
So you think he thinks someone shot her when she was already dead? Excuse me for a moment. Do you really think trainee coppers would be allowed anywhere near a loaded rifle during a training exercise?? Thats funny. ;D
No, he thinks she was collapsed, unconscious.
-
The only blood staining was to the front and side as shown in the photos that are posted on this very forum. The pathologists report makes no mention of any rear blood staining either on the deceased or on her clothing. I dont do lies just evidence.
I suggest you take another swig of that whiskey you are drinking and study the following evidence at the following link which confirms that there was / is a bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress...
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=18751;image
-
Why would there be blood on the back of Sheila's nightdress if she lay down by the bedside cabinet and shot herself in the neck? It was the bible and the notes which forensics claimed had been put there after her death.
If Sheila was shot there on the bedroom floor next to the bedside cabinet, how could there be blood on the rear of her nightdress that was not transferred on to the bedroom carpet beneath where her body was later photographed?
Think about it long and hard before you say anything further...
-
Get a grip. Nobody and I mean nobody walks anywhere with a gunshot to their spine. That theory went out the window with noddy.
There wasn't no bullet in her spine - where did you get that silly idea from?
And besides...
that ain't what Professor Knight said about it...
-
There is something wrong with your theory Mike.
-
I suggest you take another swig of that whiskey you are drinking and study the following evidence at the following link which confirms that there was / is a bloodstain on the rear of Sheila's nightdress...
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=18751;image
That diag clearly indicates blood which has soaked through having run down her neck and side.
-
That diag clearly indicates blood which has soaked through having run down her neck and side.
which was not duplicated on the carpet beneath where PC Bird later photographed her body on the floor - so how do you think that happened?
-
There wasn't no bullet in her spine - where did you get that silly idea from?
And besides...
that ain't what Professor Knight said about it...
Oh yea? The pathologist report was very clear about this.
The bullet terminated on the right side of the 4th vertical vertebra causing fractures. ie spine.
-
which was not duplicated on the carpet beneath where PC Bird later photographed her body on the floor - so how do you think that happened?
Of course, the corresponding bloodstain which appears on the rear of the nightdress could be found downstairs on the floor in the region of the kitchen, and perhaps on the bed...
Yet, by the time her body was moved to the floor the blood on the rear of her nightdress had probably dried...
-
which was not duplicated on the carpet beneath where PC Bird later photographed her body on the floor - so how do you think that happened?
The pathologist report was clear on the blood staining t the nightdress. The staining was on the inside of the nightdress which being blood would have caused little transference to the carpet beneath. We don't know what the transference was in any event as there are no photos of the carpet where she lay.
-
Of course, the corresponding bloodstain which appears on the rear of the nightdress could be found downstairs on the floor in the region of the kitchen, and perhaps on the bed...
Yet, by the time her body was moved to the floor the blood on the rear of her nightdress had probably dried...
Nice theory but with nothing to back it up. ;D
-
Oh yea? The pathologist report was very clear about this.
The bullet terminated on the right side of the 4th vertical vertebra causing fractures. ie spine.
Professor knight confirmed during his testimony that Sheila was more than capable of moving around after the first shot was inflicted - why should anyone believe or trust what Venezis, when he has turned his back on the tampering with of the original fragmented bullet PV/20 - he allowed someone to introduce a whole control bullet fired during test firing of rifle "Y", so that the prosecution could argue by a reliance upon evidence from ballistic expert Fletcher that oth bullets subject of Sheila's shooting, came from the same rifle (Y), when they did not...
-
Still waiting on your response about the first bullet which lodged in her spine?>
Nobody so afflicted would be getting up never mind walk up a flight of stairs in silence in a house swarming with plod.
-
Professor knight confirmed during his testimony that Sheila was more than capable of moving around after the first shot was inflicted - why should anyone believe or trust what Venezis, when he has turned his back on the tampering with of the original fragmented bullet PV/20 - he allowed someone to introduce a whole control bullet fired during test firing of rifle "Y", so that the prosecution could argue by a reliance upon evidence from ballistic expert Fletcher that oth bullets subject of Sheila's shooting, came from the same rifle (Y), when they did not...
Venezis examined her so I would go with his expert opinion any time. The bullet thingy is pure conspiracy theory.
-
The pathologist report was clear on the blood staining t the nightdress. The staining was on the inside of the nightdress which being blood would have caused little transference to the carpet beneath. We don't know what the transference was in any event as there are no photos of the carpet where she lay.
Unfortunately for you and your speculation about the blood which had seeped through to the outside surface of the nightdress, and in those circumstances, if Sheila had been shot next to the bedside cabinet there would have been a corresponding trace of blood on the bedroom carpet (rug) which according to the police was / is absent. There was no photograph of the relevant section of the bedroom carpet because police cut it out and burnt it on a bonfire in the grounds of the farm. But what they did say was that spots of June Bambers blood was the only blood staining found beneath where PC bird later photographed Sheila's body?
-
Venezis examined her so I would go with his expert opinion any time. The bullet thingy is pure conspiracy theory.
Bullet thingy is a conspiracy I agree, involving those that chose to substitute the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) for a whole control one test fired via rifle "Y", to allow the ballistic expert to conclude that the substituted PV/20 bullet was fired via rifle "Y"...
Venezis is part of the problem...
He knew he removed a badly fragmented bullet from Sheila's neck, yet by the time the case came to court it had become transformed into a whole bullet which the ballistic expert was able to link to the rifle "Y"...
If Venezis is not corrupted, why hasn't he spoken out about this deception?
-
Unfortunately for you and your speculation about the blood which had seeped through to the outside surface of the nightdress, and in those circumstances, if Sheila had been shot next to the bedside cabinet there would have been a corresponding trace of blood on the bedroom carpet (rug) which according to the police was / is absent. There was no photograph of the relevant section of the bedroom carpet because police cut it out and burnt it on a bonfire in the grounds of the farm. But what they did say was that spots of June Bambers blood was the only blood staining found beneath where PC bird later photographed Sheila's body?
June was never on that side of the bedroom as she was shot in bed and then again as she made for the bedroom door. Sorry.
-
June was never on that side of the bedroom as she was shot in bed and then again as she made for the bedroom door. Sorry.
Yeah, so you obviously do not believe or trust what the police have said about Junes blood being in the bedroom carpet, on that side of the bed? So, are you agreeing that police have lied about this, if that is what you are saying?
-
Bullet thingy is a conspiracy I agree, involving those that chose to substitute the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) for a whole control one test fired via rifle "Y", to allow the ballistic expert to conclude that the substituted PV/20 bullet was fired via rifle "Y"...
Venezis is part of the problem...
He knew he removed a badly fragmented bullet from Sheila's neck, yet by the time the case came to court it had become transformed into a whole bullet which the ballistic expert was able to link to the rifle "Y"...
If Venezis is not corrupted, why hasn't he spoken out about this deception?
No I said conspiracy THEORY. The bullet although fragmented was retrieved from her 4th vertebra where it had caused massive fracturing. There was no substitution and no reason to do so thus no need for the pathologist who actually conducted the autopsy to speak out about anything.
I have still got to laugh at your absurd notion that someone so shot in the neck could move let alone climb a flight of stairs. You obviously dont understand the human body.
-
Yeah, so you obviously do not believe or trust what the police have said about Junes blood being in the bedroom carpet, on that side of the bed? So, are you agreeing that police have lied about this, if that is what you are saying?
A policeman wouldn't know the difference between Junes blood and that of Sheila. Where is this magical statement saying that is was Junes blood which was found under Sheila because i guarantee it doesn't exist?
All the evidence points to June remaining on her side of the bed, the blood, the spatter, the bullet casings etc. June was dead by the time she had taken two steps from her bed.
-
No I said conspiracy THEORY. The bullet although fragmented was retrieved from her 4th vertebra where it had caused massive fracturing. There was no substitution and no reason to do so thus no need for the pathologist who actually conducted the autopsy to speak out about anything.
I have still got to laugh at your absurd notion that someone so shot in the neck could move let alone climb a flight of stairs. You obviously dont understand the human body.
Unless the spinal chord was severed Sheila could have moved with fractures to the vertebrae of her neck.
-
To confuse matters even further didn't I read somewhere that a small amount of June's blood was found outside Sheila's bedroom?
-
To confuse matters even further didn't I read somewhere that a small amount of June's blood was found outside Sheila's bedroom?
It is possible that the police trod on some of the blood and distributed it on their boots.
-
Unless the spinal chord was severed Sheila could have moved with fractures to the vertebrae of her neck.
Hardly likely. In any event there was no signs of choking on blood in her throat or blood spatter on her face which indicated that she was unconscious from the moment of the first shot.
I also believe she was overcome by her assailant using some form of mild anaesthetic which would have been undetectable in her bloodstream. She was most probably carried into the master bedroom before being shot twice. No evidence for this though but it all makes sense.
-
Hardly likely. In any event there was no signs of choking on blood in her throat or blood spatter on her face which indicated that she was unconscious from the moment of the first shot.
I also believe she was overcome by her assailant using some form of anaesthetic and was probably carried into the master bedroom before being shot twice. No evidence for this though but it al fits.
No its not unlikely but quite possible to move around with fractured vertebrae..a broken back..although eventually it would damage the spinal chord but until the spinal chord was damaged or severred there would not be paralysis. Many people fracture vertebrae and effectively have a broken back without being paralysed because they didnt damage the spinal chord.
-
If you want to pretend that only Bamber works on his case and that no others linked to the defence are capable of an indpendent, rational consideration of facts / evidence / information... there's not a lot I can do about it. He may be a supporter of a convicted multiple murderer (a phrase you seem to be over using as some kind of attempt to goad?) but at least he's a supporter of a polygraphed convicted multiple murderer who has never given up fighting against underhand tactics, for the right to clear his own name. The bunch of people who years after the event were squabbling over the estate they grabbed, will never be voluntarily polygraphed. Ever.
That is a gross misrepresentation of my posting record on this forum, which questions both sides, roughly accordance with my stance on guilt / innocence.
Hunter is obviously a thicko, like everyone else linked to the defence? Perhaps he blindly swallows also?
You question any source if it's linked to the defence or has helped the defence. Question away... If somebody wants to provide info, I very much doubt they care whether you would potentially 'question' their validity. Perhaps Hunter has just invented his sources because he is fond of a shaggy dog story?
That might require original statements for forensics? Just a thought. There is never any evidence of anything untoward having taken place in your stance on the case. For exactly the same reasons as you accuse me of. Untowardness on the part of police or prosecution doesn't fit in with your stance, so you reject it. I provided you with a link to Bambertwitpics in the archive. There may some excerpts of statements in there that did not previously come to light.
I've questioned why Jeremy Bamber did not make more of the alleged sighting during his trial, so you cant pin that one on me. Rivlin must have questioned the window incident at trial for a reason. You've been informed a number of times by ngb that original signed statements were not made available to the defence.
I think it's more the case that any justification simply isn't good enough for you.
By the time Bamber realised that a page was missing from the logs, it had been many years since he discussed with Mike Tesko in prison about the alleged window sighting. I doubt this was an attempt on his part to pre-arrange a future defence argument, for when the logs finally came to light, that a page was missing relating to incident he was questioned about in his polygraph. What price at Ladbrokes, for Bews & co to take a similar test about the same incident?
You need to ask yourself, who is actually doing the goading?
Your response does not appear to relate to my post, in fact you appear to be trying to be confrontational just for the sake of it. I'm very clear in giving my opinion, I am not asking you to agree.
I do however find it somewhat ironic that the BIBS are accusing the prosecution as being underhanded, it's a bit like Joey Barton accusing Gandhi of being aggressive.
Here is my opinion again, it is still current:
I'm not doing myself any favours by questioning the uncorroberated, unsupported, second hand word of a supporter of a convicted multiple murderer?
On the contrary, I'd suggest that your willingness to blindly swallow anything put before you as long as it fits your views about the case, actually does yourself no favours.
I don't doubt that Hunter believes what he's written, but I question the source and the interpretation and implications of any information he has used to come the the conclusions that he has.
Again, returning to edited statements, there is no evidence that anything untowards has taken place, it is in my opinion nothing more than a bout of defence propaganda, however I am happy and open to being shown actual evidence which shows my opinion to be incorrect.
Just like the erasing of Jeremys memory, you seem to be selectively ignoring the original signed statements which should have accompanied any abridged unsigned statements.
There is no justification for the accusations, that is all I am asking for.
Also, another attempt to pre-empt the predictable response that I am being hypocritical by following the official prosecution version of events, well that simply isn't the case at all, I'm not blindly following anything, I'm not trying to prove guilt or even change anybodies mind from innocent to guilty, what I am trying to do, is see if there is any truth to the various accusations put foward, either officially or just theories voiced on this forum. There is an overwhelming pattern forming, and that is that when I look into any of these theories/allegations/accusations in detail, it quickly becomes apparent that they are more often than not, unjustified and infused with premeditated attempts of deception, this is not only irritating but also reflects very, very badly on those who put the theory/allegation/accusation forward.
Another common pattern is that unsubtantiated theories are often used to try and support another unsubstantiated theory, an example of this is the use of an alleged sighting of a figure to support the alleged withholding of a page of a log which may not exist and if it does, may or may not have any reference to the incident. I'd suggest that Myalls and Bews statements would be a more readily available source of information, the information was clearly documented somewhere as Rivlin questioned Myall about it at the original trial.
-
Morning April1 I live in an Olympic freezone and a Golden Jubilee freezone so you can well imagine how good my garden is looking. Like you I know nothing about guns but I was told that type of rifle would not make much noise with or without a silencer.
-
Hi steve if a shot was heard about 9.30 p.m. on the evening of the murders could it have been Jeremy shooting rabbits certainly would not have been Sheila but I think you mean Jeremy was kinda practicing to make sure the rifle was in working order ready to use later on. I will need to give some thought to that one.
-
June was never on that side of the bedroom as she was shot in bed and then again as she made for the bedroom door. Sorry.
Junes blood in the form of multiple spotting's of blood was all over the bedroom carpet, spots of blood which began with a trail on the left side of the bed (as viewed from the vantage point of standing as an observer at the foot of the bed), around the foot of the bed across the area of the bedroom in front of the bedroom window, and around to the right hand side of the bed (in the form of multiple spots of her blood) forged onto the sheepskin rug that was eventually photographed beneath where police planted Sheila's body during the stage managing of it. How strange that not only was / is there an absence of any blood on the carpet (rug) beneath Sheila from the huge bloodstain on the reverse of her own nightdress, but none of the blood spotting that originated from June which was found beneath where Sheila's body eventually ended up was present on the nightdress either. The absence of blood which was /is present on the rear of Sheila's nightdress, and spots of dripped blood from June, duplicated on the rug or the nightdress, or vice versa, gives a clear indication that Sheila was laid elsewhere when the blood on the rear of her nightdress was wet and fresh looking, and or when June dripped her blood onto the sheepskin rug on that side of the bed. Sadly for your theory, the police agree that Junes blood was found on the sheepskin rug beneath where Sheila's body ended up, and also that June moved around the bedroom (as I have accurately described) by moving from one side of the bed to the other on the bedroom carpet, leaving a mass of blood dripped evidence all over the place, so you obviously do not know what you are talking about, in effect your theory is more or less saying that the police are / have lied about the movements of June once she got out of the bed, and that they have falsified an account about where on the bedroom carpet Junes unique AK2-1 blood type was found...
You only have to look at the bloodstained nightdress which June was photographed wearing, to see that June Bamber did not simply get out of bed and end up going directly to the bedroom door where she was finished off by Sheila with two further bullets to the head? June obviously moved around to the other side of the bed, as I have tried to accurately describe by reference to the presence of her unique blood all over the place on the bedroom carpet, (to the right of the bed, at the foot of the bed, and around to the left hand side of the bed, and back across the bedroom carpet to the doorway where her body eventually ended up)...
-
No I said conspiracy THEORY. The bullet although fragmented was retrieved from her 4th vertebra where it had caused massive fracturing. There was no substitution and no reason to do so thus no need for the pathologist who actually conducted the autopsy to speak out about anything.
fragmented bullet was not recovered from the fourth vertebrae, as you put it - again, you need to start getting your facts right. Perhaps a good place to start would be to examine the x-rays taken of Sheila's neck which clearly show that the original bullet (PV/20) had fragmented into three main pieces along with multiple smaller pieces of bullet distributed in the right side of the neck. Venezis only recovered one piece of this fragmented bullet, not all the pieces, as clearly indicated and confirmed by reference to the contents of his witness statements and reports. So which of the three main pieces of the fragmented bullet (PV/20) are you trying to suggest was recovered from Sheila's fourth vertebrae, choose one and hope for the best...
Here I will help uyou along and provide a link to the X-ray in question:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4509;image
(2) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4510;image
(3) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=18759;image
(4) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=5708;image
-
The bullet thingy is pure conspiracy theory.
You are talking codswallop - how can a bullet (PV/20) be clearly shown to be a fragmented bullet which broke up into three main pieces and countless other smaller pieces inside her neck (as verified by reference to the X-ray), and to which Venezis himself alluded to, end up turning and becoming transformed in to a whole bullet which enabled the ballistic expert (Flecther) to conclude that it had been fired via rifle "Y"? You need to run that part of your theory past me again, because I don 't quite follow your reasoning on that one...
In the meantime, I will again refer you to the X-rays, and a photograph of the bullet in question, now you need to be trying to convince me which one of the three large fragments of bullet was / is the one in the photograph / X-ray? While your trying to come to terms with the reality of the situation, try to apply your mind as to why there is only a photograph of one bullet, or part of a bullet, when three large pieces were X-rayed inside Sheila's neck, along with multiple smaller fragments distributed all over the place? Venezis himself describes the piece of bullet he recovered from Sheila's neck as a fragmented bullet, so which fragment did he actually recover? What happened to the two other larger pieces, and all the other smaller fragments of the same bullet?
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4348;image
(2) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4509;image
Now, please take as much time as you want to, I look forward to your hearing your theory about how a fragmented bullet (as shown in the X-ray), as of 7th August 1985, managed to become transformed into a whole bullet by 20th September 1985, to enable the ballistic expert Malcolm Fletcher to positively link it to rifle "Y"? Which part of the fragmented bullet shown in the X-ray, is / was photographed? When you finally get your mind to deal with the problem your theory has produced, you will no doubt realize that there should be three main pieces of the actual original PV/20, but that only one piece was recovered during autopsy by Venezis at about 3:30pm that same date - so, please enlighten me with the benefit of all your undoubted knowledge as to how such a recovered bullet (which Venezis describes in his statements and reports as a fragmented bullet) manages to become transformed into a whole bullet that can be linked to rifle "Y"? Where are the other two large pieces of the original PV/20 bullet? What happening to them? How can three large pieces of the same original PV/20 bullet have existed if the bullet examined by Fletcher (September 1985) was a whole bullet?
-
Was PV19 whole or fragmented? I can't find those lists you posted.
-
Was PV19 whole or fragmented? I can't find those lists you posted.
Bullet PV/19 Shot under chin which effectively killed her (instantaneously) was whole...
-
Bullet PV/19 Shot under chin which effectively killed her (instantaneously) was whole...
Ok, thanks. Do you know where those lists are which described each one and whether or not they could be associated with the Anschultz? I think they were MDF's.
-
Ok, thanks. Do you know where those lists are which described each one and whether or not they could be associated with the Anschultz? I think they were MDF's.
This one?
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=589.0;attach=13616;image)
-
This one?
Yes, that's the one, thanks Harters. I was wondering if some of the fragments shown in the x-ray could have come from PV19 but apparently not?
-
Ok, thanks. Do you know where those lists are which described each one and whether or not they could be associated with the Anschultz? I think they were MDF's.
Try here for starters, lab' reords for bullets PV/19 and PV/20:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2506.0;attach=13765;image
(2) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4348;image
For all other information visit following thread link in the forum at :-
(3) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
How can bullet PV/20 referred to in these lab' records be described as a fragmented piece of bullet by Venezis in his witness statement / reports, and which corresponds in shape and size to anyone of the three main pieces of the fragmented bullet shown insitu inside Sheila's neck by reference to the X-ray?
-
You need to ask yourself, who is actually doing the goading?
Your response does not appear to relate to my post, in fact you appear to be trying to be confrontational just for the sake of it. I'm very clear in giving my opinion, I am not asking you to agree.
I do however find it somewhat ironic that the BIBS are accusing the prosecution as being underhanded, it's a bit like Joey Barton accusing Gandhi of being aggressive.
Here is my opinion again, it is still current:
You've got a track record as long as Joey barton's punching arm, for accusing other posters of not responding to your posts in a relevant way. We must all have irrelaventits when you enter the arena! My opinion is that where anything omitted from a final typed statement, that statement is by default edited. You have asked for proof of wrongdoing for edited statements, for example what Mike has previously alleged about woodcocks' statement. I'm afraid I'm not a forensic scientist currently in possession of genuine documents. But yes, I agree with you, it would be nice to see more info from the defence or supporters as to why they believe statements have been edited or re-written. I have now twice referred you to Bambertwitpics which contains excerpts previously not seen, including one document which has been crossed out and the word "No" written next to it, so I wont direct you a third time
I'll do a deal with you. I'll get you Myall's and Bews' statements and you arrange a polygraph for them. Fair do's?
-
Yes, that's the one, thanks Harters. I was wondering if some of the fragments shown in the x-ray could have come from PV19 but apparently not?
Is it documented anywhere that the xrays actually show fragments? In the past people have suggested that it's broken bone, teeth or displaced tissue.
If it is as described by Mike, then I'd have expected this to have been put forward as a ground of appeal at some stage, the fact that it hasn't makes me suspect deception on Mikes part. IMHO.
-
Fragmented pieces of original bullet PV/20 as shown in X-ray, appear to suggest that the three main pieces of the fragmented bullet were generally similar in size to one another:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4509;image
How is it possible to describe one of these three pieces of the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) as whole?
-
Is it documented anywhere that the xrays actually show fragments? In the past people have suggested that it's broken bone, teeth or displaced tissue.
If it is as described by Mike, then I'd have expected this to have been put forward as a ground of appeal at some stage, the fact that it hasn't makes me suspect deception on Mikes part. IMHO.
Idiot - and so Venezis has lied as well, stop being a complete fool, think before you open your gob...
-
Whilst on the subject of people who have deceived in this case, we are still awaiting public confirmation that David Boutflour tampered with the silencer by physically trying to unscrew the top off the it with his bare hands and the fact that he tampere with the integrity of the silencer / blood evidence by using a razor blade to scrape off a small piece of dried blood which he retained because it fascinated him? I should think Bamber and his legal team, and the jury which tried the case would also have been fascinated to hear about these antics, and more importantly what Boutflour did with the blood he removed, and which Essex police officers he told about it, and what if any action they took upon being told by Boutflour regarding what he did?
Still waiting with bated breath for relatives and their supporters to get back to us on that matter...
So, if anyone has been / is being deceptive you need look no further than these feature's, and what the police / relatives and thier supporters got up to, and continue to be getting up to...
It seems to be al-right for one of the relatives to physically tampered with the silencer and blood evidence, and they carry on as if Boutflour and the police did nothing wrong which has no bearing on the integrity of the silencer evidence - this just goes to show how unfair and corrupted the criminal justice system can be when it wants to be. Criminals interfering with exhibits and the courts turning its face away as if to say, nothing wrong with that, he, they did nothing wrong, so what?
Back in the mid 1980's this is how justice was dished out to the victims of MOJ...
-
You've got a track record as long as Joey barton's punching arm, for accusing other posters of not responding to your posts in a relevant way. We must all have irrelaventits when you enter the arena! My opinion is that where anything omitted from a final typed statement, that statement is by default edited. You have asked for proof of wrongdoing for edited statements, for example what Mike has previously alleged about woodcocks' statement. I'm afraid I'm not a forensic scientist currently in possession of genuine documents. But yes, I agree with you, it would be nice to see more info from the defence or supporters as to why they believe statements have been edited or re-written. I have now twice referred you to Bambertwitpics which contains excerpts previously not seen, including one document which has been crossed out and the word "No" written next to it, so I wont direct you a third time
I'll do a deal with you. I'll get you Myall's and Bews' statements and you arrange a polygraph for them. Fair do's?
Bambertwitpics is not evidence, if there was evidence then as per the fragmented bullet scenario, I would have expected it to have been put to the CCRC. I believe ot is spin which is readily and gleefully wolfed down in double helpings by Bambers supporters.
Crossed out words etc are all very wonderful for a conspiracy, but there are a hundred and one possible reasons for it, I'd suggest the sneaky editing of statements to be one of the less likely, yet it's clung to as hard proof by yourself and referred to (twice, as you say) as some sort of corroboration that something sinister has taken place.
Lot's of people, yourself included, have a long track record of answering questions with questions when it becomes clear that their original arguments based on sweeping unsubstantiated theories are baseless. This is usually in the form of an encore to suggestions that I am goading in some manner simply because I share the opinion that your reasoning is illogical in the extreme, of course I'm the rose tinted spectacle wearer? If you say so.
The point that you are really missing, is that I am not stating that statements were not edited, I have no idea, but I'm not the one making allegations, I am asking for the reasons why these allegations are being made, if it is simply down to what is shown on Bambertwitpics, then I'm astonished that you can continue this argument without blushing.
But as I have pointed out to you on many, many occasions, and will do so again: I am not asking you to agree with me.
-
Is it documented anywhere that the xrays actually show fragments? In the past people have suggested that it's broken bone, teeth or displaced tissue.
If it is as described by Mike, then I'd have expected this to have been put forward as a ground of appeal at some stage, the fact that it hasn't makes me suspect deception on Mikes part. IMHO.
From the general examination records Mike posted a link to those bullets which were virtually intact (one from Ralph's arm for example) weigh approx 2.4g, whereas PV19 weighs only 2.16g and PV20 1.54g. That doesn't seem inconsistant with what's shown in the x-ray.
-
Bambertwitpics is not evidence, if there was evidence then as per the fragmented bullet scenario, I would have expected it to have been put to the CCRC. I believe ot is spin which is readily and gleefully wolfed down in double helpings by Bambers supporters.
Crossed out words etc are all very wonderful for a conspiracy, but there are a hundred and one possible reasons for it, I'd suggest the sneaky editing of statements to be one of the less likely, yet it's clung to as hard proof by yourself and referred to (twice, as you say) as some sort of corroboration that something sinister has taken place.
Lot's of people, yourself included, have a long track record of answering questions with questions when it becomes clear that their original arguments based on sweeping unsubstantiated theories are baseless. This is usually in the form of an encore to suggestions that I am goading in some manner simply because I share the opinion that your reasoning is illogical in the extreme, of course I'm the rose tinted spectacle wearer? If you say so.
The point that you are really missing, is that I am not stating that statements were not edited, I have no idea, but I'm not the one making allegations, I am asking for the reasons why these allegations are being made, if it is simply down to what is shown on Bambertwitpics, then I'm astonished that you can continue this argument without blushing.
But as I have pointed out to you on many, many occasions, and will do so again: I am not asking you to agree with me.
You don't have to agree with me, just get David Boutflour to sign a witness statement bearing the following contents...
I have prepared the contents of a witness statement for David Boutflour to sign:-
" I am the person who with my bare hands tried to unscrew the end cap off the silencer after I found it, but it was so tight that I could not do it. I then noticed a small flake of dried blood on the silencer where my hand had been gripping it and I found a razor blade nearby that I used to scrape off the flake which I retained because it fascinated me. I later took away the silencer and the flake of blood along with the razor blade which I retained. Later on I told Essex police officers what I had done, and they asked me for the flake of blood and razor blade which I handed over to them. I later learned that this flake was dropped into the silencer through the small aperture on the end cap and sent off to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres. As far as I know the blood flake I removed from the silencer has been attributed as having been found inside the silencer at the lab' and I have been told to say nothing about what I did, or who I told, or anything about handing it over to the police, on the basis that if the truth came out the silencer / blood evidence would be rejected on the proviso that its integrity had been violated and rendered worthless"...
-
Idiot - and so Venezis has lied as well, stop being a complete fool, think before you open your gob...
Has anybody else (apart from yourself) ever described the xray as showing a fragmented bullet? It's a simple enough questionand quite relevant in my opinion, particularly when you are using these xrays to support a theory.
-
From the general examination records Mike posted a link to those bullets which were virtually intact (one from Ralph's arm for example) weigh approx 2.4g, whereas PV19 weighs only 2.16g and PV20 1.54g. That doesn't seem inconsistant with what's shown in the x-ray.
No I suppose not, and there is inconsistancy, however it's a bit of a leap to suggest that the police swapped bullets around to try and link them to the Anshutz rifle.
-
No I suppose not, and there is inconsistancy, however it's a bit of a leap to suggest that the police swapped bullets around to try and link them to the Anshutz rifle.
So what is the inconsistancy, just that a bullet weighing 1.54g has been decribed as whole?
-
Bambertwitpics is not evidence, if there was evidence then as per the fragmented bullet scenario, I would have expected it to have been put to the CCRC. I believe ot is spin which is readily and gleefully wolfed down in double helpings by Bambers supporters.
Crossed out words etc are all very wonderful for a conspiracy, but there are a hundred and one possible reasons for it, I'd suggest the sneaky editing of statements to be one of the less likely, yet it's clung to as hard proof by yourself and referred to (twice, as you say) as some sort of corroboration that something sinister has taken place.
Lot's of people, yourself included, have a long track record of answering questions with questions when it becomes clear that their original arguments based on sweeping unsubstantiated theories are baseless. This is usually in the form of an encore to suggestions that I am goading in some manner simply because I share the opinion that your reasoning is illogical in the extreme, of course I'm the rose tinted spectacle wearer? If you say so.
The point that you are really missing, is that I am not stating that statements were not edited, I have no idea, but I'm not the one making allegations, I am asking for the reasons why these allegations are being made, if it is simply down to what is shown on Bambertwitpics, then I'm astonished that you can continue this argument without blushing.
But as I have pointed out to you on many, many occasions, and will do so again: I am not asking you to agree with me.
You've hit the nail on the head. Whatever is provided, for example previously unseen excerpts of witness statements, crossed out dates, crossed out exhibit references, passages of original statements not helpful to the prosecution's case crossed out with NO written on them, bodies found downstairs UPON ENTRY with the CORRECT number of corresponding bodies later found upstairs, photographs with oxygenated blood, photographs with mat blood, photographs with the rifle here there and everyfuckingwhere, etc etc etc ... will never be good enough for you. You talk about double helpings. I think it's more a case of you and others swallowing a certain prosecution witness's anecdotes like mother's milk.
Carry on posting in the supercilious, haughty manner that you are famous for, I can guarantee you I'm not blushing in any way whatsoever.
-
So what is the inconsistancy, just that a bullet weighing 1.54g has been decribed as whole?
I suppose so yes, although I'd suggest that a description of "whole in appearance" may be more accurate.
For example PV/29 weighed 2.13g, so did PV/19, PV/4 weighed 2.09g, PV/2 weighed 2.42g and DRH/9 weighed 1.67g, yet all are described as whole.
Were these other bullets also swapped around?
-
I suppose so yes, although I'd suggest that a description of "whole in appearance" may be more accurate.
For example PV/29 weighed 2.13g, so did PV/19, PV/4 weighed 2.09g, PV/2 weighed 2.42g and DRH/9 weighed 1.67g, yet all are described as whole.
Were these other bullets also swapped around?
Some were, yes, along with corresponding numbers of bullet cases...
-
You've hit the nail on the head. Whatever is provided, for example previously unseen excerpts of witness statements, crossed out dates, crossed out exhibit references, passages of original statements not helpful to the prosecution's case crossed out with NO written on them, bodies found downstairs UPON ENTRY with the CORRECT number of corresponding bodies later found upstairs, photographs with oxygenated blood, photographs with mat blood, photographs with the rifle here there and everyfuckingwhere, etc etc etc ... will never be good enough for you. You talk about double helpings. I think it's more a case of you and others swallowing a certain prosecution witness's anecdotes like mother's milk.
Carry on posting in the supercilious, haughty manner that you are famous for, I can guarantee you I'm not blushing in any way whatsoever.
No, I'm afraid it's not good enough for me, nor the CCRC nor the CoA, heck the majority of these leap of faith theories aren't even entertained by the the official defence team, past or present. I'm sorry that you've become so angry and are resorting to insults, it's rather unlike you. :-\
-
No, I'm afraid it's not good enough for me, nor the CCRC nor the CoA, heck the majority of these leap of faith theories aren't even entertained by the the official defence team, past or present. I'm sorry that you've become so angry and are resorting to insults, it's rather unlike you. :-\
Well if lies about who moved what during the crime scene photography are good enough for the CCRC , then what does that tell you about the CCRC? :-\
You know exactly what you are doing when you work people on here... so please don't portray your self as Mr. Nice. You forget, I've seen you do it hundreds of times.
-
Try here for starters, lab' reords for bullets PV/19 and PV/20:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2506.0;attach=13765;image
(2) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4348;image
For all other information visit following thread link in the forum at :-
(3) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
How can bullet PV/20 referred to in these lab' records be described as a fragmented piece of bullet by Venezis in his witness statement / reports, and which corresponds in shape and size to anyone of the three main pieces of the fragmented bullet shown insitu inside Sheila's neck by reference to the X-ray?
Well, as previously alluded to, I'm not convinced that the xray shows what you are suggesting, unless a bullet weighing 2.4g fragmented into three pieces each weighing 1.54g?
Just thinking out loud, but the fact that all of this is in plain view in documents available to the defence from the outset, i.e. there has been no attempt to hide this, then it seems somewhat at odds with the accusation that there was a concerted effort to secretly swap out evidence in order to frame JB?
I mean seriously? Amongst those who believe Jeremy innocent, do you really buy into this bullet swapping theory?
-
Well if lies about who moved what during the crime scene photography are good enough for the CCRC , then what does that tell you about the CCRC? :-\
You know exactly what you are doing when you work people on here... so please don't portray your self as Mr. Nice. You forget, I've seen you do it hundreds of times.
I don't think so Roch, the suggestion that I am somehow working people seems to only come out when folk run out of arguments, it's simply not the case at all. I am merely putting my views across, politely I might add (regardless of my sarcasm), I've even very clearly stated that you do not have to agree with my views.
I'm sorry that you have for some reason taken offence or feel that you are being played, it is however a reaction I have witnessed on here a hundred times.
-
No, I'm afraid it's not good enough for me, nor the CCRC nor the CoA, heck the majority of these leap of faith theories aren't even entertained by the the official defence team, past or present.
I beg your pardon - contact Ewen Smith who is now a CCRC Commissioner and ask him what interest he took in all these ballistical irregularities and inconsistencies? Ask him how excited he was back at the beginning of 2004 before Jeremy sacked him, about the discovery of these anomalies relating to the batch of crime scene ammunition? He was over the moon and was about to submit arguments relating to this, but he got cut short because as I say Jeremy ceremoniously sacked him, and employed GDS as his legal advisor. You are therefore wrong when you say that none of his legal team were or are interested in such anomalies, because that was and is not the case. What you should also bear in mind is that at the last (2002) appeal, the judges indicated that because police had destroyed all the crime scene ammunition without consulting the defences or anybody, that if Bambers legal team wished to submit any ground of appeal which involved anything at all to do with the ballistics side of the case, that the court would look favourably upon such submissions - but because of such short notice, and the fact that by that stage nobody had looked into the possibility of all these inconsistencies amounting to anything, no such ground was submitted or rejected. This does not mean, however that such grounds cannot be revisited at a later date, such as now, especially because much of the work which was required to be undertaken and completed has now been done and researched. If such research had been carried out before the court of appeal sat in judgement (2002) and gave permission for the defence to forward any such argument, the court would have been hard pressed to reject such grounds by virtue of the indication that the court would look favourably upon any such ground submitted on Bambers behalf at that time / stage...
The position has not altered even though that sanction was given in 2002, and it is a decade down the road - because until now or when ever, no such ground has ever been submitted, but that does not mean that such a ground could not be submitted in the future, and it does not mean that the same concession as was offered then, will still not be relevant now, or whenever...
I should think the current legal team who are dealing with the silencer issue not being used when Sheila was shot twice in the neck, would be very interested in how the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) became transformed into a whole bullet so that the ballistic expert (Fletcher) could link it to rifle "Y", since the question of whether or not it was fired through a silencer fitted to the end of the rifles barrel, is an integral part of their arguments?
-
I don't think so Roch, the suggestion that I am somehow working people seems to only come out when folk run out of arguments, it's simply not the case at all. I am merely putting my views across, politely I might add (regardless of my sarcasm), I've even very clearly stated that you do not have to agree with my views.
I'm sorry that you have for some reason taken offence or feel that you are being played, it is however a reaction I have witnessed on here a hundred times.
I don't think it's related to when folk run out of arguments at all. You cannot argue with somebody whose whole game plan, is to refuse all arguments.
-
Well, as previously alluded to, I'm not convinced that the xray shows what you are suggesting, unless a bullet weighing 2.4g fragmented into three pieces each weighing 1.54g?
Just thinking out loud, but the fact that all of this is in plain view in documents available to the defence from the outset, i.e. there has been no attempt to hide this, then it seems somewhat at odds with the accusation that there was a concerted effort to secretly swap out evidence in order to frame JB?
I mean seriously? Amongst those who believe Jeremy innocent, do you really buy into this bullet swapping theory?
Hang on a minute - ask yourself a question. Was the original (PV/20) bullet, fragmented or not when it was X-rayed insitu before the autopsy? Ask another question - was it described as a fragmented bullet by the pathologist who removed it from the right side of Sheila's neck? Now ask yourself how such a bullet could possibly be described as a whole bullet by anyone, least of all a so called ballistic expert?
-
I don't think it's related to when folk run out of arguments at all. You cannot argue with somebody who's whole game plan, is to refuse all arguments.
Again, I believe you are mistaken, I don't have a game plan, in fact I'm not even here to argue, I'm simply intrigued by the case.
My beliefs and views shared on this forum are genuinely held, I don't really see why you or anybody else gets so upset and confrontational simply because your views differ to mine.
All of your comments about being obtuse, biased or unwilling to accept any argument, could equally be applied to yourself and other JB supporters (usually the more fanatical ones), the big difference however is that I am not the one making the allegations.
To be perfectly honest, I think that you are being extremely unfair and quite rude to me during this particular exchange, and that is unusual for you.
-
Hi guys. Hope I am not butting in, but it is clearly documented that Vanenzes said the bullet was fragmented upon striking the bone. Yet Fletcher stated the bullet was a whole one. The xray backs up what Vanezes reported. This is clearly another discrepancy and, one that can't be argued against, for it is well documented. Of course if this should be presented in a court of today, it would make a good argument however. :) :) :) :)
-
Hi guys. Hope I am not butting in, but it is clearly documented that Vanenzes said the bullet was fragmented upon striking the bone. Yet Fletcher stated the bullet was a whole one. The xray backs up what Vanezes reported. This is clearly another discrepancy and, one that can't be argued against, for it is well documented. Of course if this should be presented in a court of today, it would make a good argument however. :) :) :) :)
An argument for what though? Do you not get the impression that a discrepancy has been discovered and then a story has been concocted and twisted to fit?
A very simple and unarguable response could be that the bullet was fragmented however the recovered fragment appeared whole. Or there is the old chestnut that the CCRC could simply say that whilst the inconsistancy is interesting, it is of no evidential value.
Unless there is further evidence to support a bullet swapping theory, then I'm not sure that there is much of a ground to argue here, perhaps that's why it has never been officially put forward by the defence.
-
Doesn't this really hinge on what MDF means when he says 'whole'? Hartley has already pointed out the fact that there are numerous 'underweight' and damaged bullets listed as whole, and MDF actually uses the description 'virtually intact' for the one weighing 2.4g, which was also described as being whole. At what point of intactness does a bullet become not whole?
-
Again, I believe you are mistaken, I don't have a game plan, in fact I'm not even here to argue, I'm simply intrigued by the case.
My beliefs and views shared on this forum are genuinely held, I don't really see why you or anybody else gets so upset and confrontational simply because your views differ to mine.
All of your comments about being obtuse, biased or unwilling to accept any argument, could equally be applied to yourself and other JB supporters (usually the more fanatical ones), the big difference however is that I am not the one making the allegations.
To be perfectly honest, I think that you are being extremely unfair and quite rude to me during this particular exchange, and that is unusual for you.
That's not how I'm picking this up at all. I have always said that in your stance on the case, every single anomaly (the ones you care to address as opposed to the ones you ignore) is a benign mistake by an honest bobby or upstanding member of the community relative. Your game plan is like a negative war of attrition, grinding down defence theories or arguments by a process of often nothing more than outright refusal. I take my hat off to you if you can dismiss disputed theories or arguments by genuinely winning them. That is a different matter altogether. By the way, you're also very good at twisting disagreements to make it look as if you are some kind of victim.
I will accept a rebuke from Mike or ngb, if I am overstepping the mark with you.
-
Could you just spell out in layman's terms why the discrepancy in the bullets is so important and why,if Ewen Smith was on the verge of a breakthrough he was sacked as a legal representative by Jeremy Bamber?
-
Doesn't this really hinge on what MDF means when he says 'whole'? Hartley has already pointed out the fact that there are numerous 'underweight' and damaged bullets listed as whole, and MDF actually uses the description 'virtually intact' for the one weighing 2.4g, which was also described as being whole. At what point of intactness does a bullet become not whole?
Do you know of any other case where the police have destroyed material , when told not to by a
court ? Do you read anything into them doing so in this case ?
-
An argument for what though? Do you not get the impression that a discrepancy has been discovered and then a story has been concocted and twisted to fit?
A very simple and unarguable response could be that the bullet was fragmented however the recovered fragment appeared whole. Or there is the old chestnut that the CCRC could simply say that whilst the inconsistancy is interesting, it is of no evidential value.
Unless there is further evidence to support a bullet swapping theory, then I'm not sure that there is much of a ground to argue here, perhaps that's why it has never been officially put forward by the defence.
Hi Hartley. I'm not interested in stories that surrounds the bullet. All I am interested in is the truth. A fragmented bullet is not a whole one, I'm sure you will agree.
However, they do have to rebuild using the fragments to make a whole bullet..that is, or should be procedure.
Whether it is a mistake by Fletcher or not, it wont alter the fact that is was documented as a whole bullet. It is documented and therefore can be considered to show there is a discrepancy. Let a court decide...we can't change what has been documented on here...facts are facts and I don't go with hearsay anymore... :) :) :)
-
That's not how I'm picking this up at all. I have always said that in your stance on the case, every single anomaly (the ones you care to address as opposed to the ones you ignore) is a benign mistake by an honest bobby or upstanding member of the community relative. Your game plan is like a negative war of attrition, grinding down defence theories or arguments by a process of often nothing more than outright refusal. I take my hat off to you if you can dismiss disputed theories or arguments by genuinely winning them. That is a different matter altogether. By the way, you're also very good at twisting disagreements to make it look as if you are some kind of victim.
I will accept a rebuke from Mike or ngb, if I am overstepping the mark with you.
I'm sorry Rochy, but I completely disagree with you, especially when the discussion suddenly turns to your (misguided in my opinion) perception of me to somehow reinforce your point. All as very clearly explained in previous replies to you in this thread.
-
Do you know of any other case where the police have destroyed material , when told not to by a
court ? Do you read anything into them doing so in this case ?
I don't think it was a deliberate attempt to cover anything up, if that's what you mean.
-
Doesn't this really hinge on what MDF means when he says 'whole'? Hartley has already pointed out the fact that there are numerous 'underweight' and damaged bullets listed as whole, and MDF actually uses the description 'virtually intact' for the one weighing 2.4g, which was also described as being whole. At what point of intactness does a bullet become not whole?
Isn't there a photo of the bullet somewhere?
-
I don't think it was a deliberate attempt to cover anything up, if that's what you mean.
Other cases ?
-
Isn't there a photo of the bullet somewhere?
Yes, here:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2507.0;attach=13844;image)
I notice the weight given there is not consistant with the one given on the MDF's report.
-
Yes, here:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2507.0;attach=13844;image)
I notice the weight given there is not consistant with the one given on the MDF's report.
Do we think 26.46 grains equals 1.54grams? And do we think this is a whole or fragmented bullet?
-
Do we think 26.46 grains equals 1.54grams? And do we think this is a whole or fragmented bullet?
No, it equals 1.715 grams. It's whol-ish ;)
-
No, it equals 1.715 grams. It's whol-ish ;)
Also fragmented-ish?
-
Also fragmented-ish?
I guess so, seeing as we know some of it is missing :)
-
It seems unfair that the bullet was presented at court as being whole, when it was fragmented. It hardly seems fair in all honesty. Had the jury had known this then, they would most likely be more aware that the first bullet was not a fatal one...It had fragments into 15 pieces....Why an expert would call it a whole one, is beyond belief and why this wasn't challenged by the defence is another matter to dwell on... :) :) :)
-
Here is what the papers said. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5DLsf0UggyWYzdiMmRiZmItZTNhZi00NjExLTg2MzUtNzk0MjRkMTBkMGEy/edit?pli=1
-
No, it equals 1.715 grams. It's whol-ish ;)
Whole bullet weight is / was 2.26 gram...
If you calculate the value of 1.715 grams in percentage terms, there is a missing mass of over 40%, which you cannot say entitles the ballistic expert to conclude that this justifies bullet PV/20 to be whole in nature?
-
It seems unfair that the bullet was presented at court as being whole, when it was fragmented. It hardly seems fair in all honesty. Had the jury had known this then, they would most likely be more aware that the first bullet was not a fatal one...It had fragments into 15 pieces....Why an expert would call it a whole one, is beyond belief and why this wasn't challenged by the defence is another matter to dwell on... :) :) :)
Could you spell out why this is materially significant? We know that the first shot was not fatal,and Andrew Hunter's book draft says there were marks from a silencer left on Sheila's neck from the first bullet.
-
I fail to see how anyone could argue against that,Patti. No matter what this tragedy was about,,or who was supposedly involved. So why was the court shown the whole bullet at the trial.? Why.?
-
Hi Patti so pleased to see you back I was worried that you and Mat had disappeared at the same time cannot tell you what was going through my mind. Bridget has been a little out of control as well knowing you had gone :)
-
All we can hope for is that past jury members are following this forum.
-
Whole bullet weight is / was 2.26 gram...
If you calculate the value of 1.715 grams in percentage terms, there is a missing mass of over 40%, which you cannot say entitles the ballistic expert to conclude that this justifies bullet PV/20 to be whole in nature?
If the bullet weight of the original PV/20 was 1.54 grams, the missing mass is greater than 40%, and again would not entitle the ballistic expert to conclude or to describe it as being a whole bullet...
-
If the bullet weight of the original PV/20 was 1.54 grams, the missing mass is greater than 40%, and again would not entitle the ballistic expert to conclude or to describe it as being a whole bullet...
So, why does he, and why did he?
-
One other matter which is perhaps of some importance, are the contents of a handwritten note, written uop by the ballistics expert who writes that he has now sorted his differences of opinion out with the pathologist, Peter Venezis?
What differences of opinion?
The only differences of opinion that I can see or make out relate to the size of the bullets, including in particular the size and nature of bullet PV/20, which Venezis describes as fragmented, whereas Fletcher concludes it was whole...
I cannot for the life of me understand how Fletcher can describe a bullet which has lost over 40% of its mass can be described as a whole bullet?
-
Hi lookout how are you. Yes I wonder if jury members read this forum what would they think they would feel they had been betrayed and mislead and an innocent young man is serving a long prison sentence for a crime he did not commit.
-
Could you spell out why this is materially significant? We know that the first shot was not fatal,and Andrew Hunter's book draft says there were marks from a silencer left on Sheila's neck from the first bullet.
Hi Steve. It is significant, because the bullet was produced at the original trial as being a whole one. The xrays that we have now, were never presented so in all fairness it was not examined upon by the defence. As far as the jury were concerned, although this is not detrimental to the case, the jury could have persuaded by the defence that what the CPS was presenting was false. :) :) :)
-
Hi Patti so pleased to see you back I was worried that you and Mat had disappeared at the same time cannot tell you what was going through my mind. Bridget has been a little out of control as well knowing you had gone :)
Hi Susan...nice to be back...but not seen mat since I hit him over the head with my dancing pole...hahahah :) :) :)
-
All we can hope for is that past jury members are following this forum.
Hi Pat....we can hope..if only... :) :) :)
-
It seems unfair that the bullet was presented at court as being whole, when it was fragmented. It hardly seems fair in all honesty. Had the jury had known this then, they would most likely be more aware that the first bullet was not a fatal one...It had fragments into 15 pieces....Why an expert would call it a whole one, is beyond belief and why this wasn't challenged by the defence is another matter to dwell on... :) :) :)
Some of those bits could be the missing bits from PV19, but anyway, do we really know how it was presented in court? The x-ray would have been available (even if not used), and Venezis' evidence - surely it is the damage done by the bullet that's important, not how many bits it ended up in.
-
So, why does he, and why did he?
Hi Mike, it is clear that he did and he went unchallenged...All these little things all add up at the end of the day...it shows how lax the defence was in 1986. :) :) :)
-
Some of those bits could be the missing bits from PV19, but anyway, do we really know how it was presented in court? The x-ray would have been available (even if not used), and Venezis' evidence - surely it is the damage done by the bullet that's important, not how many bits it ended up in.
Bridget, what are you drinking lol
How can it be some of the bits from PV19 as that was classed as a whole bullet....tooooooooooo Plus in the opposite direction?
Yes, I agree the xray would have been available, the question is why didn't the defence use it in their cross-examination....sloppy! lol :) :) :)
-
Hi Mike, it is clear that he did and he went unchallenged...All these little things all add up at the end of the day...it shows how lax the defence was in 1986. :) :) :)
I agree, I do not think Jeremy was properly represented at his original trial, in fact I would go so far as to say they represented him in a somewhat negligent fashion - which in itself could be regarded as a ground of appeal...
-
Bridget, what are you drinking lol
How can it be some of the bits from PV19 as that was classed as a whole bullet....tooooooooooo Plus in the opposite direction?
Yes, I agree the xray would have been available, the question is why didn't the defence use it in their cross-examination....sloppy! lol :) :) :)
Lol, I don't have the xray in front of me so sorry if I'm a bit off! PV19 was 2.16 grams, other bullets were 2.4+, do all of these things weigh the same when intact or not? If there's bits missing from PV19, where are they? You'd expect them to break off as it hit the base of the skull.
-
Lol, I don't have the xray in front of me so sorry if I'm a bit off! PV19 was 2.16 grams, other bullets were 2.4+, do all of these things weigh the same when intact or not? If there's bits missing from PV19, where are they? You'd expect them to break off as it hit the base of the skull.
I never did understand why there would be heavier bullets at 2.4+g when Mike says the bullets weighed 2.29g to start with. :-\
-
I never did understand why there would be heavier bullets at 2.4+g when Mike says the bullets weighed 2.29g to start with. :-\
2.26 grams, I think...
-
2.26 grams, I think...
So why are some heavier?
-
2.26 grams, I think...
Sorry, I stand corrected. :-[
-
Lol, I don't have the xray in front of me so sorry if I'm a bit off! PV19 was 2.16 grams, other bullets were 2.4+, do all of these things weigh the same when intact or not? If there's bits missing from PV19, where are they? You'd expect them to break off as it hit the base of the skull.
I know folk will think this does not matter and has no baring, but I feel anything that is or not been examined carefully and destroys what the CPS presented is relevant and. can be shown to be positive for JB......
I suspect that all x-ray's were available, but not used or not thought to have any importance by either side at trial. Now, though it could only be undermine the CPS.
I'd have thought that PV19 would have had slight fragments missing, but I would hardly believe that such fragments would have fell to the neck from the left hand side of the skull....or that it would be possible.... Off to have lunch....I'll be back to torment you later...Ho Ho Ho.... :) :) :)
-
I know folk will think this does not matter and has no baring, but I feel anything that is or not been examined carefully and destroys what the CPS presented is relevant and. can be shown to be positive for JB......
I suspect that all x-ray's were available, but not used or not thought to have any importance by either side at trial. Now, though it could only be undermine the CPS.
I'd have thought that PV19 would have had slight fragments missing, but I would hardly believe that such fragments would have fell to the neck from the left hand side of the skull....or that it would be possible.... Off to have lunch....I'll be back to torment you later...Ho Ho Ho.... :) :) :)
:(
-
Bambertwitpics is not evidence
At times your arrogance is breathtaking. Dismissive sweeping statements like above.
-
At times your arrogance is breathtaking. Dismissive sweeping statements like above.
Have you stubbed your toe or have a hangover or something?
That isn't a sweeping statement nor is it arrogant, even when you present it out of context.
The link to bambertwitpics that you kindly supplied is not in any way, concrete evidence that witness statements had been edited in order to wrongfully convict Jeremy. The accusation has been made and I'm asking for it to be justified, the only reason I'm asking you personally to justify it is because you rather sweepingly and arrogantly stated that it was a fact when the reality is that it is nothing of the kind.
-
Have you stubbed your toe or have a hangover or something?
That isn't a sweeping statement nor is it arrogant, even when you present it out of context.
The link to bambertwitpics that you kindly supplied is not in any way, concrete evidence that witness statements had been edited in order to wrongfully convict Jeremy. The accusation has been made and I'm asking for it to be justified, the only reason I'm asking you personally to justify it is because you rather sweepingly and arrogantly stated that it was a fact when the reality is that it is nothing of the kind.
It contains a number of excerpts of statements that never saw the light of day. It just so happens by some extraordinary complete coincidence, these excerpts were not supportive to the portrayal of Jeremy Bamber to the court, by the prosecution. The original signed statements were not provided to the defence. The composite statements were. The composite statements obviously did not contain the excerpts displayed in Bambertwitpics.
-
It contains a number of excerpts of statements that never saw the light of day. It just so happens by some extraordinary complete coincidence, these excerpts were not supportive to the portrayal of Jeremy Bamber to the court, by the prosecution. The original signed statements were not provided to the defence. The composite statements were. The composite statements obviously did not contain the excerpts displayed in Bambertwitpics.
How do you know that original statements were not available to the defence? Or are you just repeating what Bambers supporters are claiming?
Regardless, your answer is unimportant, it is very clear that this is not concrete evidence that witness statements were illegally edited in order to wrongly convict Jeremy Bamber, if it were, then we'd be awaiting a date for a court of appeal hearing, but we are not.
I respect the fact that you have a diffferent opinion, but I do not respect your claims that I am being goading, or am playing you, that applies equally to your suggestion that I have a track record for such behaviour, or that I somehow turn victim. Personally I find the claims insulting and quite hypocrotical.
At what stage do the accusations of goading, actually become the act of goading? Just like with Mikes profanities and rudeness, I won't rise to your bait where previously I may have done.
I'm alway up for discussing interesting aspects of the case, but I'm not at all interested in doing so when the other party is being antagonistic and confrontational, that's never been a problem between us before and we've always gotten along despite our very different views, why that has changed I have no idea, either I've hit a nerve or you're simply having a bad day, I don't know, but it's certainly pointless for us to continue to bite chunks out of each other.
You may find my views to be narrow, yet I find yours to be at least as narrow but in the other direction, I'd suggest an agree to disagree position is the order of the day.
-
How do you know that original statements were not available to the defence? Or are you just repeating what Bambers supporters are claiming?
I forgot, all Bamber's supporters or 'the defence' are liars who are involved in a massive game of spin, (as well as being thick and easily led by Bamber). Sorry about that. I will do 100 lines by tomorrow morning, to leave on your desk: only police and relatives tell the truth.
Regardless, your answer is unimportant, it is very clear that this is not concrete evidence that witness statements were illegally edited in order to wrongly convict Jeremy Bamber, if it were, then we'd be awaiting a date for a court of appeal hearing, but we are not.
Again, breathtaking arrogance. Only your answers are important it seems. I'd like to revisit this subject once I can garner more information. For now I will accept that I cannot prove that witness statements have been illegally edited. I'm still confident that deliberate omissions will have been made on the part of police.
You may find my views to be narrow, yet I find yours to be at least as narrow but in the other direction, I'd suggest an agree to disagree position is the order of the day.
Absolute bollocks. I''m way more open to guilt and prosecution arguments than you are to defence arguments.
I agree, we should once more take up positions of agreeing to disagree.
-
I forgot, all Bamber's supporters or 'the defence' are liars who are involved in a massive game of spin, (as well as being thick and easily led by Bamber). Sorry about that. I will do 100 lines by tomorrow morning, to leave on your desk: only police and relatives tell the truth.
Again, breathtaking arrogance. Only your answers are important it seems. I'd like to revisit this subject once I can garner more information. For now I will accept that I cannot prove that witness statements have been illegally edited. I'm still confident that deliberate omissions will have been made on the part of police.
Absolute bollocks. I''m way more open to guilt and prosecution arguments than you are to defence arguments.
I agree, we should once more take up positions of agreeing to disagree.
I will refrain from retaliating, I'll leave you with the last response.
Agree to disagree it is.
-
So why are some heavier?
I think it might depend on what the bullet hit. Lead bullets fragment much easy than copper bullets. The lead can sometimes fragment up to 3 inches from where the bullet stops.
If you take the 1st bullet it hits the bone at a shorter distance than that of the 2nd shot. Thus meaning the impact was quicker therefore the fragment count was much higher than the 2nd shot...and much heavier. Its worth noting that all lead bullets fragment. :) :) :)
-
I think it might depend on what the bullet hit. Lead bullets fragment much easy than copper bullets. The lead can sometimes fragment up to 3 inches from where the bullet stops.
If you take the 1st bullet it hits the bone at a shorter distance than that of the 2nd shot. Thus meaning the impact was quicker therefore the fragment count was much higher than the 2nd shot...and much heavier. Its worth noting that all lead bullets fragment. :) :) :)
Well yes, but they can't end up heavier than they were when they started!
-
Well yes, but they can't end up heavier than they were when they started!
Who said they were heavier? Not seen that.....Had a fab dinner and watched our Yorkshire lass from Otley win the silver....Well done Lizzie. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi Patti I watched Yokshire take the silver what a race I thought she was going to get gold but a very proud moment. :)
-
Who said they were heavier? Not seen that.....Had a fab dinner and watched our Yorkshire lass from Otley win the silver....Well done Lizzie. ;D ;D ;D ;D
I watched that too - incredible!
Mike said they weigh 2.26g to start with, but quite a few weighed in at over 2.4g.
-
I watched that too - incredible!
Mike said they weigh 2.26g to start with, but quite a few weighed in at over 2.4g.
Where can I find this, is part of Fletcher's statement? :) :) :) I will go and look...
-
What I find interesting, are the contents of a handwritten note sent by "Ron" Cook (SOCO) to the ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, about the silencer being possibly damaged due to it having received a hard knock, and that when test fired bullets were being fired through it, they were becoming damaged. Cook wanted to know if the silencer could be warped after striking a hard surface?
What this tells us is that before the silencer was sent to the lab' police had conducted tests by firing control bullets through the silencer, and that these control bullets were fragmenting badly. This is very interesting, since if the shot under Sheila's chin was inflicted with the silencer attached to the barrel of rifle "Y", the bullet in question should have fragmented as it passed through the 17 misaligned baffle plates so that when it ended up inside Sheila's brain, it could not be a whole bullet? On the other hand, it leads one to suspect that in the case of the first shot (PV/20), the one which was fired slightly off centre but to the left of the throat, that the damaged silencer could have been used. Indeed if you include the corresponding ring of bruising around the lower so called non fatal entry wound site, it could be an indication that such a silencer which (during unreported test firing using control ammunition) was causing bullets fired through it to fragment, may have been fitted to the barrel of the gun which fired that (PV/20) bullet?
This would explain why police or somebody connected with the investigation, decided it was best to substitute or swap over the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) for a test fired control bullet so that the argument could be put that both bullets recovered from Sheila's neck were whole, and easily linked to the rifle (Y) because both of those bullets had been fired via rifle "Y" albeit at different times, one (PV/19) fired via rifle "Y" during the shootings, and the substituted or replaced bullet (PV/20) fired via rifle "Y" later on during these unreported test firing...
-
Where can I find this, is part of Fletcher's statement? :) :) :) I will go and look...
It's in the record posted on this thread:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
-
What I find interesting, are the contents of a handwritten note sent by "Ron" Cook (SOCO) to the ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, about the silencer being possibly damaged due to it having received a hard knock, and that when test fired bullets were being fired through it, they were becoming damaged. Cook wanted to know if the silencer could be warped after striking a hard surface?
What this tells us is that before the silencer was sent to the lab' police had conducted tests by firing control bullets through the silencer, and that these control bullets were fragmenting badly. This is very interesting, since if the shot under Sheila's chin was inflicted with the silencer attached to the barrel of rifle "Y", the bullet in question should have fragmented as it passed through the 17 misaligned baffle plates so that when it ended up inside Sheila's brain, it could not be a whole bullet? On the other hand, it leads one to suspect that in the case of the first shot (PV/20), the one which was fired slightly off centre but to the left of the throat, that the damaged silencer could have been used. Indeed if you include the corresponding ring of bruising around the lower so called non fatal entry wound site, it could be an indication that such a silencer which (during unreported test firing using control ammunition) was causing bullets fired through it to fragment, may have been fitted to the barrel of the gun which fired that (PV/20) bullet?
This would explain why police or somebody connected with the investigation, decided it was best to substitute or swap over the original fragmented bullet (PV/20) for a test fired control bullet so that the argument could be put that both bullets recovered from Sheila's neck were whole, and easily linked to the rifle (Y) because both of those bullets had been fired via rifle "Y" albeit at different times, one (PV/19) fired via rifle "Y" during the shootings, and the substituted or replaced bullet (PV/20) fired via rifle "Y" later on during these unreported test firing...
I am not convinced by the argument that the original PV/20 bullet fragmented once it struck the 4th vertebrae inside Sheila's neck, I think that bullet got damaged as it passed through the warped silencer, and if I am right then of course this would go to the heart of the matter concerning whether or not a silencer was used on the gun which fired the fatal bullet (PV/19) under the chin? You would end up with a fragmented bullet (PV/20) and a whole bullet (PV/19), one fired through a warped silencer, and the other fired via rifle "Y" minus that damaged silencer. Basically, this was one of the reasons why someone took the decision to present bullet PV/20 as a whole bullet, rather than the fragmented one it had originally been...
The damaged silencer (SBJ/1) was the one which DS "Stan" Jones took possession of at the scene on the morning of 7th August 1985, at the time he also took possession of three other exhibits, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4. It was the very same silencer which DCI Jones and DS Jones spoke to Jeremy about at his cottage on the afternoon of 9th August 1985 (day before relatives found the other silencer in the gun cupboard)...
"Stan" the man, Jones, needs to asked about when he took possession of exhibits SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4, and what his exhibit SBJ/1 was / is? Until you let a scumbag like him keep getting away with not having to answer questions such as this, the criminal justice system will be in disrepute. He also needs to be taken to task about the pocketbook entries that he re-wrote so that he could eliminate evidence in the original version about finding and taking possession and control of the silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene on the morning of the shootings? There are three different start dates on the front cover of the pocketbook which DS "Stan" Jones records his contemporaneous notes, and entries in that doctored notebook have been countersigned by PI "Bob" Miller, who was / is responsible for producing a handwritten schedule in which he requests witnesses to make alterations to exhibit references of exhibits in the case - this is the same "Bob" Miller who on 14th August 1985, attended the opening of the inquest into these deaths and told Deputy Coroner, Mr Thompkins, that police were satisfied that Sheila shot and killed the others, and that she had then gone on to take her own life by way of a solitary shot beneath the chin...
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,887.30.html
-
A police officer took possession of rifle "Y" from its original position of leaning up against the bedroom window, and used it as a prop to try and replicate how Sheila could have received the first and only bullet entry wound (PV/20) upon her throat at that stage. The rifle (Y) in question was laid upon her body with the muzzle of the rifle close to the entry wound of PV/20, and Sheila's right hand was placed on the trigger mechanism so that police could be satisfied that she could have shot herself - a police officer went though the motion of actually getting Sheila's fingers to press the trigger and this discharged the second bullet under her chin which actually killed her...
This is what really happened an how Sheila died inside the bedroom from a shot under the chin (bullet PV/19)...
-
It's in the record posted on this thread:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
Thank you Bridget. I can't find out where it tells you the weight of none spent bullets. You can tell from the weight that some of the bullets fragmented more that others..they weighed less. You would have thought they would have washed the bullets...but we are talking about medieval times ....lol :) :) :)
-
Thank you Bridget. I can't find out where it tells you the weight of none spent bullets. You can tell from the weight that some of the bullets fragmented more that others..they weighed less. You would have thought they would have washed the bullets...but we are talking about medieval times ....lol :) :) :)
No, I don't know where Mike got that info from either. Are you suggesting that some may be heavier because of um.. stuff?
-
A police officer took possession of rifle "Y" from its original position of leaning up against the bedroom window, and used it as a prop to try and replicate how Sheila could have received the first and only bullet entry wound (PV/20) upon her throat at that stage. The rifle (Y) in question was laid upon her body with the muzzle of the rifle close to the entry wound of PV/20, and Sheila's right hand was placed on the trigger mechanism so that police could be satisfied that she could have shot herself - a police officer went though the motion of actually getting Sheila's fingers to press the trigger and this discharged the second bullet under her chin which actually killed her...
This is what really happened an how Sheila died inside the bedroom from a shot under the chin (bullet PV/19)...
Is this the same rifle which was described as "stiff" by firearms experts,and the same rifle which WPC Jeapes had seen from outside..
-
No, I don't know where Mike got that info from either. Are you suggesting that some may be heavier because of um.. stuff?
Of course not. I think some could be heavier due to lack of fragmentation. Having looked at the documents weight varies considerably in grams. It also looks like the majority had mushroomed; which is most consistent with lead bullets. ??? :) :) :)
-
Of course not. I think some could be heavier due to lack of fragmentation. Having looked at the documents weight varies considerably in grams. It also looks like the majority had mushroomed; which is most consistent with lead bullets. ??? :) :) :)
So Mike must be wrong then, when he says they all start out at 2.26g.
-
Is this the same rifle which was described as "stiff" by firearms experts,and the same rifle which WPC Jeapes had seen from outside..
Steve I dispute Jeaps and Myall seeing the rifle at the window of the main bedroom. Brown also saw rifle. The raid team were back at Head Quarters for 9:30 so it was impossible for Jeapes to have seen the rifle in the main bedroom. The way she describes her position that morning was on the white/red side, but she describes being mainly on the white side. Her description is of the box room which is imbetween the main bedroom and the twins room....I would have challenged this in court. :) :) :)
-
So Mike must be wrong then, when he says they all start out at 2.26g.
I don't know how much they weighed Bridget. It is clear one of the bullets weighed in over that... :) :)
-
Steve I dispute Jeaps and Myall seeing the rifle at the window of the main bedroom. Brown also saw rifle. The raid team were back at Head Quarters for 9:30 so it was impossible for Jeapes to have seen the rifle in the main bedroom. The way she describes her position that morning was on the white/red side, but she describes being mainly on the white side. Her description is of the box room which is imbetween the main bedroom and the twins room....I would have challenged this in court. :) :) :)
I agree, she was talking about the box room. I've forgotten who Brown was though.. :)
-
Sorry there are 5 spent bullet weighing over 2,26gms :-[ :-[
-
Sorry there are 5 spent bullet weighing over 2,26gms :-[ :-[
You beat me to it..
-
I agree, she was talking about the box room. I've forgotten who Brown was though.. :)
it was Mrs Brown's husband...lol
No he was one of the raid team PC Brown. I don't think he entered the building...so please don't quote me on that...I also read that when he saw the rifle, it was then the raid team entered the building, but this is not documented, if it is then I can't find it...I read it on a website, but please don't ask me which one... :) :) :) :)
-
You beat me to it..
I'm going to check up on DRH/35 because I do know there were whole bullets found...and there were approx 4 possibly 5...if one counts the one on the kitchen top at the side of the sink...I'll be back... :) :) :)
I'm wrong on this....The two bullets must have been exit bullets....the weight is 2.43 and 2.44
He compares the two bullets with the test fire...which he concludes are similar to having been fired from 18. Check date on the 11th September. Don't shout at me... :) :) :)
-
it was Mrs Brown's husband...lol
No he was one of the raid team PC Brown. I don't think he entered the building...so please don't quote me on that...I also read that when he saw the rifle, it was then the raid team entered the building, but this is not documented, if it is then I can't find it...I read it on a website, but please don't ask me which one... :) :) :) :)
Yes, I vaguely remember that from when we discussed this before. It may have been on the .org site but I don't think the actual statement was available.
Becky's about to swim!
-
Yes, I vaguely remember that from when we discussed this before. It may have been on the .org site but I don't think the actual statement was available.
Becky's about to swim!
Arrr she got the bronze....i have tears...I'm so sad at times... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Bridget two of them are pillowcase weights I think....DRH/35 is the pillow....the two weights are not bullets or shell cases...I thought I recognised it. So that is only 3 that are above 2.26gms....I will check the others out.... :) :) :)
-
Arrr she got the bronze....i have tears...I'm so sad at times... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Bridget two of them are pillowcase weights I think....DRH/35 is the pillow....the two weights are not bullets or shell cases...I thought I recognised it. So that is only 3 that are above 2.26gms....I will check the others out.... :) :) :)
No, it definately says bullets recovered from pillowcases... what are 'pillowcase weights' is that something northern?
-
I'm going to check up on DRH/35 because I do know there were whole bullets found...and there were approx 4 possibly 5...if one counts the one on the kitchen top at the side of the sink...I'll be back... :) :) :)
I'm wrong on this....The two bullets must have been exit bullets....the weight is 2.43 and 2.44
He compares the two bullets with the test fire...which he concludes are similar to having been fired from 18. Check date on the 11th September. Don't shout at me... :) :) :)
-
I'm going to check up on DRH/35 because I do know there were whole bullets found...and there were approx 4 possibly 5...if one counts the one on the kitchen top at the side of the sink...I'll be back... :) :) :)
I'm wrong on this....The two bullets must have been exit bullets....the weight is 2.43 and 2.44
He compares the two bullets with the test fire...which he concludes are similar to having been fired from 18. Check date on the 11th September. Don't shout at me... :) :) :)
I have this:
DRH36 - 2.42
DRH35A and B 2.44 and 2.43
DRH5 - 2.42
PV24 - 2.4208
PV2 - 2.4267
All bullets...
-
No, I don't know where Mike got that info from either. Are you suggesting that some may be heavier because of um.. stuff?
I will make available a chart which produces the manufacturers weights for Eley .22 Lr Subsonic hollow point bullets, if anyone would like me to send them this information, via email...
Just ask and I will send relevant attachment via email...
-
I have this:
DRH36 - 2.42
DRH35A and B 2.44 and 2.43
DRH5 - 2.42
PV24 - 2.4208
PV2 - 2.4267
All bullets...
There may be a reason that those two bullets weighed that much and that is they never entered the body, they could have been missed shots....He continues to say that they are partially mushroomed. some fatty tissue on one of then, couldn't confirm that either caused wounds.
So if this was the case then they could be classed as whole bullets or near enough so 2.43/4 could be the actual weight....I'll check June's exit wounds...Flippin heck it's hard work on here tonight... ;) ;) ;)
-
I will make available a chart which produces the manufacturers weights for Eley .22 Lr Subsonic hollow point bullets, if anyone would like me to send them this information, via email...
Just ask and I will send relevant attachment via email...
Aww your a good en Mike...I'll be happy to have a chart...thank you. :) :) :) :)
-
I have the manufacturers weight specifications for this type of bullet for anyone who is remotely interested...
Bullet weight is actually 2.27 grams, not 2.26...
-
Aww your a good en Mike...I'll be happy to have a chart...thank you. :) :) :) :)
OK, I will send you a copy of the relevant document via email address now...
Please feel free to forward a copy to other members if you want to:-
-
OK, I will send you a copy of the relevant document via email address now...
Please feel free to forward a copy to other members if you want to:-
Thank you Mike. It does beg the question Do bullets become heavy when fired? I will do a bit of googling....the only other answer of course, is that different bullets were used...?????????? 8)
-
So Mike must be wrong then, when he says they all start out at 2.26g.
Yeah, I was wrong in suggesting the manufacturers bullet weight specification was 2.26gram, because it is 2.27gram...
-
Thank you Mike. It does beg the question Do bullets become heavy when fired? I will do a bit of googling....the only other answer of course, is that different bullets were used...?????????? 8)
The other interesting thing about some of the heavier bullets, is that when DCI "Taff" Jones, and DS "Stan" Jones, went to see Jeremy at his cottage on the afternoon of 9th August, 1985, they not only spoke to him about whether or not the silencer was fitted to the guns barrel on the evening before the shootings (6th August 1985) but they questioned him about where five of the 25 bullets had originated from? This came about because Jeremy told police that he obtained a full box of .22 ammunition from which he proceeded to load up the magazine of the rifle on that occasion. Police said to Jeremy that each box of ammunition contained 50 rounds and that only 20 were missing from the tipped out box on the kitchen worktop. Jeremy told them there must have already been some bullets in the magazine, and the police accepted that the additional five they were interested in, must have already been in the magazine of the gun before Jeremy loaded it up to the max on the evening before the shootings?
Another interesting feature was / is that five of the bullet cases, showed evidence that they had been loaded twice into the magazine of the rifle (Y) - these five bullet cases had double magazine marks and only one set of firing pin and ejection / extraction marks...
-
Yeah, I was wrong in suggesting the manufacturers bullet weight specification was 2.26gram, because it is 2.27gram...
I'll let you off the 0.01g, if you tell me why you think some are heavier :)
-
I'll let you off the 0.01g, if you tell me why you think some are heavier :)
Two possibilities:-
(1) - bullets originated from a different batch of .22 ammunition than Eley .22LR subsonic
(2) - bullets collected debri when entering body and were not washed when weighed...
-
Were they hollow or solid bullets?
-
Were they hollow or solid bullets?
The ballistic experts, Malcom Fletcher, and D. Taylor, did not differentiate the type of .22 bullets to that / this extent - see general examination records for confirmation of this...
Please visit:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
-
The ballistic experts, Malcom Fletcher, and D. Taylor, did not differentiate the type of .22 bullets to that / this extent - see general examination records for confirmation of this...
Please visit:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
Mike I have a strong feeling that these are either exit bullets or missed bullets. The bullets have to weigh lighter, because it loses the outer brass case...Fletcher can't be sure that two of the bullets came from wounds....if this is the case then we might have bullets that missed their target...at close range... :) :) :)
-
Mike I have a strong feeling that these are either exit bullets or missed bullets. The bullets have to weigh lighter, because it loses the outer brass case...Fletcher can't be sure that two of the bullets came from wounds....if this is the case then we might have bullets that missed their target...at close range... :) :) :)
The information I have received / obtained suggests that the specified manufacturers bullet weights relate only to the bullet head, not to the bullet consisting of bullet head and case, along with its component parts...
-
Mike I have a strong feeling that these are either exit bullets or missed bullets. The bullets have to weigh lighter, because it loses the outer brass case...Fletcher can't be sure that two of the bullets came from wounds....if this is the case then we might have bullets that missed their target...at close range... :) :) :)
Isn't mike talking about the lead bit, rather than the whole thing including the case? Any of the other bullets could have also originally weighed 2.42 as well I suppose. Not sure where any of this gets us!
-
Isn't mike talking about the lead bit, rather than the whole thing including the case? Any of the other bullets could have also originally weighed 2.42 as well I suppose. Not sure where any of this gets us!
Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition weighed in at 2.27 grams according to the manufacturers weight specification chart, yet five of the 25 crime scene bullets weighed too much to have originated from such a batch, and another seven weighed to little (all described as being whole in nature). That is a total of 12 bullets out of 25 that do not fit the manufacturers weight specification for Eley .22LR subsonic ammunition - which in turn leaves around 13 bullets which could have originated from the relevant batch...
-
Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition weighed in at 2.27 grams according to the manufacturers weight specification chart, yet five of the 25 crime scene bullets weighed too much to have originated from such a batch, and another seven weighed to little (all described as being whole in nature). That is a total of 12 bullets out of 25 that do not fit the manufacturers weight specification for Eley .22LR subsonic ammunition - which in turn leaves around 13 bullets which could have originated from the relevant batch...
Bullet PV/20 is one of the 12 bullets which falls into the category that could not have originated from the batch of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition, because it was too light which effects the statistics because the original (PV/20) was substituted making the ratio 11 / 14...
This is where the analysis starts to get very interesting...
-
Isn't mike talking about the lead bit, rather than the whole thing including the case? Any of the other bullets could have also originally weighed 2.42 as well I suppose. Not sure where any of this gets us!
A solid whole bullet weighs in at about 2.50 which would make more sense....than a 2.27 hollow one. Maybe some were solid...
Sad about Paula Radcliffe Anther hankie wet through...aww :'( :'( :'(
-
Bullet PV/20 is one of the 12 bullets which falls into the category that could not have originated from the batch of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition, because it was too light which effects the statistics because the original (PV/20) was substituted making the ratio 11 / 14...
This is where the analysis starts to get very interesting...
At this stage - enter into the fray 14 bullet cases held at the lab' under the identifying mark of MDF/100 (14 spent cartridge cases)?
-
If anyone is really interested, check the type of bullets mentioned in each of the individual general examination records, and you will see that none of them are referred to as .22 LR subsonic hollow point rounds, or bullets, or whatever...
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
-
If anyone is really interested, check the type of bullets mentioned in each of the individual general examination records, and you will see that none of them are referred to as .22 LR subsonic hollow point rounds, or bullets, or whatever...
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
How strange that the ballistic expert does not identify any of the 25 bullets which formed part of the crime scene batch of ammunition, as Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition - what kind of an expert was he then?
-
A solid whole bullet weighs in at about 2.50 which would make more sense....than a 2.27 hollow one. Maybe some were solid...
Sad about Paula Radcliffe Anther hankie wet through...aww :'( :'( :'(
A modern day Eley hollow point Xtra and Xtra Plus weighs 2.43g and 2.59g respectively.
I have searched for a lighter round before, but other than on websites associated with this case I've never seen reference to one, perhaps manufacturing spec has changed over the years. :-\
-
A modern day Eley hollow point Xtra and Xtra Plus weighs 2.43g and 2.59g respectively.
I have searched for a lighter round before, but other than on websites associated with this case I've never seen reference to one, perhaps manufacturing spec has changed over the years. :-\
That would be a high velocity solid bullet not a hollow one. Did they have two different ones?
High velocity solid 2.59
High velocity hollow 2.27
Which one is correct? :-\ :-\ :-\
-
That would be a high velocity solid bullet not a hollow one. Did they have two different ones?
High velocity solid 2.59
High velocity hollow 2.27
Which one is correct? :-\ :-\ :-\
Nope, hollow point and sub-sonic, I think anyway. :-\
Xtra Plus: http://www.shoot.ie/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=55
Xtra: http://www.championshooters.com/Eley3.html
-
The bullets were found in the bottom pillow on the right hand side of the bed. JB had one exit wound just below the neck towards the right shoulder. One of the bullets could have come from that wound, but what about the other one?
Fletcher couldn't determine if either bullet had come from wounds, but did say that on one of the nose end of the bullets were fatty tissue. :-\ :-\
Maybe she brought her arm up, she has an exit wound on her left are just above the wrist...
-
Nope, hollow point and sub-sonic, I think anyway. :-\
Xtra Plus: http://www.shoot.ie/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=55
Xtra: http://www.championshooters.com/Eley3.html
That is a modern day weight. What would the weight have been in 1985? It is more likely the weight would have been 2.59 or anything between 2.49 and 2.59.....
Now that what you have sent me, differs from the one Mike has sent me. :-\ :-\
-
That is a modern day weight. What would the weight have been in 1985? It is more likely the weight would have been 2.59 or anything between 2.49 and 2.59.....
Now that what you have sent me, differs from the one Mike has sent me. :-\ :-\
Yes, I've never seen one lighter than 2.43g, also not one which doesn't have a sub-title like Xtra or Xtra-Plus, so maybe the bullets used are no longer manufactured. I'm not sure, I'm certainly no expert.
-
That is a modern day weight. What would the weight have been in 1985? It is more likely the weight would have been 2.59 or anything between 2.49 and 2.59.....
Now that what you have sent me, differs from the one Mike has sent me. :-\ :-\
Manufacturers weight chart is / was for Eley .22 LR subsonic hollow point in 1984 /85 - obtained by the Manchester McKenzie organisation as part of its campaign to prove Jeremy was wrongly convicted...
Bullet weight of 2.27 grams was / is relevant for the material time...
-
Evidence and information I have access to is retained on storage facility which I shall refer to as ENIGMA...
Thousands upon thousands of documents and photographs some of which have not yet been mentioned is stored on this facility...
-
Hi Mike. The bullets must have weighed more that 2.27 unless the weighing scales were wrong...but Im not going to go down that path eh? Good night to you.... :) :) :)
-
Hi Mike. The bullets must have weighed more that 2.27 unless the weighing scales were wrong...but Im not going to go down that path eh? Good night to you.... :) :) :)
Some of the bullets did weigh more than 2.27 grams and therefore did not originate from the batch of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition which the police claim they originated from. What this means is that there were at least two different types of ammunition used in the shootings, but for some reason the police have made it into a one type of ammunition/gun crime...
Ralph Bamber only ever purchased one batch of 500 rounds of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition (24th November 1984) each round weighing 2.27 grams. However, other .22 type ammunition was stored and kept at whf belonging to Anthony Pargeter for use in his Bruno bolt action rifle that was normally kept in the downstairs toilet. This opens up the possibility that some of the .22 type ammunition which was produced by a different (Remington / hornet) manufacturer may have been used in the shootings, but taken out of the equation for one reason or another by the police? The removal and substitution of such bullets is linked to the substitution of corresponding bullet cases which also appears to have taken place, so that the entire batch of crime scene ammunition found at the scene or recovered from bodies of victims, did not / does not resemble the batch of crime scene ammunition that the prosecutions ballistic expert Malcolm Fletcher built his reports and conclusions, upon and around? This was one of the reasons why in 1996 police destroyed the batch of crime scene a ammunition without consulting anyone to see if they might still be required for evidential purposes in the future?
-
Apologies to The Jam and other members, for my spat with him on this thread yesterday. Differences aside, It should not have escalated in the way it did and I was insulting towards him.
-
Hi Roch we will forgive you and Mr.Jam for anything and we don't need an apology :) ;) ;)
-
Hi Roch we will forgive you and Mr.Jam for anything and we don't need an apology :) ;) ;)
Thank you. There are more tactful and resourceful ways of hammering out a disagreement, especially for a mod. But that's that, lesson learned.
-
Apologies to The Jam and other members, for my spat with him on this thread yesterday. Differences aside, It should not have escalated in the way it did and I was insulting towards him.
No worries and my apologies by return.
-
Hello Mr. Jam and Roch so happy you boys have kissed and made up :)
-
Some of the bullets did weigh more than 2.27 grams and therefore did not originate from the batch of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition which the police claim they originated from. What this means is that there were at least two different types of ammunition used in the shootings, but for some reason the police have made it into a one type of ammunition/gun crime...
Ralph Bamber only ever purchased one batch of 500 rounds of Eley .22LR subsonic hollow point ammunition (24th November 1984) each round weighing 2.27 grams. However, other .22 type ammunition was stored and kept at whf belonging to Anthony Pargeter for use in his Bruno bolt action rifle that was normally kept in the downstairs toilet. This opens up the possibility that some of the .22 type ammunition which was produced by a different (Remington / hornet) manufacturer may have been used in the shootings, but taken out of the equation for one reason or another by the police? The removal and substitution of such bullets is linked to the substitution of corresponding bullet cases which also appears to have taken place, so that the entire batch of crime scene ammunition found at the scene or recovered from bodies of victims, did not / does not resemble the batch of crime scene ammunition that the prosecutions ballistic expert Malcolm Fletcher built his reports and conclusions, upon and around? This was one of the reasons why in 1996 police destroyed the batch of crime scene a ammunition without consulting anyone to see if they might still be required for evidential purposes in the future?
Didn't the ballistics experts say all of the bullets could have been fired by the .22 anschutz rifle? Didn't Anthony Pargeter have a similar .22 anschutz rifle and wasn't the reason for any dissembling merely that under the terms of the firearm's license his rifle was meant to be kept at his home rather than at White House Farm?
-
I could go with some of the bullets being different. This could explain why some of the measurements were different upon entry.
What I am going to do is cross reference the bullets examined by Fletcher, with the bullets/shell cases collected and the measurement of entry wounds. A tad time consuming, but might be worth doing. :o :o :o :o
-
How odd. First one I choose is PV2
Bullet
Ralph's left arm.
Weight 2.4277gms
This is important, because this wound was an exit wound. I can't find out where this bullet was found?
This bullet is almost intact. It has damage on one side and appears to have hit a curved surface.
Am I right or am I wrong...Does an exit wound mean the bullet passed through and came out of the other side?
If I am right, then how does Fletcher know this is the bullet that passed through Ralph's left arm?
Vanezes:
Oblique grazing wound measuring 1/2" situated 4" above the left elbow and associated with surrounding bruises.
The track of this wound was from the left arm and, against the left side of the lower chest causing 1 1/2 graze with a curve edge which was 3/16 in width. The radiograph showed fragments of a bullet in hte left lower chest, although these could not be located within the body cavity.
So can someone tell me where PV2 came from??????????
-
Jam and Roch, well done, both of you.
-
How odd. First one I choose is PV2
Bullet
Ralph's left arm.
Weight 2.4277gms
This is important, because this wound was an exit wound. I can't find out where this bullet was found?
This bullet is almost intact. It has damage on one side and appears to have hit a curved surface.
Am I right or am I wrong...Does an exit wound mean the bullet passed through and came out of the other side?
If I am right, then how does Fletcher know this is the bullet that passed through Ralph's left arm?
Vanezes:
Oblique grazing wound measuring 1/2" situated 4" above the left elbow and associated with surrounding bruises.
The track of this wound was from the left arm and, against the left side of the lower chest causing 1 1/2 graze with a curve edge which was 3/16 in width. The radiograph showed fragments of a bullet in hte left lower chest, although these could not be located within the body cavity.
So can someone tell me where PV2 came from??????????
Hi Patti,
First of all the PV refers to an exhibit discovered/found by Vanezis, so the bullet is from the body of Ralph on this occasion.
Without being too grisly, I'm guessing that the bullet never quite exited the body, ie it forced it's way to the surface and made an exit wound, but lodged without actually wholly exiting.
That's just a guess, although I seem to recall reading something along the same lines before, but I forget where.
-
Actually the more I look at it, then the more it appears to read as if the bullet went through Ralphs arm, exited and then entered his abdomen. :-\
What do you think? No 8 on the diagram below.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=143.0;attach=81;image)
-
Hi Patti,
First of all the PV refers to an exhibit discovered/found by Vanezis, so the bullet is from the body of Ralph on this occasion.
Without being too grisly, I'm guessing that the bullet never quite exited the body, ie it forced it's way to the surface and made an exit wound, but lodged without actually wholly exiting.
That's just a guess, although I seem to recall reading something along the same lines before, but I forget where.
Hi Hartley
It is slightly confusing, because Fletcher describes the bullet as being intact, but slightly damaged at one side, having hit a curved surface. PV2
Vanezes states that the track of a bullet went in the left arm and fragments were radiographed in the chest...He makes no mention of finding a bullet...He goes on to say that the fragments could not be retrieved from the chest.
Yes, the drawing says the bullet made an exit in the left arm....
There might be a simple explanation, but where did the bullet come from....Yes Vanezes finds it, but does not elaborate on it...he only talks about the fragments of the chest. He never mentions taking a bullet out of the arm or chest....yet Fletcher examines it and weighs it...
It could be he forgot to mention it..... :) :) :)
-
Actually the more I look at it, then the more it appears to read as if the bullet went through Ralphs arm, exited and then entered his abdomen. :-\
What do you think? No 8 on the diagram below.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=143.0;attach=81;image)
The angle of the shot looks slightly downwards to me, but then that depends on where he had his arm at the time of the shot...an exit wound it is...but where did Vanezes get the bullet from? :-\ :-\ :-\
-
Hi Hartley
It is slightly confusing, because Fletcher describes the bullet as being intact, but slightly damaged at one side, having hit a curved surface. PV2
Vanezes states that the track of a bullet went in the left arm and fragments were radiographed in the chest...He makes no mention of finding a bullet...He goes on to say that the fragments could not be retrieved from the chest.
Yes, the drawing says the bullet made an exit in the left arm....
There might be a simple explanation, but where did the bullet come from....Yes Vanezes finds it, but does not elaborate on it...he only talks about the fragments of the chest. He never mentions taking a bullet out of the arm or chest....yet Fletcher examines it and weighs it...
It could be he forgot to mention it..... :) :) :)
I read it as the unrecoverable fragments being additional to the bullet, which is then odd given the already high weight, it would be even higher if the fragments were added. :-\
The curved surface could be Ralphs left humerus I suppose.
Also, I might be making this up, but I seem to have a vague recolection of a bullet being recovered loose from within Ralphs pyjama top, does that ring any bells?
-
Venezis recovered 8 bullets from the body of Ralph Bamber during autopsy - he did not recover any loose bullet from his pyjama...
-
I read it as the unrecoverable fragments being additional to the bullet, which is then odd given the already high weight, it would be even higher if the fragments were added. :-\
The curved surface could be Ralphs left humerus I suppose.
Also, I might be making this up, but I seem to have a vague recolection of a bullet being recovered loose from within Ralphs pyjama top, does that ring any bells?
No Hartley I rechecked it and he doesn't say additional to the bullet. Yes the curved shape could be the bone...I've not heard of any bullet found in the PJ's...
He goes on to say in his summing up..:
There was evidence of 8 gunshots wounds having been received by the victim. (7 of which had entered the body. 6 in the head and neck. 1 in the left arm.
That leaves you with one bullet missing, that bullet I believe is the one that made an exit in the arm.
He only accounts for 7 bullets. Do you see where I am coming from? Fletcher is examining PV2 from NB's left arm, yet it is an exit wound... :) :) :)
-
Venezis recovered 8 bullets from the body of Ralph Bamber during autopsy - he did not recover any loose bullet from his pyjama...
Hi Mike
Either I can't add up or I am blind....Vanezes recovers 7 bullets....he states clearly here...
(There was evidence of 8 gunshots wounds having been received by the victim. (7 of which had entered the body. 6 in the head and neck. 1 in the left arm. )
He tells you there is evidence of 8 wounds...but only retrieves 7 bullets...
Anyway, I am harping on about it....I think i will :-X :-X :-X :-X ;D
-
No Hartley I rechecked it and he doesn't say additional to the bullet. Yes the curved shape could be the bone...I've not heard of any bullet found in the PJ's...
He goes on to say in his summing up..:
There was evidence of 8 gunshots wounds having been received by the victim. (7 of which had entered the body. 6 in the head and neck. 1 in the left arm.
That leaves you with one bullet missing, that bullet I believe is the one that made an exit in the arm.
He only accounts for 7 bullets. Do you see where I am coming from? Fletcher is examining PV2 from NB's left arm, yet it is an exit wound... :) :) :)
Oh I see what your saying, I just don't have the answer.
It's interesting what you say about:
There was evidence of 8 gunshots wounds having been received by the victim. (7 of which had entered the body. 6 in the head and neck. 1 in the left arm.)
I could sort of read that as bullets which entered and stayed in his body, the one in his left arm being No. 7 in the previously posted diagram rather than 8.
I'll have a search about a bullet being in his PJ's, I'm sure I've read it somewhere, maybe it was suggested by a forum member when this was brought up before, I'll see what I can find.
PV/2 is described as a flattened bullet here:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=988.0;attach=4968;image)
-
Which bullet is No.7?
PV what?
-
Could we please have less waffle and talking shop and more explaining what the significance of these bullets are in relation to how and where the victims were killed and any relevance as to a conspiracy among the interested parties..
-
8 Bullets recovered from Ralph's body during autopsy:-
(1) - PV/2 - flattened bullet (left arm of Ralph Bamber)
(2) - PV/3 - bullet from top of skull, left temple (Ralph Bamber)
(3) - PV/4 - bullet from top / front of skull (Ralph Bamber)
(4) - PV/5 - bullet fragment from left jaw (Ralph Bamber)
(5) - PV/8 - bullet, base of skull, left side (Ralph Bamber)
(6) - PV/9 - bullet, top of brain left side (Ralph Bamber)
(7) - PV/10 - bullet from left side of neck (Ralph bamber)
(8) - PV/11 - bullet from cervical muscles in left side of neck (Ralph Bamber)
-
Could we please have less waffle and talking shop and more explaining what the significance of these bullets are in relation to how and where the victims were killed and any relevance as to a conspiracy among the interested parties..
Lol..............
Sorry Steve, do keep up. There is always another thread to read. Sorry If you find this boring. I will give you a clue it sounds like rubber... :) :) :) :)
-
Angle that both shots were fired at and sustained makes it an impossibility for Sheila to have been shot twice in the neck with her body there insitu on the bedroom floor with her head askewed to one side of the bedside cabinet:-
"How did the wooden butt of the rifle manage to get beyond the side of the bed when either one or both shots were fired"?
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4465;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4312;image)
"Notice transfiguration of bloodstain on the right upper part of her nightdress between each photograph having been taken, I suppose if they could get away with saying so, police and relatives would blame Jeremy for that / this"?
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4304;image)
-
Cheers Hartley and Mike.
You see where I am coming from...I know I waffle on and on...but believe me I am really a quiet person.
So, what have we got so far. Yawn!... :-\
1, PV2 supposedly from left arm of NB
2, A diagram which shows an exit wound? (bullets normally exit out) PV2
3, A damaged bullet almost intact weighing 2.4267gms (PV2)
4, Pathologist reports no bullet taken from Left arm?
5, Fletcher reports PV2 from left arm
6, Now Vanezes says PV2 was a flattened bullet from Ralphs arm. So it is not an exit wound?
Something not right here...... :-\
-
Cheers Hartley and Mike.
You see where I am coming from...I know I waffle on and on...but believe me I am really a quiet person.
So, what have we got so far. Yawn!... :-\
1, PV2 supposedly from left arm of NB
2, A diagram which shows an exit wound? (bullets normally exit out) PV2
3, A damaged bullet almost intact weighing 2.4267gms (PV2)
4, Pathologist reports no bullet taken from Left arm?
5, Fletcher reports PV2 from left arm
6, Now Vanezes says PV2 was a flattened bullet from Ralphs arm. So it is not an exit wound?
Something not right here...... :-\
Such confusion arises because of the cover up and the tampering with exhibits, namely bullets and cartridge cases from the original batch of crime scene ammunition...
-
Patti I for one are finding your theory and discussion with Hartley and Mike totally absorbing and to go further with this thread we need to understand where we are at now :)Your post is very intelligent and could never never be described as waffle.
-
Cheers Hartley and Mike.
You see where I am coming from...I know I waffle on and on...but believe me I am really a quiet person.
So, what have we got so far. Yawn!... :-\
1, PV2 supposedly from left arm of NB
2, A diagram which shows an exit wound? (bullets normally exit out) PV2
3, A damaged bullet almost intact weighing 2.4267gms (PV2)
4, Pathologist reports no bullet taken from Left arm?
5, Fletcher reports PV2 from left arm
6, Now Vanezes says PV2 was a flattened bullet from Ralphs arm. So it is not an exit wound?
Something not right here...... :-\
Lol.
Could PV/5 (a bullet fragment) be related to one of the other bullets rather than a separate bullet in it's own right?
Or.
I think if we could separate wound No's. 7 & 8 as shown on the diagram, then we might get somewhere. I'm beginning to think that PV/2 related to No. 7 and not No. 8. No. 8 being unrecoverable for whatever reason. :-\
-
Lol.
Could PV/5 (a bullet fragment) be related to one of the other bullets rather than a separate bullet in it's own right?
Or.
I think if we could separate wound No's. 7 & 8 as shown on the diagram, then we might get somewhere. I'm beginning to think that PV/2 related to No. 7 and not No. 8. No. 8 being unrecoverable for whatever reason. :-\
This then becomes very interesting, because that would mean a 26th bullet fired, and only 25 bullet cases recovered from the scene? So where did that additional bullet case disappear to? Was it retained in the breach of the other bolt action rifle that fired it?
-
8 Bullets recovered from Ralph's body during autopsy:-
(1) - PV/2 - flattened bullet (left arm of Ralph Bamber)
(2) - PV/3 - bullet from top of skull, left temple (Ralph Bamber)
(3) - PV/4 - bullet from top / front of skull (Ralph Bamber)
(4) - PV/5 - bullet fragment from left jaw (Ralph Bamber)
(5) - PV/8 - bullet, base of skull, left side (Ralph Bamber)
(6) - PV/9 - bullet, top of brain left side (Ralph Bamber)
(7) - PV/10 - bullet from left side of neck (Ralph bamber)
(8) - PV/11 - bullet from cervical muscles in left side of neck (Ralph Bamber)
Of all of these, only one refers to an arm, the remainder are neck or head.
Patti, why did you think PV/2 was an exit wound, is it from Fletcher?
-
This then becomes very interesting, because that would mean a 26th bullet fired, and only 25 bullet cases recovered from the scene? So where did that additional bullet case disappear to? Was it retained in the breach of the other bolt action rifle that fired it?
When a round is fired via the semi-automatic rifle the corresponding bullet case is automatically ejected from the weapon, but when a shot is fired via a bolt action rifle the spent bullet case is retained in the breach until the shooter or anyone else manually operates the bolt to physically eject it...
What seems apparent to me - is that Sheila attempted to kill herself by use of this second bolt action type weapon downstairs, and had no time to carry out the necessary action to cause the ejection of the spent cartridge case from the breach of that weapon, or that the weapon she used was an air rifle which had no corresponding bullet case? Either explanation would account for the potential existence of 26 rounds, and only 25 bullet cases (found loosely at the scene)...
-
None of us ( whichever side of the fence we might be sitting upon) should disregard the existence of this second weapon that was found downstairs which had red paint on the end of its barrel, which DS Davidson told COLP about during their 1991 police investigation into the handling of this case by Essex police? You should bear in mind that the reason DS Davidson told COLP about this second weapon was because of the fact that a paint sample bearing the exhibit reference of RC/1 had been taken from the aga surround on 8th August 1985, by "Ron" Cook, who has since denied ever taking such a sample on that occasion?
Cook was shitting himself that if he admitted to taking such a paint (RC/1) sample, it would lead on to the discovery that police showed an interest in a second rifle as part of their investigation into these deaths, which had been found downstairs that had red paint on the end of its barrel, a second weapon which police knew had been used in the shooting of Sheila Caffell...
So, why didn't Davidson, or Essex police, or COLP simply identify then second weapon in question and put us all out of our misery? The answer to this lies behind a shield of Pii...
-
Lol.
Could PV/5 (a bullet fragment) be related to one of the other bullets rather than a separate bullet in it's own right?
Or.
I think if we could separate wound No's. 7 & 8 as shown on the diagram, then we might get somewhere. I'm beginning to think that PV/2 related to No. 7 and not No. 8. No. 8 being unrecoverable for whatever reason. :-\
Yes PV5 is a fragment and it could be related to another bullet.
7 is the wound to the shoulder....In the general examination list that we have on here, Fletcher does not examine that bullet...Or, it is possible we don't have the full list of what he examined?
Vanezes states he takes that bullet out of wound 7 (the shoulder) Yes there could be a mix up here and, this bullet could be PV2...It makes sense, but why hasn't anyone picked up on this?
The only thing is that there were fragments viewed in the radiograph that linked to PV2...in the chest cavity...
Would the bullet have curved though, going through the shoulder.
Did PV2 go through the arm and into the shoulder?
It complicated ask Bridget...lol :) :) :)
-
Of all of these, only one refers to an arm, the remainder are neck or head.
Patti, why did you think PV/2 was an exit wound, is it from Fletcher?
Fletcher examines PV2 on the document it says Ralph Bamber's Left arm. :)
-
Lol.
Could PV/5 (a bullet fragment) be related to one of the other bullets rather than a separate bullet in it's own right?
Or.
I think if we could separate wound No's. 7 & 8 as shown on the diagram, then we might get somewhere. I'm beginning to think that PV/2 related to No. 7 and not No. 8. No. 8 being unrecoverable for whatever reason. :-\
Hartley if you are single, never marry me.....we are on the wrong thread...hahahahahahah Look at the thread General examination records - Crime Scene Ammunition...Look at the 1st posted document...
Why am i here.....lololol
-
Hartley if you are single, never marry me.....we are on the wrong thread...hahahahahahah Look at the thread General examination records - Crime Scene Ammunition...Look at the 1st posted document...
Why am i here.....lololol
Look here:-
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2506.0;attach=13750;image)
-
I am saying that in order for Sheila to have been shot under the chin, and taking into account the path and trajectory that bullet PV/20 took to end up embedded inside Sheila's brain, the rifle (Y) which fired that fatal bullet would have to be flush with her body so that the muzzle of the gun was almost if not in contact with the surface of the skin beneath her chin, and that you could not get the rifle to fit into the relatively small space afforded by reference to the photographs which show Sheila's body on the floor with her head lopsided next to the bedroom cabinet, irrespective of whether or not her head was resting up against the cabinet or laid to one side - you cannot get the rifle in the correct position to say she was shot there by anyone, not by herself, not by Jeremy, not by any would be as yet unidentified killer or hitman, and not by the police themselves...
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4314;image)
"Sheila's body was stage managed by the police and laid in the position shown in the photographs"...
-
He certainly wasn't describing a flattened bullet, like Vanezes did for PV2. Not that he said he took a bullet from the arm of course..Very odd. :-\ :-\ :-\
-
Dr Martin Ismail said he thought Sheila's legs had been pulled due to the position of her nightdress which had been rucked up at the rear. Could this have been Jeremy after the second shot to test whether or not she were dead. It doesn't look clear from the photograph that Sheila is at all dead. If Sheila shot herself with the bolt rifle then how does it explain the other shots with the .22 anschutz and why would she change weapon when there's a whole lot of anschutz bullets scattered on the kitchen worktop? And why attempt suicide in the kitchen anyway..
-
Dr Martin Ismail said he thought Sheila's legs had been pulled due to the position of her nightdress which had been rucked up at the rear. Could this have been Jeremy after the second shot to test whether or not she were dead. It doesn't look clear from the photograph that Sheila is at all dead. If Sheila shot herself with the bolt rifle then how does it explain the other shots with the .22 anschutz and why would she change weapon when there's a whole lot of anschutz bullets scattered on the kitchen worktop? And why attempt suicide in the kitchen anyway..
Unfortunately, Dr Ismail cannot say who pulled Sheila's legs, as you describe - it could just as easily have been the police who did this during the stage managing process...
It could not have been Jeremy who shot Sheila for the second time, she didn't get shot with the second bullet (PV/19) until after police entered premises, and Jeremy was not with them inside premises...
-
Unfortunately, Dr Ismail cannot say who pulled Sheila's legs, as you describe - it could just as easily have been the police who did this during the stage managing process...
If we agree that Sheila's legs were pulled either after the first or second shot is it still feasible that both shots could have occurred in the bedroom. And please don't tell me that Police stage managed the Bible..that has all the hallmarks of Jeremy.
-
If we agree that Sheila's legs were pulled either after the first or second shot is it still feasible that both shots could have occurred in the bedroom. And please don't tell me that Police stage managed the Bible..that has all the hallmarks of Jeremy.
Hi Steve. Can you prove it has the hallmark of Jeremy?
Yes, I agree her nightie is up at the back...it happens to all us ladies at some point.
Looking at the picture it is so obvious what happened, but being as I am so kind, I will let you work it out....lol :) :) :) :)
-
Hi Steve. Can you prove it has the hallmark of Jeremy?
Yes, I agree her nightie is up at the back...it happens to all us ladies at some point.
Looking at the picture it is so obvious what happened, but being as I am so kind, I will let you work it out....lol :) :) :) :)
Well do spill the beans and trawling through two days of fragmented bullet evidence when I am none the wiser will have made it worthwhile. Forensics made it clear that in their opinion the Bible had been placed there after death..
-
If we agree that Sheila's legs were pulled either after the first or second shot is it still feasible that both shots could have occurred in the bedroom. And please don't tell me that Police stage managed the Bible..that has all the hallmarks of Jeremy.
You can believe what you like about anything, but if you want to know who put the bible on Sheila's arm, whilst her body was moved to the floor you need to see what PS Adams told COLP? You also need to consider what a police officer told Ann Eaton on the morning of the shootings about Sheila's body being found on the bed with a bible on her chest... How the hell could Jeremy be responsible for where police put the bible during the stage managing of Sheila's body on the floor from the bed?
-
Actually the more I look at it, then the more it appears to read as if the bullet went through Ralphs arm, exited and then entered his abdomen. :-\
What do you think? No 8 on the diagram below.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=143.0;attach=81;image)
I've noticed something....on the diagram...can anyone else see it?
-
I've noticed something....on the diagram...can anyone else see it?
Ralph doesn't have an exit wound on the back of one arm in the diagram?
-
Ralph doesn't have an exit wound on the back of one arm in the diagram?
No Mike, because the the bullet exited at the front of his arm....Look closely...what do you see. I'm not tricking you... :-\ :-\ ;D
-
And please don't tell me that Police stage managed the Bible..that has all the hallmarks of Jeremy.
So the police manage to move the rifle up and down her body, move her hand to photograph a blood stain, move her head enough for welled blood to begin exiting her fatal wound from when Bamber shot her.... but don't manage to knock a precariously placed bible over her arm... and this stays in place as it was found?
BTW,
you've not answered a single post of mine since I suggested you were starryian, so you've probably got me on ignore.
-
No Mike, because the the bullet exited at the front of his arm....Look closely...what do you see. I'm not tricking you... :-\ :-\ ;D
If bullet exited front or back of arm, how did Venezis recover bullet PV/2 from Ralphs left arm?
Somebody has messed up bad with the ballistics...
-
If bullet exited front or back of arm, how did Venezis recover bullet PV/2 from Ralphs left arm?
Somebody has messed up bad with the ballistics...
Hi Mike
He couldn't have got it from his arm, for it was an exit wound. Yet Fletcher examines it and says one side of the bullet is intact, then Vanezes says it was flattened....someone has got it very wrong...
Going back to the diagram...it's rings of double bullets wounds....1 and 2 3 and 4 5 and 6.....Either you are a very good shot to get bullets going side by side of each other, or the rifle has a malfunction and shoots two bullets twice.....and that could be why Sheila was shot twice....Just a theory of course, but one worth looking at.. :) :) :) What do you think?
-
Hi Mike
He couldn't have got it from his arm, for it was an exit wound. Yet Fletcher examines it and says one side of the bullet is intact, then Vanezes says it was flattened....someone has got it very wrong...
Going back to the diagram...it's rings of double bullets wounds....1 and 2 3 and 4 5 and 6.....Either you are a very good shot to get bullets going side by side of each other, or the rifle has a malfunction and shoots two bullets twice.....and that could be why Sheila was shot twice....Just a theory of course, but one worth looking at.. :) :) :) What do you think?
Why would the pathologist give a false account about where he got bullet PV/2 from Ralphs left arm...
-
Why would the pathologist give a false account about where he got bullet PV/2 from Ralphs left arm...
I don't know Mike. He couldn't have got it from Nevill's left arm, for it exited out...He says the track of the bullet went to his chest. His chest was raidgraphed and there was fragments of the bullet, but they could not be retrieved. He does not say he got the bullet from anywhere. Yet Fletcher says he examined the bullet from Nevill's left arm which was PV2....he couldn't have, because there was no bullet in the arm. A bit of a mix up I think....Plus the bullet Fletcher examines is not a flattened bullet. But according to Vanezes it is....it's complicated...
I think the bullet Fletcher examines is from Nevill's shoulder...and Vanezes cocks it up at the lab and sends it as the bullet from the arm and not the shoulder....
Sorry, this is so boring....I hope I'm not putting people off.... :( :( :(
-
They did manage to move her arm without moving the bible.
-
Fletcher examines PV2 on the document it says Ralph Bamber's Left arm. :)
Yes but No.7 was in his left arm, all be it via his shoulder, so what links PV/2 to an exit wound, am I being blind?
Surely if there are two wounds in the left arm/shoulder, one exited and one didn't, then the one bullet found must be the one that didn't exit, right?
(Pssst I am happily married, so you are quite safe ;) )
-
Patti you are not boring us at all..as I said in a previous post the devil may be in the detail in this case and though I have switched off on occasion in this section it might just be what this case needs for everyone's dogged persistence to be rewarded. Roch I don't know who starryian is..
-
Patti, this should clear things up for you I think.
PV/2 was number 7 on the diagram and not number 8, number 8 was not recovered.
There is therefore nothing wrong with any of this, just our temporary lack of understanding. :)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=156.0;attach=152;image)
-
Also Patti, just to confirm that I'm not completely losing my marbles (just one or two maybe), here is where I got the suggestion that bullet 8 was in Ralphs clothing, not quite as I thought, but this is what I was thinking of.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=156.0;attach=162;image)
-
Morning Hartley
Thank you for posting the above. Please look back at post 320 on this thread from me and click on the link. Fletcher does say PV2 was from the left arm and not the shoulder. This, is what caused the confusion. The way he describes the bullet as being intact on one side and the other side having hit a curved surface. He doesn't say the bullet was flattened. Yet in the documents you have posted, it is clear that PV2 is from the shoulder and not the left arm and the bullet weight was 2.4 something ...It's a mistake by Fletcher. obviously, but one that has been found through research from both sides of the fence. Thank you. I was inclined to go with the theory it could be from the shoulder, but we had to prove it and I think that has been done...Well done.
How he got it wrong...mind boggles. God knows where the flattened bullet ended up.
That was my first check...I intend checking them all out...lolol Yes, I'm mad. :) :) :) :)
-
Morning Hartley
Thank you for posting the above. Please look back at post 320 on this thread from me and click on the link. Fletcher does say PV2 was from the left arm and not the shoulder. This, is what caused the confusion. The way he describes the bullet as being intact on one side and the other side having hit a curved surface. He doesn't say the bullet was flattened. Yet in the documents you have posted, it is clear that PV2 is from the shoulder and not the left arm and the bullet weight was 2.4 something ...It's a mistake by Fletcher. obviously, but one that has been found through research from both sides of the fence. Thank you. I was inclined to go with the theory it could be from the shoulder, but we had to prove it and I think that has been done...Well done.
How he got it wrong...mind boggles. God knows where the flattened bullet was listed.
That was my first check...I intend checking them all out...lolol Yes, I'm mad. :) :) :) :)
I think the bullet was in his arm, even if it entered high up on or near the shoulder, so I don't think the description is necessarily incorrect.
Carry on with the checking, I'll assist where I can. It's good that you look at things for yourself instead of simply repeating accusations made by others (which is all too common on both sides). Very refreshing. :)
-
The ballistic experts, Malcom Fletcher, and D. Taylor, did not differentiate the type of .22 bullets to that / this extent - see general examination records for confirmation of this...
Please visit:-
(1) - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2506.0.html
-
I think the bullet was in his arm, even if it entered high up on or near the shoulder, so I don't think the description is necessarily incorrect.
Carry on with the checking, I'll assist where I can. It's good that you look at things for yourself instead of simply repeating accusations made by others (which is all too common on both sides). Very refreshing. :)
Yes, Fletcher put arm and should have put shoulder. Vanezes put shoulder. The weight was the same on all the documents. It goes to show that mistakes can be made. I also think the shoulder shot was done from the landing as NB went downstairs...hence the shell case on the landing. I could be wrong, can't prove it, but it is likely.
Did you see what I thought about the diagram of double head shot wounds. 1 and 2 3 and 4 5 and 6.
Again it is a theory, that the rifle could have consecutively fired two bullets.
Right now I will check out PV3....lol :) :) :)
-
Yes, Fletcher put arm and should have put shoulder. Vanezes put shoulder. The weight was the same on all the documents. It goes to show that mistakes can be made. I also think the shoulder shot was done from the landing as NB went downstairs...hence the shell case on the landing. I could be wrong, can't prove it, but it is likely.
Did you see what I thought about the diagram of double head shot wounds. 1 and 2 3 and 4 5 and 6.
Again it is a theory, that the rifle could have consecutively fired two bullets.
Right now I will check out PV3....lol :) :) :)
Yes, I've suggested that before about the shot on the stairs, mainly because is from above and behind Ralph, plus the locations of shell cases found at the top of the stairs. I have a slight problem though that the stairs wind round to the right, so the wound seems it should be on his right arm/shoulder rather than his left, but maybe I'm over complicating things.
With the pairs of shots, I understand that it can be a characteristic of a semi-auto rifle for shots to be grouped together in that way, it would indicate that Ralph could have been immobile at the time. I don't believe this is the same as the shots to Sheila, her shots are more spaced out and at different angles. The shots to the children are similar to the grouped shots to Ralph, at least in my laymans opinion.
Bring on PV/3 :)
-
I'm off the Barton Upon Humber to nature reserve. I must be mad, it is throwing it down with rain...But I might get to see the elusive Bittern...Will check PV3 out when I get back... :) :) :)
-
I'm off the Barton Upon Humber to nature reserve. I must be mad, it is throwing it down with rain...But I might get to see the elusive Bittern...Will check PV3 out when I get back... :) :) :)
Morning Patti.Enjoy your day. ( in your wellies and mac )
-
Morning Patti.Enjoy your day. ( in your wellies and mac )
Hi Lookout not long since back. Weather was kind and no rain, in fact it was warm and the sun came out
at one point. Didn't see much...Saw a tree sparrow, which are rare, but that was in...Loads of black headed gulls...no waders...
Must book that train ticket....had trouble getting on BT....could get on AOL but I am with Talk Talk....lol I know..it's confusing... :) :) :) :)
-
Bump
-
Bump
-
Bump
Why do you keep walking into thimgs? ;)
-
Why do you keep walking into thimgs? ;)
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) I need this thread for some research I am doing.....so I keep brining it up to the front...lolol
-
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) I need this thread for some research I am doing.....so I keep brining it up to the front...lolol
Cunning. :)