Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on August 07, 2012, 06:59:AM
-
Court which tried and convicted JEREMY was decieved regarding this matter - a deliberate deception which is capable of rendering these convictions unsafe...
-
Court which tried and convicted JEREMY was decieved regarding this matter - a deliberate deception which is capable of rendering these convictions unsafe...
Sworn testimony given by PC Bird during trial about the order certain phographs were taken in ( 23, 27 and 32) was very misleading and not supported by any disclosed or exhibited schedules - it turns out that the rifle photo'd at the window (23) was moved from there onto Sheila's body in time for PC Bird to photo it on Shrila's body as per 27, to 32...
-
Sworn testimony given by PC Bird during trial about the order certain phographs were taken in ( 23, 27 and 32) was very misleading and not supported by any disclosed or exhibited schedules - it turns out that the rifle photo'd at the window (23) was moved from there onto Sheila's body in time for PC Bird to photo it on Shrila's body as per 27, to 32...
Morning Mike
Bird claims to have taken the photo's in the main bedroom, then taken photo's on the landing, which showed the gun at the window. What the court did not pick up on was the fact he was called back to take more photo's of Sheila/main bedroom. This was in the transcripts. So the rifle had been moved and placed back on her body, to me there is no doubt about that. But, what numbers are they?
We have index number 25 to 38 taken in the main bedroom. The 2nd lot of photo's that were taken was just before the photo's taken of the dining room. :) :) :)
-
Because the police weren't altogether truthful about their findings and overall evidence,,,is it any wonder that there is so much suspicion on how they conducted themselves and orchestrated the whole of the crime scene.
The house looked as though there'd been a vandal attack by the time the raid team had finished,,,and what I see in the photographs,is a complete lack of respect for the deceased and also for the inside of the property itself. How anyone can work in such a disorganised fashion,,and who are supposed to be trained professionals,,,I don't know.
Then to give the relatives carte-blanche to " physically " help police with enquiries has to be the last straw in this bungled scene known as an investigation.
-
The rifle photographed at the bedroom window (23) was never photographed on Sheila's body beforehand - only after 23 had been taken (see the photographic schedules produced by PC Bird for confirmation of this). What this means is that any photographs shown to the jury which had the rifle on Sheila's body, wete misused because such photographs could only have been stage managed by the police, yet the jury were fooled into accepting that what they were being show n had been untouched images which depicted how the raod team had found Sheila's body in the bedroom, when all along , the images relied upon had been stage manahed by police aftet photograph 23 had been taken...
The rifle which was photographed leaning up against thr bedtoom window in 23, could not have been on Sheila's body when photograph 23 was taken, a police officer had to pick the rifle up from the window at some point after 23 was taken, and he had to physically place the rifle on Sheila's body and stage manage her body with the displaced rife upon it, and then get PC Bird to take photographs 27 to 32...
-
It now becomes apparent why police cut up the relatove strips of photographic negatives around the time photograph 23 was taken which places the rifle at the bedroom window before police put it on Sheila's body?
-
So, are you definitely saying the police killed Sheila?
-
So, to get this straight, after 'barking like a dog' for a couple of hours, she shot herself in the kitchen, collapsed, then woke up, picked up the rifle, evaded the police, entered the bedroom, placed the gun down, and was then shot through the neck a 2nd time by the police? On the bed? And you have a photo of her in the interim time between shots, on the bed, which to your knowledge has never been seen by McKay, but is on an 'enigma' system, which you've not tried to access throughout the 10 years or so you've had it?
-
So, are you definitely saying the police killed Sheila?
There is now a trail of evidence ready for Jeremy's legal team to rely upon to confirm that PC Bird and DI Cook, deliberately falsified photohraphic records to suggest that photographs 27 to 32 were taken before 23, and that Cook thn removed the rifle from Sheila's body and placed it against the window, but in actial fact Cook took the rifle from the bedroom window and put the rifle onto Sheila's body, and then PC Bird took photographs, 27 to 32..
Yes, police shot and killed Sheila whilst moving rifle from window onto her body...
-
There is now a trail of evidence ready for Jeremy's legal team to rely upon to confirm that PC Bird and DI Cook, deliberately falsified photohraphic records to suggest that photographs 27 to 32 were taken before 23, and that Cook thn removed the rifle from Sheila's body and placed it against the window, but in actial fact Cook took the rifle from the bedroom window and put the rifle onto Sheila's body, and then PC Bird took photographs, 27 to 32..
Yes, police shot and killed Sheila whilst moving rifle from window onto her body...
No there isn't. All of the 'schedules' you've posted are just lists of the 50 photos in the order they appeared in the court album, which was not in chronological order, they prove nothing.
-
There is now a trail of evidence ready for Jeremy's legal team to rely upon to confirm that PC Bird and DI Cook, deliberately falsified photohraphic records to suggest that photographs 27 to 32 were taken before 23, and that Cook thn removed the rifle from Sheila's body and placed it against the window, but in actial fact Cook took the rifle from the bedroom window and put the rifle onto Sheila's body, and then PC Bird took photographs, 27 to 32..
Yes, police shot and killed Sheila whilst moving rifle from window onto her body...
Well that's clearly fantastical, the negatives sequence will clearly show the order photographs were taken in, I strongly suspect that they will correlate to the order described by PC Bird.
I suspect that the photograph on this forum labelled 23 was taken at positions L-M on the schedule below, after the rifle had been removed, with the photographs showing the rifle on top of Sheila being taken prior to this, at position B on the schedule below.
There isn't even an argument to be had here, the negatives will categorically indicate the sequence.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=738.0;attach=3241;image)
-
There is now a trail of evidence ready for Jeremy's legal team to rely upon to confirm that PC Bird and DI Cook, deliberately falsified photohraphic records to suggest that photographs 27 to 32 were taken before 23, and that Cook thn removed the rifle from Sheila's body and placed it against the window, but in actial fact Cook took the rifle from the bedroom window and put the rifle onto Sheila's body, and then PC Bird took photographs, 27 to 32..
Yes, police shot and killed Sheila whilst moving rifle from window onto her body...
I would be willing to accept if the rumour had gone around the house that there was a young woman's body upstairs who had killed her family and then killed herself that the Police might have moved the rifle adjacent to Sheila's body slightly to check for a pulse or fingerprints,but of course it is unacceptable for the rifle to be moved to the window and then replaced by the body. Didn't Michael Gradwell,formerly of the Lancashire Police acknowledge that this may have happened,along with PC Bewes,but that it didn't materially affect the outcome of the case?
Could you explain the timeline of the events as regards the moving of the rifle,the taking of the photographs,the CPR attempt,the fingerprinting,the arrival of the Police surgeon. Was the rifle put by the window the same window that WPC Jeapes saw what she thought was a rifle from outside and was this ever explained?
-
Well that's clearly fantastical, the negatives sequence will clearly show the order photographs were taken in, I strongly suspect that they will correlate to the order described by PC Bird.
I suspect that the photograph on this forum labelled 23 was taken at positions L-M on the schedule below, after the rifle had been removed, with the photographs showing the rifle on top of Sheila being taken prior to this, at position B on the schedule below.
There isn't even an argument to be had here, the negatives will categorically indicate the sequence.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=738.0;attach=3241;image)
To be fair, from Bird's evidence it seems more likely that 23 was taken at C, with photos 27 and 32 having been taken at B. Patti has quite rightly asked what photos were taken at L, and that is a good question I think. What seems clear though, is that the photos taken at L were not used in 50 photos in the green court album. Perhaps they were photos of cartridges or something.
-
So, to get this straight, after 'barking like a dog' for a couple of hours, she shot herself in the kitchen, collapsed, then woke up, picked up the rifle, evaded the police, entered the bedroom, placed the gun down, and was then shot through the neck a 2nd time by the police? On the bed? And you have a photo of her in the interim time between shots, on the bed, which to your knowledge has never been seen by McKay, but is on an 'enigma' system, which you've not tried to access throughout the 10 years or so you've had it?
If the dog was barking. Why was it barking? Since there was according to the police (who themselves were very quiet according to that moe chappie) no movement in the house because all were dead. Dogs surely bark at a disturbance? What was disturbing the dog I wonder?
-
No there isn't. All of the 'schedules' you've posted are just lists of the 50 photos in the order they appeared in the court album, which was not in chronological order, they prove nothing.
No, you are wrong again, big time. There were only 50 photographs in the "COURT ALBUM", but the STOKENCHURCH registry schedule lists hundreds all in sequence. In the absence of any other chronological schedule, the Stokenchurch one has to be regarded as key. The 50 court album photographs are listed and reproduced exactly in sequenxe within the Stokenchurch schedule - photo's 23, 27 to 32 were taken in that order, your counter argument is simply rubbish. The only way you, or anybody else can or could undermine what I have exposed would be to produce a different chronological schedule (like the Stokenchurch one) showing how photographs 27 to 32 were taken before 23, which neither you, nor anybody else can ever produce, because one like that does not exist...
-
Well that's clearly fantastical, the negatives sequence will clearly show the order photographs were taken in, I strongly suspect that they will correlate to the order described by PC Bird.
I suspect that the photograph on this forum labelled 23 was taken at positions L-M on the schedule below, after the rifle had been removed, with the photographs showing the rifle on top of Sheila being taken prior to this, at position B on the schedule below.
There isn't even an argument to be had here, the negatives will categorically indicate the sequence.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=738.0;attach=3241;image)
This signed schedule will be one of the key exhibits when PC Bird, DI Cook and the other conspirators stand trial - its a forgery...
-
To be fair, from Bird's evidence it seems more likely that 23 was taken at C, with photos 27 and 32 having been taken at B. Patti has quite rightly asked what photos were taken at L, and that is a good question I think. What seems clear though, is that the photos taken at L were not used in 50 photos in the green court album. Perhaps they were photos of cartridges or something.
Not that it matters, but I disagree for the following reasons:
1. According to DC Bird he commenced taking photographs at 10am.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1037.0;attach=12011;image
2. According to A/PS Woodcock the rifle was removed from Sheila at 11:10am.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=609.0;attach=12498;image
3. According to DI Cook, he instructed DC Bird to take photographs of Sheila with the rifle, then continue to photograph the rest of the house. Photograph 23 showing the gun that was removed from Sheila was then taken after the original photographs.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12548;image
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12549;image
Therefore, I strongly suspect that photograph 23 was taken at position L and not at position C on DC Birds schedule.
-
Photo 23 was taken to show the rifle in the bedroom leaning up against the bedroom window, exactly how and where WPC Julia Jeapes had reported she had seen it some 15 minutes or so before the raid team went to enter the farmhouse. Photo 23 was / is a view of the rifle from inside the premises, of what WPC Jeapes had seen from outside, undisturbed as it were, until along came Cook to remove it, and he placed it on Sheila's body then got PC Bird to take pictures 27 to 32...
-
Not that it matters, but I disagree for the following reasons:
1. According to DC Bird he commenced taking photographs at 10am.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1037.0;attach=12011;image
2. According to A/PS Woodcock the rifle was removed from Sheila at 11:10am.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=609.0;attach=12498;image
3. According to DI Cook, he instructed DC Bird to take photographs of Sheila with the rifle, then continue to photograph the rest of the house. Photograph 23 showing the gun that was removed from Sheila was then taken after the original photographs.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12548;image
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12549;image
Therefore, I strongly suspect that photograph 23 was taken at position L and not at position C on DC Birds schedule.
Sorry H, I'm posting from my phone and so haven't read the links, but Bird's evidence was that photo 23 was 3 photos after he finished in the main bedroom, session 'B', he can't have taken photos in places C-K in between.
-
Sorry H, I'm posting from my phone and so haven't read the links, but Bird's evidence was that photo 23 was 3 photos after he finished in the main bedroom, session 'B', he can't have taken photos in places C-K in between.
Okay, I'm not sure I've seen that, where is it?
-
Okay, I'm not sure I've seen that, where is it?
I hope this works, I'm not sure how to do it on my phone..
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3005.msg111319.html#msg111319 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3005.msg111319.html#msg111319)
-
I hope this works, I'm not sure how to do it on my phone..
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3005.msg111319.html#msg111319 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3005.msg111319.html#msg111319)
Thanks Bridget.
Something isn't making sense to me, how can he photograph the rifle on Sheila, be present when they moved Sheilas arm and photograph the blood stain on her night dress, then walk out of the room and take a photograph from the stairs which shows the rifle leaning against the window frame, yet not be present when the rifle is removed?
It makes perfect sense if it is three photographs after going to the main bedroom for the second time, but not the first, unless I'm interpreting it incorrectly? :-\
-
Thanks Bridget.
Something isn't making sense to me, how can he photograph the rifle on Sheila, be present when they moved Sheilas arm and photograph the blood stain on her night dress, then walk out of the room and take a photograph from the stairs which shows the rifle leaning against the window frame, yet not be present when the rifle is removed?
It makes perfect sense if it is three photographs after going to the main bedroom for the second time, but not the first, unless I'm interpreting it incorrectly? :-\
Correct about a visit to main bedroom before 23, but this was when body of Sheila was on bed, without rifle on body, because rifle was still leaning against bedroom window where it had been continously ever since and from when WPC Jeapes Spotted it there before raid team went to get in house. Photos's 27 to 32 were taken after 23...
-
Cook did not take rifle off Sheila's body and place it against the bedroom window before PC Bird took 23, Cook took rifle from window After 23 and put it on Sheila's body, then PC Bird took photo's 27 to 32...
-
Thanks Bridget.
Something isn't making sense to me, how can he photograph the rifle on Sheila, be present when they moved Sheilas arm and photograph the blood stain on her night dress, then walk out of the room and take a photograph from the stairs which shows the rifle leaning against the window frame, yet not be present when the rifle is removed?
It makes perfect sense if it is three photographs after going to the main bedroom for the second time, but not the first, unless I'm interpreting it incorrectly? :-\
I assume he took the first set of photos, walked out of the room (at which point the gun was moved to the window), took another couple of photos then took photo 23. Can you see a problem with that?
-
I assume he took the first set of photos, walked out of the room (at which point the gun was moved to the window), took another couple of photos then took photo 23. Can you see a problem with that?
I suppose not, but would he not then have seen the rifle being moved or placed against the window, or wouldn't he have at least questioned why the rifle suddenly appeared somewhere it previously wasn't.
I could well be wrong, but it just doesn't sit right with me unless it was second visit to the bedroom that 23 was taken.
-
I suppose not, but would he not then have seen the rifle being moved or placed against the window, or wouldn't he have at least questioned why the rifle suddenly appeared somewhere it previously wasn't.
I could well be wrong, but it just doesn't sit right with me unless it was second visit to the bedroom that 23 was taken.
If he had already left the room when it was moved he wouldn't have seen them move it, and I suppose when he turned around and took the photo (23) he may not have noticed it there, he would have been looking through a view finder in 1985 wouldn't he?
-
If he had already left the room when it was moved he wouldn't have seen them move it, and I suppose when he turned around and took the photo (23) he may not have noticed it there, he would have been looking through a view finder in 1985 wouldn't he?
Problem with this theory is that rifle was always at bedroom window ever since WPC Jeapes spotted it there before raid team entered house...
Rifle had been leaning against that same window unmoved until after 23 was taken...
-
If he had already left the room when it was moved he wouldn't have seen them move it, and I suppose when he turned around and took the photo (23) he may not have noticed it there, he would have been looking through a view finder in 1985 wouldn't he?
I'm not totally convinced, but you could well be right.
-
I'm not totally convinced, but you could well be right.
Bridget, did you read the extracts from Cooks trial evidence, where Cook says he sent Bird off to photograph the rest of the house?
Relevant pages below:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12548;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12549;image)
-
Well that's clearly fantastical, the negatives sequence will clearly show the order photographs were taken in, I strongly suspect that they will correlate to the order described by PC Bird.
I suspect that the photograph on this forum labelled 23 was taken at positions L-M on the schedule below, after the rifle had been removed, with the photographs showing the rifle on top of Sheila being taken prior to this, at position B on the schedule below.
There isn't even an argument to be had here, the negatives will categorically indicate the sequence.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=738.0;attach=3241;image)
When Bird was examined in court he was asked by the CPS and the defence when he took court album number 23. The reply was after I had taken photo's of the main bedroom, I continued on the upper and, top set of stairs that is when 23 was taken. So it was in C. He continued towards the twins room, bathroom, back staircase, toilet, bedroom next to that, front bedroom (Sheila's room) down stairs. I was then called back up to the main bedroom, where I took more photo's.
It shows the rifle had been taken from Sheila. Cook says he was the one that put it at the window and it was about 11:00 ish. So Bird spent an hour just over taking photo's in the main bedroom. What photo's he took on his 2nd visit...I don't know, but it does make one think that the rifle had been replaced back on her body, if there is another photo's of her...If there is one higher than court index number 38 then the rifle had been placed back onto her body.....
Hello all. :) :) :) :)
-
Bridget, did you read the extracts from Cooks trial evidence, where Cook says he sent Bird off to photograph the rest of the house?
Relevant pages below:
Yes, that seems entirely consistent with what I'm trying to say.
-
Sorry Patti, I missed you there - hello!
-
Bridget, did you read the extracts from Cooks trial evidence, where Cook says he sent Bird off to photograph the rest of the house?
Relevant pages below:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12548;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=12549;image)
Cook lied, he PC Bird and others could not have taken photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, before 23 - there is no evidence in the form of any photographic schedule to support that which Cook and Bird have spoken about. The records show that photo's 26 to 32 were taken after 23, not before...
-
Yes, that seems entirely consistent with what I'm trying to say.
But also consistent with it being taken on the second visit, as is Birds court evidence, he just says after the main bedroom, not after the first visit to the main bedroom.
Okay, I still find it difficult to believe that he wouldn't have seen the rifle being moved, he must really have been engrossed.
-
But also consistent with it being taken on the second visit, as is Birds court evidence, he just says after the main bedroom, not after the first visit to the main bedroom.
Okay, I still find it difficult to believe that he wouldn't have seen the rifle being moved, he must really have been engrossed.
I can see I'm going to have to go back and read it again...:)
-
The lkast photo taken in the bedroom, before he went onto the landing was number 37.
Another thing here that bothers me. Is that cook said he asked Bird to take photo's of SC's wrist having being moved. He took 4 photo's inbetween that. 37,42,22,and 26.
It's confusing......but 27 was taken first then the numbers above then 32. :-\ :-\
-
I can see I'm going to have to go back and read it again...:)
If you read before that Hartley...He was asked what photo's he took first ..Kitchen and Laundry room. Then the main bedroom when asked when he took 23 he told them they were took after the main bedroom. He was being asked in which order and he continues to tell you....to me is was C.... ;)
-
Cook lied, he PC Bird and others could not have taken photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, before 23 - there is no evidence in the form of any photographic schedule to support that which Cook and Bird have spoken about. The records show that photo's 26 to 32 were taken after 23, not before...
If the schedules are wrong, why did PC Bird produce such a false schedule? Also, why have the contents of the Stokenchurch schedule been falsified as well? It is obvious to me that the details contained in these schedules is entirely accurate, and that the testimony of Cook and Bird does not fit the facts regarding the sequence which photographs, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 were taken...
So...
This brings us on to the technical matter of the photographic negative strips, some of which have been cut up, with some negatives missing altogether, some strips chopped up so that certain images in two separate strips could be presented as individual negative strips from only one strip...
Lets get the facts right...
The "SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ALBUM" contained 581 photographs, yet Essex police only released 402, or there abouts, imagine that over 179 missing or unaccounted for negatives? Most of the strips of disclosed negatives in tact and undisturbed, but the crucial negative strips which relate to the era when photographs were taken of Sheila in the bedroom, have been cut or as the case may be? From what I have been told there as many as seven or eight photographs that were taken of Sheila in the bedroom are missing...
Police have not gone to all this teouble of tampering with the photographic evidence for nothing, there has to be a reason for all these underhand tactics to have been adopted. ..
-
But also consistent with it being taken on the second visit, as is Birds court evidence, he just says after the main bedroom, not after the first visit to the main bedroom.
Okay, I still find it difficult to believe that he wouldn't have seen the rifle being moved, he must really have been engrossed.
What he says is:
I had finished taking the photographs of the main bedroom and I had come out and I had photographed the top landing and I stood in the middle of the upper set of stairs and took that photograph up there.
If he took photo 23 after M, N would be 'landing' again. I agree with Patti, photo 23 was taken at C. Reading it again they seem to be referring to only one set of pictures of Sheila (the ones that follow 27) and so I reckon the 2nd visit to the main bedroom was probably to take pics of blood stains or cartridges in situ.
-
If you read before that Hartley...He was asked what photo's he took first ..Kitchen and Laundry room. Then the main bedroom when asked when he took 23 he told them they were took after the main bedroom. He was being asked in which order and he continues to tell you....to me is was C.... ;)
Nah, he doesn't, they are not continuous, he says he took 23 after the main bedroom and repears this later on, what he doesn't do is say whether it was his first visit to the bedroom or second. What he does do is describe what he does immediately after the first visit to the bedroom.
Anyway, it doesn't matter, this isn't a quiz with scores awarded at the end, I'm quite happy with it being immediately after the first visit, but if it was then I can't understand why he didn't see the rifle being moved, unless as Bridget has suggested, it was at the precise instant of Bird turning his back and exiting the room.
It just makes more sense to me for it to have been after his second visit, as I've already said, I may well be wrong.
-
Nah, he doesn't, they are not continuous, he says he took 23 after the main bedroom and repears this later on, what he doesn't do is say whether it was his first visit to the bedroom or second. What he does do is describe what he does immediately after the first visit to the bedroom.
Anyway, it doesn't matter, this isn't a quiz with scores awarded at the end, I'm quite happy with it being immediately after the first visit, but if it was then I can't understand why he didn't see the rifle being moved, unless as Bridget has suggested, it was at the precise instant of Bird turning his back and exiting the room.
It just makes more sense to me for it to have been after his second visit, as I've already said, I may well be wrong.
I thought he said the main bedroom was after the kitchen then the landing where 23 was taken...You love making me work...I will re check it... :-\ :o :o :o ;)
-
What he says is:
I had finished taking the photographs of the main bedroom and I had come out and I had photographed the top landing and I stood in the middle of the upper set of stairs and took that photograph up there.
If he took photo 23 after M, N would be 'landing' again. I agree with Patti, photo 23 was taken at C. Reading it again they seem to be referring to only one set of pictures of Sheila (the ones that follow 27) and so I reckon the 2nd visit to the main bedroom was probably to take pics of blood stains or cartridges in situ.
Yes, you are probably right. :-\
-
Nah, he doesn't, they are not continuous, he says he took 23 after the main bedroom and repears this later on, what he doesn't do is say whether it was his first visit to the bedroom or second. What he does do is describe what he does immediately after the first visit to the bedroom.
Anyway, it doesn't matter, this isn't a quiz with scores awarded at the end, I'm quite happy with it being immediately after the first visit, but if it was then I can't understand why he didn't see the rifle being moved, unless as Bridget has suggested, it was at the precise instant of Bird turning his back and exiting the room.
It just makes more sense to me for it to have been after his second visit, as I've already said, I may well be wrong.
It doesn't have to be at that precise instant, after he left the main bedroom the first time he took two other photos on the landing before he took photo 23.
-
Yes, you are probably right. :-\
When were the bodies removed?
-
When were the bodies removed?
They were still there when he left WHF I think.
-
What he says is:
I had finished taking the photographs of the main bedroom and I had come out and I had photographed the top landing and I stood in the middle of the upper set of stairs and took that photograph up there.
If he took photo 23 after M, N would be 'landing' again. I agree with Patti, photo 23 was taken at C. Reading it again they seem to be referring to only one set of pictures of Sheila (the ones that follow 27) and so I reckon the 2nd visit to the main bedroom was probably to take pics of blood stains or cartridges in situ.
Now throw into the equation, the missing 7 or 8 negatives and photographs and treat these as the very first photographs which PC Bird took of of Sheila in the bedroom, on the bed, without the rifle on her body because it was still leaning against the bedroom window where it had been all along ever since WPC Jeapes spotted it there from before raid team went into premises. PC Bird then took photo of rifle leaning against bedroom window (23), followed by 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, which were taken after police moved Sheila's body from the bed to the floor...
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2185.0;attach=11962;image
-
Now throw into the equation, the missing 7 or 8 negatives and photographs and treat these as the very first photographs whic PC Bird took of of Sheila in the bedroom, on the bed, without the rifle on her body because it was still leaning against the bedroom window where it had been all along ever since WPC Jeapes spotted it there from before raid team went into premises. PC Bird then took photo of rifle leaning against bedroom window (23), followed by 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32...
The picture before photo 25 on the neg strip was of the dairy. Out of interest, what is the dairy?
-
The picture before photo 25 on the neg strip was of the dairy. Out of interest, what is the dairy?
I think that was the photo that is in the archives, where the eggs were kept and mesh is over the window...I might be wrong... :) :)
-
I think that was the photo that is in the archives, where the eggs were kept and mesh is over the window...I might be wrong... :) :)
Oh right, people seem to have multiple names for some of the rooms, I've also seen 'pantry' and 'back kitchen'.
-
Oh right, people seem to have multiple names for some of the rooms, I've also seen 'pantry' and 'back kitchen'.
[/quote
I could be wrong. Can we safely say that numbers 39 to 47 was taken on the 2nd visit? :-\
-
Oh right, people seem to have multiple names for some of the rooms, I've also seen 'pantry' and 'back kitchen'.
I could be wrong. Can we safely say that numbers 39 to 47 was taken on the 2nd visit? :-\
We can probably safely say that's possible ;)
-
Three sets of photographs were taken of Sheila in the bedroom, (first set) to which the missing 7/8 negatives of Sheila relate, (Second set) , 26 to 32, inclusive (third set), two photographs, one of her left leg and foot, and the other of her right leg and foot ( I believe)...
-
Three sets of photographs were taken of Sheila in the bedroom, (first set) to which the missing 7/8 negatives of Sheila relate, (Second set) , 26 to 32, inclusive (third set), two photographs, one of her left leg and foot, and the other of her right leg and foot ( I believe)...
Hi Mike
Blinking heck! It is recorded that some negatives and photo's are still withheld, plus some destroyed. How could anyone work all that lot out....is the order they have be given to court?
This is the first time I have heard of any photo's pertaining to her left and right leg....I know that JB has said he has never seen a photo underneath her right foot or hand....Yet, if you look closely enough you can see blood on her right thumb....
When Bird went in for the 2nd time, he takes a photo of the bed......why didn't he take that the 1st time? :) :) :)
-
There is no chronological record of which photographs were taken in sequence (1 to 179) other than the STOKENCHURCH register schedule, which includes the 50 court album photographs incorporated within it. According to these records, photographs 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, were taken in that order. It may well be that PC Bird took two photographs from the vantage point of the middle landing of the main stairs, showing the rifle leaning against the bedroom window, not one. This is very interesting particularly so, because PC Bird produced a double schedule showing the 223 photographs which formed part of the so called (wrongly named) MASTER COPY ALBUM, and the 50 COURT ALBUM photographs - photograph 23 in the MASTER COPY ALBUM, was a different photographs to photographs 23 in the COURT ALBUM, but both could have been a photographs showing the same general view of the rifle leaning up against the bedroom window. Because of this, you cannot be sure to which photo 23 PC Bird was referring to, in whichever system or Schedule, because it is not clear from the transcripts of his testimony?
-
Stokenchurch is not in chronological order...
Yes Patti, there are photos of both od Sheila's legs and feet listed in Stokenchurch. There's no reason at all to think that these were not disclosed, not least because the Stokenchurch list appears to be lists of photos which were included in the various court albums, but no idea whether they show the soles of her feet.
-
When Bird went in for the 2nd time, he takes a photo of the bed......why didn't he take that the 1st time? :) :) :)
He did photograph the bed on his first visit, and Sheila was on it - these are the negatives which are missing (I believe), the 7/8 all in a row, or from the same negative strip?
-
Stokenchurch is not in chronological order...
Yes Patti, there are photos of both od Sheila's legs and feet listed in Stokenchurch. There's no reason at all to think that these were not disclosed, not least because the Stokenchurch list appears to be lists of photos which were included in the various court albums, but no idea whether they show the soles of her feet.
It is a chronological order of the first 179 photographs, which also includes the 50 COURT ALBUM photographs given to the jury...
There is no other chronological schedule because to produce such a record exposes what the police did, that is why negatives have been cut out of negative strips so that they are singular, and why so many are still missing or unaccounted for? They chopped and changed the sequence with which these photographs were or had been taken to fit in with their made up story about finding Sheila's body as photographed by PC Bird in 27 to 32? What "a load of codswallop", what about the rifle not being on Sheila's body when PS Adams viewed Sheila in the bedroom at about 9am? What about the rifle still not being on Sheila's body when the coroners officer PC Wright viewed Sheila' body in the bedroom? How did the rifle get back on the body (it was never on in the first place) in time for PC Bird to photograph it there as per 27, to 32? Who put the gun back on Sheila's body in time for Cook and Bird to see it there, and for Bird to photograph it there (27, to 32) after 23?
Police moved rifle onto the body and off the body, and are tying themselves in knots trying to come up with some sort of an explanation to get away with stage managing Sheila's body with the rifle from the bedroom window?
Forget the order which PC Bird took photographs 23, and 27 to 32, for the moment - ask yourselves how the rifle that was seen at the bedroom window by WPC Julia Jeapes some 15 minutes or so before the raid team enter the premises, end up on top of Sheila's body, in keeping with the raid team version of events about supposedly finding Sheila's body in the bedroom, on the bedroom floor with the rifle atop it, and its barrel pointing in the direction of her chin, which had two wounds upon it? How did the rifle jump onto Sheila's body from the bedroom window in such a short period of time? Who moved it onto her body? How did it get there? A ghost didn't put it there?
-
It is a chronological order of the first 179 photographs, which also includes the 50 COURT ALBUM photographs given to the jury...
There is no other chronological schedule because to produce such a record exposes what the police did, that is why negatives have been cut out of negative strips so that they are singular, and why so many are still missing or unaccounted for? They chopped and changed the sequence with which these photographs were or had been taken to fit in with their made up story about finding Sheila's body as photographed by PC Bird in 27 to 32? What "a load of codswallop", what about the rifle not being on Sheila's body when PS Adams viewed Sheila in the bedroom at about 9am? What about the rifle still not being on Sheila's body when the coroners officer PC Wright viewed Sheila' body in the bedroom? How did the rifle get back on the body (it was never on in the first place) in time for PC Bird to photograph it there as per 27, to 32? Who put the gun back on Sheila's body in time for Cook and Bird to see it there, and for Bird to photograph it there (27, to 32) after 23?
Police moved rifle onto the body and off the body, and are tying themselves in knots trying to come up with some sort of an explanation to get away with stage managing Sheila's body with the rifle from the bedroom window?
Forget the order which PC Bird took photographs 23, and 27 to 32, for the moment - ask yourselves how the rifle that was seen at the bedroom window by WPC Julia Jeapes some 15 minutes or so before the raid team enter the premises, end up on top of Sheila's body, in keeping with the raid team version of events about supposedly finding Sheila's body in the bedroom, on the bedroom floor with the rifle atop it, and its barrel pointing in the direction of her chin, which had two wounds upon it? How did the rifle jump onto Sheila's body from the bedroom window in such a short period of time? Who moved it onto her body? How did it get there? A ghost didn't put it there?
Oh, hang on a minute, it must have been Jeremy...
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2185.0;attach=11962;image
Interesting. Thank you Patti. I did note something in that script. (1) Cook "gently" moved the hand. If her body was in rigor do you think he would have been able to do that?
And (2) It is acknowledged in the script that the gun "was" moved.
-
Police shot and killed Sheila after they took the rifle from the bedroom window (23) and placed it on her body - it was loaded at the time and due to mishandling and failing to check to make sure it was in a safe condition, a shot was discharged which effectively killed Sheila. They moved her body onto the floor and placed it on a rug from another part of the bedroom which had spots of June Bambers blood upon it. The bloodstain on the back of her nightdress was not duplicated on the rug beneath her body - they shot her, and killed her, and then they set about trying to cover up what they did. Part of the action they took was to create a false photographic record in the form of the MASTER COPY ALBUM into which they placed 223 of the 581 photographs they had taken, and from this they preselected 50 of those, and made them into another album, which they called the COURT ALBUM, which was to be given to the jury to help them make up their minds, as to Jeremy's guilt, or innocence? There were photographs in that COURT ALBUM which showed Sheila's body with the rifle atop it, which had been stage managed by the police, but the prosecution suggested that this was how Jeremy had left the body with a view to fooling the police into thinking, or accepting that Sheila took her own life (but she did not, and neither did Jeremy shoot and kill her), but it was the police who shot, and killed Sheila...
They cut up strips of photographic negatives to get rid of damning photographs in sequential order, which could be used at a later date by anyone who might come along to try and reconstruct what took place. Just like what they did with the bloodstained bedroom carpet, from that rather crucial area of the bedroom for where they had stage managed Sheila's body...
Crooks, the lot of them, evil "scumbag" crooks...
-
Police shot and killed Sheila after they took the rifle from the bedroom window (23) and placed it on her body - it was loaded at the time and due to mishandling and failing to check to make sure it was in a safe condition, a shot was discharged which effectively killed Sheila. They moved her body onto the floor and placed it on a rug from another part of the bedroom which had spots of June Bambers blood upon it. The bloodstain on the back of her nightdress was not duplicated on the rug beneath her body - they shot her and killed her, and then they set about trying to cover up what they did. Part of the action they took was to create a false photogroahic recird in the form of the MASTER COPY ALBUM into which they placed 223 of the 581 photogrioahs they had taken, and from this they preselected 50 of those and made them into another album which they called the COURT ALBUM, which was to be given to the jury to help them make up their minds as to Jeremy's guilt or innocence? There were photographs in that COURT ALBUM which showed Sheila;'s body with the rifle atop it, which had been stage managed by the police, but the prosecution suggested that this was how Jeremy had left the body with a view to fooling the police into thinking or accepting that Sheila took her own life (but she did not, and neither did Jeremy shoot and kill her) but it was the police who shot and killed Sheila...
They cut up strips of photographic negatives to get rid of damning photographs in sequential order which could be used at a later date by anyone who might come along to try and reconstruct what took place. Just like what they did with the bloodstained bedroom carpet from that rather crucial area of the bedroom for where they had stage managed Sheila's body...
Crooks, the loot of them, evil "scumbag" crooks...
Mike, was the gun checked to see if it had a hair trigger? I know some can be adjusted.
-
Mike, was the gun checked to see if it had a hair trigger? I know some can be adjusted.
I am not sure, but what I do know is that police at the scene were satisfied that Sheila could have shot herself twice because of recoil, so they must have thought that it did have a hair trigger, otherwise they wouldn't have come to the conclusion they did, if the trigger action was stiff...
-
Police shot and killed Sheila after they took the rifle from the bedroom window (23) and placed it on her body - it was loaded at the time and due to mishandling and failing to check to make sure it was in a safe condition, a shot was discharged which effectively killed Sheila. They moved her body onto the floor and placed it on a rug from another part of the bedroom which had spots of June Bambers blood upon it. The bloodstain on the back of her nightdress was not duplicated on the rug beneath her body - they shot her, and killed her, and then they set about trying to cover up what they did. Part of the action they took was to create a false photographic record in the form of the MASTER COPY ALBUM into which they placed 223 of the 581 photographs they had taken, and from this they preselected 50 of those, and made them into another album, which they called the COURT ALBUM, which was to be given to the jury to help them make up their minds, as to Jeremy's guilt, or innocence? There were photographs in that COURT ALBUM which showed Sheila's body with the rifle atop it, which had been stage managed by the police, but the prosecution suggested that this was how Jeremy had left the body with a view to fooling the police into thinking, or accepting that Sheila took her own life (but she did not, and neither did Jeremy shoot and kill her), but it was the police who shot, and killed Sheila...
They cut up strips of photographic negatives to get rid of damning photographs in sequential order, which could be used at a later date by anyone who might come along to try and reconstruct what took place. Just like what they did with the bloodstained bedroom carpet, from that rather crucial area of the bedroom for where they had stage managed Sheila's body...
Crooks, the lot of them, evil "scumbag" crooks...
They then hide the 581 photographs contained inside the SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ALBUM at headquarters, so that no-one can get their hands on it, depriving the defence of over 358 pictures that may have assisted the defence during the trial...
-
Another sad thing, is that even if the police did shoot and kill Sheila' the relatives would not want the truth to come out, because it would create all sorts of problems for them financially, emotionally, psychologically, and physically...
I don't think the relatives care if the police shot Sheila, as described, just so long as Jeremy is kept locked up for the rest of his natural life...
-
Another sad thing, is that even if the police did shoot and kill Sheila' the relatives would not want the truth to come out, because it would create all sorts of problems for them financially, emotionally, psychologically, and physically...
I don't think the relatives care if the police shot Sheila, as described, just so long as Jeremy is kept locked up for the rest of his natural life...
That is a very sad thing Mike.
-
Another sad thing, is that even if the police did shoot and kill Sheila' the relatives would not want the truth to come out, because it would create all sorts of problems for them financially, emotionally, psychologically, and physically...
I don't think the relatives care if the police shot Sheila, as described, just so long as Jeremy is kept locked up for the rest of his natural life...
I think that on that August night, two birds (cuckoos?) were killed very effectively with a stray bullet. I think Sheila and Jeremy had probably been thorns in avararistic family flesh from the time of their adoption. The removal of one, subsequently making provision for the removal of both from sharing the family fortune, may well have been seen as a golden opportunity. Like you, Mike, I find it hard to believe they cared beyond the fact that dirty washing may have to be done in public.
-
I think that on that August night, two birds (cuckoos?) were killed very effectively with a stray bullet. I think Sheila and Jeremy had probably been thorns in avararistic family flesh from the time of their adoption. The removal of one, subsequently making provision for the removal of both from sharing the family fortune, may well have been seen as a golden opportunity. Like you, Mike, I find it hard to believe they cared beyond the fact that dirty washing may have to be done in public.
..and yet the relatives were not beneficiaries of Nevill and June's estate;Sheila had the London flat and Jeremy would inherit the farm. It was Jeremy Bamber who was set to inherit as things stood after the murders and Ann Eaton's sole concern was her innate belief that "Sheila couldn't have done it".
-
..and yet the relatives were not beneficiaries of Nevill and June's estate;Sheila had the London flat and Jeremy would inherit the farm. It was Jeremy Bamber who was set to inherit as things stood after the murders and Ann Eaton's sole concern was her innate belief that "Sheila couldn't have done it".
When I was a young man I used to visit an old man just to keep him company. He didn't have much and his daughter and other relations never ever visited him.
But when he died they were round his house like a shot. Cleared out everything and were never seen again.
When people die I have often seen this avarice within mankind surface like a monster. It is the ugly side of human nature and affects most of us.
-
..and yet the relatives were not beneficiaries of Nevill and June's estate;Sheila had the London flat and Jeremy would inherit the farm. It was Jeremy Bamber who was set to inherit as things stood after the murders and Ann Eaton's sole concern was her innate belief that "Sheila couldn't have done it".
This is not entirely true, it was not clear cut who stood to inherit either parents estate? Depended on order of death, whether Ralph survived June, or vice versa? The contents of both wills were not identical, so it mattered who died before the other...
I agree that Sheila could not have committed suicide with the rifle that was leaning up against the bedroom window, whilst her body was found (a) downstairs in the kitchen, (b) upstairs on the bed, or (c) with her body on the floor in the bedroom...
-
At some stage after photograph 23 was taken, police renoved the metal end cap from the end of its barrel - this metal end cap would later become an exhibit of the court without anyone providing any information about who took possession of it, where it was found or when? This is because it was fitted to the end of the rifles barrel during the shootings and was the end of the guns barrel with paint on it, that DS Davidson spoke to COLP about - police know that at least one mark found on the underside of the aga surround was made when this metal end cap came into contact with it during the shootings. It must have been attached to the barrel of the rifle when the mark was made, therefore making it less likely that a silencer was used with that rifle...
Although this end cap was removwd by the police from the end of the rifles barrel after photo 23, was taken, police originally intended to suggest it had been discovered downstairs - this was because after police shot Sheila they needed to try and make this into a one gun crime where the person who was the principal suspect shot herself twice with use of the same .22 rifle (alrhough she had not). Later on, police decided to take the metal end cap out of the equation in favour of using the silencer / paint / blood evidence to help convict Jeremy of the murders...
-
Interesting. Thank you Patti. I did note something in that script. (1) Cook "gently" moved the hand. If her body was in rigor do you think he would have been able to do that?
And (2) It is acknowledged in the script that the gun "was" moved.
Grahame,dependent on the time of death,a person in the throes of rigor can't be " straightened " out without breaking bones. Sheila,in the pic with her hand bent,hadn't been dead for that long as I didn't detect any rigor even by looking at it. Neville would have been dead the longest I would have thought,but Sheilas' would have happened while Jeremy was outside with the police.
I'm just disgusted that times of death weren't recorded,,as it would have helped towards Jeremys' defence.
There wasn't even any sign of livor mortis in Sheila either,,which occurs about 2+ hours after death,,visible,if a person is lying on the floor like Sheila was latterly.( collection of blood that settles wherever or however a person has died in that position.)
-
..and yet the relatives were not beneficiaries of Nevill and June's estate;Sheila had the London flat and Jeremy would inherit the farm. It was Jeremy Bamber who was set to inherit as things stood after the murders and Ann Eaton's sole concern was her innate belief that "Sheila couldn't have done it".
The London flat was of no use to Sheila after she was dead, nor to the twins for the same reason. I'm fully aware that Jeremy would have inherited the farm and one of the ideas he'd tossed around, and at his age, why not, was that he would like to live in Devon and I contend that the rellies could NOT have been unconcerned about their future should this happen. I cannot be said that Jeremy's conviction did NOT work to their advantage.
As to your contention of "AEs sole concern", I find it both arrogant and presumptous. You are not in a position to tell us what she, or anyone else, was feeling, nor am I, but I can tell you, that with so many variables of personal concern in the mix, "sole concern" is a bit of a misnomer.
-
........I'm just disgusted that times of death weren't recorded,,as it would have helped towards Jeremys' defence...........
HI lookout. Yes, indeed it would and not doing so was a serious lapse, but at the time, Jeremy had no need of defence.
-
When I was a young man I used to visit an old man just to keep him company. He didn't have much and his daughter and other relations never ever visited him.
But when he died they were round his house like a shot. Cleared out everything and were never seen again.
When people die I have often seen this avarice within mankind surface like a monster. It is the ugly side of human nature and affects most of us.
How right you are,Grahame.I've had a taste of that in the past. Similar situation to this one.Say no more.!
-
So, to get this straight, after 'barking like a dog' for a couple of hours, she shot herself in the kitchen, collapsed, then woke up, picked up the rifle, evaded the police, entered the bedroom, placed the gun down, and was then shot through the neck a 2nd time by the police? On the bed? And you have a photo of her in the interim time between shots, on the bed, which to your knowledge has never been seen by McKay, but is on an 'enigma' system, which you've not tried to access throughout the 10 years or so you've had it?
Well, whilst your talking in such terms, to get this straight, the rifle is spotted at the bedroom window by WPC Jeapes, before the raid team set foot inside the farmhouse, yet by the time it takes the raid team to kick the door in, and get upstairs, the rifle has lept all by itself from the window onto Sheila's body? Then by the time PS Adams gets to see Sheila's body in the bedroom, the rifle has lept back off the body, as also confirmed by Coroners officdr PC Wright, but then the rifle has lept back onto the body in time for DI Cook to remove it again and (wait for it) place the rifle back at the bedroom window in time for PC Bird to take photograph 23 showing the rifle leaning against the same bedroom window that WPC Jeapes reported it to be resting earlier, then along comes PC Bird to photograph the rifle on the body when it was already resting at the bedroom window, without anyone seeing anybody pick up the rifle once from its original position at the bedroom window to return it back onto the body. For some reason, nobody wants to have to admit putting the rifle at the window onto Sheila's body, not once; not twice, not three times?
If nobody moved or touched anything, how did rifle get back and forth from window to body, to window to body, from window to body?
Oh, I get it, we can just put the blame on Jeremy...
-
Well, whilst your talking in such terms, to get this straight, the rifle is spotted at the bedroom window by WPC Jeapes, before the raid team set foot inside the farmhouse, yet by the time it takes the raid team to kick the door in, and get upstairs, the rifle has lept all by itself from the window onto Sheila's body? Then by the time PS Adams gets to see Sheila's body in the bedroom, the rifle has lept back off the body, as also confirmed by Coroners officdr PC Wright, but then the rifle has lept back onto the body in time for DI Cook to remove it again and (wait for it) place the rifle back at the bedroom window in time for PC Bird to take photograph 23 showing the rifle leaning against the same bedroom window that WPC Jeapes reported it to be resting earlier, then along comes PC Bird to photograph the rifle on the body when it was already resting at the bedroom window, without anyone seeing anybody pick up the rifle once from its original position at the bedroom window to return it back onto the body. For some reason, nobody wants to have to admit putting the rifle at the window onto Sheila's body, not once; not twice, not three times?
If nobody moved or touched anything, how did rifle get back and forth from window to body, to window to body, from window to body?
Oh, I get it, we can just put the blame on Jeremy...
I was just looking at the link that Patti posted where Bird was questioned about the gun.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2185.0;attach=11962;image
Q: Were you present - if that be the gun that was on Sheila's body - were you present when that was removed?
A: No.
Well if that be so then how did he take a picture of the gun as it rested next to the window? He must have been present even though he emphasised that Cook "carefully" moved Sheila's hand presumably so as not to disturb the gun?
Now this poses 2 questions. (1) Did Cook move the gun off Sheila's body? (2) Were there two guns?
Also it disproves one posters statement that the first thing the raid team would have done was to make the gun safe by removing it. If one denies that, then this must verify Mikes theory that Sheila was shot by mistake as the gun was removed from Sheila's body?
-
I was just looking at the link that Patti posted where Bird was questioned about the gun.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2185.0;attach=11962;image
Q: Were you present - if that be the gun that was on Sheila's body - were you present when that was removed?
A: No.
Well if that be so then how did he take a picture of the gun as it rested next to the window? He must have been present even though he emphasised that Cook "carefully" moved Sheila's hand presumably so as not to disturb the gun?
Now this poses 2 questions. (1) Did Cook move the gun off Sheila's body? (2) Were there two guns?
Also it disproves one posters statement that the first thing the raid team would have done was to make the gun safe by removing it. If one denies that, then this must verify Mikes theory that Sheila was shot by mistake as the gun was removed from Sheila's body?
Just a wild throw away though. Probably completely untrue? But......If the police shot Sheila by accident as they removed the gun, Would it have been they who removed the silencer and put it into the gun cupboard? But as I said it is just a foolish throw away thought. For to what purpose would it serve?
-
I am engaging Enigma to get access to the negative information in / on the system - I may post intelligence Gathered either later on today, or sometime tomorrow...
-
Links:-
(1) - http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profile/person?personId=622368390&targetid=profile
(2) - http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/forensic-evidence
(3) - http://www.channel4.com/news/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-will-set-me-free
(4) - http://news.sky.com/story/832908/family-massacre-bamber-hopes-for-freedom-bid
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1681.0;attach=7895;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1681.0;attach=7896;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1681.0;attach=7897;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1681.0;attach=7898;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1681.0;attach=7899;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1681.0;attach=7900;image)
-
There you have it in Jeremy's own words (courtesy of Enigma)...
"First photographs of Sheila in the bedroom, were taken after 23, showing the rifle at the bedroom window, not beforehand"...
-
Why did police lie about when first photographs of Sheila in the bedroom with the rifle upon her body, were taken, by claiming that theses were taken before PC Bird took photograph 23 (rifle leaning up against bedroom window), not afterwards?
-
Why did police lie about when first photographs of Sheila in the bedroom with the rifle upon her body, were taken, by claiming that theses were taken before PC Bird took photograph 23 (rifle leaning up against bedroom window), not afterwards?
Hi Mike
Blimey, I need a degree to understand that... :-[ :-[
-
I am engaging Enigma to get access to the negative information in / on the system - I may post intelligence Gathered either later on today, or sometime tomorrow...
Just a reminder Mike, that you need to find that picture of Sheila on the bed so that you can get Jeremy released. Just a thought, instead of posting all this other stuff, you might want to actually get him out!
-
Mike, what is Enigma? You posted a picture of a hard drive a while back, is it the same thing?
-
Mike, what is Enigma? You posted a picture of a hard drive a while back, is it the same thing?
No..
-
Meeting with "Z" this morning at Ware, Herts'...
-
The missing 7/8 negatives (in sequence) cover the first session when PC Bird took photographs of Sheila in the bedroom - These were not the ones 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 (which are not missing). Somebody is responsible, for editing the photographic negative records, cut a corresponding section of negatives out which relate to Sheila on the bed without the rifle on her body, and only one entry wound on her throat, and which were taken before 23, and substitute these with a corresponding section of photographs also taken of Sheila (after 23) with the rifle now on the body, fresh looking blood, and two wounds now upon her throat. This ploy and tactic was used to try and decieve people into thinking and accepting that photo's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 were taken before 32. Since it is now possible to reconstruct what actually took place, it becomes clear that Sheila recieved the second entry wound beneath the chin whilst police moved the rifle from the bedroom window (23) onto Sheila's body. If this deception had been known about at the time of Jeremy's trial it would have had very serious consequences upon the prosecutions case - it becomes clear that police stage managed Sheila's body, not jeremy...
-
Just collected something of interest and value from "Z"...
-
Mike what is enigma? i know nothing of these things. Is it some kind of storage facility? Do you have to buy one?
-
Mike what is enigma? i know nothing of these things. Is it some kind of storage facility? Do you have to buy one?
The only thing I could find was this:
http://www.enigmadata.com/
-
Thanks for that, Roch. Its all dutch to me though. I just need the basic gist.
-
Thanks for that, Roch. Its all dutch to me though. I just need the basic gist.
From what I can work out it's like a file management system for your computer. They supposedly make it easier to reference and locate stuff.
-
From what I can work out it's like a file management system for your computer. They supposedly make it easier to reference and locate stuff.
He needs to ask for his money back then!
-
He needs to ask for his money back then!
;D
-
What if one of the missing 7/8 negatives suddenly materialized? Where would that leave the integrity of the prosecutions case?
-
There is a short fall of 7/8 photographs which PC Bird took of Sheila's body in the bedfoom - linked to the disapearance of these 7/8 negatives, is the fact that a block of photographs, (25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32) have been moved to them being taken before 23, rather than afterwards...
PC Bird did take photo's of Sheila in the bedroom before 23, but those photographs have been removed and the corresponding negatives cut out of the strip, so that police could promote the idea that Sheila was shot twice already before photo 23 was taken, when she did not recieve the second shot under the chin until after 23...
-
There is a short fall of 7/8 photographs which PC Bird took of Sheila's body in the bedfoom - linked to the disapearance of these 7/8 negatives, is the fact that a block of photographs, (25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32) have been moved to them being taken before 23, rather than afterwards...
PC Bird did take photo's of Sheila in the bedroom before 23, but those photographs have been removed and the corresponding negatives cut out of the strip, so that police could promote the idea that Sheila was shot twice already before photo 23 was taken, when she did not recieve the second shot under the chin until after 23...
Documentary evidence exists to prove photo"s of Sheila with two wounds did not surface until after 23, and nothing can alter that fact...
-
Documentary evidence exists to prove
photo"s os Sheila with two wounds di
d not surface unt a
fter photo 23 was taken...
Are you on your phone by any chance? ;D
-
Are you on your phone by any chance? ;D
Yeah...
-
Yeah...
Lol, it shows. ;)
-
Lol, it shows. ;)
I agree, and it is equally as obvious that because Essex police cut up strips of photographic negatives, and produced false (forged) photographic schedules, to try and deceive the court into believing and accepting photo's, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, were taken sooner rather than later (either side of 23), the conspiracy they were all involved in, is exposed as the big lie that it was, and is...
-
I am not a back seat moderator as Roach suggests. Neither do I desire to be one. I apologise to Roach for my offensive words to him. I was extremely angry. But I am quite possibly the oldest person on the forum, a long standing member as well and I think that age deserves respect as it always used to in this country, don't you?
Just some food for thought, respect isn't something that should ever be demanded. It isn't something that comes with age.
Maybe if you calmed down more often, stopped the attacks and the foul language - you'd have respect? :o
-
Just some food for thought, respect isn't something that should ever be demanded. It isn't something that comes with age.
Maybe if you calmed down more often, stopped the attacks and the foul language - you'd have respect? :o
You know where you stand with Grahame, he doesn't suffer fools. If someone is offended by him they can always just ignore him, easy! There are certain people on here who I believe, have earnt the right to say what the hell they like (within reason!).