Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on February 20, 2011, 11:34:PM
-
ANN Eaton Notes - CAE/1a
According to contemporaneous notes written up by Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985, Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest, and the gun beside her...
Now...
Where did Ann Eaton get these details from?
More importantly, if Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed besides her, how did Sheila's body end up on the bedroom floor with the gun on her body, and the bible next to her arm?
How did her body get from one place to the other?
Who could have moved her body, and the gun, and the bible?
-
Where did this come from?
-
that was mentioned by the tabloids at the time of the murders too. also, didnt someone mention that both shiela and june were on the bed with the bible and gun between them?
-
Where did this come from?
--------------------------
I have a copy of all Ann Eatons notes that she wrote up contemporaneously from the date of the shootings - I will endeavor to post every note, as soon as I can find time to do so. These notes were handed over to COLP in 1991, when they carried out their investigation...
Mention in thee about the 11 minute delay involving phone call by Jeremy to police, and also about her knowing Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed next to the body...
-
that was mentioned by the tabloids at the time of the murders too. also, didnt someone mention that both shiela and june were on the bed with the bible and gun between them?
-------------------------------
Correct....
-
These comtemporaneous notes, recorded by one of the prosecutions main witnesses, Ann Eaton, were not disclosed to Jeremy, at the time of his trial, and can be relied upon, as fresh evidence, to help prove or establish, Sheila's body was moved, from the bed to the floor, by the police...
-
Ann Eaton, failed to disclose to the court, and to Jeremy, or his legal team, that these handwritten notes existed, the contents of which were capable of undermining the prosecutions claim that police originally found Sheila's body on the bedroom floor...
-
The position of the bodies, mentioned in these notes, is accurate and consistent with police statements, with the exception of Sheila - where Ann Eaton says, police told her Sheila's body was found on the bed, with a bible on her chest, and the rifle by her side, whereas, police claim Sheila was found on the bedroom floor, with the rifle on her body, and the bible next to her body...
-
Ann Eaton wrote "Jeremy phoned Chelmsford Police, who didn't react at all quickly - 11 min."
That puzzles me. There seems to be no other reference to or confirmation of an 11 minute delay and I can't think why she would have invented this.
-
Why would police mislead Ann Eaton, over the position they found her body in?
-
Ann Eaton wrote "Jeremy phoned Chelmsford Police, who didn't react at all quickly - 11 min."
That puzzles me. There seems to be no other reference to or confirmation of an 11 minute delay and I can't think why she would have invented this.
... Ann Eaton received this information from the same police source, as the information she was given, about where Sheila's body was found on the bed. There is no puzzle as far as the 11 minute delay, is concerned, since I believe this was the period mentioned to Ann Eaton, by her police informant, who was refering to the 11 minute delay, Ralph's call to Jeremy at 3. 25am, and Jeremy's call to the police, at 3. 36am. At the time her police informant told Ann about this 11 minute delay, the precise times of the aformentiomed calls, may not have been given to her. She may simply have been told that Jeremy had received a call from Ralph, at around 3 am. And this was slightly misinterpreted, culminating in the notes, she made...
-
There is no other mention of this 11 minute delay, anywhere at all, in any police record or account, it was obviously something which was told to Ann Eaton in confidence by a police officer. This 11 minute delay cannot be linked to the suggestion that Jeremy received the call from Ralph, at 3 am, because in order for that to be true, PC WEST'S claim that the clock was ten minutes fast, would have to be re - written, the clock in the control room, would have needed to be 36 minutes, fast...
-
This isn't really much to go on at all.
Firstly the accuracy of contemporaneous notes is subject to how the information was observed, did Ann see the bodies herself, or if she was told by a police officer, then did that police officer see the bodies or did someone tell him/her.
Also if you are going to take that particular sentence as fact then what about this one?
"3:00am Nevill called Jeremy, then the line went dead"
The police officers statements must be a more accurate account of events than these second hand information notes.
-
That sentence could easily reflect bias against Jeremy, whereas the entry about the delay effectively just criticizes the police.
-
Ann Eaton wrote "Jeremy phoned Chelmsford Police, who didn't react at all quickly - 11 min."
That puzzles me. There seems to be no other reference to or confirmation of an 11 minute delay and I can't think why she would have invented this.
----------------------------------------
It depends how you read, what Ann Eaton wrote, in my opinion...
She starts off talking about "Jeremy", who didn't react at all quickly - 11 mins, is not the same as "Chelmsford police", who didn't react at all quickly - 11 minutes...
There was exactly 11 minutes between when Ralph called Jeremy, (3:25am), and Jeremy calling the police at 3:36am, and I think that reference of 11 minutes, is a reference to this period...
There was not 11 minutes between the timing of PC Wests log (3:36am) and the timing of Malcolm Bonnets log timed at 3:26am - in any event, PC West claims the clock in the control room was 10 minutes fast, in order for both Bonnets and Wests calls to become synchronized, so bearing this in mind, Jeremy would have had to call the police some 11 minutes before 3:26am, which would place such a call made by him at 3:15am...
Ann Eaton places the timing of Jeremy's call to the police at 3am, which would make the clock in the control room have to be 36 minutes fast, instead of 10 minutes?
There is absolutely no physical or imaginary possibility that Jeremy called the police at all before either 3:36am, or if Ralph did not make the call at 3:26am, to that time, as well...
In my opinion, the comments made by Ann Eaton was based upon information given to her by a police officer claiming to be in the know for one reason or another, and this police officer, may have been referring to the fact that it took Jeremy some 11 minutes to react to the alleged call he received from Ralph, and that that call had or must have occurred at around or before 3am, because at the time he or she passed this information to Ann Eaton, that police officer did not know the specific times referred to...
-
This isn't really much to go on at all.
Firstly the accuracy of contemporaneous notes is subject to how the information was observed, did Ann see the bodies herself, or if she was told by a police officer, then did that police officer see the bodies or did someone tell him/her.
Also if you are going to take that particular sentence as fact then what about this one?
"3:00am Nevill called Jeremy, then the line went dead"
The police officers statements must be a more accurate account of events than these second hand information notes.
-----------------------------
The police officer who passed this information onto Ann Eaton, must have seen the body of Ralph Bamber in the kitchen with his head in the bucket. This same police officer must have seen the body of June Bamber near the door to the bedroom. This police officer must have seen the children in their beds. This same police officer must have seen Sheila's body on the bed - the identity of this police officer, who gave Ann Eaton, all of this information, should be declared and should have been declared, because this police officer had first hand knowledge that Sheila's body was on the bed, and that it had been found upon the bed. Such information and evidence is capable of seriously undermining the prosecution case, and the evidence given by other police officers that Sheila's body was found on the bedroom floor with the rifle on her body (not the bible) and the bible by her side (not on her chest)...
The identity of this police officer needs to be found out and established - I can't believe and I do not accept that Ann Eaton does not know the identity of this police officer, because she only came into contact with a few during those early days:-
(1) DS Jones
(2) DC Carter
(3) PC Robert Carr
(4) PI "Bob" Miller
It would be a simple case of deduction to work out which of these police officers could have been present inside the bedroom at a time when Sheila Caffells body was on the bed...
DS Jones, and PI Miller's, names spring to the fore...
I am aware, that Dr Craig attended the scene with PI Miller, and that both made witness statements declaring that Sheila's body had been found on the bedroom floor with the gun upon it, but DR Craig later informed Ewen Smith (Jeremy's solicitor in 2003) that Sheila's body was on the bed, not on the floor at that stage. What this means is that it is a very good chance that it could have been PI "Bob" Miller who told Ann Eaton that Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed next to the body...
I have personally seen a picture of Sheila on the bed...
In my opinion, Ann Eaton, knows far more than she is prepared to let on, about who told her Sheila's body was on the bed, not on the floor when police found it in the bedroom...
-
That reference to 11 minutes is very specific. She didn't say "about 10 minutes" or anything - she said 11. Hmmmmmm, very odd.
-
This is not evidence - it's the written equivalent of hearsay.
Neighbours to crime scenes are full of theories. Sometimes the press even print them. Are my diary entries of a crime suddenly evidence, contemporaneous or not?
JB's complaint was that the police kept him on hold for 11 minutes, asserted in other sources. Other aspects of these have been quoted as 'the truth'. Are these now lies?
Seriously doubt this would be admissable in court, particularly as any decent judge knows it would be savaged.
Today I was given to understand that there are now 5 million (yes million) documents/items of evidence concerning this case. Going on this, they'll eventually need a very big shredder.
-
Mike that all may well be true, I don't know, you've done a lot more research than I have any intention of doing.
However, my point is simply that the notes by Ann do not provide strong enough evidence to that effect. That's why I mentioned the time of 3:00am of the phone call, there is other evidence which indicates the call took place at a different time, so if the time given in Anns notes is incorrect then it's not beyond reason that Shiela's body location is incorrect.
-
Mike that all may well be true, I don't know, you've done a lot more research than I have any intention of doing.
However, my point is simply that the notes by Ann do not provide strong enough evidence to that effect. That's why I mentioned the time of 3:00am of the phone call, there is other evidence which indicates the call took place at a different time, so if the time given in Anns notes is incorrect then it's not beyond reason that Shiela's body location is incorrect.
----------------------------------------
Odd coincidence that the position of the other four bodies was accurate, but Sheila's was not?
Where did Ann Eaton get this information from?
Why does she protect the identity of the police officer, who fed her this information?
Are you suggesting that this police officer did not actually see the position of the five bodies at the scene, with his own two eyes? Is it being argued that he simply speculated about where the bodies could have been?
I think not...
-
This is not evidence - it's the written equivalent of hearsay.
Neighbours to crime scenes are full of theories. Sometimes the press even print them. Are my diary entries of a crime suddenly evidence, contemporaneous or not?
JB's complaint was that the police kept him on hold for 11 minutes, asserted in other sources. Other aspects of these have been quoted as 'the truth'. Are these now lies?
Seriously doubt this would be admissable in court, particularly as any decent judge knows it would be savaged.
Today I was given to understand that there are now 5 million (yes million) documents/items of evidence concerning this case. Going on this, they'll eventually need a very big shredder.
If Jeremy was specific about how long he was on the phone to the police, he must also know what time he called surely.
-
I'm not suggesting anything other than that this is not evidence which would stand up to scrutiny.
-
This is not evidence - it's the written equivalent of hearsay.
Neighbours to crime scenes are full of theories. Sometimes the press even print them. Are my diary entries of a crime suddenly evidence, contemporaneous or not?
JB's complaint was that the police kept him on hold for 11 minutes, asserted in other sources. Other aspects of these have been quoted as 'the truth'. Are these now lies?
Seriously doubt this would be admissable in court, particularly as any decent judge knows it would be savaged.
Today I was given to understand that there are now 5 million (yes million) documents/items of evidence concerning this case. Going on this, they'll eventually need a very big shredder.
If Jeremy was specific about how long he was on the phone to the police, he must also know what time he called surely.
-------------------------
The time quoted on the note, is Ann Eaton's, or the police officer ,who spoke to her's, guestimation, not Jeremy's. Jeremy has never said how long he was on the phone for, and neither has any police officer, or civilian worker, as far as I know - with the exception of the comments recorded by Ann Eaton, on these notes of hers, which details an 11 minute period...
The person who is responsible for introducing this 11 minute period has so far, not yet been formally identified, and yet everyone is accepting that there must have been such an 11 minute period...
Matter could be resolved if Ann Eaton identified the police officer who started all these rumors off in the first place...
In my opinion...
-
I'm not suggesting anything other than that this is not evidence which would stand up to scrutiny.
I understand what you are saying Hartley, but I accept that the photograph which Mike describes exists and therefore am willing to believe in the possibility that Ann Eaton's note of Sheila's location has some basis in reality. It also agrees with Julie Mugford's account of Jeremy's 'confession'.
-
JB's complaint was that the police kept him on hold for 11 minutes, asserted in other sources.
I think you're mistaken, Ann Eaton's notes being the only source (see below). JB's "complaint" seems to be limited to a more urgent tone and saying Nevill sounded terrified, after being put on hold.
Jeremy has never said how long he was on the phone for, and neither has any police officer, or civilian worker, as far as I know - with the exception of the comments recorded by Ann Eaton, on these notes of hers, which details an 11 minute period...
I think you asserted (or estimated?) that JB's call took 3 to 4 minutes. Haven't you ever asked Jeremy how long the call took (as far as he can recall)? If JB called PC West at 3.36, the call probably didn't end after 3.42, as the police recorded that Jeremy met them at Pages Lane at 3.50.
Malcolm Bonnet's log shows a call from PC 1990 at 3.26 and that car CA7 was sent at 3.35. That's a considerable delay, but perhaps the time of 3.35 reflected when it was confirmed that car CA7 was on its way, as nothing I've seen confirms that car CA7 already had three officers in it when requested to go to the farm.
-
I'm not suggesting anything other than that this is not evidence which would stand up to scrutiny.
I understand what you are saying Hartley, but I accept that the photograph which Mike describes exists and therefore am willing to believe in the possibility that Ann Eaton's note of Sheila's location has some basis in reality. It also agrees with Julie Mugford's account of Jeremy's 'confession'.
I agree that it's possible.
-
JB's complaint was that the police kept him on hold for 11 minutes, asserted in other sources.
I think you're mistaken, Ann Eaton's notes being the only source (see below). JB's "complaint" seems to be limited to a more urgent tone and saying Nevill sounded terrified, after being put on hold.
Jeremy has never said how long he was on the phone for, and neither has any police officer, or civilian worker, as far as I know - with the exception of the comments recorded by Ann Eaton, on these notes of hers, which details an 11 minute period...
I think you asserted (or estimated?) that JB's call took 3 to 4 minutes. Haven't you ever asked Jeremy how long the call took (as far as he can recall)? If JB called PC West at 3.36, the call probably didn't end after 3.42, as the police recorded that Jeremy met them at Pages Lane at 3.50.
Malcolm Bonnet's log shows a call from PC 1990 at 3.26 and that car CA7 was sent at 3.35. That's a considerable delay, but perhaps the time of 3.35 reflected when it was confirmed that car CA7 was on its way, as nothing I've seen confirms that car CA7 already had three officers in it when requested to go to the farm.
... One of the problems is that no-one knows when all of these key witnesses, recorded the times mentioned in these telephone logs, or statements, or handwritten notes? Were times jotted down when calls were made, received, or at the conclusion of the activities being spoken about, or mentioned? Another problem would thus be, the real possibility that none of these would be synchronized so that everyones account would fit snuggly together like pieces of a jigsaw. These are some of the problems which you may have to deal with in cases like this...
-
I'm not suggesting anything other than that this is not evidence which would stand up to scrutiny.
I understand what you are saying Hartley, but I accept that the photograph which Mike describes exists and therefore am willing to believe in the possibility that Ann Eaton's note of Sheila's location has some basis in reality. It also agrees with Julie Mugford's account of Jeremy's 'confession'.
Your last sentence is interesting.
I wonder if there's a statement anywhere which shows what Julie said. It would be interesting to see if her account tallies with what Ann said rather than what the photographs actually show. I don't recall Julie saying that Sheila was on the bed, but according to the Appeal document she claimed Jeremy told her that Sheila was told to shoot herself and that the killer placed a Bible on her chest. Ann also said the Bible was on Sheila's chest. Did Julie tell Ann that, or did Ann tell Julie that?
Julie said all that on 7th September, and I wonder what she actually knew by then - ie, that the Bible was not found on Sheila's chest.
It would also be interesting to know when Ann made those notes.
-
It's possible that the Bible was on Sheila's chest at some point. That would account for where the blood on the pages came from. It's obvious that the Bible didn't start off in the position depicted in the photos as the blood is in the wrong place.
-
I'm not suggesting anything other than that this is not evidence which would stand up to scrutiny.
I understand what you are saying Hartley, but I accept that the photograph which Mike describes exists and therefore am willing to believe in the possibility that Ann Eaton's note of Sheila's location has some basis in reality. It also agrees with Julie Mugford's account of Jeremy's 'confession'.
Your last sentence is interesting.
I wonder if there's a statement anywhere which shows what Julie said. It would be interesting to see if her account tallies with what Ann said rather than what the photographs actually show. I don't recall Julie saying that Sheila was on the bed, but according to the Appeal document she claimed Jeremy told her that Sheila was told to shoot herself and that the killer placed a Bible on her chest. Ann also said the Bible was on Sheila's chest. Did Julie tell Ann that, or did Ann tell Julie that?
Julie said all that on 7th September, and I wonder what she actually knew by then - ie, that the Bible was not found on Sheila's chest.
It would also be interesting to know when Ann made those notes.
... Ann Eatons statement that she made to COLP, in 1991, is very interesting, since she is giving her account of how she came to know that Sheila's body was found on the bed. She discusses the possibility that Julie Mugford could have been present when the policeman told Ann that Sheila's body was found on top of the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the rifle next to the body, not on it. The note written up by Ann Eaton, was written up by her, with regard to this matter, on 7th August 1985...
-
I'm not suggesting anything other than that this is not evidence which would stand up to scrutiny.
I understand what you are saying Hartley, but I accept that the photograph which Mike describes exists and therefore am willing to believe in the possibility that Ann Eaton's note of Sheila's location has some basis in reality. It also agrees with Julie Mugford's account of Jeremy's 'confession'.
Your last sentence is interesting.
I wonder if there's a statement anywhere which shows what Julie said. It would be interesting to see if her account tallies with what Ann said rather than what the photographs actually show. I don't recall Julie saying that Sheila was on the bed, but according to the Appeal document she claimed Jeremy told her that Sheila was told to shoot herself and that the killer placed a Bible on her chest. Ann also said the Bible was on Sheila's chest. Did Julie tell Ann that, or did Ann tell Julie that?
Julie said all that on 7th September, and I wonder what she actually knew by then - ie, that the Bible was not found on Sheila's chest.
It would also be interesting to know when Ann made those notes.
... Ann Eatons statement that she made to COLP, in 1991, is very interesting, since she is giving her account of how she came to know that Sheila's body was found on the bed. She discusses the possibility that Julie Mugford could have been present when the policeman told Ann that Sheila's body was found on top of the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the rifle next to the body, not on it. The note written up by Ann Eaton, was written up by her, with regard to this matter, on 7th August 1985...
If that's right, Ann wrote those notes before Jeremy allegedly told Julie how the murders had been done. That's interesting because it would indicate that it was Ann who told Julie about the Bible.
I suppose the first thing to establish is whether the Bible was actually on Sheila's chest or not. If it was not, then that would indicate that Jeremy did not tell Julie that.
-
I suppose the first thing to establish is whether the Bible was actually on Sheila's chest or not. If it was not, then that would indicate that Jeremy did not tell Julie that.
Other than the possible existence of withheld photographs that Mike keeps referring to I'm not sure how that could be established. Particularly given that there are witness statements from police officers stating that the bible was not on Sheila's chest.
-
This is not evidence - it's the written equivalent of hearsay.
Neighbours to crime scenes are full of theories. Sometimes the press even print them. Are my diary entries of a crime suddenly evidence, contemporaneous or not?
JB's complaint was that the police kept him on hold for 11 minutes, asserted in other sources. Other aspects of these have been quoted as 'the truth'. Are these now lies?
Seriously doubt this would be admissable in court, particularly as any decent judge knows it would be savaged.
Today I was given to understand that there are now 5 million (yes million) documents/items of evidence concerning this case. Going on this, they'll eventually need a very big shredder.
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found, unless the policeman who told her this, cannot be traced, or in the event that he can be traced, that he denies telling Ann Eaton, what she says he told her, and there is no further evidence, or information available, to suggest that what Ann Eaton says is true. In addition to her note, she made witness statements saying precisely what is written, in her note, and since the content of such a witness statement, would be admissible evidence, a court that deals with a case like this, could allow the contents of the note in, on the basis that its contents are supported, by information and evidence, elsewhere, in my opinion...
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... The witness statements made for the pokice officers, by the DPP, which gives detail about where Sheila's body was found, and the general circumstances of how she came to die inside the main bedroom, were not statements that were tended into evidence during the trial, and therefore, it was not evidence that the juries decision was acheived by a reliance upon. None of those police officers statements, were stamped with the Chelmsford Crown court stamp, or seal of approval, so, how anyone can say, that the police statements are stronger than photographs, is beyond comprehension...
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... The witness statements made for the pokice officers, by the DPP, which gives detail about where Sheila's body was found, and the general circumstances of how she came to die inside the main bedroom, were not statements that were tended into evidence during the trial, and therefore, it was not evidence that the juries decision was acheived by a reliance upon. None of those police officers statements, were stamped with the Chelmsford Crown court stamp, or seal of approval, so, how anyone can say, that the police statements are stronger than photographs, is beyond comprehension...
Beyond comprehension or not, that is the CCRC's interpretation and preliminary ruling.
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... CCRC have made a fundamental / elimentary mistake, by choosing to rely on the suggestion that these edited witness statements, are more reliable than the photographs - in view of the fact that the original unedited versions, may contain the very same evidence, to prove and establish, the exact opposite. It would be a traversty of justice, and bring the criminal justice system into disrepute, if the CCRC don't fully review this matter, in my opinion. A defendant, or appellant, is fully entitled to have sight of any original document, photograph, negative, and so my point would be this, how can it be lawful and legitimate, for the CCRC to rely on these police statements, without first of all having had sight of the original, or the originals to be handed over?
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... CCRC have made a fundamental / elimentary mistake, by choosing to rely on the suggestion that these edited witness statements, are more reliable than the photographs - in view of the fact that the original unedited versions, may contain the very same evidence, to prove and establish, the exact opposite. It would be a traversty of justice, and bring the criminal justice system into disrepute, if the CCRC don't fully review this matter, in my opinion. A defendant, or appellant, is fully entitled to have sight of any original document, photograph, negative, and so my point would be this, how can it be lawful and legitimate, for the CCRC to rely on these police statements, without first of all having had sight of the original, or the original?
I don't think so Mike. I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
You have no idea what is contained within these so called withheld files, and it is therefore beyond comprehension that you can use them to infer guilt or innocence.
I've asked you a few times now but haven't had any response (probably got lost in amongst other posts), what efforts has JB's legal team gone to in order to obtain these files?
If so much weight is being given to them potentially containing the smoking gun which would lead to proving JB's innocence, then why on earth are his team messing around with all these little tidbits of speculative evidence which doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny of lay people on these boards. Surely they should be spending every waking second to attempting to obtain these files?
I'm trying to be as open minded as I can.
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... CCRC have made a fundamental / elimentary mistake, by choosing to rely on the suggestion that these edited witness statements, are more reliable than the photographs - in view of the fact that the original unedited versions, may contain the very same evidence, to prove and establish, the exact opposite. It would be a traversty of justice, and bring the criminal justice system into disrepute, if the CCRC don't fully review this matter, in my opinion. A defendant, or appellant, is fully entitled to have sight of any original document, photograph, negative, and so my point would be this, how can it be lawful and legitimate, for the CCRC to rely on these police statements, without first of all having had sight of the original, or the original?
I don't think so Mike. I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
You have no idea what is contained within these so called withheld files, and it is therefore beyond comprehension that you can use them to infer guilt or innocence.
I've asked you a few times now but haven't had any response (probably got lost in amongst other posts), what efforts has JB's legal team gone to in order to obtain these files?
If so much weight is being given to them potentially containing the smoking gun which would lead to proving JB's innocence, then why on earth are his team messing around with all these little tidbits of speculative evidence which doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny of lay people on these boards. Surely they should be spending every waking second to attempting to obtain these files?
I'm trying to be as open minded as I can.
... I have a copy of a DPP memo, which clearly states that 'everything' has to be disclosed, except for the witness statement of, Mrs Mary Mugford - which was deceptive and misleading, because Essex police, and the DPP, between them, went on to deliberately withhold thousands and thousands of documents, most of which had been gathered when police believed Sheilb had killed herself - most of this withheld material, could have gone a very long way, toward helping to convince the jury, but for the police and DPP, deception...
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... CCRC have made a fundamental / elimentary mistake, by choosing to rely on the suggestion that these edited witness statements, are more reliable than the photographs - in view of the fact that the original unedited versions, may contain the very same evidence, to prove and establish, the exact opposite. It would be a traversty of justice, and bring the criminal justice system into disrepute, if the CCRC don't fully review this matter, in my opinion. A defendant, or appellant, is fully entitled to have sight of any original document, photograph, negative, and so my point would be this, how can it be lawful and legitimate, for the CCRC to rely on these police statements, without first of all having had sight of the original, or the original?
I don't think so Mike. I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
You have no idea what is contained within these so called withheld files, and it is therefore beyond comprehension that you can use them to infer guilt or innocence.
I've asked you a few times now but haven't had any response (probably got lost in amongst other posts), what efforts has JB's legal team gone to in order to obtain these files?
If so much weight is being given to them potentially containing the smoking gun which would lead to proving JB's innocence, then why on earth are his team messing around with all these little tidbits of speculative evidence which doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny of lay people on these boards. Surely they should be spending every waking second to attempting to obtain these files?
I'm trying to be as open minded as I can.
... I have a copy of a DPP memo, which clearly states that 'everything' has to be disclosed, except for the witness statement of, Mrs Mary Mugford - which was deceptive and misleading, because Essex police, and the DPP, between them, went on to deliberately withhold thousands and thousands of documents, most of which had been gathered when police believed Sheilb had killed herself - most of this withheld material, could have gone a very long way, toward helping to convince the jury, but for the police and DPP, deception...
Unless I'm being a bit thick (which is highly possible), you don't appear to have answered my question.
Okay, just for my benefit, lets take this one piece at a time.
1. You have a memo from the DPP stating the requirement for full disclosure of evidence. Who is the recipient of this memo, Essex Police I assume? When was this dated 1991?
2. Essex Police have given full disclosure of all evidence contained in the file relating to the charge of five murders, thus fulfilling the requirements of the memo from DPP.
3. What they have not disclosed (rightly or wrongly) is anything contained in the file relating to what they consider to be a different case of four murders and a suicide.
4. You have no idea what is contained in the file relating to the four murders and a suicide, yet you keep referring to it as potentially containing a smoking gun piece of evidence which would result in proving the innocence of JB.
5. What has been done by JB's team to release the files relating to the four murders and a suicide case?
6. Refer to my previous post above.
I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
-
I suppose the first thing to establish is whether the Bible was actually on Sheila's chest or not. If it was not, then that would indicate that Jeremy did not tell Julie that.
Other than the possible existence of withheld photographs that Mike keeps referring to I'm not sure how that could be established. Particularly given that there are witness statements from police officers stating that the bible was not on Sheila's chest.
Oh I don't know - perhaps we can establish that.
Take a look at this photo of the Bible.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=67.0;attach=742;image)
There is a large amount of blood on the right hand page at the top and a couple of small blood stains further down that page. There is also blood on the left hand page, but that seems to have got there when the Bible was closed because the small stains at least mirror the stains on the right hand page. Bear in mind that the Bible was face down at the scene. Is it not possible that it was on her chest and that's how the blood got onto the right hand page?
-
Is it not possible that it was on her chest and that's how the blood got onto the right hand page?
Yes it's possible.
-
Is it not possible that it was on her chest and that's how the blood got onto the right hand page?
Yes it's possible.
I can't understand those blood stains on the Bible at all otherwise. If the Bible was on the floor in the position depicted in the photos, I would expect most of the blood to be on the left hand page rather than the right hand page.
-
The book has also been closed whilst the blood was still wet, whether that happened before or after it was found by the police is unclear.
-
The book has also been closed whilst the blood was still wet, whether that happened before or after it was found by the police is unclear.
Yes, and one question I have is - would the blood on the pages still be wet enough to transfer to the other page when the police found Sheila if she died at around 3 am? If not, then the killer must have closed the Bible.
-
I suppose the first thing to establish is whether the Bible was actually on Sheila's chest or not. If it was not, then that would indicate that Jeremy did not tell Julie that.
Other than the possible existence of withheld photographs that Mike keeps referring to I'm not sure how that could be established. Particularly given that there are witness statements from police officers stating that the bible was not on Sheila's chest.
Oh I don't know - perhaps we can establish that.
Take a look at this photo of the Bible.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=67.0;attach=742;image)
There is a large amount of blood on the right hand page at the top and a couple of small blood stains further down that page. There is also blood on the left hand page, but that seems to have got there when the Bible was closed because the small stains at least mirror the stains on the right hand page. Bear in mind that the Bible was face down at the scene. Is it not possible that it was on her chest and that's how the blood got onto the right hand page?
My punt in the dark *clearly speculation* is that the blood on the right hand page of the bible could have been transferred by the person smearing their fingers on Sheila's wound. The wound with what looks like fingermarks on it.
And while i'm speculating some more, if a killer was involved, they could have quite happily closed the bloodied bible, wondered where to put it to make it look convincing, tried 2 or 3 places & then decided that leaving it open where it was photographed was roughly right.
*Although, looking again, maybe the big smear was added last, as an afterthought - or otherwise there might be a corresponding smear on the otherside. Looking at the larger smear, does anyone think this might have been made by gloved fingers?
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... CCRC have made a fundamental / elimentary mistake, by choosing to rely on the suggestion that these edited witness statements, are more reliable than the photographs - in view of the fact that the original unedited versions, may contain the very same evidence, to prove and establish, the exact opposite. It would be a traversty of justice, and bring the criminal justice system into disrepute, if the CCRC don't fully review this matter, in my opinion. A defendant, or appellant, is fully entitled to have sight of any original document, photograph, negative, and so my point would be this, how can it be lawful and legitimate, for the CCRC to rely on these police statements, without first of all having had sight of the original, or the original?
I don't think so Mike. I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
You have no idea what is contained within these so called withheld files, and it is therefore beyond comprehension that you can use them to infer guilt or innocence.
I've asked you a few times now but haven't had any response (probably got lost in amongst other posts), what efforts has JB's legal team gone to in order to obtain these files?
If so much weight is being given to them potentially containing the smoking gun which would lead to proving JB's innocence, then why on earth are his team messing around with all these little tidbits of speculative evidence which doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny of lay people on these boards. Surely they should be spending every waking second to attempting to obtain these files?
I'm trying to be as open minded as I can.
... I have a copy of a DPP memo, which clearly states that 'everything' has to be disclosed, except for the witness statement of, Mrs Mary Mugford - which was deceptive and misleading, because Essex police, and the DPP, between them, went on to deliberately withhold thousands and thousands of documents, most of which had been gathered when police believed Sheilb had killed herself - most of this withheld material, could have gone a very long way, toward helping to convince the jury, but for the police and DPP, deception...
Unless I'm being a bit thick (which is highly possible), you don't appear to have answered my question.
Okay, just for my benefit, lets take this one piece at a time.
1. You have a memo from the DPP stating the requirement for full disclosure of evidence. Who is the recipient of this memo, Essex Police I assume? When was this dated 1991?
2. Essex Police have given full disclosure of all evidence contained in the file relating to the charge of five murders, thus fulfilling the requirements of the memo from DPP.
3. What they have not disclosed (rightly or wrongly) is anything contained in the file relating to what they consider to be a different case of four murders and a suicide.
4. You have no idea what is contained in the file relating to the four murders and a suicide, yet you keep referring to it as potentially containing a smoking gun piece of evidence which would result in proving the innocence of JB.
5. What has been done by JB's team to release the files relating to the four murders and a suicide case?
6. Refer to my previous post above.
I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
Mike, my understanding would benefit from answers to Hartley's points too.
-
... It is not hearsay that Ann Eaton was told by a police officer where Sheila's body was found...
Well actually that's exactly what it is.
You can't trace any supporting corroborating evidence, in fact police officers witness statements contradict Ann's notes.
Your opinion that the body was found on the bed is indeed possible, but this is not the evidence which proves it.
... CCRC have made a fundamental / elimentary mistake, by choosing to rely on the suggestion that these edited witness statements, are more reliable than the photographs - in view of the fact that the original unedited versions, may contain the very same evidence, to prove and establish, the exact opposite. It would be a traversty of justice, and bring the criminal justice system into disrepute, if the CCRC don't fully review this matter, in my opinion. A defendant, or appellant, is fully entitled to have sight of any original document, photograph, negative, and so my point would be this, how can it be lawful and legitimate, for the CCRC to rely on these police statements, without first of all having had sight of the original, or the original?
I don't think so Mike. I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
You have no idea what is contained within these so called withheld files, and it is therefore beyond comprehension that you can use them to infer guilt or innocence.
I've asked you a few times now but haven't had any response (probably got lost in amongst other posts), what efforts has JB's legal team gone to in order to obtain these files?
If so much weight is being given to them potentially containing the smoking gun which would lead to proving JB's innocence, then why on earth are his team messing around with all these little tidbits of speculative evidence which doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny of lay people on these boards. Surely they should be spending every waking second to attempting to obtain these files?
I'm trying to be as open minded as I can.
... I have a copy of a DPP memo, which clearly states that 'everything' has to be disclosed, except for the witness statement of, Mrs Mary Mugford - which was deceptive and misleading, because Essex police, and the DPP, between them, went on to deliberately withhold thousands and thousands of documents, most of which had been gathered when police believed Sheilb had killed herself - most of this withheld material, could have gone a very long way, toward helping to convince the jury, but for the police and DPP, deception...
Unless I'm being a bit thick (which is highly possible), you don't appear to have answered my question.
Okay, just for my benefit, lets take this one piece at a time.
1. You have a memo from the DPP stating the requirement for full disclosure of evidence. Who is the recipient of this memo, Essex Police I assume? When was this dated 1991?
2. Essex Police have given full disclosure of all evidence contained in the file relating to the charge of five murders, thus fulfilling the requirements of the memo from DPP.
3. What they have not disclosed (rightly or wrongly) is anything contained in the file relating to what they consider to be a different case of four murders and a suicide.
4. You have no idea what is contained in the file relating to the four murders and a suicide, yet you keep referring to it as potentially containing a smoking gun piece of evidence which would result in proving the innocence of JB.
5. What has been done by JB's team to release the files relating to the four murders and a suicide case?
6. Refer to my previous post above.
I'm pretty sure the way it works is that you need to find some evidence to warrant being awarded leave to appeal. The absolute fact is that this evidence either hasn't been found, or doesn't exist, depending on which side of the fence you want to lean.
-------------------------------------------------
Steps have already been taken to get control of the missing documents as far as I am aware, so I hope that answers your query on that point?
I would now like to take the opportunity to set the record straight about the misuse of these two files, SC/688/85 and SC/786/85, by the police, DPP and the criminal Justice system, in general...
The trial Judge, Mr Justice Drake, summed up Jeremy's trial when he spoke to the jury in his summing up speech, where he reminded them, that there was no suggestion that any as yet unidentified third party was or could have been responsible for killing everyone, and that the jury had to decide if, Sheila killed the others, and then herself, of ii Jeremy killed everyone...
This is what the trial was all about - was it Sheila, or Jeremy?
It was therefore inappropriate, and totally unfair for the police, and the prosecution (DPP), to select parts of the first case (SC/688/85), which the DPP edited, and retyped, for inclusion into the second file (SC/786/85), and then deny the defendant and his legal team, and the court which tried Bamber for these offences, any opportunity to see the other parts of the evidence contained in the original file, that might show or support the fact that Sheila took her own life in the bedroom?
In order for Jeremy Bamber to have received a fair trial, it was necessary, to provide access to him, and his legal team, before he even set foot inside any courthouse, so that he could extract from the original file, anything which might tend to prove or show Sheila's culpability...
The jury had to decide whether Sheila killed herself after killing the others, or if Jeremy killed everyone?
I do not see how there can have been anything fair about his trial if the police and the DPP took anything or everything they could lay their hands upon from the original file, (SC/688/85) and re-hashed it, so that they could put it into the new file, (SC/786/85), then seek to ban Bamber and his legal team, and the jury from seeing all the other material which had been obtained during the original investigation, which tended to prove and show that Sheila was responsible...
You cannot allow one party to take something from the original file (SC/688/85) and include it in the new file (SC/786/85) and then seek to block any attempt that the defendant and his legal team, may want to get their hands on all the material which would tend to establish Bambers innocence to these allegations, by claiming that Bamber was not entitled to see any of it, because that was a different case altogether?
What a load of nonsense...
The deaths of these five people was common to both cases, (SC/688/85 and SC/786/85) and where their bodies were found, how many times they were shot, which guns were used to kill each and everyone of them, How the different silencers came to be in the possession of the police, who moved the bodies, why there were 581 photographs in the SC/688/85 file, yet only 223 in the new file, SC/786/85, on and on the list of features which are common to both files, etc...
Fact is, that Jeremy Bamber did not receive a fair trial because the police and the DPP adopted these tactics to prevent the jury hearing about any evidence which the police gathered as part of SC/688/85 to prove beyond a shadow of doubt, that Sheila Caffell took her own life in the bedroom, at whf...
The police used information at the opening of the inquest into these five deaths, on 14th August 1985, that Jeremy Bamber was on trial for, from the original file (SC/688/85), and they convinced the deputy Coroner Mr Thompkin, to accept that Sheila killed the others and that she then took her own life, and as a result of this information being imparted from the original file (SC/688/85) the bodies of the five victims were authorized for release...
Police and DPP conspired to pervert the course of justice by adopting these tactics in my opinion, resulting in the jury being denied access to information, material and evidence which the police gathered during the early part of the investigation, under SC/688/85, which the jury were entitled to hear considering that they were there on the pretense of trying to decide if Sheila killed the others and then herself, or if Jeremy killed everyone...
Read the judges summing up, Drake puts the case to the jury on the basis that there could only be two possible outcomes, (1) Sheila killed herself, or (2) Jeremy did?
If the court was denied all this evidence contained in the original file (SC/688/85) that tended to show or prove that Sheila took her own life in the bedroom...
In view of all this - please explain to me how Jeremy Bamber got a fair trial?
He did not get a fair trial at all, it was akin to a kangaroo court, where the police and the DPP, conspired together with its witnesses to pervert the course of justice, by claiming the jury made a just decision based upon all the available evidence, but the Truth is that all the crucial evidence that tended to prove or show Sheila's culpability was denied to the court, and to Jeremy...
Everyone is entitled o receive a fair trial, and to know the case alleged against them, and to have access to all the information available so that he / she can prepare a proper defense...
Bambers convictions are not safe, and he did not get a fair trial, if anything he got an unfair trial...
-
Why did the defence not complain about the stuff from the first file being witheld? They must have noticed that statements from early on after the murders were not being disclosed to them.
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
It doesnt have to be released in the public domain just to a lawyer who sign's a confidentiality agreement , otherwise the countries judicial system looks a joke to the watching world, dont you think it looks bad enough destroying the DNA , also release all notebooks for ESDA testing .
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
It did look as if the Bible was resting on her arm. It's absurd to think that she put it there. She was shot sitting up IMO - at least the first time. If she fell back after the first shot the Bible wouldn't have been on top of her arm, and I doubt she would put it there before shooting herself again. If she didn't fall back after the first shot, she couldn't have put the Bible in that position herself before shooting herself again.
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
------------------------------
Good points...
The use of these different silencers (SBJ/1, DB/1 and DRB/1) has been concealed between these two files, (SC/688/85 and SC/786/85) and merged into one...
Bamber silencer (DRB/1) played no role at all in the original case file (SC/688/85), yet the police doctored the exhibit references and lab' item numbers, to make out a false case that the Bamber silencer (DRB/1) was in the possession of the police all along, when it was not and could not h ave been because it was not found in the gun cupboard by David Boutflour, until 11th September 1985...
-
When was it first brought up about these undisclosed files?
Why do you jump to the conclusion that the withholding of this first case is evidence of corruption and that it means JB was framed. Also what makes you think it will prove his innocence?
I just don't see it, if your accusation is true then the level of corruption involved is huge.
-
When was it first brought up about these undisclosed files?
Why do you jump to the conclusion that the withholding of this first case is evidence of corruption and that it means JB was framed. Also what makes you think it will prove his innocence?
I just don't see it, if your accusation is true then the level of corruption involved is huge.
------------------------
Far too many errors, and mistakes, for it not to be a conspiracy...
-
So many errors and mistakes, yet they can pull off a perfect stitch up? There is far too many people involved for it to have stayed a secret, I think it's more than a bit far fetched.
But that's theory, which I didn't fully understand before, so thank you for explaining it.
-
So many errors and mistakes, yet they can pull off a perfect stitch up? There is far too many people involved for it to have stayed a secret, I think it's more than a bit far fetched.
But that's theory, which I didn't fully understand before, so thank you for explaining it.
---------------------------------
But thats just the point - they have not got away with it...
The evidence is there in black and white for everyone who cares to see it, but there will always be those who choose to interpret it, differently - but, as I say, they doctored the silencer evidence so that they could convict Jeremy Bamber for these murders. Without that silencer he would never have got convicted at all...
-
So many errors and mistakes, yet they can pull off a perfect stitch up? There is far too many people involved for it to have stayed a secret, I think it's more than a bit far fetched.
But that's theory, which I didn't fully understand before, so thank you for explaining it.
---------------------------------
But thats just the point - they have not got away with it...
The evidence is there in black and white for everyone who cares to see it, but there will always be those who choose to interpret it, differently - but, as I say, they doctored the silencer evidence so that they could convict Jeremy Bamber for these murders. Without that silencer he would never have got convicted at all...
Yes, the silencer is that main sticking point really.
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
Even if they are in the first file ?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
Even if they are in the first file ?
Correct. You address the question to the specific file.
This file has NOT been sealed for security purposes.
You or I can't ask out of curiosity. It would disclose private information about the Bamber family.
JB is a ember of that family and has been tried for their murders. His legal representative can ask on his behalf.
So, have they asked?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
Even if they are in the first file ?
Correct. You address the question to the specific file.
This file has NOT been sealed for security purposes.
You or I can't ask out of curiosity. It would disclose private information about the Bamber family.
JB is a ember of that family and has been tried for their murders. His legal representative can ask on his behalf.
So, have they asked?
You seem to know how these things work , what do you think ? They must have surely ? Is there a way they could ignore the request knowing it would point to JB being innocent in your opinion ?
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
Even if they are in the first file ?
Correct. You address the question to the specific file.
This file has NOT been sealed for security purposes.
You or I can't ask out of curiosity. It would disclose private information about the Bamber family.
JB is a ember of that family and has been tried for their murders. His legal representative can ask on his behalf.
So, have they asked?
You seem to know how these things work , what do you think ? They must have surely ? Is there a way they could ignore the request knowing it would point to JB being innocent in your opinion ?
Honestly?
I think they have asked, don't like the answer, so have decided it's a lie.
or
Haven't asked because they know there isn't anything there, but conjecture keeps 'theories' alive.
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
Even if they are in the first file ?
Correct. You address the question to the specific file.
This file has NOT been sealed for security purposes.
You or I can't ask out of curiosity. It would disclose private information about the Bamber family.
JB is a ember of that family and has been tried for their murders. His legal representative can ask on his behalf.
So, have they asked?
You seem to know how these things work , what do you think ? They must have surely ? Is there a way they could ignore the request knowing it would point to JB being innocent in your opinion ?
Honestly?
I think they have asked, don't like the answer, so have decided it's a lie.
or
Haven't asked because they know there isn't anything there, but conjecture keeps 'theories' alive.
I like you MB1 you speak sense !!
-
Two things
Disclosure:
'We want everything' has not, does not, will never meet with a response.'
All evidence pertaining to 'silencer DB/1 - within the regulations can be checked for and disclosed.
Pii and all associated laws are actually in place to protect us - our identities and our right to privacy. Imagine if everyone had access to everything? Your nosey neighbour... Your boss... The drug dealer with heavy mates you phoned the police about, and because they found enough evidence they never needed to use your information?
The bureaucracy is maddening, but it has a real purpose.
As I've said, you have to ask the right question of the file, and it will answer!
Responses from the 'mystery file' HAVE been given to JB.s legal team in this way. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
Bible:
It has clearly been closed at some point, although I wouldn't dispute that could be the police.
Anyone who has regularly deal with documents or books will tell you they take an age to dry out. Blood dries on the surface first, so the underneath could still be semi-liquid.
Interesting idea about it being deliberately smeared with Sheila's/someone's blood.
Wasn't this partly rested/posed on her arm?
-------------------------------------------------
I take on board points made above, but this system is also open to abuse by the police and the cps, and the judiciary, in general...
I accept your point as well. But's it's a tough call. Because most of the time this system does serve most of us well.
The difficulty in saying solicitors should be given carte blanche is exactly the same - what if they are defending that drug dealer? Play golf with your nosey neighbour? Your boss?
The problem is, we all feel justified when we want to find out things, but that changes when we realise others could use it against us.
I have heard of employers who check every job applicants name against Facebook etc.
Imagine once everything's computerised if they were just able to ask the NHS/police etc to do a name/NINO search and give them everything that came up?
So if JB asked for pictures of Sheila's body on the bed and they had them they would have to release them ? By the way who do they have to protect by not releasing photo's or audio tape's of the night, not to mention note book's ?
I see absolutely NO reason why they could refuse to respond to the following:
All photographs detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF
or
Images processed from all negatives detailing the bed in the main bedroom at WHF (cost of processing images to be incurred by requestor)
So, have they been asked and told no further images?
Or haven't they asked yet?
Even if they are in the first file ?
Correct. You address the question to the specific file.
This file has NOT been sealed for security purposes.
You or I can't ask out of curiosity. It would disclose private information about the Bamber family.
JB is a ember of that family and has been tried for their murders. His legal representative can ask on his behalf.
So, have they asked?
You seem to know how these things work , what do you think ? They must have surely ? Is there a way they could ignore the request knowing it would point to JB being innocent in your opinion ?
Honestly?
I think they have asked, don't like the answer, so have decided it's a lie.
or
Haven't asked because they know there isn't anything there, but conjecture keeps 'theories' alive.
I like you MB1 you speak sense !!
If they asked and didnt like the answer its simple for EP to come out and say so , are you happy MB for them to withhold anything , notebooks , audio tapes , photos or documents that dont compromise anyone's personal address or other personal details ?
-
If they asked and didnt like the answer its simple for EP to come out and say so , are you happy MB for them to withhold anything , notebooks , audio tapes , photos or documents that dont compromise anyone's personal address or other personal details ?
I suppose if that were the case, then Essex Police could release that to the public, but why would they, there's no incentive for them to do so.
I'm not so sure this withheld evidence claim is as big a deal as Mike is making it out to be, it's contents are unknown so it could either help JB's cause or hinder it, or more than likely do neither.
-
If they asked and didnt like the answer its simple for EP to come out and say so , are you happy MB for them to withhold anything , notebooks , audio tapes , photos or documents that dont compromise anyone's personal address or other personal details ?
I suppose if that were the case, then Essex Police could release that to the public, but why would they, there's no incentive for them to do so.
I'm not so sure this withheld evidence claim is as big a deal as Mike is making it out to be, it's contents are unknown so it could either help JB's cause or hinder it, or more than likely do neither.
Yes, good point. Elsewhere Mike says he has 50,000 copy documents, of which say the best 100 or so documents are used to illustrate his views and are shared with us. (100 is a guess obviously). So I wonder what the other 49,000 documents illustrate.
And no, I don't want them all posted. ;)
-
If they asked and didnt like the answer its simple for EP to come out and say so , are you happy MB for them to withhold anything , notebooks , audio tapes , photos or documents that dont compromise anyone's personal address or other personal details ?
I suppose if that were the case, then Essex Police could release that to the public, but why would they, there's no incentive for them to do so.
I'm not so sure this withheld evidence claim is as big a deal as Mike is making it out to be, it's contents are unknown so it could either help JB's cause or hinder it, or more than likely do neither.
Yes, good point. Elsewhere Mike says he has 50,000 copy documents, of which say the best 100 or so documents are used to illustrate his views and are shared with us. (100 is a guess obviously). So I wonder what the other 49,000 documents illustrate.
And no, I don't want them all posted. ;)
The other 49,900 could just simply point to the fact hes guilty! i think until ALL documents and evidence is released its impossible for anyone to form a proper opinion.
I read somewhere that JB and his legal team where holding evidence back incase they needed to appeal further in future, that just seems absurd to me.
-
I read somewhere that JB and his legal team where holding evidence back incase they needed to appeal further in future, that just seems absurd to me.
I agree: why wait? why hold back?
-
I read somewhere that JB and his legal team where holding evidence back incase they needed to appeal further in future, that just seems absurd to me.
I agree: why wait? why hold back?
Well, for one, the CCRC would have to take even longer reviewing the submissions. The other reason for not presenting the CCRC with everything, in my opinion, could be because should they not respond favourably to your submissions, they might respond more favourably at a later date under different circumstances, considering only that evidence, perhaps involving different case workers etc. who perhaps view the case differently for some non-specific other reason . . . Plus, in July (or a bit before) the CCRC would no longer receive submissions from him).
-
If there is nothing to hide then disclose all the information - simple. Revealing all the undisclosed information may help neither side but it would go some way to being more transparent in the name of justice. The resistance to it makes everyone feel there is something to hide - how many national newspapers have been quoting the fact of the undisclosed documents and photos? It is actually pivotal in an individuals decision to want to support an appeal. I have explained the case to a number of people and most of them can't make up their mind either way until you mention the undisclosed documents and photos - it's that important! The general public think it's outrageous when explained to them. It would go some way to settling this matter once and for all. I can not think of anything that could be in there that needs to held under PII rules to protect the public - can anyone else?
-
If there is nothing to hide then disclose all the information - simple. Revealing all the undisclosed information may help neither side but it would go some way to being more transparent in the name of justice. The resistance to it makes everyone feel there is something to hide - how many national newspapers have been quoting the fact of the undisclosed documents and photos? It is actually pivotal in an individuals decision to want to support an appeal. I have explained the case to a number of people and most of them can't make up their mind either way until you mention the undisclosed documents and photos - it's that important! The general public think it's outrageous when explained to them. It would go some way to settling this matter once and for all. I can not think of anything that could be in there that needs to held under PII rules to protect the public - can anyone else?
---------------------------
Could be information about informants, or to do with national Security...
-
If there is nothing to hide then disclose all the information - simple. Revealing all the undisclosed information may help neither side but it would go some way to being more transparent in the name of justice. The resistance to it makes everyone feel there is something to hide - how many national newspapers have been quoting the fact of the undisclosed documents and photos? It is actually pivotal in an individuals decision to want to support an appeal. I have explained the case to a number of people and most of them can't make up their mind either way until you mention the undisclosed documents and photos - it's that important! The general public think it's outrageous when explained to them. It would go some way to settling this matter once and for all. I can not think of anything that could be in there that needs to held under PII rules to protect the public - can anyone else?
Exactly !! Very well put .
-
If there is nothing to hide then disclose all the information - simple. Revealing all the undisclosed information may help neither side but it would go some way to being more transparent in the name of justice. The resistance to it makes everyone feel there is something to hide - how many national newspapers have been quoting the fact of the undisclosed documents and photos? It is actually pivotal in an individuals decision to want to support an appeal. I have explained the case to a number of people and most of them can't make up their mind either way until you mention the undisclosed documents and photos - it's that important! The general public think it's outrageous when explained to them. It would go some way to settling this matter once and for all. I can not think of anything that could be in there that needs to held under PII rules to protect the public - can anyone else?
---------------------------
Could be information about informants, or to do with national Security...
This is something that troubles me as well, that the newspapers don't seem terribly interested in the alleged non-disclosure. I simply don't believe that there would be a national crisis were this evidence revealed, no matter what had occurred. So I assume that disclosure of the non-disclosed evidence would provide a way for Jeremy Bamber to be released, even if his innocence were left in doubt, and nothing more than that.
-
If there is nothing to hide then disclose all the information - simple. Revealing all the undisclosed information may help neither side but it would go some way to being more transparent in the name of justice. The resistance to it makes everyone feel there is something to hide - how many national newspapers have been quoting the fact of the undisclosed documents and photos? It is actually pivotal in an individuals decision to want to support an appeal. I have explained the case to a number of people and most of them can't make up their mind either way until you mention the undisclosed documents and photos - it's that important! The general public think it's outrageous when explained to them. It would go some way to settling this matter once and for all. I can not think of anything that could be in there that needs to held under PII rules to protect the public - can anyone else?
---------------------------
Could be information about informants, or to do with national Security...
No information on informants in the photo's or the audio tapes and note books have been ESDA tested before and not compromised national security .
-
According to Andrew Hunter's account (five years ago) Bamber's defence team have made repeated requests for specific pieces of evidence to no avail.
"Bamber's defence team has repeatedly asked for access to the following: first, the notebooks and other papers of Inspector Jones, who headed the initial investigation and firmly believed in Bamber's innocence; secondly, the findings of the coroner who inquired into Inspector Jones's sudden death, which have never been made public; thirdly, the audio recordings of all telephone and radio messages from White House farm; fourthly, the audio recordings describing the scene of the crime; fifthly, the video recordings of the scene of the crime; and sixthly, the original radio and telephone messages log and incident report. All are still being withheld from the defence. On every occasion on which the defence team has asked for them, Essex constabulary has refused to provide them. I put it directly to the Minister—and ask her to respond—that that is surely an intolerable state of affairs."
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,368.0.html
-
According to Andrew Hunter's account (five years ago) Bamber's defence team have made repeated requests for specific pieces of evidence to no avail.
"Bamber's defence team has repeatedly asked for access to the following: first, the notebooks and other papers of Inspector Jones, who headed the initial investigation and firmly believed in Bamber's innocence; secondly, the findings of the coroner who inquired into Inspector Jones's sudden death, which have never been made public; thirdly, the audio recordings of all telephone and radio messages from White House farm; fourthly, the audio recordings describing the scene of the crime; fifthly, the video recordings of the scene of the crime; and sixthly, the original radio and telephone messages log and incident report. All are still being withheld from the defence. On every occasion on which the defence team has asked for them, Essex constabulary has refused to provide them. I put it directly to the Minister—and ask her to respond—that that is surely an intolerable state of affairs."
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,368.0.html
+1
-
According to Andrew Hunter's account (five years ago) Bamber's defence team have made repeated requests for specific pieces of evidence to no avail.
"Bamber's defence team has repeatedly asked for access to the following: first, the notebooks and other papers of Inspector Jones, who headed the initial investigation and firmly believed in Bamber's innocence; secondly, the findings of the coroner who inquired into Inspector Jones's sudden death, which have never been made public; thirdly, audio recordings describing the scene of the crime; fifthly, the video recordings of the scene of the crime; and sixthly, the original radio and telephone messages log and incident report. All are still being withheld from the defence. On every occasion on which the defence team has asked for them, Essex constabulary has refused to provide them. I put it directly to the Minister—and ask her to respond—that that is surely an intolerable state of affairs."
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,368.0.html
Jones's notebook etc - pii. JB's defence have no right to access information pertinent to other cases Cook may have been working on etc.
Jones' inquest - pii. What right have they to invade the Jones' family's privacy over the accidental death of their loved one? Because some JB supporters decided Jones must have been killed?
Audio and video recordings, radio and telephone messages - have they said 'no you can't have these' or 'they do not exist'?
-
As far as I know, photocopies of the relevant pages of Jones's notebook haven't been provided to the defence either.
Why would Essex Police be asked for the coroner's findings when the original document wouldn't be the property of Essex Police? Also, PII is not a general purpose excuse for not revealing relevant documents; it could be cited only for documents covered by a PII certificate granted and signed by the Home Secretary.
-
According to Andrew Hunter's account (five years ago) Bamber's defence team have made repeated requests for specific pieces of evidence to no avail.
"Bamber's defence team has repeatedly asked for access to the following: first, the notebooks and other papers of Inspector Jones, who headed the initial investigation and firmly believed in Bamber's innocence; secondly, the findings of the coroner who inquired into Inspector Jones's sudden death, which have never been made public; thirdly, audio recordings describing the scene of the crime; fifthly, the video recordings of the scene of the crime; and sixthly, the original radio and telephone messages log and incident report. All are still being withheld from the defence. On every occasion on which the defence team has asked for them, Essex constabulary has refused to provide them. I put it directly to the Minister—and ask her to respond—that that is surely an intolerable state of affairs."
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,368.0.html
Jones's notebook etc - pii. JB's defence have no right to access information pertinent to other cases Cook may have been working on etc.
Jones' inquest - pii. What right have they to invade the Jones' family's privacy over the accidental death of their loved one? Because some JB supporters decided Jones must have been killed?
Audio and video recordings, radio and telephone messages - have they said 'no you can't have these' or 'they do not exist'?
... Information came to light in 2003, that DCI Jones was in possession of one of these silencers, which he kept on his desk, that he used as a paperweight, before it was sent to the lab to be checked a few weeks later. This is understood to have been the Bamber silencer, and notes contained in DCI Jomes p/b, are pertenent to the instant case, and therefore, should be disclosed...
-
... Information came to light in 2003, that DCI Jones was in possession of one of these silencers, which he kept on his desk, that he used as a paperweight, before it was sent to the lab to be checked a few weeks later.
Where did this 2003 information come from?
-
Also, PII is not a general purpose excuse for not revealing relevant documents; it could be cited only for documents covered by a PII certificate granted and signed by the Home Secretary.
All the Home Secretaries and Shadow Home Secretaries since 1986 are in on the police set up though. ;D
-
Ann's notes and this one in particular contain things that may be worthy of more consideration.
For instance she writes that Nevill phoned Jeremy and initially words it "she has a " before going to to state "Sheila has the gun".
This seems the same as what JB said in interviews with the police in September. He wonders wether he heard the words said by Nevill correctly.
It is in my view safe to say that Stan Jones passed on much info to Ann at some stages in the investigation and it could be that he mentioned bits of JB's september interviews to her and she used this in her fabricated notes purporting them to be made on the 7th august but actually made much later.
Conversely as Ann was present for some of JB's interview at his home on the 7th he may have raised this issue back then either to the police or to Ann. If so and the card was made up on the 7th then this shows JB was not altering his story later on in september. Remember had only just woken up to answer the phone so would not have been fully alert at the time of the phone call.
An alternative would be if Ann was present at whf and may be sourcing the words used from what she heard Nevill say but that would carry huge implications.
What is odd though is what she muses over in regards to Nevill and his position in the kitchen and questioning that his head in the kitchen scuttle was not right....how would she know it was not right...
it does raise an issue of guilty knowledge in which from having guilty knowledge she is aware the police had tampered with Nevill's body.
-
According to contemporaneous notes written up by Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985, Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest, and the gun beside her...
Now...
Where did Ann Eaton get these details from?
More importantly, if Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed besides her, how did Sheila's body end up on the bedroom floor with the gun on her body, and the bible next to her arm?
How did her body get from one place to the other?
Who could have moved her body, and the gun, and the bible?
Could it have been the police told her and it was the police who moved her? Doesn't take much to work that out and also that she was shot twice while lying on the bed. Eat your heart out Sherlock. ;D ;D ;D
-
According to contemporaneous notes written up by Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985, Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest, and the gun beside her...
Now...
Where did Ann Eaton get these details from?
More importantly, if Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed besides her, how did Sheila's body end up on the bedroom floor with the gun on her body, and the bible next to her arm?
How did her body get from one place to the other?
Who could have moved her body, and the gun, and the bible?
Could it have been the police told her and it was the police who moved her? Doesn't take much to work that out and also that she was shot twice while lying on the bed. Eat your heart out Sherlock. ;D ;D ;D
either something like that or something like Ann having guilty knowledge of the crime.
the police later claim never to have said such things to Ann so that leaves Ann in a tricky position.
tsk tsk..shouldnt trust a policeman it seems would be good advice.
-
According to contemporaneous notes written up by Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985, Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest, and the gun beside her...
Now...
Where did Ann Eaton get these details from?
More importantly, if Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed besides her, how did Sheila's body end up on the bedroom floor with the gun on her body, and the bible next to her arm?
How did her body get from one place to the other?
Who could have moved her body, and the gun, and the bible?
Could it have been the police told her and it was the police who moved her? Doesn't take much to work that out and also that she was shot twice while lying on the bed. Eat your heart out Sherlock. ;D ;D ;D
Oh good grief. The same old trolls with the same old crap. ::) They read a couple of pages in the forum and suddenly they are experts.
-
According to contemporaneous notes written up by Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985, Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest, and the gun beside her...
Now...
Where did Ann Eaton get these details from?
More importantly, if Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed besides her, how did Sheila's body end up on the bedroom floor with the gun on her body, and the bible next to her arm?
How did her body get from one place to the other?
Who could have moved her body, and the gun, and the bible?
Could it have been the police told her and it was the police who moved her? Doesn't take much to work that out and also that she was shot twice while lying on the bed. Eat your heart out Sherlock. ;D ;D ;D
either something like that or something like Ann having guilty knowledge of the crime.
the police later claim never to have said such things to Ann so that leaves Ann in a tricky position.
tsk tsk..shouldnt trust a policeman it seems would be good advice.
Now you are behaving a tad childish in suggesting that Ann Eaton could have had some knowledge of the crime. I have no doubt that the police gave Robert and Ann a few details of what had just occurred and which they were later to repeat. You do realise that Ann will have you over a barrel and it won't be a double barrel when this is all concluded? ;D
-
From what I read today I fear the end is nigh for Jeremy Bamber. It seems the CCRC just won't take him seriously any more and as for the conspiracy nonsense....well seen better in the Beano.
-
According to contemporaneous notes written up by Ann Eaton on 7th August 1985, Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest, and the gun beside her...
Now...
Where did Ann Eaton get these details from?
More importantly, if Sheila's body was found on the bed, with the bible on her chest, and the gun on the bed besides her, how did Sheila's body end up on the bedroom floor with the gun on her body, and the bible next to her arm?
How did her body get from one place to the other?
Who could have moved her body, and the gun, and the bible?
Could it have been the police told her and it was the police who moved her? Doesn't take much to work that out and also that she was shot twice while lying on the bed. Eat your heart out Sherlock. ;D ;D ;D
either something like that or something like Ann having guilty knowledge of the crime.
the police later claim never to have said such things to Ann so that leaves Ann in a tricky position.
tsk tsk..shouldnt trust a policeman it seems would be good advice.
Now you are behaving a tad childish in suggesting that Ann Eaton could have had some knowledge of the crime. I have no doubt that the police gave Robert and Ann a few details of what had just occurred and which they were later to repeat. You do realise that Ann will have you over a barrel and it won't be a double barrel when this is all concluded? ;D
You speak as if you know her and her intentions?
-
he knows nowt grahame, ignore him.
he wants us to think he knows something
-
From what I read today I fear the end is nigh for Jeremy Bamber. It seems the CCRC just won't take him seriously any more and as for the conspiracy nonsense....well seen better in the Beano.
So what have you read today that we haven't? As it happens JB has several courses he could take even to go as far as to challenge the CCRC in a court of law.
-
he knows nowt grahame, ignore him.
he wants us to think he knows something
I know he knows nothing Andrea. There go, you play with the troll for a bit until I get tired of him. ;)
-
just thinking about rope ;) wonder if he wants to do some skipping, that a good game ;)
-
just thinking about rope ;) wonder if he wants to do some skipping, that a good game ;)
Ya wanna shoot at his feet and make him dance a bit? ;D
-
ha ha, oh yeees, i might and hit his bollocks though :o
-
ha ha, oh yeees, i might and hit his bollocks though :o
Or his brain.
-
no brain, those maxi trolls dont have one.