Jeremy Bamber Forum

JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: tyler on August 18, 2013, 03:53:PM

Title: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 18, 2013, 03:53:PM
I know I have mentioned this before,but I am still confused! It has been denied that two (or more) silencers were forensically tested,but there are conflicting statements as to what was actually found inside the silencer that incriminated JB. I have read it as a 'flake' of blood trapped between the first and second baffle plate,but also as "lots" of blood at the bottom end of the silencer. If the latter were true then why didn't they use the "lots" of blood at the lab to establish the blood groupings? Why dissect one tiny flake of blood instead? Is this in truth all they had available? This can hardly be described as backspatter surely? Didn't DB state he saw a flake of blood on the end of the silencer? Whilst fiddling with it could he not have accidentally pushed it down into the silencer?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 18, 2013, 04:29:PM
Hi Tyler, I have asked the same question. According to Wilkes's book - Hayward said that there were 'traces' of blood on the outside but inside there was a 'considerable' quantity of blood in the baffles. The 'blob' isn't mentioned (which is odd, given that it survived being unscrewed from the rifle. Was still preserved 3 days later after being found by RB and continued to hold tight for a further two days - even after all the handling and travelling it endured in the process). If there was a considerable quantity why were the tests basically inconclusive and why only test the flake for DNA when they had a 'considerable quantity' at their fingertips??
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 18, 2013, 04:49:PM
Glad I'm not the only one confused Caroline! They only referred to a "flake" of blood at the 2002 appeal. And although Sheila's DNA was not found in the silencer,they decided that it was because it had all been swabbed away! And yet the DNA from June and the unknown male had not. Funny that! Unknown male couldn't have been any of the twins as they too would have shared DNA with Sheila's biological mother (source of the DNA sample)? So it had to be Neville's DNA. Surely this signifies the 'intimate mixture' of Neville and June that was put forward at trial by Hayward as a "remote possibility"? JB should have won that appeal!
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 05:19:PM
I think what Webster was trying to say in 2002 was that a forensic scientist would not be able to analyse a flake of less than 1/4 of an inch. So this was the size that Webster assumed it was, because according to Webster when reading Hayward's notes he does not write the size of the flake down.

I think the flake was found on the 5th baffle...maybe someone can confirm to us which baffle it was, please.   :D

What Webster goes on to tell the court and this was very important. He asked Hayward whether precautions were taken to ensure that the different people carrying out the blood test were testing the same material?  The reason for asking this is because if not it can give and erroneous result.

What Webster said was good practise is that the flake should have been dissolved and ground up to a powder thus, giving each individual that tested it equivalent material to work with.  In this case it was not done therefore it could have been an erroneous reading.

***It was the Crown's case that the blood in the silencer was that of 3 people, like Caroline has pointed out, Sheila, June's and Nevill's.  Now anyone with any sense can see this is impossible....What are the CHANCES of 3 drops of blood from 3 individuals caused by drawback/backspatter landing in the same place on the same baffle?????????????  It's also a fact that this is very unlikely that drawback/backsppatter occurs from one person let alone 3.....More tests in this department and I am surprised that this has not been done....
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 18, 2013, 05:22:PM
Glad I'm not the only one confused Caroline! They only referred to a "flake" of blood at the 2002 appeal. And although Sheila's DNA was not found in the silencer,they decided that it was because it had all been swabbed away! And yet the DNA from June and the unknown male had not. Funny that! Unknown male couldn't have been any of the twins as they too would have shared DNA with Sheila's biological mother (source of the DNA sample)? So it had to be Neville's DNA. Surely this signifies the 'intimate mixture' of Neville and June that was put forward at trial by Hayward as a "remote possibility"? JB should have won that appeal!

So how can Sheila's blood be found in the silencer and NOT her DNA?? The very fact that the blood evidence is a mess should have been enough to make the conviction unsafe. I really don't get it!!
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 05:31:PM
Glad I'm not the only one confused Caroline! They only referred to a "flake" of blood at the 2002 appeal. And although Sheila's DNA was not found in the silencer,they decided that it was because it had all been swabbed away! And yet the DNA from June and the unknown male had not. Funny that! Unknown male couldn't have been any of the twins as they too would have shared DNA with Sheila's biological mother (source of the DNA sample)? So it had to be Neville's DNA. Surely this signifies the 'intimate mixture' of Neville and June that was put forward at trial by Hayward as a "remote possibility"? JB should have won that appeal!

Tyler I don't think further test can be made on the silencer.  The test they did had insufficient markers to conclusively say that it belonged to Sheila, so the court excepted  that it might not have been Sheila's.  The other two results were that of an unidentified male?  and June's DNA but on saying that the test were not that conclusive because DNA from her sister was used in the test....Also that the LCN DNA test which was done cannot determine if the test was from blood...so if that being the case then its likely that someone dropped a bit of snot on it at some point  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 18, 2013, 05:33:PM
It was probably old animal blood in those baffles.Rabbits/Hare,foxes,rats.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 05:37:PM
It was probably old animal blood in those baffles.Rabbits/Hare,foxes,rats.

Or contamination by other means.  I don't think the silencer should have been allowed in court. The bloody thing had an history of travels. If the lab had known it was in a car boot along with other guns/rifles they would have rejected it based on contamination, but here we have a court excepting it as evidence... >:(
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 18, 2013, 05:47:PM
Or contamination by other means.  I don't think the silencer should have been allowed in court. The bloody thing had an history of travels. If the lab had known it was in a car boot along with other guns/rifles they would have rejected it based on contamination, but here we have a court excepting it as evidence... >:(



And a bucket of bloodied clothes.Why,,I don't know.! You'd have thought those sort of things would have been left to join the other rubbish in one of the bins at WHF,,not taken to somewhere else.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 18, 2013, 05:53:PM
Or contamination by other means.  I don't think the silencer should have been allowed in court. The bloody thing had an history of travels. If the lab had known it was in a car boot along with other guns/rifles they would have rejected it based on contamination, but here we have a court excepting it as evidence... >:(

But they know now and have still upheld his conviction?? Like I said, I just don't get it.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 06:04:PM
this is interesting girls. Did you know that Hayward dropped a drop of blood into the sound moderator prior to the 2002 appeal and fired bullets through it? And guess what???? The blood didn't dry. 

Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Alias on August 18, 2013, 06:22:PM
The silencer evidence is problematic from beginning to end, and I cannot understand it was allowed into evidence and was actually very central in the conviction of JB. (That, and Julie´s testimony, which the judge instructed the jury to be cautious about. They really had nothing, did they?!)
Just the way it was found was very problematic. First overlooked by the EP - and some time after found by relatives who would benefit from Jeremy´s conviction.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 06:34:PM
The silencer evidence is problematic from beginning to end, and I cannot understand it was allowed into evidence and was actually very central in the conviction of JB. (That, and Julie´s testimony, which the judge instructed the jury to be cautious about. They really had nothing, did they?!)
Just the way it was found was very problematic. First overlooked by the EP - and some time after found by relatives who would benefit from Jeremy´s conviction.

I totally agree and because Hayward has dropped some of his blood inside it, the thing could never be sworn in at court again surely....I wonder if this is the unidentified males DNA.  :) :) :)
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: killingeve on August 18, 2013, 06:52:PM
The silencer evidence is problematic from beginning to end, and I cannot understand it was allowed into evidence and was actually very central in the conviction of JB. (That, and Julie´s testimony, which the judge instructed the jury to be cautious about. They really had nothing, did they?!)
Just the way it was found was very problematic. First overlooked by the EP - and some time after found by relatives who would benefit from Jeremy´s conviction.

It's almost beyond comprehension that the silencer evidence was allowed as an exhibit in the first place.  The fact it has stood the test of time beggars belief.

I think there's something about having family members fighting a MoJ or police wrongdoing eg:

Guilford 4, Birmingham 6, Magiire 7 = Many family members.

Barry George = Sister

Stefan Kiszko = Mother

Stephen Lawrence = Mother

Hillsborough = Many family members

IMO JB's attempts to get the judiciary to look seriously at his case have been severely hampered by not having any family support.  No one could have done more for JB than Mike over the years but IMO it doesn't have the same impact with the powers that be than a demanding family would. 
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 18, 2013, 07:03:PM
this is interesting girls. Did you know that Hayward dropped a drop of blood into the sound moderator prior to the 2002 appeal and fired bullets through it? And guess what???? The blood didn't dry.

Where did you read that Patti?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 07:06:PM
Where did you read that Patti?

From the Webster transcriptions of examination in the 2002 appeal.  I'll post it, it might be worth putting in the archives... :) :) :) :)
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 07:08:PM
Here it is.....I have to open this with adobe...or what ever its called.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Alias on August 18, 2013, 07:19:PM
It's almost beyond comprehension that the silencer evidence was allowed as an exhibit in the first place.  The fact it has stood the test of time beggars belief.

I think there's something about having family members fighting a MoJ or police wrongdoing eg:

Guilford 4, Birmingham 6, Magiire 7 = Many family members.

Barry George = Sister

Stefan Kiszko = Mother

Stephen Lawrence = Mother

Hillsborough = Many family members

IMO JB's attempts to get the judiciary to look seriously at his case have been severely hampered by not having any family support.  No one could have done more for JB than Mike over the years but IMO it doesn't have the same impact with the powers that be than a demanding family would.

I think you could be right about the lack of family and thereby support. In essence Jeremy is a nobody by that glaring lack of family. The authorities have NO interest in an exposure of the incredibly bad policework and dodgy "evidence". Who wants a scandal?
I have never understood Jeremy´s birth parents entirely turning their back on him. I find that particularly nasty - I don´t know how they can live with themselves.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 18, 2013, 07:21:PM
From the Webster transcriptions of examination in the 2002 appeal.  I'll post it, it might be worth putting in the archives... :) :) :) :)

Cheers Patti, do you know what page it's on? I'll put the link in the archives  :D XX
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Patti on August 18, 2013, 07:36:PM
Cheers Patti, do you know what page it's on? I'll put the link in the archives  :D XX

Its on every page lolol  Noooo I think from memory check out point 78???????? or round about.  How many pages are they? Can't we have the whole document in there, or is that too much? What I mean is too many pages.... :) :) :) ;)
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 18, 2013, 07:42:PM
Its on every page lolol  Noooo I think from memory check out point 78???????? or round about.  How many pages are they? Can't we have the whole document in there, or is that too much? What I mean is too many pages.... :) :) :) ;)

I would need to convert the file for that and it will take up space. The link is just as good because you can just download the file.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Jane on August 18, 2013, 07:46:PM
I think you could be right about the lack of family and thereby support. In essence Jeremy is a nobody by that glaring lack of family. The authorities have NO interest in an exposure of the incredibly bad policework and dodgy "evidence". Who wants a scandal?
I have never understood Jeremy´s birth parents entirely turning their back on him. I find that particularly nasty - I don´t know how they can live with themselves.



Alias, we're stripping back yet another layer here. When Jeremy was given up for adoption his biological family relinquished ALL rights to him. It was as if he had never been born to them. If they die he has no claim on their estate, if he dies, they would have no claim on his. We know that it wasn't the usual set of circumstances because his mother later married the man who claimed paternity of him and went on to have more children. I find their choice difficult to accept. I see no reason why Jeremy couldn't have been fostered until such time as they married and I think that having him adopted raises more questions than it answers. I can't help but feel there must be times when life in the Marsham household becomes strained, because what they did all those years ago and what subsequently happened must be rather like an elephant in the room, but that one is theirs to deal with. The greatest, most heartbreaking tragedy for me, is that should Jeremy be taken seriously ill or even, God forbid, die, he has absolutely NO family to support him.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: killingeve on August 18, 2013, 07:46:PM
I think you could be right about the lack of family and thereby support. In essence Jeremy is a nobody by that glaring lack of family. The authorities have NO interest in an exposure of the incredibly bad policework and dodgy "evidence". Who wants a scandal?
I have never understood Jeremy´s birth parents entirely turning their back on him. I find that particularly nasty -  I don´t know how they can live with themselves.

Perhaps one day they will struggle to live with themselves.  I do hope so. 
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: susan on August 18, 2013, 07:50:PM
Alias I agree about Jeremy's birth parents they turned their backs on him twice all for selfish reasons I suspect how can a Mother do that to a son she has given birth to she should love him unconditionally if I were her I would be broken hearted I had let my son down twice especially now when he needs support.  They had the pleasure of creating him so they should have accepted the responsibility of the outcome of their pleasure.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 18, 2013, 07:52:PM
I think you could be right about the lack of family and thereby support. In essence Jeremy is a nobody by that glaring lack of family. The authorities have NO interest in an exposure of the incredibly bad policework and dodgy "evidence". Who wants a scandal?
I have never understood Jeremy´s birth parents entirely turning their back on him. I find that particularly nasty - I don´t know how they can live with themselves.



Not forgetting Eddie Gilfoyles' sister,Susan,,,whose voice went a long way in assisting his release in 2010. She can be seen on a few videos' on Youtube,airing her views on the way Eddies' case was conducted from start to finish.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: susan on August 18, 2013, 07:53:PM
Hi N/N  I don't think Jeremy's birth parents will ever feel guilt at their treatment of him they will be too selfish and wrapped up in themselves to think about poor Jeremy.  Shame on them.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Alias on August 18, 2013, 08:12:PM
I assume Jeremy´s parents know that his adoptive mother had mental issues - and had them before thier infant son was given into her care.
As I say, I assume - at least they must have learned about that eventually, which makes it even more heartless not to reach out to Jeremy, regardless whether they think he is guilty.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Jane on August 18, 2013, 08:28:PM
I assume Jeremy´s parents know that his adoptive mother had mental issues - and had them before thier infant son was given into her care.
As I say, I assume - at least they must have learned about that eventually, which makes it even more heartless not to reach out to Jeremy, regardless whether they think he is guilty.


Alias, his biological parents would have been told NOTHING of the adoptive parents. That was part of the conditions of adoption, but I CANNOT imagine how his bio mum, on learning after the tragedy, of June's mental issues, didn't claw her way to hold him in her arms, as you say, regardless of whether or not she believed him guilty.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Reader on August 19, 2013, 06:56:AM
. . . his mother later married the man who claimed paternity of him and went on to have more children.
So Jeremy has full siblings, if they're still alive.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Jane on August 19, 2013, 07:50:AM
So Jeremy has full siblings, if they're still alive.



Yes, Reader, two or three, all of course, younger than he and last I heard, leading very successful lives. Why would it occur to you to wonder if they were still living?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 19, 2013, 08:05:AM
He has one full brother and one full sister.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: susan on August 19, 2013, 08:35:AM
Morning tyler  wonder if they have ever contacted him?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 19, 2013, 08:39:AM
Reader.....there are links to JB's siblings on the following page if you are interested.  :)


http://jeremybamber.org/jeremy-bamber/
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 19, 2013, 08:40:AM
Morning tyler  wonder if they have ever contacted him?
Morning Susie  :) I'm pretty sure they havent   :(
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Jane on August 19, 2013, 08:58:AM
Morning Susie  :) I'm pretty sure they havent   :(



Morning Girls :) I wonder how tempting it is for them to contact him? I'm trying to imagine how I would feel. We must assume that their parents got their story in first and that will have carried a lot of weight and even if they had accepted what they'd been told, I can't conceive that they wouldn't at least, have written to him, but from their viewpoint, I can see that making contact might be very scary and the ramifications, huge.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: susan on August 19, 2013, 09:12:AM
Morning april  I wonder if Jeremy's brother or sister reads the forum I would if I were them I would be curious about my brother and they may look like him.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Jane on August 19, 2013, 09:16:AM
Morning april  I wonder if Jeremy's brother or sister reads the forum I would if I were them I would be curious about my brother and they may look like him.



Susan, good morning :) So would I!!! In a HEARTBEAT!!!! Probably whilst I was plucking up the courage to make contact.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 19, 2013, 09:29:AM
Susie,click on the link I put on for Reader,scroll down the page a little and you will see the names of Jeremy's siblings. By clicking on each name you will be able to view a picture of them x
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: susan on August 19, 2013, 09:47:AM
tyler thanks for that will do.xx
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Reader on August 19, 2013, 10:30:AM
Thanks for that link, tyler. As I hadn't come across any information about them, I had no idea whether they were still around, so I was just being cautious. Sophie seems the more interesting sibling; I like her sculptures and it's easy to imagine her getting on well with Jeremy once he has been cleared. Also, the article happened to mention Pc Lay, a name I wasn't previously aware of.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Roch on August 19, 2013, 10:35:AM
Thanks for that link, tyler. As I hadn't come across any information about them, I had no idea whether they were still around, so I was just being cautious. Sophie seems the more interesting sibling; I like her sculptures and it's easy to imagine her getting on well with Jeremy once he has been cleared. Also, the article happened to mention Pc Lay, a name I wasn't previously aware of.

Isn't PC Lay an officer who recounts the presentation of Jeremy Bamber, upon being informed everyone has been killed? I think his notes are on here. Maybe he recounts the accusation that firearms team were responsible?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Reader on August 19, 2013, 11:06:AM
Possibly. You asked about Pc Lay's statement some time ago, but I don't know whether it's been posted. There is a short message by Pc Lay posted here (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=3295.0), but it's not what you were asking about.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 19, 2013, 01:19:PM


Susan, good morning :) So would I!!! In a HEARTBEAT!!!! Probably whilst I was plucking up the courage to make contact.




Hi April,,but would it just be curiosity,,or a genuine reason for contacting.?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Jane on August 19, 2013, 01:26:PM



Hi April,,but would it just be curiosity,,or a genuine reason for contacting.?



Lookout, hello. I can't imagine that the initial contact would be out of anything MORE than curiosity, after all there would be no mutual background. Familial bond would take time to develop
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 19, 2013, 01:35:PM


Lookout, hello. I can't imagine that the initial contact would be out of anything MORE than curiosity, after all there would be no mutual background. Familial bond would take time to develop



It is questionable,April. A lot would depend on the circumstances of the arrangement,and characteristics/nature of either person. Some can go through life not caring one way or the other.Others have an inbuilt loving nature and find it easy to blend in. We're all different.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Roch on August 19, 2013, 03:55:PM
Possibly. You asked about Pc Lay's statement some time ago, but I don't know whether it's been posted. There is a short message by Pc Lay posted here (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=3295.0), but it's not what you were asking about.

Are these the notes of PC Lay? Or are they notes jotted by COLP, from PC Lay? It would be interesting to read the next page, the content of which starts at the end this page with 'He'

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=137.0;attach=26140;image)
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Nickos on August 19, 2013, 04:20:PM
The point about JB stating “it was them that killed them” – “those men with the guns” cuts both ways of course.

JB Innocent: a concerned reaction from a confused young man.

JB Guilty:  a deliberate attempt to complicate the situation, and throw the light further from himself.

He just can’t win!!

It would be good to see the next page though.

Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Roch on August 19, 2013, 06:05:PM
The point about JB stating “it was them that killed them” – “those men with the guns” cuts both ways of course.

JB Innocent: a concerned reaction from a confused young man.

JB Guilty:  a deliberate attempt to complicate the situation, and throw the light further from himself.

He just can’t win!!

It would be good to see the next page though.

Hi Nickos.

I don't wish to take this thread off topic but in answer to your question, I've always found it a bit absurd that implicating the raid team would be some obscure diversion, as part of a bigger plan to frame Mrs. Caffell.  There are other statements / notes available which suggest shock and an inability to accept the situation. One of Dr. Craig's statements for example.

Anyway, like I said, don't wish to go off-topic.  I was just trying to place PC Lay, as per Reader's enquiry.

Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Reader on August 20, 2013, 04:23:AM
Are these the notes of PC Lay? Or are they notes jotted by COLP, from PC Lay?
They seem to be by Pc Saxby. He wrote "seperate" instead of "separate".
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 20, 2013, 12:21:PM
The blood in the silencer,. " Blue " at that,,according to Wilkes,,which would have been the ingrained deposits from the final layers of the paint on the Aga. The only mention of the " blob " came from AE.
But which silencer would this have been.? And when was that deep gouge made,and by whom.?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 21, 2013, 01:14:PM
 " The silencer ".? Which one.? The one that DB" found  ",,or the one that was collected from PE's home by Stan Jones,,the whisky-drinker,who threw the said silencer into the boot of his car and after consuming most of the bottle of whisky,proceeded to drive home in a drunken manner.!
How do these people get away with such things.? Even PE wasn't impressed about that behaviour after having offered to drive the drunken pig home. Sorry,,but I find this behaviour unprofessional from a man who calls himself a serving officer and in one of his sober moods,felt fit to charge an innocent man with murder.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: maggie on August 21, 2013, 01:20:PM
" The silencer ".? Which one.? The one that DB" found  ",,or the one that was collected from PE's home by Stan Jones,,the whisky-drinker,who threw the said silencer into the boot of his car and after consuming most of the bottle of whisky,proceeded to drive home in a drunken manner.!
How do these people get away with such things.? Even PE wasn't impressed about that behaviour after having offered to drive the drunken pig home. Sorry,,but I find this behaviour unprofessional from a man who calls himself a serving officer and in one of his sober moods,felt fit to charge an innocent man with murder.
I agree lookout, I believe drunk driving is unforgiveable especially by a Police Officer who has seen the effects off such behaviour.  It shows Stan Jones in a very bad light imo.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 21, 2013, 01:23:PM
The " blood " on the silencer was,or appeared something of a mystery,as AE had been told not to talk about it. However,RWB had told Betty Howie,and in turn it got back to Stan Jones who blew his top and gave them a telling off.?
From then on,only close members of the family spoke about the murders,which in turn gave outsiders the impression that they were hiding something.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: tyler on August 21, 2013, 01:26:PM
The silencer that DB "found" and was collected from the Eaton's home were one and the same. The silencer allegedly having been found on 12th August. However,in Basil Cock's statement (he was present) he describes the house being covered in fingerprinting dust. Full fingerprinting of the house was not carried out until the 18th September!
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 21, 2013, 01:31:PM
The silencer that DB "found" and was collected from the Eaton's home were one and the same. The silencer allegedly having been found on 12th August. However,in Basil Cock's statement (he was present) he describes the house being covered in fingerprinting dust. Full fingerprinting of the house was not carried out until the 18th September!



Hi tyler ( all done to confuse ) but I thought it was a different silencer to the one which was in the boot of AE's car,,as I thought that DB had taken the said silencer himself to the police station. Taff Jones also had a silencer gathering dust in his office.? Yes,,everything was done after the " event ".!
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Roch on August 21, 2013, 03:07:PM
The silencer that DB "found" and was collected from the Eaton's home were one and the same. The silencer allegedly having been found on 12th August. However,in Basil Cock's statement (he was present) he describes the house being covered in fingerprinting dust. Full fingerprinting of the house was not carried out until the 18th September!

Vic has challenged the notion that the gun cuboard was not fingerprinted earlier.  I recall he made reference to something possbily from the Wilkes book?
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 21, 2013, 04:24:PM
Vic has challenged the notion that the gun cuboard was not fingerprinted earlier.  I recall he made reference to something possbily from the Wilkes book?

Don't know about it being fingerprinted but this document suggests it was searched by no less than 5 officers
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: lookout on August 21, 2013, 04:31:PM
Hammersley wasn't even aware that the gun cupboard existed when cross-examined by Mr Rivlin,,let alone a silencer.
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: susan on August 21, 2013, 04:36:PM
Hi lookout is this the same gun cupboard where the silencer was found by the rellies if so why did the police not find it if they searched the cupboard must have had their eyes shut :'(
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Roch on August 21, 2013, 04:38:PM
The silencer that DB "found" and was collected from the Eaton's home were one and the same. The silencer allegedly having been found on 12th August. However,in Basil Cock's statement (he was present) he describes the house being covered in fingerprinting dust. Full fingerprinting of the house was not carried out until the 18th September!

My mistake.  This is actually what Vic posted:

Quote
Hi Tyler, just wondered why you believe the farm was not fingerprinted earlier.

In Julie's statements she makes mention of Jeremy complaining that fingerprinting was taking longer than he expected, I think on the Friday keys were handed to the family.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4217.msg172809.html#msg172809
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: Caroline R on August 21, 2013, 06:36:PM
Is Basil's statement on the forum??
Title: Re: The Blood in the Silencer
Post by: killingeve on September 02, 2013, 12:57:PM
So Jeremy has full siblings, if they're still alive.

Hi Reader

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2531.msg77872.html#msg77872

Makes you think...doesn't it?  ;)

Bambers v Marshams

Nurture v Nature