Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on October 16, 2013, 09:08:PM
-
"My daughter has got one of my guns", versus, "Sheila has got the gun, she has gone crazy, come quickly"...
-
"My daughter has got one of my guns", versus, "Sheila has got the gun, she has gone crazy, come quickly"...
How is it possible, for information passed at either 3;36am, or 3;26am, by Jeremy to the police, to be interpreted so differently, if the contents of the two logs, refer to one and the same call made by Jeremy?
-
Well, it is hard to imagine the wording turning out like that if this was scribbled down in connection to a call made by Jeremy Bamber!
-
"My daughter has got one of my guns", versus, "Sheila has got the gun, she has gone crazy, come quickly"...
Mike,,you know as well as I do that the police put words into your mouth,,then whatever you've said goes full circle to confuse you,,while they've already written down what they've said,and not what you said.
-
Mike,,you know as well as I do that the police put words into your mouth,,then whatever you've said goes full circle to confuse you,,while they've already written down what they've said,and not what you said.
Good point...
-
Well, it is hard to imagine the wording turning out like that if this was scribbled down in connection to a call made by Jeremy Bamber!
What I don't get, is that Jeremys call to police is supposed to have lasted 10/11 minutes, and the two phone logs are 10 minutes apart, but PC West says the clock was wrong by 10 minutes, which puts his log at the same time as Bonnets, but the content is totally different - Jeremy never told police what was recorded in the 3.26am phone log...
The whole thing just doesn't add up to both logs being reference to one telephone call, with the force clock supposedly being 10 minutes fast - I must remember not to ask a policeman for the time whilst in Essex...
-
What I don't get, is that Jeremys call to police is supposed to have lasted 10/11 minutes, and the two phone logs are 10 minutes apart, but PC West says the clock was wrong by 10 minutes, which puts his log at the same time as Bonnets, but the content is totally different - Jeremy never told police what was recorded in the 3.26am phone log...
The whole thing just doesn't add up to both logs being reference to one telephone call, with the force clock supposedly being 10 minutes fast - I must remember not to ask a policeman for the time whilst in Essex...
;D
-
What I don't get, is that Jeremys call to police is supposed to have lasted 10/11 minutes, and the two phone logs are 10 minutes apart, but PC West says the clock was wrong by 10 minutes, which puts his log at the same time as Bonnets, but the content is totally different - Jeremy never told police what was recorded in the 3.26am phone log...
The whole thing just doesn't add up to both logs being reference to one telephone call, with the force clock supposedly being 10 minutes fast - I must remember not to ask a policeman for the time whilst in Essex...
Mike, there was a time when you could trust it, but now it's safer to have your own watch so you can check that they're telling the truth ;D
-
Can anyone explain the age discrepancy in the two logs (26 versus 27), other than them coming from 2 separate calls?
-
Can anyone explain the age discrepancy in the two logs (26 versus 27), other than them coming from 2 separate calls?
Well, I certainly can't ;)
-
What I don't get, is that Jeremys call to police is supposed to have lasted 10/11 minutes, and the two phone logs are 10 minutes apart, but PC West says the clock was wrong by 10 minutes, which puts his log at the same time as Bonnets, but the content is totally different - Jeremy never told police what was recorded in the 3.26am phone log...
The whole thing just doesn't add up to both logs being reference to one telephone call, with the force clock supposedly being 10 minutes fast - I must remember not to ask a policeman for the time whilst in Essex...
Hi Mike, PC West said clock was correct when it was suggested to him at trial that it was incorrect
-
Hi Mike, PC West said clock was correct when it was suggested to him at trial that it was incorrect
Hi Caroline,
Yes, I think his evidence has been twisted, and played basically on the timing of the call he received from Jeremy, without both the 3;36am and the 3;26am logs being produced, which clearly do not contain the same information - disclosure of the contents of the 3:26am log did not occur until after the 2002 appeal. If it had been disclosed at the 2002 appeal and compared against the content of the 3;36am log, and laid bare at that stage for all to see, the convictions would almost certainly have been quashed...
What becomes clear by reference to PC Wests court transcript (produced) is that he says he had spoken to the information room on a previous occasion to the one in question, and there was obviously some confusion over which call was made and when. So, there were two calls, not one, with two different times given to a solitary call - there were two calls, not one, he said so in his testimony, basically he was lying through his teeth...
-
Hi Caroline,
Yes, I think his evidence has been twisted, and played basically on the timing of the call he received from Jeremy, without both the 3;36am and the 3;26am logs being produced, which clearly do not contain the same information - disclosure of the contents of the 3:26am log did not occur until after the 2002 appeal. If it had been disclosed at the 2002 appeal and compared against the content of the 3;36am log, and laid bare at that stage for all to see, the convictions would almost certainly have been quashed...
What becomes clear by reference to PC Wests court transcript (produced) is that he says he had spoken to the information room on a previous occasion to the one in question, and there was obviously some confusion over which call was made and when. So, there were two calls, not one, with two different times given to a solitary call - there were two calls, not one, he said so in his testimony, basically he was lying through his teeth...
Caroline/Mike that is very interesting.
-
Do you know something, it really distresses me that police made such a cock up of tampering with the two calls, aforementioned, and they are still trying to maintain these two calls were the same call, but neither of the two logs (3;26am and 3.36am) include what Jeremy actually said to PC West, as demonstrated by the following extracted log contents, and transcript of PC West / Bonnet...
"You have got to help me"...
-
As you can all see, PC West did not record what Jeremy told him, "You have got to help me", in his 3:36am log, furthermore, Bonnet makes a similar mistake in his 3.26am by presenting the contents of the log as though Ralph Bamber had made that call, whilst the contents of PC Wests 3;36am log, present the case for the call only being made by Jeremy...
Well, well, well, now there's a funny thing, because neither of these logs include the all important information relayed to the police by Jeremy, it was the very first thing he said to them, "You have got to help me"...
You see, what I know with certainty, is that there were two different phone calls to police, and a third call relayed to the police as a result of the attack alarm at the scene having been activated. OK, I know some of you will want to see hard evidence to back that up, but you are going to have to wait a little while longer before I give you that / this. In the meantime, I choose to draw your attention to the following, designed to make each and everyone of you think long and hard about all the discrepancies surrounding these phone logs...
If you want to know, hang on...
-
As you can all see, PC West did not record what Jeremy told him, "You have got to help me", in his 3:36am log, furthermore, Bonnet makes a similar mistake in his 3.26am by presenting the contents of the log as though Ralph Bamber had made that call, whilst the contents of PC Wests 3;36am log, present the case for the call only being made by Jeremy...
Well, well, well, now there's a funny thing, because neither of these logs include the all important information relayed to the police by Jeremy, it was the very first thing he said to them, "You have got to help me"...
You see, what I know with certainty, is that there were two different phone calls to police, and a third call relayed to the police as a result of the attack alarm at the scene having been activated. OK, I know some of you will want to see hard evidence to back that up, but you are going to have to wait a little while longer before I give you that / this. In the meantime, I choose to draw your attention to the following, designed to make each and everyone of you think long and hard about all the discrepancies surrounding these phone logs...
If you want to know, hang on...
You can tell the content of the log created by PC West has been doctored, by reference to it, and the continuing page, where details are duplicated, a duplication technique which I call "overlap"...
-
It is very strange with these times, and it is very strange how almost all aspects of this case have to be "bent" to make sense of Jeremy as the culprit. Nothing is clear cut.
-
It is very strange with these times, and it is very strange how almost all aspects of this case have to be "bent" to make sense of Jeremy as the culprit. Nothing is clear cut.
Hi Alias,
Have a look at this, which is recorded on the reverse of log 3.36am:-
-
According to the contents of the above, Jeremy did not arrive at the scene until 4:13am...
More worryingly...
The operator made a call to the scene, and although answered, the handset was left off the hook by somebody who was still alive inside the farmhouse by that stage...
This is extremely interesting, because when Jeremy contacted the police at 3.36am, it means that some 6 minutes into his call to PC west, there was someone still alive inside the farmhouse, meaning that Jeremy Bamber could not possibly be responsible for killing that person. Furthermore, if the timing of Jeremys call to police had been timed at 3.26am, instead of 3.36am, then there must have been someone still alive inside whf some 16 minutes after Jeremy contacted police - so there it is, the truth laid bare, Jeremy could not be responsible for killing the person who answered the phone at the scene from the operator at 3:42am...
-
If the clock that was relied upon to make the log contents timed at 3.36am was 10 minutes fast, so as to make the actual time of the log, 3.26am, how could Jeremy arrive at the scene according to the same log at 4.13am, be altered to 3.52am, if the clock was 10 minutes fast? How can the same clock which is being relied upon to record timed events surrounding the developing incident at the scene, be accurate, be 10 minutes fast, or whenever it suits the police, be 21 minutes fast?
-
If the clock that was relied upon to make the log contents timed at 3.36am was 10 minutes fast, so as to make the actual time of the log, 3.26am, how could Jeremy arrive at the scene according to the same log at 4.13am, be altered to 3.52am, if the clock was 10 minutes fast? How can the same clock which is being relied upon to record timed events surrounding the developing incident at the scene, be accurate, be 10 minutes fast, or whenever it suits the police, be 21 minutes fast?
With this shambolic state of affairs thriving, when did the operator make that all important first telephone call to the scene, recorded as having occurred at 3.42am? Was the timing of that call really 3.42am, or did it occur 10 minutes beforehand (3.32am), or 21 minutes beforehand (3.21am)?
If Jeremy made his call to police at 3.36am, or 3.26am, and the operator called the scene at 3;21am, only to find someone who answered the call had then left the handset off the hook, it means that police had an interest in the goings on at whf long before Jeremy called the police...
-
With this shambolic state of affairs thriving, when did the operator make that all important first telephone call to the scene, recorded as having occurred at 3.42am? Was the timing of that call really 3.42am, or did it occur 10 minutes beforehand (3.32am), or 21 minutes beforehand (3.21am)?
If Jeremy made his call to police at 3.36am, or 3.26am, and the operator called the scene at 3;21am, only to find someone who answered the call had then left the handset off the hook, it means that police had an interest in the goings on at whf long before Jeremy called the police...
Why would police be showing an interest in the goings on at whf (3.21am) before jeremy contacted the police at either 3.36am, or 3.26am, unless the police were responding to the attack alarm which had been activated, or someone had tried to call the police before jeremy did...
-
According to the contents of the above, Jeremy did not arrive at the scene until 4:13am...
More worryingly...
The operator made a call to the scene, and although answered, the handset was left off the hook by somebody who was still alive inside the farmhouse by that stage...
This is extremely interesting, because when Jeremy contacted the police at 3.36am, it means that some 6 minutes into his call to PC west, there was someone still alive inside the farmhouse, meaning that Jeremy Bamber could not possibly be responsible for killing that person. Furthermore, if the timing of Jeremys call to police had been timed at 3.26am, instead of 3.36am, then there must have been someone still alive inside whf some 16 minutes after Jeremy contacted police - so there it is, the truth laid bare, Jeremy could not be responsible for killing the person who answered the phone at the scene from the operator at 3:42am...
How do you mean 'answered'? I was under the impression that the operator simply connected to the line and was able to tell the phone was off the hook?
-
In those days,,if the phone was off the hook you'd hear a voice telling you.Now of course,,it's a noise ( electronically ) So when the police entered,,they'd have heard the " voice " on the phone. The same as the raid team,as they too would have heard the operator telling you to reconnect. The voice inside.-------
-
How do you mean 'answered'? I was under the impression that the operator simply connected to the line and was able to tell the phone was off the hook?
Contents of the log, confirm that at 3.42am, farm was contacted by GPO and left off hook:-
-
Contents of the log, confirm that at 3.42am, farm was contacted by GPO and left off hook:-
Oh OK, when you said 'answered' I thought you meant someone physically picked it up from the farmhouse side. In which case, we wouldn't all be here debating the case ;D ;D
-
There is something seriously wrong with PC Wests log (3.36am), the timings are all to cock...
How can the force room clock be 10 minutes fast when Jeremy makes his call and speaks with PC west, yet it be 21 minutes fast when West records the arrival of Jeremy at the scene (4.13am)? How interesting that according to this account, the occupants of CA07 requested the attendance of the firearms team to the scene (4.11am), before the arrival of Jeremy at the scene two minutes later (4.13am), when by other accounts, Jeremy had arrived at the scene at 3;52am, and more importantly, Jeremy had apparently accompanied PC Myall and PS Bews on a view of the premises, to try and ascertain the current state of play...
-
There is something seriously wrong with PC Wests log (3.36am), the timings are all to cock...
How can the force room clock be 10 minutes fast when Jeremy makes his call and speaks with PC west, yet it be 21 minutes fast when West records the arrival of Jeremy at the scene (4.13am)? How interesting that according to this account, the occupants of CA07 requested the attendance of the firearms team to the scene (4.11am), before the arrival of Jeremy at the scene two minutes later (4.13am), when by other accounts, Jeremy had arrived at the scene at 3;52am, and more importantly, Jeremy had apparently accompanied PC Myall and PS Bews on a view of the premises, to try and ascertain the current state of play...
What if, Jeremy didn't or hadn't arrived at the scene until 4.13am?
How would that sit with the suggestion that at 4.02am, the occupants of CA07 had requested the attendance of the firearms team, 11 minutes before Jeremy himself had arrived at the farm to meet the police? Did the police take a second look around the farmhouse, after Jeremys arrival at the scene (4.13am), and if so, why has this important feature been displaced in time by some 11 minutes? Has this got anything to do with the fact that two different calls were made to the police, one by Ralph Bamber, (3.26am), and the other by Jeremy Bamber (3.36am)...
-
Oh OK, when you said 'answered' I thought you meant someone physically picked it up from the farmhouse side. In which case, we wouldn't all be here debating the case ;D ;D
I think the log entry, timed at 3.42am, implies that prior to Jeremy arriving at the scene, fathers phone called GPO, and was left off hook - and that somebody later could have added the word "By", thus changing the meaning of the notes, hence why the notes were rewritten on the reverse of page 1 of log 3.36am...
-
Nothing could be clearer, the phone at whf called the GPO - it was the attack alarm, activated by someone still alive inside the farmhouse...
-
Nothing could be clearer, the phone at whf called the GPO - it was the attack alarm, activated by someone still alive inside the farmhouse...
Activated prior to 3:42am...
-
The attack alarm was activated inside whf, whilst Jeremy was at his cottage miles away...
-
I think you are misreading Pc West's handwriting. In his log, he wrote "checked by GPO", not "called by GPO", and so the word "by" isn't a later insertion.
However, the line "0413 informant @ scene." does look as though it were added later, as it is unnaturally close to the lines before and after it.
Jeremy wasn't at all sure how long his call lasted, but guessed its duration was about five minutes. There is nothing in the logs to suggest it took 10 or 11 minutes.
-
The attack alarm was activated inside whf, whilst Jeremy was at his cottage miles away...
Hi Mike, I thought we had pretty much put the panic alarm theory to bed? Jeremy said it was installed after and Vic confirmed that it was installed post murders.
-
Hi Mike, I thought we had pretty much put the panic alarm theory to bed? Jeremy said it was installed after and Vic confirmed that it was installed post murders.
Hi Caroline,
burglar alarm was fitted after, panic alarm was fitted before due to threats made to kill Ralph Bamber and his family...
-
I think you are misreading Pc West's handwriting. In his log, he wrote "checked by GPO", not "called by GPO", and so the word "by" isn't a later insertion.
However, the line "0413 informant @ scene." does look as though it were added later, as it is unnaturally close to the lines before and after it.
Jeremy wasn't at all sure how long his call lasted, but guessed its duration was about five minutes. There is nothing in the logs to suggest it took 10 or 11 minutes.
Hi Reader,
According to other sources, police checked telephone line at whf after Jeremy called them (3.38am), and police found it to be engaged, not the operator (3.42am). Sequence of events, is out of synchronization, I did not think the operator established phone was off the hook until much later on...
Ann Eaton mentions that Jeremy told her his call lasted about 11 minutes, or so...
Mike.
-
Hi Caroline,
burglar alarm was fitted after, panic alarm was fitted before due to threats made to kill Ralph Bamber and his family...
Categorically untrue.
-
Hi Caroline,
burglar alarm was fitted after, panic alarm was fitted before due to threats made to kill Ralph Bamber and his family...
Everything points to the PB being installed post murders - there is no mention of it anywhere by anyone until after. We also confirmation from Jeremy himself that it was installed after. Also, why would anyone make a call to police and also activate a PB?
-
Categorically untrue.
I'm afraid I have to agree with you on that one hartley.
-
Hi Caroline,
Yes, I think his evidence has been twisted, and played basically on the timing of the call he received from Jeremy, without both the 3;36am and the 3;26am logs being produced, which clearly do not contain the same information - disclosure of the contents of the 3:26am log did not occur until after the 2002 appeal. If it had been disclosed at the 2002 appeal and compared against the content of the 3;36am log, and laid bare at that stage for all to see, the convictions would almost certainly have been quashed...
What becomes clear by reference to PC Wests court transcript (produced) is that he says he had spoken to the information room on a previous occasion to the one in question, and there was obviously some confusion over which call was made and when. So, there were two calls, not one, with two different times given to a solitary call - there were two calls, not one, he said so in his testimony, basically he was lying through his teeth...
If it wasn't disclosed until after 2002 appeal, why is there a Chelmsford court stamp on it from '86?
-
If it wasn't disclosed until after 2002 appeal, why is there a Chelmsford court stamp on it from '86?
Hello Vic. How are you? :)
-
Categorically untrue.
Yes, it is absolutely true, that there was only one burglar alarm fitted (after the shootings), but a panic button was fitted beforehand in connection with threats made by someone local to kill Ralph and his famiy. Ask yourself what would be the point installing a panic alarm after everybody had all been shot?
-
Yes, it is absolutely true, that there was only one burglar alarm fitted (after the shootings), but a panic button was fitted beforehand in connection with threats made by someone local to kill Ralph and his famiy. Ask yourself what would be the point installing a panic alarm after everybody had all been shot?
There were still people working there and relatives coming and going. It was most likely installed for their peace of mind.
-
There were still people working there and relatives coming and going. It was most likely installed for their peace of mind.
Ok, so you think that the threats to kill Ralph and his family were not taken seriously then, despite Ralph taking time off from his duties as a magistrate, and Ralph confided in people that he had better keep his eye on two people in particular, because the shooting season was due to start soon - who were the two persons being referred to...
-
Hi Mike, It will be of importance to ascertain when Nevill requested the installation of the Panic Alarm/Button, and equally important, when was it fitted?
The 'shooting season' will have been due to start on 'the Glorious Twelfth (of August).
Am I right in thinking that 'Herr Flick' was staying at WHF until the Thursday prior to the massacre, and may well have stayed on but for the anticipated arrival of Sheila and the twins?
-
There were still people working there and relatives coming and going. It was most likely installed for their peace of mind.
And there was a cat, don't forget the cat. :D
There was no panic alarm at the time of the murders, regardless of the lies that Mike continues to spin.
-
Sorry to go 'Off Topic,
Where does the cat come in?
Did he get in a flap?
Or conversely did Steve UK get calls from the cat called Tom?
-
Sorry to go 'Off Topic,
Where does the cat come in?
Did he get in a flap?
Or conversely did Steve UK get calls from the cat called Tom?
Nah he just carried a hacksaw blade around with him.
-
Morning Camps sorry no cat "flap" that is why the cat used the window that was left open for easy access ;D for the cat of course ;D
-
Morning Susan, you may well be on the ball here.
I'm confident that the cat didn't trespass for a nap. Most likely he'd seen what the local 'hack' saw!
-
I seem to recall seeing a flap in the coal shed door, if so then the cat must simply have used the spare key to enter the house. :-\
-
No Bits the cat must have slept in the coal shed my neighbours cats do and are called Sooty and Sweep ;D
-
Pardon me for saying that's a No Brainer.
The cat would have known that the locks had been changed for security purr pusses, and for that very reason no spare key would have been able to have been used by Tom(cat), Dick or Harry.
-
No Bits the cat must have slept in the coal shed my neighbours cats do and are called Sooty and Sweep ;D
Yes you are a probably right. Sooty and Sweep aren't cats though are they? :-\
-
campion the cat would be "hacked off" nowhere to rest its weary head ;D ;D ;D
-
No Bits the cats I see covered in coal dust do look like cats 4 legs and a tail oh and whiskers ;D ;D ;D
-
No Bits the cats I see covered in coal dust do look like cats 4 legs and a tail oh and whiskers ;D ;D ;D
Aaah so they aren't 'The' Sooty & Sweep, now I understand. :-[
-
Back to the drawing board eh ! 'H'.
If you think about it, you could become a Puss Artist, or even a ventriloquist.
-
Back to the drawing board eh ! 'H'.
If you think about it, you could become a Puss Artist, or even a ventriloquist.
Keep swallowing Camps, a few more times and it'll be summer again. ;)
-
Not only do I find your defensive posts hard to swallow, but also your reasoning does not follow.
The old adage is:- One swallow doesn't make a Summer - Not quite what you are advocating.
BTW how long since the lovely 'Summer' has been posting. Hope she's SS&BF !
-
Not only do I find your defensive posts hard to swallow, but also your reasoning does not follow.
The old adage is:- One swallow doesn't make a Summer - Not quite what you are advocating.
BTW how long since the lovely 'Summer' has been posting. Hope she's SS&BF !
I'm not being defensive in any way, I don't believe it's warranted. :)
-
There were still people working there and relatives coming and going. It was most likely installed for their peace of mind.
A kind of "after the horse has bolted" attitude.
-
Morning Camps sorry no cat "flap" that is why the cat used the window that was left open for easy access ;D for the cat of course ;D
Just wrapped his claws round the window and wrenched it open. ;D
-
Hi Grahame thought the small window was left open for the cat to come and go ;D
-
Nah he just carried a hacksaw blade around with him.
Is your avatar 666 or 999? Wow! something really has got up your arse. Perhaps you're some sort of religious nut? Nah! of course not. ;D Perhaps they should be 3 inverted 7's instead after all that ranting and raving? ::)
-
Hi Grahame thought the small window was left open for the cat to come and go ;D
I've no idea? It appears the relatives can say what they want in order to incriminate JB?
-
Hi Grahame thought the small window was left open for the cat to come and go ;D
That is what is claimed Susie and it is a very small window. Could a grown man squeeze through there, as sometimes claimed?
-
I've no idea? It appears the relatives can say what they want in order to incriminate JB?
And they did just that,Grahame.
-
That is what is claimed Susie and it is a very small window. Could a grown man squeeze through there, as sometimes claimed?
All the stuff that is theory in this case so easily is used as fact. Just as long as it incriminates JB. Even the stars in their courses are set against poor ol' Jeremy. :-[
-
Maggie depends on the size of the man that is what it is all about cat/man ;D
-
How big does the window need to be?
-
How big does the window need to be?
Big enough for a grown man to climb through? ;D
-
Big enough for a grown man to climb through? ;D
Groan. >:( ;D ;D
-
No doubt you can explain how JB could exit WHF through the window which is indicated?
When the initial reconnoitring of the house was made by Bews, Myall and JB, Myall was emphatic that the window to the left of the 'Yard Door' was not curtained and no light was visible.
However he (Myall) was adamant that the window to the right of the door showed the Main Kitchen light was on, but couldn't be seen into. We established that this was because a Roller Blind was in its lowered mode.
That being the case, how can JB have used this means of egress when not only has he to negotiate the work surface, but to also lower the blind, which was shown to have been operated by cords seen to be at the left of the window, and finally on exit, to secure the opened window light.
Houdini would indeed be proud of this escaping exercise!
-
No doubt ............We established that this was because a Roller Blind was in its lowered mode.
Unfortunately not.
-
I couldn't help but notice written on the picture of the farmhouse "JEREMY'S ESCAPE ROUTE". See what I mean about theories accepted as established fact? It has NEVER been proved that JB used this way of escape. They may be and I suggest they are all fairy tales and figments of imagination?
-
I couldn't help but notice written on the picture of the farmhouse "JEREMY'S ESCAPE ROUTE". See what I mean about theories accepted as established fact? It has NEVER been proved that JB used this way of escape. They may be and I suggest they are all fairy tales and figments of imagination?
I guess you missed the question mark too?
See, how senstive you are Grahame. ::)
-
No doubt you can explain how JB could exit WHF through the window which is indicated?
When the initial reconnoitring of the house was made by Bews, Myall and JB, Myall was emphatic that the window to the left of the 'Yard Door' was not curtained and no light was visible.
However he (Myall) was adamant that the window to the right of the door showed the Main Kitchen light was on, but couldn't be seen into. We established that this was because a Roller Blind was in its lowered mode.
That being the case, how can JB have used this means of egress when not only has he to negotiate the work surface, but to also lower the blind, which was shown to have been operated by cords seen to be at the left of the window, and finally on exit, to secure the opened window light.
Houdini would indeed be proud of this escaping exercise!
Remember it was also entered into an official statement that ALL WINDOWS WERE SECURE.
-
I guess you missed the question mark too?
See, how senstive you are Grahame. ::)
No, I didn't scroll the the picture far enough along. I stand corrected. But at the same time this suggestion was accepted in court.
-
I couldn't help but notice written on the picture of the farmhouse "JEREMY'S ESCAPE ROUTE". See what I mean about theories accepted as established fact? It has NEVER been proved that JB used this way of escape. They may be and I suggest they are all fairy tales and figments of imagination?
True Grahame, it is another assumption. Unfortunately the judge ruled it didn't matter if he did use the window or not, just that he could have. Did the judge try to climb through the window? How did they establish it as a possibility? ?.?
-
No, I didn't scroll the the picture far enough along. I stand corrected. But at the same time this suggestion was accepted in court.
I think that is where many people are mistaken.
-
True Grahame, it is another assumption. Unfortunately the judge ruled it didn't matter if he did use the window or not, just that he could have. Did the judge try to climb through the window? How did they establish it as a possibility? ?.?
Well Maggie by saying that he automatically focussed the jury's mind on the matter so that it appeard that it didn't matter, because Jeremy could still have done the murder. Because the question arose yet ignored as to how he entered and exited the building. It still leaves the question, how did he enter and exit the building without leaving any clues at all that he was there? Or indeed how anybody else was there? There quite simply are no clues that any other persons were there aqt all.
-
I think that is where many people are mistaken.
But it is still used by many today to describe how JB did the murders and is accepted as fact today by almost all those who believe him to be guilty.
-
But it is still used by many today to describe how JB did the murders and is accepted as fact today by almost all those who believe him to be guilty.
That may be your perception of things, and I can't speak for others, but in my case that is certainly untrue.
I very much understand that the ability to enter and exit simply allowed the police to increase their suspect list to those who were not found murdered in an apparently secured from the inside house.
How access and egress actually occurred, is unknown, however the possibility remained and was confirmed by Jeremy himself.
-
That may be your perception of things, and I can't speak for others, but in my case that is certainly untrue.
I very much understand that the ability to enter and exit simply allowed the police to increase their suspect list to those who were not found murdered in an apparently secured from the inside house.
How access and egress actually occurred, is unknown, however the possibility remained and was confirmed by Jeremy himself.
That is true. He if not the murderer was still a very foolish boy.
-
That is true. He if not the murderer was still a very foolish boy.
Yes, there is a risk of being caught if you commit a crime.
Our overflowing prisons are testament to that.
-
It now remains highly probable, that both calls mentioned in the two phone logs (3.26am and 3.36am) overlapped one another for a period of 5 to 6 minutes, between 3.36am and 3.42am, and that reference to this was / is recorded on the reverse of the original page 1 of Bonnets 3.26am phone log...
The all important information concerns the GPO calling the farmhouse at 3.42am and establishing that the phone had been left off the hook, whilst Jeremy was still speaking to the police, on the other line...
-
It now remains highly probable, that both calls mentioned in the two phone logs (3.26am and 3.36am) overlapped one another for a period of 5 to 6 minutes, between 3.36am and 3.42am, and that reference to this was / is recorded on the reverse of the original page 1 of Bonnets 3.26am phone log...
The all important information concerns the GPO calling the farmhouse at 3.42am and establishing that the phone had been left off the hook, whilst Jeremy was still speaking to the police, on the other line...
What now needs to be done, is to identify the person (GPO) who checked the line at the farmhouse at 3.42am, and obtain that persons witness statement covering this action...
-
True Grahame, it is another assumption. Unfortunately the judge ruled it didn't matter if he did use the window or not, just that he could have. Did the judge try to climb through the window? How did they establish it as a possibility? ?.?
"Erm....would counsel help me on this one please? My leg appears to be stuck..under my chin".
-
Grahame you need a push and a shove ;D happy to oblige if not me No Bits ;D ;D ;D
-
Grahame you need a push and a shove ;D happy to oblige if not me No Bits ;D ;D ;D
I would always be happy to push Grahame through a window. ;D
-
No Bits you are so naughty but I like you ;D make sure it is a ground floor window ;D
-
No Bits you are so naughty but I like you ;D make sure it is a ground floor window ;D
Spoil sport, I was thinking the 5th. :(
-
No Bits ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D OK then just do it ;D
-
According to other sources, police checked telephone line at whf after Jeremy called them (3.38am), and police found it to be engaged, not the operator (3.42am). Sequence of events, is out of synchronization, I did not think the operator established phone was off the hook until much later on...
If a telephone line is in use or off-hook, one gets engaged tone on trying to call it. This applies to the operator as well. However, the operator can make further checks (including eavesdropping) to discover why the line is engaged. Regarding any "panic alarm call" or any other type of automated call, such calls are brief - they do not tie up the line, as doing so would be dangerous in various situations, as it would prevent normal use of the line. However, if a telephone handset has been left off-hook, the dial tone isn't present and no call can be made, whether by a person or by automation, until the off-hook handset is replaced.
Ann Eaton mentions that Jeremy told her his call lasted about 11 minutes, or so...
Isn't it the case that Ann Eaton mentioned a delay of 11 minutes, but didn't attribute that delay to any specific cause, such as the length of Jeremy's call?
It would be helpful, mike, if you could provide links to the relevant evidence when you quote from it, so that we can easily see for ourselves what you are referring to (or explain that you have the evidence but it hasn't been made public yet).
-
If a telephone line is in use or off-hook, one gets engaged tone on trying to call it. This applies to the operator as well. However, the operator can make further checks (including eavesdropping) to discover why the line is engaged. Regarding any "panic alarm call" or any other type of automated call, such calls are brief - they do not tie up the line, as doing so would be dangerous in various situations, as it would prevent normal use of the line. However, if a telephone handset has been left off-hook, the dial tone isn't present and no call can be made, whether by a person or by automation, until the off-hook handset is replaced.
Isn't it the case that Ann Eaton mentioned a delay of 11 minutes, but didn't attribute that delay to any specific cause, such as the length of Jeremy's call?
It would be helpful, mike, if you could provide links to the relevant evidence when you quote from it, so that we can easily see for ourselves what you are referring to (or explain that you have the evidence but it hasn't been made public yet).
OK...