Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on June 21, 2014, 11:15:AM
-
After supporting Jeremy for one month, the police made a complete U turn and decided to frame him. Instructing the lab technicians to expertly put incriminating blood in the silencer.
This of course meant several policemen wanted to ruin an innocent man's life, reputation and freedom. An innocent man who had just lost his family as well.
Taff Jones was against this. But had no evidence of Jeremy's innocence. Or did he ? But then why didn't he take that evidence to higher bodies ? Or were they also in on it ?
The police were in a no win situation. Get a 'guilty' verdict and face severe criticism in getting it wrong in the beginning. Get a 'not guilty' verdict and face even more criticism. Jeremy may even sue. There was also the chance of the framing attempt being discovered. Meaning dozens of police officers and lab technicians being prosecuted.
There was no financial incentive to frame. And it was a lot more work for everyone involved. Everyone relying on each other to not retract or make a mistake.
Why do people think the police went for the 'late late' frame ?
-
After supporting Jeremy for one month, the police made a complete U turn and decided to frame him. Instructing the lab technicians to expertly put incriminating blood in the silencer. What a load of Tosh - who said that
This of course meant several policemen wanted to ruin an innocent man's life, reputation and freedom. An innocent man who had just lost his family as well. Some people think they did not know he was innocent they just thought he did it but had themselves made a mess of the crime scene and how they investigated it - not sure that's my opinion
Taff Jones was against this. But had no evidence of Jeremy's innocence. Or did he ? But then why didn't he take that evidence to higher bodies ? Or were they also in on it ? How do you know what he did before his tragic death or what is on the original file?
The police were in a no win situation. Get a 'guilty' verdict and face severe criticism in getting it wrong in the beginning. Get a 'not guilty' verdict and face even more criticism. Jeremy may even sue. There was also the chance of the framing attempt being discovered. Meaning dozens of police officers and lab technicians being prosecuted. Stop going on about the lab technicians? or show me someone has accused them of any wrong doing?
There was no financial incentive to frame. And it was a lot more work for everyone involved. Everyone relying on each other to not retract or make a mistake. I would think that is the case in many other MOJ , but it still happened
Why do people think the police went for the 'late late' frame ?
-
I will post the recent threads. You must have missed them.
-
Adam
I believe that a lot of things that were said about Jeremy during the trial were part of a "character assassination"
you have formed an image of him in your mind mostly from what Julie and a few members of the family said .
1) Do you think even if it was true , and a lot of posters have said they don't think he was a particularly
nice man - that being arrogant and possibly selfish ( although recall Barbara Wilsons first glowing statement ::) he was not that bad) Make you a murderer?
2) Experts are still arguing and giving different opinions on the blood in the silencer or if it was even used and argue about the DNA evidence
3) so take this out of the equation - and what did the police have to go on? No forensics. they could not prove ( see court transcripts) that he could lock the window from the outside. They could not prove how he had got back to the house . They could not prove any timings of calls because they apparently had dodgy time keeping. They had no times of deaths . They did not call in ballistic experts to examine the house .
They did not have a lot to go on - but the family were on and on at them and there would have been an inquest into the murders and suicide ( because lets face it that still would have been a crime) and a lot of their mistakes would have come out . So they could not really refuse to look at the other angle could they?
As for an absolute reason why?
Why have they done it in other cases ? Tbh I have not a clue .
Perhaps you should read the link I posted yesterday about officers resigning during investigations of corruption and MOJ , so they can keep their pensions. I am sure it is only a minority of officers but it does happen
-
because i think the police had only just realized how badly they had screwed up and how much potential trouble they were in.
-
I will post the recent threads. You must have missed them.
don't waste your precious time I have you on ignore most of the time .
-
because i think the police had only just realized how badly they had screwed up and how much potential trouble they were in.
How had the police screwed up ? Thought Jeremy was innocent, which was the police's stance for a month.
-
i refer you to my last thread about this subject.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5498.0.html
-
I have never read any criticism about the police calling the raid team in. Jeremy has never complained. There was no enquiry.
Anyway how would framing something resolve this ?
-
read the threat i posted its fully explained.
-
i refer you to my last thread about this subject.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5498.0.html
Moderator. Please delete of I will repost the threads Janus missed.
Thank you.
-
Adam, why are you doing things on purpose to annoy people? What´s in it for you, there must be some reward?
-
Moderator. Please delete of I will repost the threads Janus missed.
Thank you.
why do you want me link deleted it explains fully they why might of taken that decision.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5344.0.html
ADAM - I repeat I have you on ignore so I can chose when to look at your posts. I don't need to read your threads - just post one piece of evidence that posters on here have said the lab technicians planted the blood.
I have read all the threads and have never seen that . In fact they were VERY annoyed that EP changed reference numbers on exhibits without their permission or knowledge and there are documents on here to show that.
if YOU have come to that conclusion through your methods of elimination then don't bother.
-
Adam, please note that YOUR links have been removed because YOU have been asked on numerous occasions NOT to keep posting your own links. YOU have been told that should you refrain from so doing, the offending links would be removed.....................and they have been. Nugs, to my knowledge has NEVER previously posted a link and the same courtesy must be extended to Nug as was originally to you.
-
Adam, please note that YOUR links have been removed because YOU have been asked on numerous occasions NOT to keep posting your own links. YOU have been told that should you refrain from so doing, the offending links would be removed.....................and they have been. Nugs, to my knowledge has NEVER previously posted a link and the same courtesy must be extended to Nug as was originally to you.
As Mat said, you are over moderating me. Probably because I say horrible things about you're beloved Jeremy.
My threads have posts from Jeremy's supporters as well. Re posting them is assisting people asking questions who have missed the thread.
Anyway. I will just just copy my original thread post rather than the whole thread link from now on. Will save me repeating myself.
-
ADAM - I repeat I have you on ignore so I can chose when to look at your posts. I don't need to read your threads - just post one piece of evidence that posters on here have said the lab technicians planted the blood.
I have read all the threads and have never seen that . In fact they were VERY annoyed that EP changed reference numbers on exhibits without their permission or knowledge and there are documents on here to show that.
if YOU have come to that conclusion through your methods of elimination then don't bother.
There is no evidence. If there was then Jeremy would be free.
But the relatives did not have the blood knowledge, expertise, time, courage & financial need to do it.
So if the relatives & lab technicians did not do it. How did the blood get on the moderator ?
-
As Mat said, you are over moderating me. Probably because I say horrible things about you're beloved Jeremy.
My threads have posts from Jeremy's supporters as well. Re posting them is assisting people asking questions who have missed the thread.
Anyway. I will just just copy my original thread post rather than the whole thread link from now on. Will save me repeating myself.
Adam, why should YOU be allowed to get away with anything. You have acted as an irritant from the time you became a member. Being a pest would appear to be your raison d' etre. It's very clear from the way other members respond to you that I'm not alone in my beliefs.
-
the link is to a thread which answers the question that adam is asking.
-
the link is to a thread which answers the question that adam is asking.
No probs, Nugs. I knew exactly what it was about :)
-
There is no evidence. If there was then Jeremy would be free.
But the relatives did not have the blood knowledge, expertise, time, courage & financial need to do it.
So if the relatives & lab technicians did not do it. How did the blood get on the moderator ?
what exactly do you mean by blood knowledge?
the rest of the sentence is supposition and your opinion only.
-
As Mat said, you are over moderating me. Probably because I say horrible things about you're beloved Jeremy.
My threads have posts from Jeremy's supporters as well. Re posting them is assisting people asking questions who have missed the thread.
Anyway. I will just just copy my original thread post rather than the whole thread link from now on. Will save me repeating myself.
It's just strange behaviour on Aprils part that she refuses to let you post links to other topics when you're asked a question, other members post links all the time and they aren't followed around having their posts edited. Maybe an admin could clarify when it's okay for members to actually post links since as usual April is making it up as she goes along. Certainly doesn't say anything in the forum rules - petty and strange.
-
first it would of taken a while for the police to realise the consequences of what they had done.
when they had it would take them a little while to decide what they were going to do about it.
id say a month would probebly be about right.
-
what exactly do you mean by blood knowledge?
the rest of the sentence is supposition and your opinion only.
They would not know Sheila's blood type. I do not even know mine.
-
what exactly do you mean by blood knowledge?
the rest of the sentence is supposition and your opinion only.
Well I posted a source saying the relatives were rich in their own right and had no reason to lie.
Another poster has also said you need to know how to correctly plant blood into a silencer.
None of the relatives were criminals. Unless you can provide a source showing otherwise. To suddenly risk big sentences if caught framing an innocent man, takes a lot of courage.
The relatives handed the silencer in within three days.
The relatives have denied Jeremy's claim that they have framed him. Source available upon request.
Do you think the relatives framed Jeremy ?
-
Adam you are probably O positive like me ;D ;D ;D ;D we are as common as muck everybody is O positive ;D ;D ;D
-
Adam you are probably O positive like me ;D ;D ;D ;D we are as common as muck everybody is O positive ;D ;D ;D
You English are mostly O positive - same in Iceland. The rest of the Nordic people mostly are A positive, which I happen to have. Glad I have common blood type!
Bet Adam is AB negative, only 1% has that - he is so special! ;D
-
Well I posted a source saying the relatives were rich in their own right and had no reason to lie.
Another poster has also said you need to know how to correctly plant blood into a silencer.
None of the relatives were criminals. Unless you can provide a source showing otherwise.
The relatives handed the silencer in within three days.
The relatives have denied Jeremy's claim that they have framed him. Source available upon request.
1 i see no evedence they were rich. 2 being rich doesnt stop you wanting more money
3 nobodys a criminal untill they decide to commit a crime. 4 denying it is what you would expect them to do weather they had done or not.
-
1 i see no evedence they were rich. 2 being rich doesnt stop you wanting more money
3 nobodys a criminal untill they decide to commit a crime. 4 denying it is what you would expect them to do weather they had done or not.
Rich people never stop wanting more - that´s why they are rich!
-
http://youtu.be/BLedeOGdj2U
Showing the relatives were wealthy in their right and had no reason to lie.
Do you think the relatives framed Jeremy ?
-
Rich people never stop wanting more - that´s why they are rich!
Poor people that have not got the motivation of talent to get rich (of both), will commit crimes. Even robbing from their own family
-
http://youtu.be/BLedeOGdj2U
Showing the relatives were wealthy in their right and had no reason to lie.
Do you think the relatives framed Jeremy ?
I am not saying the relatives framed Jeremy - I don´t know, but to claim that just because people have money, they don´t want more is absurd. The world just doesn´t work that way.
-
http://youtu.be/BLedeOGdj2U
Showing the relatives were wealthy in their right and had no reason to lie.
Do you think the relatives framed Jeremy ?
that gives no evedence that were weathly in there own right other than they claimed to be.
-
Alias/Adam (has a ring to it) I am not saying anyone was lying but had Jeremy taken possession of what he was left he would have owned land the rellies farmed and also he was not considered one of them and they would not have been happy about him owning the farm and the land etc. Sad but true.
-
I am not saying the relatives framed Jeremy - I don´t know, but to claim that just because people have money, they don´t want more is absurd. The world just doesn´t work that way.
There are lots of reasons why the relatives would 'not' and could 'not' frame Jeremy. Just posted.
It seems the only reason they would is for financial gain. Although they were already wealthy.
-
I am not saying the relatives framed Jeremy - I don´t know, but to claim that just because people have money, they don´t want more is absurd. The world just doesn´t work that way.
the same could have been said for Jeremy - he was not badly off and would have inherited from Granny Bamber without the risk of life in prison.
The more you think about it the more ludicrous it gets.
How many mass murderers that are not mentally ill do you know that committed a crime so bad and so risky as this without any prior record or evidence of violence. Even All the things that he were supposed of said about the murder of his parents are not co-oberated .
-
that gives no evedence that were weathly in there own right other than they claimed to be.
The relatives are not saying it. A pro Jeremy video is saying it.
-
Alias hope he never needs a blood transfusion in a hurry wont be much of that in the blood bank ;D ;D ;D
-
The relatives are not saying it. A pro Jeremy video is saying it.
yes i watched it it wasn't claiming that.
the only evedence it showed that they were wealthy is they cliamed to be.
thats hardly evedence.
-
the same could have been said for Jeremy - he was not badly off and would have inherited from Granny Bamber without the risk of life in prison.
The more you think about it the more ludicrous it gets.
How many mass murderers that are not mentally ill do you know that committed a crime so bad and so risky as this without any prior record or evidence of violence. Even All the things that he were supposed of said about the murder of his parents are not co-oberated .
As far as Jeremy was concerned he was badly off. Having to work long hours on a farm in the 'loads of money' 80's. While Sheila lived rent free in London. Several people testified how he 'hated' his family.
-
Maybe if the relatives had been fully aware of the backgrounds of both June and Sheila,,then they wouldn't have had doubts about the killer in the first place.
Their bone of contention in all of this was their sheer disbelief in Sheila as having been capable of killing,,caused by the critical illness that they DIDN'T know she had.
-
they dident care who the killer was they just wanted the cash.
-
Alias/Adam (has a ring to it) I am not saying anyone was lying but had Jeremy taken possession of what he was left he would have owned land the rellies farmed and also he was not considered one of them and they would not have been happy about him owning the farm and the land etc. Sad but true.
I was just thinking about that. It would have been intolerable for them.
-
if the relatives were wealthy how come they had to approach nevile.
to get him to buy the land why couldn't they have done it themselves.
-
Questionable,nugs.
-
he could they be wealthy they couldent aford to buy there own farms.
-
if the relatives were wealthy how come they had to approach nevile.
to get him to buy the land why couldn't they have done it themselves.
were there not outstanding loans as well ?
-
Stan Jones gave Ann Eaton the keys to WHF. This was to do some cleaning.
Ann Eaton and other relatives attended WHF. Finding a silencer hidden away in the gun cupboard. Basil Cock & Barbara Wilson were also present. The silencer had blood & paint on according to the relatives.
The silencer was handed to Stan Jones within two days.
In court it was never suggested the silencer was contaminated or was unsafe evidence. Jeremy suggested this decades later. Claiming his surviving family framed him. The relatives did not do this for money. Jeremys own Youtube video said they were already rich with no reason to lie. They also had no criminal record as far as I know.
If the silencer did not have blood & paint on, the relatives, in two days had to -
1: Decide in unison to attempt to frame Jeremy. All be confident in each other that no one will crack under pressure. They all had to agree to commit a serious crime & risk criminal charges.
2: Find out about back splatter.
3: Find out if any shots were contact shots which would produce back splatter.
4: Find out Sheila's blood type.
5: Find out if the rifle end had blood on it. Meaning a silencer was not used & they could not frame Jeremy.
6: Get blood which is very close to Sheilas. Assisting in getting a conviction.
7: Find out how to effectivly & realistically put the correct blood into the silencer baffles.
8: Get the right equipment to transfer the found blood into the silencer.
9: Go back to WHF and effectivly put paint onto the silencer.
Do people believe this was doable in two days ?
-
were there not outstanding loans as well ?
yes i belive they were they couldent aford to pay nevile back.
-
You forgot to mention that Jeremy declined his visit to WHF so soon after the tragedy because he was possibly squeamish about going in--------------but not squeamish enough to " murder 5 people ",eh ?
I notice the relatives didn't refuse the offer !! Goodness me,they hadn't been inside the place 5 minutes when they found a silencer,key to the safe,a file,blood on a window-sill,and whatever else they could find to help police with their enquiries,as it was the force of RWB who " bullied " the police into changing their minds on the verdict,,so they had to find as much " incriminating " evidence as they could muster in order to justify everyones' change of mind.
-
After supporting Jeremy for one month, the police made a complete U turn and decided to frame him. Instructing the lab technicians to expertly put incriminating blood in the silencer.
This of course meant several policemen wanted to ruin an innocent man's life, reputation and freedom. An innocent man who had just lost his family as well.
Taff Jones was against this. But had no evidence of Jeremy's innocence. Or did he ? But then why didn't he take that evidence to higher bodies ? Or were they also in on it ?
The police were in a no win situation. Get a 'guilty' verdict and face severe criticism in getting it wrong in the beginning. Get a 'not guilty' verdict and face even more criticism. Jeremy may even sue. There was also the chance of the framing attempt being discovered. Meaning dozens of police officers and lab technicians being prosecuted.
There was no financial incentive to frame. And it was a lot more work for everyone involved. Everyone relying on each other to not retract or make a mistake.
Why do people think the police went for the 'late late' frame ?
In one word family either do as they wanted or they would expose EP to be lieing they knew Antony's gun had been used and about the training exercise.
David now knows what they have done but how can he ever admit it prison loss of assets and breaking his family in the process await him what would you do in his shoes.
I have asked him to reconsider but I know he can not unwind his mistake I fell sorry for him.
-
David now knows what they have done but how can he ever admit it prison loss of assets and breaking his family in the process await him what would you do in his shoes.
I have asked him to reconsider but I know he can not unwind his mistake I fell sorry for him.
Pure rubbish, Bambergate. I can guarentee you if you had presented this to David he would of told you where to go! In fact I doubt you'd even have the oppurtunity to present anything.
-
Stan Jones gave Ann Eaton the keys to WHF. This was to do some cleaning.
Ann Eaton and other relatives attended WHF. Finding a silencer hidden away in the gun cupboard. Basil Cock & Barbara Wilson were also present. The silencer had blood & paint on according to the relatives.
The silencer was handed to Stan Jones within two days.
In court it was never suggested the silencer was contaminated or was unsafe evidence. Jeremy suggested this decades later. Claiming his surviving family framed him. The relatives did not do this for money. Jeremys own Youtube video said they were already rich with no reason to lie. They also had no criminal record as far as I know.
If the silencer did not have blood & paint on, the relatives, in two days had to -
1: Decide in unison to attempt to frame Jeremy. All be confident in each other that no one will crack under pressure. They all had to agree to commit a serious crime & risk criminal charges.
2: Find out about back splatter.
3: Find out if any shots were contact shots which would produce back splatter.
4: Find out Sheila's blood type.
5: Find out if the rifle end had blood on it. Meaning a silencer was not used & they could not frame Jeremy.
6: Get blood which is very close to Sheilas. Assisting in getting a conviction.
7: Find out how to effectivly & realistically put the correct blood into the silencer baffles.
8: Get the right equipment to transfer the found blood into the silencer.
9: Go back to WHF and effectivly put paint onto the silencer.
Do people believe this was doable in two days ?
so why on his thread is there a record of reporting the silencer on 1oth sept and why in anne eatons statement of 14th august does she not mention finding the silencer AT ALL?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,415.msg216524.html#msg216524
-
In one word family either do as they wanted or they would expose EP to be lieing they knew Antony's gun had been used and about the training exercise.
David now knows what they have done but how can he ever admit it prison loss of assets and breaking his family in the process await him what would you do in his shoes.
I have asked him to reconsider but I know he can not unwind his mistake I fell sorry for him.
Having formed my own opinion of David, what you say doesn't surprise me in the least. I have always felt he was above all, that which his father demanded of him, a dutiful and obedient son, a view I understand to be shared, but not put as politely, by someone who has been a long time friend. I would be interested to know how much of David's feelings are shared by Ann.
-
You forgot to mention that Jeremy declined his visit to WHF so soon after the tragedy because he was possibly squeamish about going in--------------but not squeamish enough to " murder 5 people ",eh ?
I notice the relatives didn't refuse the offer !! Goodness me,they hadn't been inside the place 5 minutes when they found a silencer,key to the safe,a file,blood on a window-sill,and whatever else they could find to help police with their enquiries,as it was the force of RWB who " bullied " the police into changing their minds on the verdict,,so they had to find as much " incriminating " evidence as they could muster in order to justify everyones' change of mind.
well you wouldent want to viset would you.
-
well you wouldent want to viset would you.
No,I certainly wouldn't,nugs. It would have taken me all my time to have gone in there again. After all,it wasn't as though the Bambers owned the property,so there was no real attachment to it.
-
so why on his thread is there a record of reporting the silencer on 1oth sept and why in anne eatons statement of 14th august does she not mention finding the silencer AT ALL?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,415.msg216524.html#msg216524
Wilkes's book has the silencer being found on August 11th. And handed in before the 14th August.
Sounds right to me. The police would have finished with WHF. It was murder/suicide after all. September is too long a wait.
And the relatives did not ask for the key. Or need Jeremy's permission. Stan Jones gave them the keys and asked them to do some cleaning and tidying up. They then attended with the family lawyer & BW.
Yes they did look for evidence. They did not believe Sheila was capable of the massacre.
-
No,I certainly wouldn't,nugs. It would have taken me all my time to have gone in there again. After all,it wasn't as though the Bambers owned the property,so there was no real attachment to it.
no i doubt if i would want to go in there ever again.
-
no i doubt if i would want to go in there ever again.
The thought would be with you for life. Different when you don't know the previous tenant/s.
The Bambers tragedy was the third one at that property,,so I'd have avoided it like the plague.
-
To put it in just a few words, If Jeremy was to inherit everything, which was likely, they would end up with nothing and not only their livelyhoods were in danger, but also the very places they lived. I'm not saying they did, but they had a real reason to put Jeremy in the frame for murder. The strange thing is that they tried from the very beginning to accuse Jeremy. That in itself is a very strange thing for a family to do? But then again since he was the "Cuckoo" in the nest? ::)
-
To put it in just a few words, If Jeremy was to inherit everything, which was likely, they would end up with nothing and not only their livelyhoods were in danger, but also the very places they lived. I'm not saying they did, but they had a real reason to put Jeremy in the frame for murder. The strange thing is that they tried from the very beginning to accuse Jeremy. That in itself is a very strange thing for a family to do? But then again since he was the "Cuckoo" in the nest? ::)
The crazy wallpaper incident comes to mind. More than unusual behaviour! :o
I said yesterday that Ann Eaton seems truthful in her witness statement, but during her cross examination at trial she gives three different reasons for, in a fit of rage, tearing down all wallpaper in their bathroom. You don´t have a fit of rage for three reasons - I know which one set her off: the land deal Jeremy talked about to her before the tragedy.
-
The crazy wallpaper incident comes to mind. More than unusual behaviour! :o
I said yesterday that Ann Eaton seems truthful in her witness statement, but during her cross examination at trial she gives three different reasons for, in a fit of rage, tearing down all wallpaper in their bathroom. You don´t have a fit of rage for three reasons - I know which one set her off: the land deal Jeremy talked about to her before the tragedy.
They clearly had the inheritance in mind.
-
Wilkes's book has the silencer being found on August 11th. And handed in before the 14th August.
Sounds right to me. The police would have finished with WHF. It was murder/suicide after all. September is too long a wait.
And the relatives did not ask for the key. Or need Jeremy's permission. Stan Jones gave them the keys and asked them to do some cleaning and tidying up. They then attended with the family lawyer & BW.
Yes they did look for evidence. They did not believe Sheila was capable of the massacre.
that did not answer my question-you are quoting from a book . I showed you a link to two actual documents. And if you found a silencer with apparently blood and a hair on it - would you not just call the police back in straight away - rather than take it home and put it in a wardrobe ?
-
that did not answer my question-you are quoting from a book . I showed you a link to two actual documents. And if you found a silencer with apparently blood and a hair on it - would you not just call the police back in straight away - rather than take it home and put it in a wardrobe ?
Well I thought the silencer was allegedly found on the 10th of August? But in any case if I found such evidence I would have called the police. But I suppose it is rather like the other similar question, why did not Jeremy dial 999 but called the police station instead. Oh well. None so queer as folk as they say.
-
Well I thought the silencer was allegedly found on the 10th of August? But in any case if I found such evidence I would have called the police. But I suppose it is rather like the other similar question, why did not Jeremy dial 999 but called the police station instead. Oh well. None so queer as folk as they say.
who knows? there is a record of David B phoning on 10th Sept - and Anne does not mention it in here statement - when she was asked about that in 1991 - she just said she did not think the silencer was important ? :o even though they allegedly saw blood on it.
It seems to me that EP and the witnesses are allowed to say what they want and change what they want without any retribution.