Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on December 15, 2015, 11:13:AM
-
For a long time now, there has been much speculation concerning which upstairs window WPC Julia Jeapes, saw the rifle leaning against a window on the first floor whilst she was at the corner of the farmhouse, covering White / Red sides, at the grey brick part of the building. So, this thread is being introduced so that the true whereabouts of that rifle can be accurately pinpointed, and any implications of "its presence there" just prior to armed officers forcing their way into the kitchen at around 7.37am, and 'it' ending up on Sheila's body in photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, after the rifle had "previously" been photographed against the main bedroom window, in photograph 23...
-
Once entry into the farmhouse was made, nobody reports seeing, or finding, or making safe, any rifle at the box room window situated on the first floor. So, if the rifle had been there beforehand (say at 7.15am) what happened to 'that' rifle, at the box room window?
Who moved it?
When was it moved?
What happened to it?
-
Photograph 23 shows "the rifle" leaning against the main bedroom before police took it from there and brought it to the body of Sheila Caffell, to use in a 'gauging exercise' to verify whether or not it could be argued that she had shot herself...
-
Photograph 23 shows "the rifle" leaning against the main bedroom before police took it from there and brought it to the body of Sheila Caffell, to use in a 'gauging exercise' to verify whether or not it could be argued that she had shot herself...
But, if this rifle had actually been resting against the box window on White side of the farmhouse, as described by WPC Julia Jeapes, at 7.15am, how did it end up resting at the main bedroom window in time for PC Bird to photograph it there as per photo' No. 23, before police brought the rifle from "there", and placed it on Shela's body, so that PC Bird could photograph that rifle on her body, as in photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, and later on rely upon those same images which show the rifle on Sheila's body as though her death scene was photographed before anything was moved or touched, but it wasn't...
-
Until now, there has been confusion about which window 'the rifle' was seen at by WPC Jeapes, and any significance this must have had depending upon which window was being spoken about - but it makes no difference which window we are taking about, since if it was seen at an upstairs window prior to the firearm officers entering the building via the rear external farmhouse door, exactly how and under what circumstance could that rifle have managed to end up on top of Sheila Caffell within half an hour or so, of WPC Jeapes seeing 'it' at one of the windows at the corner of White / Red?
-
So, just to recap, rifle is at window on first floor at 7.15am, and according to the witness statements of firearm officers, the same rifle was in Sheila's possession on the bedroom floor...
How did the rifle get from the window onto Sheila's body, in the limited time scale between 'it' being sighted at whichever upstairs window by WPC Jeapes at 7.15am, and the alleged first discovery of Sheila's body upstairs, which appears to be narrowed down to the latest time possible of 8.10am, when police passed a message from inside the farmhouse stating, "five dead, in total"...
How then did the rifle manage to get onto Sheila's body from whichever first floor window between 7.15am and 8.10am?
Only Sheila had the opportunity to move 'the rifle' from 'that window', during this all important period, therefore, Jeremy could not possibly have killed his sister with use of that rifle, for all the reasons given...
-
So, just to recap, rifle is at window on first floor at 7.15am, and according to the witness statements of firearm officers, the same rifle was in Sheila's possession on the bedroom floor...
How did the rifle get from the window onto Sheila's body, in the limited time scale between 'it' being sighted at whichever upstairs window by WPC Jeapes at 7.15am, and the alleged first discovery of Sheila's body upstairs, which appears to be narrowed down to the latest time possible of 8.10am, when police passed a message from inside the farmhouse stating, "five dead, in total"...
How then did the rifle manage to get onto Sheila's body from whichever first floor window between 7.15am and 8.10am?
Only Sheila had the opportunity to move 'the rifle' from 'that window', during this all important period, therefore, Jeremy could not possibly have killed his sister with use of that rifle, for all the reasons given...
Jememy Bamber, therefore, enjoys the benefit of the 'perfect alibi'...
-
WPC Jeapes witness statement which makes mention of the rifle at a first floor window was not disclosed until after the failed 2002 appeal...
-
WPC Jeapes witness statement which makes mention of the rifle at a first floor window was not disclosed until after the failed 2002 appeal...
The bigger picture begins to emerge once you start putting together different pieces of the jigsaw. Essex police sought to hide away from Bambers legal team the fact that the rifle which was photographed on Sheila's body by PC Bird after 10 O'clock, had 2 hours and 45 minutes earlier, been seen resting against a first floor window by WPC Jeapes...
-
The bigger picture begins to emerge once you start putting together different pieces of the jigsaw. Essex police sought to hide away from Bambers legal team the fact that the rifle which was photographed on Sheila's body by PC Bird after 10 O'clock, had 2 hours and 45 minutes earlier, been seen resting against a first floor window by WPC Jeapes...
Imagine the impact upon Bambers case, had it been disclosed in the build up to the trial, that police had seen a rifle at a first floor window, prior to police going into the farmhouse, had ended up with the body of Sheila at the point of first discovery prior to 8.10am?
-
Rifle moves from first floor window, onto Sheila Caffells body - So, exactly how did that occurr?
-
Rifle moves from first floor window, onto Sheila Caffells body - So, exactly how did that occurr?
How could Jeremy have played any role whatsoever in putting 'that' rifle from the first floor window, onto Sheila's body, between 7.15 and 8.10am?
-
How could Jeremy have played any role whatsoever in putting 'that' rifle from the first floor window, onto Sheila's body, between 7.15 and 8.10am?
Oh I agree, he couldn't - he did it after he shot her hours before.
-
Oh I agree, he couldn't - he did it after he shot her hours before.
Why would Jeremy have shot his sister hours before hand , and just to make it look like she had killed herself on the floor of the main bedroom with use of the anshuzt rifle, he places it either at the the main bedroom window, or worse still he places the rifle in the window of the box room, because he must have known police would bring the rifle from the window of whichever room and plant it on his sisters body, and then photograph the rifle in her possession, yes, of course he did...
-
Now, according to The firearm officers who entered the farmhouse, they did not find "the rifle" which 15 minutes earlier had been resting against a first floor window, They did not find 'it' resting against the box room window, and according to them they did not find 'it' resting against the main bedroom window. They all claim the 'rifle' was found on top of Sheila's body, every single one of them, all potential alibi witnesses, capable of proving beyond reasonable doubt that Sheila must have been, that Sheila was almost 'certainly' still very much alive inside the farmhouse after WPC Julia Jeapes had spotted 'the rifle' leaning against whichever first floor window...
-
Let's take the matter to the next level - if there was or had been a rifle resting against the main broom window, or indeed the box room window, how had 'this' impacted upon the contradiction of two bodies having been found downstairs by 7.37am?
-
Let's take the matter to the next level - if there was or had been a rifle resting against the main broom window, or indeed the box room window, how had 'this' impacted upon the contradiction of two bodies having been found downstairs by 7.37am?
Well, it would serve to demonstrate that Sheila could not have shot herself, or been shot with use of the anshuzt rifle downstairs in the region of the main kitchen of the farmhouse. If she had been shot 'across the throat' whilst she was present in that kitchen, then obviously a different weapon must have been used to shoot her on that occasion. This is supported by the fact that police felt it necessary to swap over the original badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) which was broken into at least 15 different pieces, by introducing a 'whole' control bullet test fired in 'the rifle' long after the shooting of victims had occurred...
-
Police staged Sheila Caffells death scene on the bedroom floor by introducing the rifle to her body which they brought to her body after the police surgeon, Dr Craig, had already pronounced her dead with a solitary wound in her neck. Police brought the rifle from the window and placed it on her body. At the time this was done on the first occasion, Sheila only had a single shot to the neck. Once police brought the rifle from the window and placed it on her body as part of 'a gauging process' during a training exercise which they performed with the bodies of victims still in situ (familiars), Sheila received the second shot under the chin. The rifle was quickly removed and stood back at the window whilst police frantically tried to keep Sheila alive. When Cook, Bird, and the other SOCO's arrived at the scene at 9.20am, Bird photographed 'that rifle' back resting against the bedroom window in crime scene photograph No. 23. Then police removed 'that rifle' from the window where it had just been photographed (23), and positioned 'it' on Sheila's body in keeping with the instructions given to PC Bird by Detective Inspector Cook before PC Bird went into the farmhouse to start taking crime scene photographs, "make sure you get the position of the rifle correct on the body"...
Then PC Bird took crime scene photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 (all these photographs show 'that rifle' on Sheila Caffells body, after the same rifle had already been photographed resting against the bedroom window).It is important to remember Cooks instruction that he gave to PC Bird before Bird went back into the farmhouse to start taking his set of crime scene photographs, "make sure you get the position of the rifle correct on the body"...
Point being that if the rifle had been on the body already by the time PC Bird went back into the farmhouse to take photographs, he would not have needed to be told to "make sure you get the position of the rifle correct on the body", because no matter what photographs he took, if the rifle had been on the body already, any photographs he took of Sheila would automatically be photographed in the correct position. The fact that PC Bird took photograph 23 showing 'that rifle' resting against the Main bedroom window, in sequence, and prior to police moving it onto Sheila's body, in accordance with phototographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, clearly demonstrates that the police, and no-one else staged Sheila Caffells death scene in the main bedroom, on the bedroom floor, and that it was the police who took the crime scene photographs, which they sought to rely upon to support the case for Sheila to have killed herself (Coroners court proceedings). There is clear unambiguous proof of evidence by a reliance upon the sequence with which photograph No.'s 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 were taken by PC Bird, after 10 O'clock that morning that nobody but the police themselves could have and did stage Sheila Caffells death scene in the main bedroom. Whilst ever this was the case, and it was the case for a whole month afterwards, police treated Jeremy Bamber as a victim, and rightly so...
-
If the rifle seen by WPC Jeapes at the box room window, was the same rifle later photographed resting against the main bedroom window, and later still photographed on Sheila's body, somebody who was still alive inside the farmhouse was still alive after 7.15am...
-
If the rifle seen by WPC Jeapes at the box room window, was the same rifle later photographed resting against the main bedroom window, and later still photographed on Sheila's body, somebody who was still alive inside the farmhouse was still alive after 7.15am...
That person, who was still alive could only have been Sheila Caffell, no-one else...
-
And so, there we have it, the rifle that was seen at the 'box window' by WPC Jeapes at around 7.15am, was never downstairs and could not have fired any shot in connection with the 'dead body of a female', or ' a suicide', prior to 7.45am...
This is because it is now possible to track the journey of 'that rifle', from its position at the 'box room window' at around 7.15am, to the 'main bedroom window' (23), at just after 10am, and then 'onto her body' in time for PC Bird to photograph it there, as per photographs 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
-
And so, there we have it, the rifle that was seen at the 'box window' by WPC Jeapes at around 7.15am, was never downstairs and could not have fired any shot in connection with the 'dead body of a female', or ' a suicide', prior to 7.45am...
This is because it is now possible to track the journey of 'that rifle', from its position at the 'box room window' at around 7.15am, to the 'main bedroom window' (23), at just after 10am, and then 'onto her body' in time for PC Bird to photograph it there, as per photographs 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
This establishes that police staged Sheila Caffells death scene, and then took photographs of 'the rifle' on her body...
-
It is a criminal offence to fabricate evidence, which can attract a number of charges preferred against a solitary perpetrator, or a group of different perpetrators, such as :-
(1) perverting the course of justice
(2) - forgery
(3) - conspiracy
(4) - interferring with a crime scene
(4) - keeping false police records
(5) - deception
-
Was lying about who staged Sheila Caffells death scene, a criminal offence?
-
Was lying about who staged Sheila Caffells death scene, a criminal offence?
In my view, yes it was...
-
Was a deception played out by the police who were responsible for making an accurate photographic record of the various crime scenes within the farmhouse, including the death scene upstairs in the main bedroom involving Sheila Caffells body?
-
Was a deception played out by the police who were responsible for making an accurate photographic record of the various crime scenes within the farmhouse, including the death scene upstairs in the main bedroom involving Sheila Caffells body?
In my view, yes - there was a deliberate deception introduced during the trial, and since by the Scenes Of Crime Officers (SOCO's), regarding the order with which the rifle was photographed resting at the window (23) prior to 'it' being photographed on Sheila's body ( 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33)...
-
It is very telling, that not one single member of the firearm team which entered the farmhouse at the peak of activity, was shown these key photographs (23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33), and asked if the photographed body of Sheila Caffell in possession of the rifle, was exactly as it had been found by them upon the first discovery of her body?
-
It is very telling, that not one single member of the firearm team which entered the farmhouse at the peak of activity, was shown these key photographs (23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33), and asked if the photographed body of Sheila Caffell in possession of the rifle, was exactly as it had been found by them upon the first discovery of her body?
If asked, the only true answer they can give is "no"...
-
Now that we all must know, that it was the police who had brought 'the rifle' from one window or another to Sheila's body, after which PC Bird photographed the 'rifle' on her body, it must be absolutely clear to all and sundry, that the jury were deliberately deceived by this part of the prosecutions case. These images which show the rifle on Sheila's body were in effect, ' props', nothing more, nothing less...
-
Why had the police to resort to this kind of a deception to support the case for Sheila having killed herself with use of the rifle which police themselves had introduced to her body?
-
Why had the police to resort to this kind of a deception to support the case for Sheila having killed herself with use of the rifle which police themselves had introduced to her body?
The rifle must not have been with the body when confronted by the police, otherwise, why bring the rifle from one or other first floor window, to the body...
-
PS Adams, the Commander of the firearm operation, visited the death scene of Sheila Caffell at around 9 O'clock before leaving the scene altogether, and he does not recollect the gun being present upon her body when he viewed it. Well, where was the rifle at 'that' stage, if 'it' was not on Sheila's body?
-
PS Adams, the Commander of the firearm operation, visited the death scene of Sheila Caffell at around 9 O'clock before leaving the scene altogether, and he does not recollect the gun being present upon her body when he viewed it. Well, where was the rifle at 'that' stage, if 'it' was not on Sheila's body?
Set against these facts, is the truthfulness or otherwise, of the testimony of SOCO's Cook and Bird, about the order key crime scene photographs were taken in? We now know both Cook and Bird told blatent lies about whether the rifle was photographed on her body, as opposed to it being photographed against the bedroom window?
He lied...
He lied...
They all lied, and lied, and lied...
-
Just to give you more food for thought on your theory mike. Didn't Malcom fletcher make a contradiction in his statements that he tested the murder weapon on the 13th but in another statement he dates receiving this weapon at a much later date? opening the possibility for two rifles
-
I think a timeline might be helpful here from when Police arrived at the White House,when WPC Jeapes sighted the rifle and when PC Bird started taking photographs.
-
I think a timeline might be helpful here from when Police arrived at the White House,when WPC Jeapes sighted the rifle and when PC Bird started taking photographs.
Steve, being hopeless with number, I find it frightfully confusing with so many being thrown around and constantly being changed.
-
Just to give you more food for thought on your theory mike. Didn't Malcom fletcher make a contradiction in his statements that he tested the murder weapon on the 13th but in another statement he dates receiving this weapon at a much later date? opening the possibility for two rifles
Yes, Fletcher looked at an 'anshuzr rifle' which he described as being 'a bolt action' type, no mention of it being semi - automatic in design. He did not officially receive the semi - automatic rifle until the 30th August 1985. He performed a cloth pull through test of the rifles barrel on the 12th September 1985, and did not according to his evidence officially test fire the semi - automatic rifle, until the 20th, and 25th September, and the 2nd October 1985 using 27 of the 29 control rounds recovered from the kitchen worktop...
Interestingly enough, markings found on several pieces of different bullets from the batch of crime scene ammunition, were compared against marks on test fired rounds, on the following dates, 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, and therefore, there must have been another 'unreported test fire' of the rifle prior to the date of the first official test fire (20th September 1985), and this may have included the two missing rounds from the batch of 29 control rounds spoken about earlier...
-
My take on this, is that there must have been two lots of test firing of the anshuzt rifle, one which I shall refer to as ' the unofficial test fire of the anshuzt rifle', using two of the twenty nine control rounds. A second series of 'official test firings of the anshuzt rifle' took place on and after the 20th September 1985, using the remaining twenty seven rounds of the same batch of control rounds...
-
My take on this, is that there must have been two lots of test firing of the anshuzt rifle, one which I shall refer to as ' the unofficial test fire of the anshuzt rifle', using two of the twenty nine control rounds. A second series of 'official test firings of the anshuzt rifle' took place on and after the 20th September 1985, using the remaining twenty seven rounds of the same batch of control rounds...
The two control rounds used in the 'unofficial test fire of the anshuzt rifle' were used to make comparisons of marks present on some of the batch of crime scene ammunition, on dates, 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, and then at least one of these two rounds were used in a bullet substitution process, involving swapping over the original badly fragmented PV/20 round which had shattered into 15 separate pieces, swapped with a whole round recovered during the aforementioned 'unofficial test fire'...
-
Once the 'official test fire of the anshuzt rifle' had got under way from the 20th September 1985, these 'test fired rounds' were used to make 'comparison tests with the remaining bullets, including the substituted PV/20 (whole) round...
-
Ewen Smith, was really excited about 'this discovery' of the 'unofficial test fire of the anshuzt rifle' with control ammunition...
-
He dubbed, the ballistic expert, ' Malcolm Fletcher', a very dodgy character...
-
The truth is this, police brought the anshuzt rifle from one or other upstairs window onto Sheila's body. They are responsible for doing that / this, and much later on once the nature of the investigation seemed to change, police then sought to argue that it had been Jeremy Bamber who had in fact 'put the rifle on Sheila's body', in an effort to fool police into accepting that Sheila had shot herself with that rifle and killed herself. In a nutshell, therefore, the key event at the centre of the case was 'how had the rifle ended up in the possession of Sheila Caffell on the bedroom floor' in order that police could photograph it there as per crime scene photograph No.'s, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32?
Added to this, has to be 'the approach taken by the police at different stages of the investigation". For examle, we know that originally the police investigation, had a crime reference No. Of 'SC/886/85', and that police were more than happy to proceed upon the basis that what they were dealing with was a case of ' four murders, and a suicide', where they believed that ' Sheila had shot and killed the other four victims, then shot and killed herself'. A central plank of the evidence relied upon at 'that' time, in support of this, had been the existence of 8 consecutively taken crime scene photographs (26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33) which show Sheila in possession of 'the rifle'...
However, as everyone knows the nature of the investigation changed at around the 6th / 7th September 1985, (given a different crime reference No. of SC/786/85) with (a) the coming forward of 'Bambers girlfriend' Julie Mugford, and (b) 'pressure exerted on police by the relatives', namely by Robert Boutflour, Ann Eaton, David Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter, which caused 'it' to 'change' into ' a five murders, investigation'. At 'this' time, the circumstances of how 'the rifle had found its way onto Sheila Caffells body' before 'it' was photographed there remained unchanged. It 'had' still been the police who 'had' brought the rifle from one or other of the upstairs windows, to the body', and 'then' and 'only then' had 'taken the only photographs in existence' which ' show Sheila Caffells body in possession of the anshuzt rifle'...
-
The person, or the people responsible for ' introducing the anshuzt rifle onto Sheila Caffells body' in time for PC Bird to photograph 'it' there, in sequential order, as per crime scene photograph No.'s 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, remains unaltered, no matter which investigation was ' up and running', or not...
-
The person, or the people responsible for ' introducing the anshuzt rifle onto Sheila Caffells body' in time for PC Bird to photograph 'it' there, in sequential order, as per crime scene photograph No.'s 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, remains unaltered, no matter which investigation was ' up and running', or not...
Without any doubt 'whatsoever', police introduced 'that' rifle to Sheila's body so that 'it could be photographed in 'her possession'. Do 'not, therefore, accuse Jeremy Bamber of being responsible for positioning 'the rifle' on Sheila's body, as depicted in any of these 8 consecutively taken crime scene photographs...
-
Police and the CPS are therefore, 'guilty' of 'misusing' all these photographs during the trial, as 'evidence' proving that 'Sheila Caffell had not killed herself with use of that rifle'. Indeed, she had not, and did not. But by the same token the CPS must have 'known', and do know, that Jeremy Bamber 'had not put 'that' rifle onto his sisters body at all. The rifle had in fact been seen resting against the box room window some 15 minutes before the firearms team had even set off with the intention of entering the farmhouse. Furthermore, PC Bird (SOCO) had photographed 'it' (23) leaning against the main bedroom window after 10 O'clock that morning. The rifle in question, therefore in two different locations inside the farmhouse prior to 'it' being eventually photographed upon Sheila Caffells body. The truth therefore must surely be, that Jeremy Bamber had 'not' staged his sisters death scene by placing 'the rifle' onto her body to try to make it look like she had shot herself...
If he had been the killer, he had left the rifle at the box room window...
So, where does that mean Sheila's dead body should have been 'if' Jeremy Bamber was the killer? Certainly not in the main bedroom that's for sure...
' the more I dig, the more I am finding out what can only be the inevitable truth in the mystery, of who killed Sheila Caffell'? She certainly could not possibly have shot and killed herself with the use of the anshuzt rifle in the main bedroom, whilst the rifle in question was resting against the box room window...
-
'The presence of the rifle at the box room window', before the firearm team went into the farmhouse at around 7.37am, is completely 'inconsistent' with Sheila's body already by 'that stage' being laid out on the bedroom floor, with 'it' already being on the body, since ' that' rifle could not possibly be ' in two different locations at one and the same time'. There is therefore, an inconsistency, an ambiguity and a serious contradiction, in the prosecutions case, which relates to that part of their case which is that Jeremy Bamber had not only shot and killed everyone else and his sister, but that 'he' had planted that rifle onto his sisters body in an attempt to fool the investigating police officers into accepting that she had shot herself with use of 'that' rifle - when 'he had not'...
-
With the anshuzt rifle at the box room window, at around 7.15am, how did this fit in with the discovery of 'two bodies', downstairs in the kitchen upon entry, as per police message log entries timed at 7.37am, 7.38am, and 7.42 am, where mention is made of the discovery of 'two bodies', 'the body of one dead male', and 'the body of one dead female'? And by 7.45am, information known about and being told to DS Davidson (SOCO) at his home address via telephone link by someone (Linda) in the control room, 'can you come into the office because police are dealing with an incident at white house farm (whf) involving a murder, and a suicide'...
-
Two bodies, not one body mistaken for two different ones, clearly found downstairs in the kitchen between the times of 7.37am and (7.38am) 7.45am...
'The body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female' (7.37am), ' one dead male, one dead female' (7.38am), ' a murder, and a suicide' (7.45am)...
Nothing could be any clearer, this was never a case of police misidentifying the body of Ralph Bamber, for that of the body of a dead female. I will tell you all why that proposition cannot be entertained once the firearm officers set foot in 'the kitchen'. This is because the discovery of 'the body of one dead male', was reported at 7.37am, before any additional mention of ' and the body of one dead female'. In addition, Ralph Bambers body could never have been described as ' a suicide', yet before ' Linda' in the control room was contacting DS Davidson at his home via telephone at 7.45am, police knew about one of the two deaths already repoirted being ' a murder', and the second body already known about being ' a suicide'...
Ralph Bambers death could never be described by any stretch of imagination as having been 'a suicide'...
-
Police are therefore responsible for yet 'another colossal deception', by introducing the claim that there was ' some sort of a mistake' involving the misidentification of Ralph Bambers ' murdered' body, for that of a females 'suicide'...
'Pull the other leg, its got bells on'...
-
With 'the rifle' at the box room window, from 7.15am, onward, how could the police be in a position to know that the 'female' body found along with Ralph Bambers body downstairs in the kitchen, had in fact ' committed suicide'?
What weapon had she committed 'suicide' with downstairs in the kitchen?
-
With 'the rifle' at the box room window, from 7.15am, onward, how could the police be in a position to know that the 'female' body found along with Ralph Bambers body downstairs in the kitchen, had in fact ' committed suicide'?
What weapon had she committed 'suicide' with downstairs in the kitchen?
According to ' the official version of events', police didn't see or find any .22 calibre rifle in the kitchen at all. Now, there's a funny thing, no rifle found downstairs in the main kitchen but the firearm officers are responsible for relaying information from within the farmhouse, that not only had 'two bodies' been found 'upon entry' into the kitchen, but that one of these two bodies had in fact been described, or interpreted as 'a suicide'...
How, can there have been 'a suicide' downstairs in the kitchen, without a gun being found alongside or with 'that' body?
-
Now, for the sake of trying to be complete in this approach into 'uncovering' and ' reconstructing' what did actually occur, or take place, I shall draw everyone's attention, to what 'DS Davidson' told the COLP investigators in 1992, where he makes mention of some 'paint found upon the end of a guns barrel'. He told COLP that this gun 'had been found downstairs with red paint, like the paint from the aga surround, upon its barrel'...
What gun?
-
The police have 'no official record' of any gun being found 'downstairs' with any paint on the end of its barrel...
-
The police have 'no official record' of any gun being found 'downstairs' with any paint on the end of its barrel...
However, we do know that a 'red coloured stain' was found to be present upon the 'foresite' of the anshuzt rifles barrel, photographed resting upon the body of Sheila Caffell, upstairs in the main bedroom, as shown in photograph No.'s 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33. But wasn't 'that rifle' resting against the 'box room window' 15 minutes or so, before the firearm officers set off to get into the farmhouse?
Did the police find 'that' rifle downstairs in the kitchen, or elsewhere 'downstairs', after it had been spotted at the upstairs box room window, minutes earlier?
-
No other gun found at the scene is reported to have got ' this red stain on the end of its barrel'...
-
Do the police 'know' that the rifle seen originally at the box room window at around 7.15am, had later been discovered downstairs in the region of the main kitchen, before being moved upstairs and placed against the main bedroom window, and subsequently planted onto Sheila Caffells body, not by Jeremy Bamber , or any as yet unidentified killer, but by the police themselves, in an attempt to stage Sheila's death scene upstairs in the main bedroom, when in fact her 'death' had already been reported 'previously downstairs in the kitchen', as a ' suicide'?
-
Do the police 'know' that the rifle seen originally at the box room window at around 7.15am, had later been discovered downstairs in the region of the main kitchen, before being moved upstairs and placed against the main bedroom window, and subsequently planted onto Sheila Caffells body, not by Jeremy Bamber , or any as yet unidentified killer, but by the police themselves, in an attempt to stage Sheila's death scene upstairs in the main bedroom, when in fact her 'death' had already been reported 'previously downstairs in the kitchen', as a ' suicide'?
The inevitable conclusion that I am drawn to, is 'yes'...
-
This seems to suggest that police were fully aware that 'the rifle' had 'moved' from its 'original location' at the 'box room window' at around 7.15am, ended up downstairs in the region of the kitchen by 7.37am, then been moved upstairs so that it could be 'rested against the main bedroom window' (photo' 23), before being planted onto Sheila's body by the police, as per the sequentially taken crime scene photographs, numbered, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33...
-
'Movement' of the rifle from one place to another, and then onto the body of Sheila Caffell, and then photographed, is proof positive of Jeremy Bambers, innocence...
-
When the police surgeon, Dr Craig, pronounced Sheila dead at 8.44am, there cannot have been a rifle on her body, because it was at the window?
The rifle had not been on the body when PS Adams visited the main bedroom at about 9am, before he left the scene...
When training got underway at 9 O'' clock, ' Familiars', the rifle was not on the body, but was resting against the main bedroom window...
The rifle was not on Sheila's body when Cook and Bird arrived at the scene at 9.20am...
When SOCO took control of the crime scene at 10 O'clock, the rifle was resting against the main bedroom window, as per photograph No. 23...
-
When the police surgeon, Dr Craig, pronounced Sheila dead at 8.44am, there cannot have been a rifle on her body, because it was at the window?
The rifle had not been on the body when PS Adams visited the main bedroom at about 9am, before he left the scene...
When training got underway at 9 O'' clock, ' Familiars', the rifle was not on the body, but was resting against the main bedroom window...
The rifle was not on Sheila's body when Cook and Bird arrived at the scene at 9.20am...
When SOCO took control of the crime scene at 10 O'clock, the rifle was resting against the main bedroom window, as per photograph No. 23...
At 10.13 am, police brought the rifle from the main bedroom window, and placed it onto the body of Sheila Caffell. At this juncture, PC Bird took 8 consecutive photographs which now showed the rifle which had previously been photographed by him at the bedroom window (23), on Sheila's body, as per photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33. The claim that Cook only moved the position of Sheila's right hand so that PC Bird could photograph the bloodied fingermarks on the front lower part of the nightdress, is a red herring, since Cook could have got PC Bird to photograph the aforementioned bloodied fingermarks on the nightdress whilst the rifle was standing at the bedroom window in photo' 23...
-
The most startling discovery of all, thus far is that we now know the 'true Identity', of the person who actually 'put the rifle' onto the body of Sheila Caffell, as shown in crime scene photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, it was DETECTIVE INSPECTOR Ronald Walter Cook. This is verified by reference to the fact that only SOCO were present inside the farmhouse after 10 O'clock when SOCO took control of the scene, and Cook stated only he had been responsible for moving or touching the body of Sheila, and the anshuzt rifle...
-
The truth of the matter is that the person who planted the anshuzt rifle on Sheila's body, as shown in photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 (Ron Cook) was not responsible for shooting her dead, since the shot (PV/19) which was discharged beneath her chin occurred minutes before the arrival of Cook at the scene at 9.20am. She was killed when 'that' rifle was brought to her body from the other box room window, during a 'gauging exercise' as part of a training exercise where it was being checked to see whether or not, Sheila could have fired shots from the rifle which killed the other four victims...
-
When Sheila first arrived in the bedroom at about 8.30am, 'she had only been shot once', and that was 'the shot across her neck' that was inflicted 'downstairs in the kitchen'...
-
When Sheila first arrived in the bedroom at about 8.30am, 'she had only been shot once', and that was 'the shot across her neck' that was inflicted 'downstairs in the kitchen'...
At the time Sheila arrived in the bedroom at around 8.30am, and collapsed on to the bed, she had already been declared 'deceased' downstairs in the kitchen at 7.37am, her alleged death being 'known as a suicide' by staff manning the control room, since before 7.45am...
-
How could 'Sheila's death downstairs in the kitchen' be described as 'a suicide' without a gun being beside her body, or upon it?
-
We now know that Sheila's body was 'displaced' from its original position in the kitchen after 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and that for a period of at least 15 minutes between 8.15 and 8.30am, there was a grave concern as to her whereabouts, which coincided with a 15 minute telephone conversation between DCI Harris and ACC Peter Simpson using the landline inside the kitchen, with Harris updating Simpson in a blow by blow running commentary of the renewed search for Sheila, until she was found collapsed upstairs, on top of the bed...
-
We now know that Sheila's body was 'displaced' from its original position in the kitchen after 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and that for a period of at least 15 minutes between 8.15 and 8.30am, there was a grave concern as to her whereabouts, which coincided with a 15 minute telephone conversation between DCI Harris and ACC Peter Simpson using the landline inside the kitchen, with Harris updating Simpson in a blow by blow running commentary of the renewed search for Sheila, until she was found collapsed upstairs, on top of the bed...
Sheila's body was then moved from the bed onto the bedroom floor (before the rifle was brought to her body from the box room window at around 9.13am, and she got shot whilst the fingers of her right hand were being manipulated around and upon the trigger mechanism), bang...
-
The said rifle was stood against the bedroom window as soon as the shot was discharged beneath Sheila's chin, where it remained for about another hour, until along came PC Bird who took photograph No. 23...
-
The said rifle was stood against the bedroom window as soon as the shot was discharged beneath Sheila's chin, where it remained for about another hour, until along came PC Bird who took photograph No. 23...
After she was shot under the chin and killed, with the rifle placed at the bedroom window out of harms way, police rolled Sheila's body into the recovery position upon its right side...
-
After she was shot under the chin and killed, with the rifle placed at the bedroom window out of harms way, police rolled Sheila's body into the recovery position upon its right side...
Her body laid in that position until after PC Bird took photograph No.23 showing the rifle at the bedroom. At that stage, her body was rolled back into the suppine position, and that's when Ron Cook brought the rifle from the bedroom window and positioned it onto Sheila's body and then got PC Bird to photograph her body in possession of the rifle (photo's 26 to 33, inclusive)...
-
Since, police were in possession of both of the weapons, which fired the two bullets into Sheila's neck, it must follow that 'they must know' whether or not, the silencer which relatives 'introduced' so late in the day, had been fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle at the time the fatal shot ended Sheila's life on this earth, because the anshuzt rifle was not used to shoot her through the neck downstairs in the kitchen. The way I see it is that 'if' the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle at the time of the shot beneath the chin, then 'its' discovery by relatives in the gun cupboard in the downstairs office, compounded the police error in disposing of it because to leave 'it' attached to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle would have raised question marks about Sheila's capability to shoot herself twice in the throat with the weapon so configured. Did police discard the silencer found by the relatives?
-
We know that police had 'possession of a silencer' on the 9th August 1985, and it begs the question, did police return 'that' silencer to the gun cupboard prior to handing the keys over to Ann Eaton, later that evening?
-
Police possession of the silencer at any stage prior to 'it' being handed over to DS Jones on the evening of the 12th August 1985, would have been problematic for the police, in much the same way 'it' has become problematic to Bambers case, involving the claim, that ' with the silencer fitted to the rifles barrel, it would have been too long to enable her to have shot herself, even if she wanted to'...
-
Police possession of the silencer at any stage prior to 'it' being handed over to DS Jones on the evening of the 12th August 1985, would have been problematic for the police, in much the same way 'it' has become problematic to Bambers case, involving the claim, that ' with the silencer fitted to the rifles barrel, it would have been too long to enable her to have shot herself, even if she wanted to'...
If police shot her (then) this fulfills the prophecy, that 'either', the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle when police brought it to the body from a window and it discharged bullet PV/19 beneath the point of the chin, and police themselves removed the silencer and put it away in the gun cupboard, or there was no silencer fitted to the barrel of that rifle when the police brought 'that' rifle to Sheila's body and dispatched the fatal shot, enacted out in a 'gauging exercise' during a police training exercise (familiars) carried out between 9am and 10am, that morning inside the farmhouse with the bodies of the five victims still 'insitu'. At this time police treated the bodies of the five victims 'as props', after which the anshuzt rifle was photographed (23) resting against the bedroom window where it had been placed immediately after it had discharged the shot under Sheila's chin. Thereafter, put back on Sheila's body and then photographed as per photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. This sequence of photographs did not represent Sheila Caffells death scene, as first found when firearm officers first entered the farmhouse. These 8 photographs simply record Sheila's concocted death scene, as staged by the police. The police put the anshuzt rifle on Sheila's body, and then took photographs. Therefore these key 8 photographs only show Sheila's body after 10 O'clock that morning showing how the police had arranged her body with the rifle that was 'put there by the police, themselves'...
-
If police shot her (then) this fulfills the prophecy, that 'either', the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle when police brought it to the body from a window and it discharged bullet PV/19 beneath the point of the chin, and police themselves removed the silencer and put it away in the gun cupboard, or there was no silencer fitted to the barrel of that rifle when the police brought 'that' rifle to Sheila's body and dispatched the fatal shot, enacted out in a 'gauging exercise' during a police training exercise (familiars) carried out between 9am and 10am, that morning inside the farmhouse with the bodies of the five victims still 'insitu'. At this time police treated the bodies of the five victims 'as props', after which the anshuzt rifle was photographed (23) resting against the bedroom window where it had been placed immediately after it had discharged the shot under Sheila's chin. Thereafter, put back on Sheila's body and then photographed as per photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. This sequence of photographs did not represent Sheila Caffells death scene, as first found when firearm officers first entered the farmhouse. These 8 photographs simply record Sheila's concocted death scene, as staged by the police. The police put the anshuzt rifle on Sheila's body, and then took photographs. Therefore these key 8 photographs only show Sheila's body after 10 O'clock that morning showing how the police had arranged her body with the rifle that was 'put there by the police, themselves'...
The jury were entitled to know the truth about the circumstances behind the taking of them, and be told exactly what these key photographs represented. Instead, Ron Cook and David Bird, lied and sought to deliberately deceive the jury by claiming falsely that the anshuzt rifle had been photographed 8 times on Sheila's body, before 'it' was photographed (23) at the bedroom window, when it had not...
The convictions are unsafe because of the seriousnous of 'this deception' in the Prosecutions case...
-
Mike,I've been reading about " over-duplicating/editing " in order to confuse the jury--------purposely.
Justice ? You could have fooled me.!
EP have a lot to answer for. All I've seen is a mish-mash of fabricated evidence which makes me feel heartily sick that we're " made " to trust those who are not answerable to their own shortcomings. I'd have used a stronger word but it wouldn't be permissible on here with all those narrow minds,biased opinions and rose-tinted specs.
Just one sentence of a statement can lead to a dozen pages ! I know this as a FACT !
-
Mike,I've been reading about " over-duplicating/editing " in order to confuse the jury--------purposely.
Justice ? You could have fooled me.!
EP have a lot to answer for. All I've seen is a mish-mash of fabricated evidence which makes me feel heartily sick that we're " made " to trust those who are not answerable to their own shortcomings. I'd have used a stronger word but it wouldn't be permissible on here with all those narrow minds,biased opinions and rose-tinted specs.
Just one sentence of a statement can lead to a dozen pages ! I know this as a FACT !
Where hae you been reading about it? Not sure who is supposed to be wearing the rose tinted specs, I don't wear specs at all but that sounds like projection! You say there is no evidence but when it is posted right in front of you, you ignore it and then deny it. Just a few days ago you argued that you thought Sheila was wearing a RING but when I mentioned 'gun oil' (which I did on purpose) you changed and said you thought it was dirt - even though confirmation was givem from Venezis's report that it was a ring. Total denial.
-
Where hae you been reading about it? Not sure who is supposed to be wearing the rose tinted specs, I don't wear specs at all but that sounds like projection! You say there is no evidence but when it is posted right in front of you, you ignore it and then deny it. Just a few days ago you argued that you thought Sheila was wearing a RING but when I mentioned 'gun oil' (which I did on purpose) you changed and said you thought it was dirt - even though confirmation was givem from Venezis's report that it was a ring. Total denial.
I didn't " change " at all.I said what I said ON PURPOSE and KNEW instantly the answer I'd get,which proved that YOU were the desperate one,not I because of your rapid exchange.
How can I ignore evidence when it's not there ? ::) It never will be there because it wasn't him who murdered his family.
-
I didn't " change " at all.I said what I said ON PURPOSE and KNEW instantly the answer I'd get,which proved that YOU were the desperate one,not I because of your rapid exchange.
How can I ignore evidence when it's not there ? ::) It never will be there because it wasn't him who murdered his family.
The thing is, the ring on Sheila's finger has nothing to do with Jeremy's guilt and you didn't change on purpose at all - you saw an avenue that MIGHT lead to suspicion in Sheula's direction so you grabbed it, The evidence is Venezis's report that states it was a ring. I really don't know why you just can't admit to being wrong but here it is again stating that Sheila wore a ring on her right ring finger!!!!!
-
I still stand by what I said was purposely done to see if,for once,I got an agreeable reaction. I could be a ring,but is most DEFINITELY muck also around that area. Rather than ANYONE admit it,it turned out to be a shadow ::) I KNEW that NOBODY would admit to it being mucky.!
-
I still stand by what I said was purposely done to see if,for once,I got an agreeable reaction. I could be a ring,but is most DEFINITELY muck also around that area. Rather than ANYONE admit it,it turned out to be a shadow ::) I KNEW that NOBODY would admit to it being mucky.!
I know you'll sand by what you said because you can't admit to being wrong! Now because I said I PURPOSELY mentioned gun oil, you're using the same argument - as though that is credible!
-
That person, who was still alive could only have been Sheila Caffell, no-one else...
hi the only one alive at 7.15am was the dog.
-
hi the only one alive at 7.15am was the dog.
Hello sami welcome to the forum.
-
We now know that Sheila's body was 'displaced' from its original position in the kitchen after 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and that for a period of at least 15 minutes between 8.15 and 8.30am, there was a grave concern as to her whereabouts, which coincided with a 15 minute telephone conversation between DCI Harris and ACC Peter Simpson using the landline inside the kitchen, with Harris updating Simpson in a blow by blow running commentary of the renewed search for Sheila, until she was found collapsed upstairs, on top of the bed...
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe and any firearms found were made safe.so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything.about the rifle.what does it matter where it was and if it was moved .theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle.why would the police fit up bamber.because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide.the farm house was cleaned.items burned and victims cremated case closed.why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools for having been decived by bamber.
-
Hello sami welcome to the forum.
hi susan;thanks for the wecome :)
-
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe and any firearms found were made safe.so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything.about the rifle.what does it matter where it was and if it was moved .theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle.why would the police fit up bamber.because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide.the farm house was cleaned.items burned and victims cremated case closed.why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools for having been decived by bamber.
Where's your evidence that Sheila hadn't fired a shot ?
-
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe and any firearms found were made safe.so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything.about the rifle.what does it matter where it was and if it was moved .theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle.why would the police fit up bamber.because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide.the farm house was cleaned.items burned and victims cremated case closed.why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools for having been decived by bamber.
I agree with most of what you say but I don't believe Taff Jones was 'bumberling' or bumbling, he was highly successful, highly decorated Detective, so why his unwillingness to point the finger at JB?
-
Where's your evidence that Sheila hadn't fired a shot ?
NO gunshot residue on her .none on hands none on nighty.the jury agreed with the ballistics expert that said had she fired 25 shots .there would have been massive amounts.yet not a trace .read the experts report.
-
NO gunshot residue on her .none on hands none on nighty.the jury agreed with the ballistics expert that said had she fired 25 shots .there would have been massive amounts.yet not a trace .read the experts report.
Say it had been washed off if there was any to start with ? Not massive amounts if bullets had been fed a couple at a time. A full magazine perhaps,but it wasn't always a full one. To have loaded it to the max would have broken all her nails,instead of the one which was found by AE.
-
I agree with most of what you say but I don't believe Taff Jones was 'bumberling' or bumbling, he was highly successful, highly decorated Detective, so why his unwillingness to point the finger at JB?
hi maggie your right i shouldnt talk badly of the dead.i think he was fooled by bamber .theres some reports he was in a rush so he could play golf.but theres no proof.i think bamber fooled a lot of people that morning including the two doctors.ps bewes is one although he thought it was bamber from the start.so he claims now. he also claimed in a itv doc that when he approached the house with bamber .whf was in darkness no lights on.we know thats not true because raid team statements say lights were on in different parts of the house.
-
Say it had been washed off if there was any to start with ? Not massive amounts if bullets had been fed a couple at a time. A full magazine perhaps,but it wasn't always a full one. To have loaded it to the max would have broken all her nails,instead of the one which was found by AE.
why would she wash her hands.and had she showered where is the bloodstained and gunshot residue filled nighty she took off.none was found .are you saying that sheila was laying there with a false nail missing.show me your proof
-
hi maggie your right i shouldnt talk badly of the dead.i think he was fooled by bamber .theres some reports he was in a rush so he could play golf.but theres no proof.i think bamber fooled a lot of people that morning including the two doctors.ps bewes is one although he thought it was bamber from the start.so he claims now. he also claimed in a itv doc that when he approached the house with bamber .whf was in darkness no lights on.we know thats not true because raid team statements say lights were on in different parts of the house.
I would question if Bews can remember anything clearly, seems to say what occurs to him at the time, I would guess he's even muddled himself. :)
-
why would she wash her hands.and had she showered where is the bloodstained and gunshot residue filled nighty she took off.none was found .are you saying that sheila was laying there with a false nail missing.show me your proof
You know full well that AE found a false nail.Read her statement,that'll tell you and will also give you the proof you want.
How do we know Sheila hadn't burnt a nightdress ? We don't do we ? Because the one she had on looked more like her mothers, not that of a young model.
-
I would question if Bews can remember anything clearly, seems to say what occurs to him at the time, I would guess he's even muddled himself. :)
maggie i think apart from ds jones and than di miller were the only two.who smealt a rat .the rest now jump on the bandwagon to save face.remember the front page in the national paper.how did he fool you.douglas hurd.
-
You know full well that AE found a false nail.Read her statement,that'll tell you and will also give you the proof you want.
How do we know Sheila hadn't burnt a nightdress ? We don't do we ? Because the one she had on looked more like her mothers, not that of a young model.
show me the statement that says sheila was missing a nail.show me a photo of her hands missing a nail.only than ae words would mean anything.
-
You know full well that AE found a false nail.Read her statement,that'll tell you and will also give you the proof you want.
How do we know Sheila hadn't burnt a nightdress ? We don't do we ? Because the one she had on looked more like her mothers, not that of a young model.
because shes a model doesnt mean she would have a nighty that showed her body through it .ie. see through.i think a lot of women would this agree with you.she also was a mother and was staying with parents any sexy nighty she had .she would not have brought with her .there were no ashes or traces of burnt items.also why would she burn them. to hide the fact she was not involved it wouldnt have matterd if she was going to kill herself.what you say doesnt make sense
-
because shes a model doesnt mean she would have a nighty that showed her body through it .ie. see through.i think a lot of women would this agree with you.she also was a mother and was staying with parents any sexy nighty she had .she would not have gought with her .there were no ashes or traces of burnt items.also why would she burn them. to hide the fact she was not involved it wouldnt have matterd if she was going to kill herself.what you say doesnt make sense
Hi Sami - I totally agree, why go to the trouble of burning anything that showed you had committed suicide only to be found with a rifle laying on your chest?
-
show me the statement that says sheila was missing a nail.show me a photo of her hands missing a nail.only than ae words would mean anything.
You won't get anything like that from Lookout.She doesn't post sources and the claims change quite often, so keep that in mind. A false nail was apparently found - but Sheila wasn't missing any nails.
A red spec was found and people here have claimed that they can "match it" an apparent "broken piece of toe nail" believe it or not.
Hi Sami - I totally agree, why go to the trouble of burning anything that showed you had committed suicide only to be found with a rifle laying on your chest?
And a suicide note (if you beleive that) - and why try to disguise your guilt when your Father has already phone Jeremy and told him you have the gun.
-
You won't get anything like that from Lookout.She doesn't post sources and the claims change quite often, so keep that in mind. A false nail was apparently found - but Sheila wasn't missing any nails.
A red spec was found and people here have claimed that they can "match it" an apparent "broken piece of toe nail" believe it or not.
And a suicide note (if you beleive that) - and why try to disguise your guilt when your Father has already phone Jeremy and told him you have the gun.
good point mat.phoned jb without leaving a trace of blood on the phone.also the speck of paint they found in the kitchen from the mantle.some have falsely claimed was red nail varnish from sheilas feet
-
i also dont agree with mike.saying that the second shot was fired when police were placing the gun back on sheilas body impossible.they would not be doing any reinactments with a loaded rifle .its laughable.that they would be manhandling that rifle onto sheilas fingers while it was loaded .
-
lets give our firearms officers some respect.they were not bungalers.they would have made sure any firearms found were made safe.
-
hi maggie your right i shouldnt talk badly of the dead.i think he was fooled by bamber .theres some reports he was in a rush so he could play golf.but theres no proof.i think bamber fooled a lot of people that morning including the two doctors.ps bewes is one although he thought it was bamber from the start.so he claims now. he also claimed in a itv doc that when he approached the house with bamber .whf was in darkness no lights on.we know thats not true because raid team statements say lights were on in different parts of the house.
Sami, that's correct. They all saw what Jeremy had "conditioned" them to believe they'd see and the same "conditioning" would have been passed on to others who hadn't been there at the time.
-
Where hae you been reading about it? Not sure who is supposed to be wearing the rose tinted specs, I don't wear specs at all but that sounds like projection! You say there is no evidence but when it is posted right in front of you, you ignore it and then deny it. Just a few days ago you argued that you thought Sheila was wearing a RING but when I mentioned 'gun oil' (which I did on purpose) you changed and said you thought it was dirt - even though confirmation was givem from Venezis's report that it was a ring. Total denial.
Clearly then, according to the Pathologist, Venezis, her finger was marked, by a ring she had been wearing, and he described blood being present on the top part of her right hand, and we all now know that she had bloodied fingers because blood from those fingers transferred onto the nightdress. We also know because it can clearly be seen that Sheila had a small cut / mark on the inside of the index finger of her right hand that was almost certainly caused by persistent contact with the trigger guard of the rifle through use of the gun when she shot and killed the other four victims...
-
How can I ignore evidence when it's not there ? ::) It never will be there because it wasn't him who murdered his family.
That is correct, Jeremy Bamber did not shoot the other four members of his family, but Sheila did. He did not play any role in Sheila Caffells death, which was reported to have happened downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the bedroom - police were involved in her death. They know it, I know it, and the evidence is there to prove they did it....
It's there own evidence which they introduced in the first place to try to show with use of their own crime scene photographs taken after they brought the rifle to Sheila's body and straged her supposed death scene on the bedroom floor, to prove that she had taken her own life, when the truth of the matter is that 'she did not'...
Bamber himself complained at the scene upon the news being broken to him that all his family were dead, that the men with the guns who had gone in the house had shot them all, that these armed men had killed everyone whilst storming the farmhouse at around 7.30am. The police officer who he made this complaint to told no - one according to his COLP witness statement, about Jeremy Bamber alleging that police shot members of his family. I do not for one moment accept that PS Saxby did not tell other police officers at the scene of the first words spoken out of Jeremy's mouth upon him being given the news that all his family inside the farmhouse were dead, and he complaining that 'police must have shot and killed them all'...
The first words spoken by an accused are ' important', and every copper in the land knows this to be the case, so why is it that dodgy Saxby and the rest of the motley crew at the scene chose not to speak about it?
Of course dodgy Saxbty relayed what Jeremy had said to him, to senior officers at the scene that morning, ' police had shot Sheila Caffell, and were responsible for killing her', and that's why they staged her death scene in the main bedroom with use of the rifle from the box room window, then photographed her body and used those photographs initially to support the claim that she had taken her own life, and subsequently when Jeremy was prosecuted they misused those very same photographs to support the claim that Jeremy had staged his sisters death scene, as shown in the same photographs...
It's unforgivable what Essex police did, and what they have done, and what they continue to do...
-
hi the only one alive at 7.15am was the dog.
Not true, since Sheila Caffell was still very much alive inside the farmhouse at that stage. Why do you think the armed police waited until just after 7.15am to make the move intending to enter the farmhouse? They chose that moment because of the sudden appearance of the anshuzt rifle at the bedroom window. They knew Sheila was alive inside the farmhouse by 'its' sudden materialisation there at that box room window. For sure, the dog did not put it there, and neither did anyone outside the farmhouse put that rifle there. It had to be put there at the box room window by someone who was clearly still alive inside the farmhouse at that point (7.15am). Police made the move to send in armed officers within minutes of the rifle being spotted at the box room window, and of course, with the rifle there at the box room window at 7.15am, it could hardly already be perched on top of Shgeila Caffells body at the same time, in the main bedroom, now could it?
-
That is correct, Jeremy Bamber did not shoot the other four members of his family, but Sheila did. He did not play any role in Sheila Caffells death, which was reported to have happened downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the bedroom - police were involved in her death. They know it, I know it, and the evidence is there to prove they did it....
It's there own evidence which they introduced in the first place to try to show with use of their own crime scene photographs taken after they brought the rifle to Sheila's body and straged her supposed death scene on the bedroom floor, to prove that she had taken her own life, when the truth of the matter is that 'she did not'...
Bamber himself complained at the scene upon the news being broken to him that all his family were dead, that the men with the guns who had gone in the house had shot them all, that these armed men had killed everyone whilst storming the farmhouse at around 7.30am. The police officer who he made this complaint to told no - one according to his COLP witness statement, about Jeremy Bamber alleging that police shot members of his family. I do not for one moment accept that PS Saxby did not tell other police officers at the scene of the first words spoken out of Jeremy's mouth upon him being given the news that all his family inside the farmhouse were dead, and he complaining that 'police must have shot and killed them all'...
The first words spoken by an accused are ' important', and every copper in the land knows this to be the case, so why is it that dodgy Saxby and the rest of the motley crew at the scene chose not to speak about it?
Of course dodgy Saxbty relayed what Jeremy had said to him, to senior officers at the scene that morning, ' police had shot Sheila Caffell, and were responsible for killing her', and that's why they staged her death scene in the main bedroom with use of the rifle from the box room window, then photographed her body and used those photographs initially to support the claim that she had taken her own life, and subsequently when Jeremy was prosecuted they misused those very same photographs to support the claim that Jeremy had staged his sisters death scene, as shown in the same photographs...
It's unforgivable what Essex police did, and what they have done, and what they continue to do...
Why was Jeremy's defence that Sheila shot the family and then shot herself if he was sure police shot Sheila? He still says on his OS site that Sheila shot herself. Sheila was found on the floor on her father’s side of the bed. What strongly suggests that Sheila committed suicide is the fact that she had calmly laid down on the floor. This is on his site, how can he say one minute police shot her then say she committed suicide.
-
Not true, since Sheila Caffell was still very much alive inside the farmhouse at that stage. Why do you think the armed police waited until just after 7.15am to make the move intending to enter the farmhouse? They chose that moment because of the sudden appearance of the anshuzt rifle at the bedroom window. They knew Sheila was alive inside the farmhouse by 'its' sudden materialisation there at that box room window. For sure, the dog did not put it there, and neither did anyone outside the farmhouse put that rifle there. It had to be put there at the box room window by someone who was clearly still alive inside the farmhouse at that point (7.15am). Police made the move to send in armed officers within minutes of the rifle being spotted at the box room window, and of course, with the rifle there at the box room window at 7.15am, it could hardly already be perched on top of Shgeila Caffells body at the same time, in the main bedroom, now could it?
who saw the rifle there.who photograthed it from outside whf.is the photo in the crime scene photos. i dont mean the one taken inside showing rifle by the window.the one as you said showing the rifle pictuerd from outside .if yes what time was it taken and by who.police took their time to enter because of bamber frightning them.
-
Why was Jeremy's defence that Sheila shot the family and then shot herself if he was sure police shot Sheila? He still says on his OS site that Sheila shot herself. Sheila was found on the floor on her father’s side of the bed. What strongly suggests that Sheila committed suicide is the fact that she had calmly laid down on the floor. This is on his site, how can he say one minute police shot her then say she committed suicide.
excellent point .justice
-
That is correct, Jeremy Bamber did not shoot the other four members of his family, but Sheila did. He did not play any role in Sheila Caffells death, which was reported to have happened downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the bedroom - police were involved in her death. They know it, I know it, and the evidence is there to prove they did it....
It's there own evidence which they introduced in the first place to try to show with use of their own crime scene photographs taken after they brought the rifle to Sheila's body and straged her supposed death scene on the bedroom floor, to prove that she had taken her own life, when the truth of the matter is that 'she did not'...
Bamber himself complained at the scene upon the news being broken to him that all his family were dead, that the men with the guns who had gone in the house had shot them all, that these armed men had killed everyone whilst storming the farmhouse at around 7.30am. The police officer who he made this complaint to told no - one according to his COLP witness statement, about Jeremy Bamber alleging that police shot members of his family. I do not for one moment accept that PS Saxby did not tell other police officers at the scene of the first words spoken out of Jeremy's mouth upon him being given the news that all his family inside the farmhouse were dead, and he complaining that 'police must have shot and killed them all'...
The first words spoken by an accused are ' important', and every copper in the land knows this to be the case, so why is it that dodgy Saxby and the rest of the motley crew at the scene chose not to speak about it?
Of course dodgy Saxbty relayed what Jeremy had said to him, to senior officers at the scene that morning, ' police had shot Sheila Caffell, and were responsible for killing her', and that's why they staged her death scene in the main bedroom with use of the rifle from the box room window, then photographed her body and used those photographs initially to support the claim that she had taken her own life, and subsequently when Jeremy was prosecuted they misused those very same photographs to support the claim that Jeremy had staged his sisters death scene, as shown in the same photographs...
It's unforgivable what Essex police did, and what they have done, and what they continue to do...
bamber saying the armed police shot them cannot be proven is complete rubbish who heard him say it which police officer wrote it down .police are there to save lives not kill people.why didnt the coward go in himself 'after all his father had rung him for help.what evidence did you expect to find on bamber. we can say sheila did not kill anyone and the mountain of forensic evidence for that is clear.so that leaves bamber with plenty of time to stage the scene.
-
Another from his OS, Sadly, this life was taken from Jeremy and completely destroyed when, in August 1985, Sheila – who had developed schizophrenia in adult life – took the lives of both her parents and her own two young children in a psychotic episode before killing herself. So your saying that Jeremy was convinced police shot Sheila, but he goes with the fact Sheila shot herself, or is it your theory but not Jeremy's?
-
Another from his OS, Sadly, this life was taken from Jeremy and completely destroyed when, in August 1985, Sheila – who had developed schizophrenia in adult life – took the lives of both her parents and her own two young children in a psychotic episode before killing herself. So your saying that Jeremy was convinced police shot Sheila, but he goes with the fact Sheila shot herself, or is it your theory but not Jeremy's?
i think mike has got himself confused
-
................. police were involved in her death. They know it, I know it, and the evidence is there to prove they did it....
So you say, but I can't see any of those involved in the case to stand in a witness box and admit "We fitted him up, M' Lud coz we dun it"..................which just leaves you.
You have said that the first words spoken to the police are important. Jeremy's FIRST words to them involved him giving them a breakdown of Sheila's mental history and her competency with fire arms, and, of course his father's alleged call saying she'd gone mad and had a gun. He virtually told them she was capable of causing their deaths. Why he'd change his mind is anyone's guess.
-
So you say, but I can't see any of those involved in the case to stand in a witness box and admit "We fitted him up, M' Lud coz we dun it"..................which just leaves you.
You have said that the first words spoken to the police are important. Jeremy's FIRST words to them involved him giving them a breakdown of Sheila's mental history and her competency with fire arms, and, of course his father's alleged call saying she'd gone mad and had a gun. He virtually told them she was capable of causing their deaths. Why he'd change his mind is anyone's guess.
Very good point Jane
-
Very good point Jane
Justice, THANK-YOU :)
-
Justice, THANK-YOU :)
this topic name makes no sense.what conundrum are you talking about mike.you cannot show who took the outside photo and at what time it was taken.and it makes no difference where the gun had been placed on sheila or by the window.i think ive seen a photo somewhere showing a window with a rifle leaning on it .but is that window at whf. i dont believe so.if you have the photo please post it mike.
-
this topic name makes no sense.what conundrum are you talking about mike.you cannot show who took the outside photo and at what time it was taken.and it makes no difference where the gun had been placed on sheila or by the window.i think ive seen a photo somewhere showing a window with a rifle leaning on it .but is that window at whf. i dont believe so.if you have the photo please post it mike.
Sami, I think the picture to which you refer can be located in Archives. Mike has produced several pictures for us which others must have convinced him were genuine. He must have believed them to be so -why would he have posted them otherwise?- but it has sometimes seemed not to be the case. I think it pays to be wary. Not everything is what it presents itself as being.
-
Sami, I think the picture to which you refer can be located in Archives. Mike has produced several pictures for us which others must have convinced him were genuine. He must have believed them to be so -why would he have posted them otherwise?- but it has sometimes seemed not to be the case. I think it pays to be wary. Not everything is what it presents itself as being.
thanks jane i will bear that in mind.and check that photo in archives
-
thanks jane i will bear that in mind.and check that photo in archives
cant find that photo jane do you know where in archives
-
cant find that photo jane do you know where in archives
OK. If you look in Archive and Library, click on Case Related Photos and scroll down the first page. You'll see diagrams, pictures of the house, numerous pictures of the kitchen and then your patience will be rewarded with several pictures of bedrooms, INCLUDING ones showing a rifle at the window.
-
no one except' the raid team' would be allowed in that farmhouse until the scene had been made safe Well, you had better get your facts right, before you start having a go at me. Firstly, according to the trial testimony of Detective Inspector Ron Cook. The rifle had remained in position upon Sheila's body, unmoved and untouched by anybody since its alleged first find when firearm officers stormed the farmhouse. Indeed, (unless he lied), Cook testifified that it was 'he' who had first moved the rifle from the body, and Cook himself did not arrive at the scene along with PC Bird until 9.20am. He and the rest of SOCO did not take control of the scene until 10 O' clock. PC Bird did not photograph 'the rifle' leaning against thge bedroom window until about 10.13am. That photograph was photograph No. 23. After that, PC Bird took 8 consecutive photographs showing 'the rifle' from the bedroom window in photograph 23, now upon Sheila Caffells body, in photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. Cook testified that he moved Sheila's right hand (as per photo's 29 and 30) so that PC Bird could photograph bloodied finger marks on Sheila's nightdress) Cook then said he removed 'the rifle' from Sheila's body (presumably after PC Bird had taken the last of the 8 photographs (33) which shows the rifle 'still' on the body) and he said he 'handed' the rifle to Police Inspector Montgomery to check and make safe, before 'it' was handed back to Cook who stated he then placed the rifle at the main bedroom window before PC Bird photographed the rifle at the window as per photograph 23. So, why would Cook be handing 'the rifle' to Montgomery, for him to check and make safe for the very first time, if as Cook testified to the effect that 'no - one had moved' or 'touched the rifle on the body' before 'he' had? Not only that but PC Bird took photograph 23 which shows the rifle at the bedroom window, before he took photographs 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, showing the same rifle on Sheila's body. Additionally, if Cook did not deliberately lie and deceive the jury about these matters, then the additional fact that it is documented by the police themselves (elsewhere) that at 8.15am, three police officers, namely, DCI Harris, DCI Gibbons, and PI Montgomery entered the kitchen of the farmhouse, and were held there whilst DCI Harris spoke to ACC Peter Simpson with use of the land line telephone situated in the kitchen, a call which lasted some 15 minutes. So, officers did enter the crime scene before the rifle was checked and made safe by reference to what Cook said during his testimony and cross examination during the trial then and any firearms found were made safe. If Cooks testimony was honest and reliable, then of course, you must be wrong, either that, or you are in agreement that Cook gave dishonest evidence during the trial about the sequence with which 9 key photographs were taken, and lied about the first occasion the rifle was checked and made safe...so idont think dci harris would be giving a running commentary about anything. So DCI Harris used the telephone in the kitchen for 15 minutes, without speaking or saying anything at all to ACC Simpson?about the rifle.what does it matter where it was it does matter where it was, stop acting daft...and if it was moved . are you thick or what? Of course it matters if it 'was moved' from the window onto the body and then photographed. What kind of a person can say what your saying, and not realize the significance or importance of it. For your information, its called 'fabricating evidence'...theres plenty of other evidence sheila did not fire that rifle. there's sufficient evidence to indicate that she did 'fire the rifle' to kill the other four victims...why would the police fit up bamber. Why did the same police stage Sheila's death scene by bringing the rifle from the box room window plant out on Sheila's body and then take photographs (26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33) which they relied upon to frame Sheila for her own suicide. It was therefore a simple matter of the police using that very same fabricated photographic evidence which they used to frame Sheila, to frame Jeremy by a reliance upon the same fabricated crime scene photographs, aforementioned...because of bumberling dci taff jones it was a closed case four murders and a suicide. DCI Jones did not fabricate Sheila Caffells Death scene in the main bedroom, he was not even present at the scene when 'the rifle' was photographed against the bedroom window (23) at 10.13am, and 'it' was brought to Sheila's body by the police, to stage her death scene. So, if you have got any credible evidence to counter what is being said, post it up... the farm house was cleaned.items burned police must have wanted to burn and destroy any evidence which could potentially incriminate themselves in Sheila's death...and victims cremated case closed. Case not closed, evidence of police corruption still available ready to be used...why than point the finger at bamber and make themselfs look like fools The police did what they did, the facts are starring everyone in the face, unless you are someone who ignores the truth, and pretends that what police did and have done, is not wrong, and is not a collection of acts of corruption... for having been decived by bamber. He didn't deceive anyone, but was a victim, himself...
-
iam sorry you feel i was having a go.i wasnt .let me clear one thing with you have you got a photo of the rifle leaning against the window.taken from outside whf.show me the plenty of evidence you claim shows sheila fired a gun or loaded bullets in that rifle.rubbish.utter tripe.show me the statement that dci harris spoke to some one from that phone .while sheila was unaccounted for.statements please show proof.where that rifle was placed when photoed from inside whf means nothing.
-
You'll find photo's in the archives including the rifle in the window. Also EP statements.
Why don't you prove that it WASN'T Sheila,but Jeremy who fired that rifle ?
-
You'll find photo's in the archives including the rifle in the window. Also EP statements.
Why don't you prove that it WASN'T Sheila,but Jeremy who fired that rifle ?
read the forensic report on sheila.it proves she didnt fire a gun.so what does the rifle near the window which was photoed from inside whf prove
-
read the forensic report on sheila.it proves she didnt fire a gun.so what does the rifle near the window which was photoed from inside whf prove
That there were two rifles in use. Much has been said that Neville kept on under his bed,and there was the one in which Jeremy left on the settle in the back-kitchen. There was also AP's rifle which was always kept in the downstairs toilet area. That makes 3 if I'm splitting hairs,though neverthless it was a working farm so there was a store of guns.
Can you account for Sheila's prints being found on the shotgun that AE found in one of the rooms ?
BTW,I'm not interested in what the forensic report said.
-
That there were two rifles in use. Much has been said that Neville kept on under his bed,and there was the one in which Jeremy left on the settle in the back-kitchen. There was also AP's rifle which was always kept in the downstairs toilet area. That makes 3 if I'm splitting hairs,though neverthless it was a working farm so there was a store of guns.
Can you account for Sheila's prints being found on the shotgun that AE found in one of the rooms ?
BTW,I'm not interested in what the forensic report said.
Much has been made of the fact that two rifles were used but thus far no proof of it has been forthcoming. Nor is there proof that Nevill kept a rifle under his bed. I believe a single print of Sheila's was found on THE rifle but I have no recall of proof of her prints being on A rifle.
BTW, if you're not interested in what the forensic report say, does one presume you to be interested only in rumour?
-
That there were two rifles in use. Much has been said that Neville kept on under his bed,and there was the one in which Jeremy left on the settle in the back-kitchen. There was also AP's rifle which was always kept in the downstairs toilet area. That makes 3 if I'm splitting hairs,though neverthless it was a working farm so there was a store of guns.
Can you account for Sheila's prints being found on the shotgun that AE found in one of the rooms ?
BTW,I'm not interested in what the forensic report said.
the forensic report is fact not fiction.hearsay about nevill keeping rifle under his bed cannot be proved and therefor is hearsay.who tested that shotgun and why.or is that also hearsay.if ap rifle was in the toilet area than nevill would have placed it in the gun cupboard while the twins were staying there. one must never reject the forensic report it was an expert who wrote it .not laymen like us.10 members of the jury believed it
-
iam sorry you feel i was having a go.i wasnt . OK...let me clear one thing with you have you got a photo of the rifle leaning against the window taken from inside the farmhouse, yes, but not one from outside of it. However, latest estimates suggest that there are around 211 photographic images which Essex police and the CPS are refusing to disclose to the present legal team working behind the scenes on Jeremy Bambers behalf, it could well include at least one photograph of the gun resting at that window that was taken from outside....taken from outside whf. ask Essex police if there exists such a photograph amongst the 211 still in their possession...show me the plenty of evidence you claim shows sheila fired a gun marks on the top part of her right hand which can be matched to the design of the breach face and trigger mechanism of the rifle, plus a corresponding mark, or small cut on her index finger of her right hand which was caused through constantly activating the trigger mechanism perhaps as many as 23 times... or loaded bullets in that rifle. bullets had brass casings, it means nothing that lead deposit levels on her hands were low, she obviously wiped her bloodied fingers on her nightdress, and pages of the bible...rubbish. yes, what your saying is rubbish...utter tripe. I agree, what you have said is utter tripe...show me the statement that dci harris spoke to some one from that phone . show me any evidence at all which denies that he made such a call...while sheila was unaccounted for. in order for you to understand how and in what circumstances Sheila's body became unaccounted for after 8.10am and before 8.30am, you need to read the contents of the police radio message logs, which place the bodies of two victims downstairs in the kitchen, and a further three bodies upstairs in the bedroom. Then take the so called official version of events as per the contents of firearm officers witness statements where they claim four bodies were found upstairs in the bedrooms, and only the body of one victim found downstairs in the kitchen. Sheila's body became temporarily unaccounted for in between the changing scenarios, aforementioned. How did her body find its way upstairs into the main bedroom, from its original position downstairs in the kitchen? Nobody claims to have seen head nor hair of Sheila anywhere else in between the kitchen and the bedroom, so it is at 'that' stage that her body was unaccounted for, which coincided with the use of the round finger dial phone in the kitchen by DCI Harris, between 8.15am and 8.30am...statements please show proof. if you can read, all the evidence is posted up everywhere on this forum, you'll know when you come across it, you won't need me to point it out to you...where that rifle was placed when photoed from inside whf means nothing. Oh yes it does - and by those comments of yours we can all see how corrupt you yourself must be, because staging Sheila's death scene and then taking photographs of the rifle on her body, when there had previously been no rifle on the body, or with the body, is known as 'fabricated evidence'...
-
your making the claim of dci harris's call then its up to you to show proof.so your saying cut her finger while pressing the trigger.i doubt a rifle thats cuts peoples finger would be a reject and never be allowed to inter the market by the makes .reputation is everything for a arms maker.she cut her finger but her nails remained perfect while she loaded that rifle.this really is getting very funny.i will answer a few more later beacause an intilligent man like you is very trying.please point me to that statement of dci harris's phone call while sheila was still missing.thanks
-
the forensic report is fact not fiction.hearsay about nevill keeping rifle under his bed cannot be proved and therefor is hearsay.who tested that shotgun and why.or is that also hearsay.if ap rifle was in the toilet area than nevill would have placed it in the gun cupboard while the twins were staying there. one must never reject the forensic report it was an expert who wrote it .not laymen like us.10 members of the jury believed it
The whole case was built on hearsay so what's new ? " Not laymen like us ",a contradiction in terms when it was 10 laymen ( what do they know ?) who found an innocent man,guilty.
-
The whole case was built on hearsay so what's new ? " Not laymen like us ",a contradiction in terms when it was 10 laymen ( what do they know ?) who found an innocent man,guilty.
i meant they had all the facts from both sides.your wrong about the first sentence. NO HEARSAY EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED IN COURT.or barbara wilson would have told the court of her conversation with nevill.
-
i meant they had all the facts from both sides.your wrong about the first sentence. NO HEARSAY EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED IN CO more than me and I have been here for 4 yearsURT.or barbara wilson would have told the court of her conversation with nevill.
Heck sami you must have been following this case for ages as you seem to have lots of knowledge more than me and I have been here for 4 years.
-
read the forensic report on sheila.it proves she didnt fire a gun. based on the conclusions of that report, it also seems to be saying that no gun was fired in close proximity to the nightdress, so how did she get killed then? The rifle which police brought from the box room window and 'planted it' on her body upon 'its right side' against Sheila's nightdress, had the ejection port, and three venting holes which would surely have been heavily contaminated with propellent, and residue and soot caused during the use of the gun, but miraculously no such propellent, no such residue and no such soot became transferred onto the surface of the nightdress. Additionally, the shooter of 'that' rifle, would have needed to reload at least 13 additional rounds into the ammunition magazine of the rifle, and activate the trigger mechanism. One of the failings in the ballistic report is the 'total absence' of any lead deposit amounts present upon 'the trigger', itself, and 'the trigger mechanism'. It seems inadequate to me, that no - one thought to swab the trigger of the rifle, considering that in all probability at least one of the two fingers used to load ammunition, 'fired' bullets from the rifle by activating the trigger...
The facts are that no lead deposit were found to be present at all on the trigger, so why all the fuss about low levels of lead deposit found upon the hand swabs supposedly taken from Sheila, in the guise of exhibit DRH/33, or DRH/44, or otherwise...so what does the rifle near the window which was photoed from inside whf prove Do I really need to spell it out for you? OK, it means that Sheila had not shot herself on either of the two occasions she was shot, and that somebody else shot her. Well with the rifle seen at the box room window at 7.15am, and then being planted on Sheila's body, and the ballistics saying both shots had been fired from 'it', the only people who could have shot Sheila, were the police themselves, and they did...
-
the forensic report is fact not fiction.hearsay about nevill keeping rifle under his bed cannot be proved and therefor is hearsay.who tested that shotgun and why.or is that also hearsay.if ap rifle was in the toilet area than nevill would have placed it in the gun cupboard while the twins were staying there. one must never reject the forensic report it was an expert who wrote it .not laymen like us.10 members of the jury believed it
Forensic reports are expert opinions. Experts remain divided on this case, people who argue online about this case then decide to go with an expert opinion that suits their position on guilt or innocence.
you say "one must never reject the forensic report it was an expert who wrote it"
- Expert Forensic biologist Mark Webster's report states there is a serious possibility the blood in silencer could be a mix of June and Nevillis blood and not Shelia's
- Dr Fowler and two other medical examiners from the states produced a report concluding the silencer was not attached when Shelia was shot.
- Two medical pathologists produced a report based on the photos of Shelia's body that she died between 6 to 7am while Jeremy was outside with police. (In their opinion effectively making him innocent)
So now what? Expert opinion is not fact, I personally don't think much of point 3. However I do feel Mark Webster and Dr Fowler make substantial points specially since both their views corroborate with one another in their respective fields.
-
Mike, it never ceases to fascinate me how information meaning, quite clearly, one thing to most, means something entirely and incomprehensively different to someone else.
-
Forensic reports are expert opinions. Experts remain divided on this case, people who argue online about this case then decide to go with an expert opinion that suits their position on guilt or innocence.
you say "one must never reject the forensic report it was an expert who wrote it"
- Expert Forensic biologist Mark Webster's report states there is a serious possibility the blood in silencer could be a mix of June and Nevillis blood and not Shelia's
- Dr Fowler and two other medical examiners from the states produced a report concluding the silencer was not attached when Shelia was shot.
- Two medical pathologists produced a report based on the photos of Shelia's body that she died between 6 to 7am while Jeremy was outside with police. (In their opinion effectively making him innocent)
So now what? Expert opinion is not fact, I personally don't think much of point 3. However I do feel Mark Webster and Dr Fowler make substantial points specially since both their views corroborate with one another in their respective fields.
good points that jb's defence team should have used.if he could produce all of them in court.it might have made a stronger case.webster has said its only a possibility.as for the others can it be proved they were not paid for their accounts.judging time of death by photos sounds very dubious to me
-
Can anyone tell me, if Sheila was shot once downstairs as Mike is suggesting and then shot once upstairs why was there 2 she'll cases at Sheila's body?
-
Can anyone tell me, if Sheila was shot once downstairs as Mike is suggesting and then shot once upstairs why was there 2 she'll cases at Sheila's body?
good point justice.cant wait to read answer.
-
Can anyone tell me, if Sheila was shot once downstairs as Mike is suggesting and then shot once upstairs why was there 2 she'll cases at Sheila's body?
Howz about this? Having shot her once, they crawled around on the floor to find the shell case so they could say she was shot twice upstairs????
-
Howz about this? Having shot her once, they crawled around on the floor to find the shell case so they could say she was shot twice upstairs????
But wait Jane, if someone could bring the drawing up for me out the archives, if you was setting it up why would you place one shell case to the left and one shell case to the right? If the scene was set and rigged up by all these experts yet they could not get the casing right, if it was set up they would have put both casings to the same side? This was stage managed by someone in a hurry and not experienced with crime scene staging?
-
Howz about this? Having shot her once, they crawled around on the floor to find the shell case so they could say she was shot twice upstairs????
that sounds like they were very clever .good at scene staging but not better than jb.police never staged anything.it was jb's handiwork
-
Forensic reports are expert opinions. Experts remain divided on this case, people who argue online about this case then decide to go with an expert opinion that suits their position on guilt or innocence.
you say "one must never reject the forensic report it was an expert who wrote it"
li]Expert Forensic biologist Mark Webster's report states there is a serious possibility the blood in silencer could be a mix of June and Nevillis blood and not Shelia's[/li][/list]
- Dr Fowler and two other medical examiners from the states produced a report concluding the silencer was not attached when Shelia was shot.
[/b]
- Two medical pathologists produced a report based on the photos of Shelia's body that she died between 6 to 7am while Jeremy was outside with police. (In their opinion effectively making him innocent)
So now what? Expert opinion is not fact, I personally don't think much of point 3. However I do feel Mark Webster and Dr Fowler make substantial points specially since both their views corroborate with one another in their respective fields.
Even taking these "facts" as given the Defence still has to jump through a number of hoops before Jeremy becomes innocent. Sheila still has to remove the silencer from the weapon after killing four, return it to the gun cupboard and proceed upstairs to finish herself off. Andrew Hunter mentioned a silencer mark on her neck spotted by two gun enthusiasts whilst perusing photographs in Ewen Smith's office, so they would have to be mistaken. She would have to burn her clothes in the Aga, ritualistically wash and change into the nightie. Of course all other Prosecution witnesses would be involved in the conspiracy too.
-
But wait Jane, if someone could bring the drawing up for me out the archives, if you was setting it up why would you place one shell case to the left and one shell case to the right? If the scene was set and rigged up by all these experts yet they could not get the casing right, if it was set up they would have put both casings to the same side? This was stage managed by someone in a hurry and not experienced with crime scene staging?
OK. How does this work? Having shot her a second time, they're just about to leave when one of the plods remembers the "downstairs" shell case is still in his pocket, so he hoicks it out and chucks it down randomly coz he wants his breakfast!!!! Ta Dah!!!
-
that sounds like they were very clever .good at scene staging but not better than jb.police never staged anything.it was jb's handiwork
The police obviously not being as adept at stage craft as Jeremy.
-
The police obviously not being as adept at stage craft as Jeremy.
Even taking these "facts" as given the Defence still has to jump through a number of hoops before Jeremy becomes innocent. Sheila still has to remove the silencer from the weapon after killing four, return it to the gun cupboard and proceed upstairs to finish herself off. Andrew Hunter mentioned a silencer mark on her neck spotted by two gun enthusiasts whilst perusing photographs in Ewen Smith's office, so they would have to be mistaken. She would have to burn her clothes in the Aga, ritualistically wash and change into the nightie. Of course all other Prosecution witnesses would be involved in the conspiracy too.
good points steve.i never knew about the enthusiasts it would take someone like that to spot those marks .because we are not firearms enthusiasts.another thing that proves jb's guilt
-
OK. How does this work? Having shot her a second time, they're just about to leave when one of the plods remembers the "downstairs" shell case is still in his pocket, so he hoicks it out and chucks it down randomly coz he wants his breakfast!!!! Ta Dah!!!
More like it was trodden on and ended up in the cleats of the clod-hopping boots as it was carted around. It would have sounded like a tap-shoe on the quarry tiles in the kitchen.
-
More like it was trodden on and ended up in the cleats of the clod-hopping boots as it was carted around. It would have sounded like a tap-shoe on the quarry tiles in the kitchen.
So do you think the police shot her downstairs?
-
Hello steve some on the forum do not believe a silencer was used and that Sheila's clothes were soaking in the buckets it has also been suggested on here that Sheila's hair looked damp indicating she had washed it. If Jeremy had murdered his family and planned it so well surely he would have been more astute and disposed or swapped the silencer. Just a suggestion as to what has been said before.
-
So do you think the police shot her downstairs?
My options are kept open on that one,but I've made up my mind that the first shot wasn't done by Sheila's own hand,but a skewed shot delivered when her father tried to wrestle the rifle from her. Whoever delivered that second shot,which would have been minutes after the first,was in direct contact with her neck as is plain to see on the pic.
Saying that,then her death would have occurred in the kitchen and not the bedroom,where it looks for all the world as though she'd been placed there.
-
Hello steve some on the forum do not believe a silencer was used and that Sheila's clothes were soaking in the buckets it has also been suggested on here that Sheila's hair looked damp indicating she had washed it. If Jeremy had murdered his family and planned it so well surely he would have been more astute and disposed or swapped the silencer. Just a suggestion as to what has been said before.
susan dont qoute me on this.but i think the only items that were soaking in buckets were sheila's blood stained knickers and the twins jogging top and bottoms.some might correct me if iam wrong
-
Hello steve some on the forum do not believe a silencer was used and that Sheila's clothes were soaking in the buckets it has also been suggested on here that Sheila's hair looked damp indicating she had washed it. If Jeremy had murdered his family and planned it so well surely he would have been more astute and disposed or swapped the silencer. Just a suggestion as to what has been said before.
Yes I agree susan. I find it incomprehensible that the silencer was not even inside a box but resting on its side,though as someone pointed out the gun cupboard had a large recess. Maybe he was worried that the silencer would have been missed had he disposed of it.
-
My options are kept open on that one,but I've made up my mind that the first shot wasn't done by Sheila's own hand,but a skewed shot delivered when her father tried to wrestle the rifle from her. Whoever delivered that second shot,which would have been minutes after the first,was in direct contact with her neck as is plain to see on the pic.
Saying that,then her death would have occurred in the kitchen and not the bedroom,where it looks for all the world as though she'd been placed there.
Vanezis has recently stated, contrary to his original belief, that she wouldn't have been able to move after the first shot.
-
Vanezis has recently stated, contrary to his original belief, that she wouldn't have been able to move after the first shot.
That's what I've just said.
-
Vanezis has recently stated, contrary to his original belief, that she wouldn't have been able to move after the first shot.
that means she could not have fired the 2nd.and as the police couldnt have done it .that only leaves jb
-
JB did NOT shoot anyone.
-
That's what I've just said.
O - M - G!!!! If you'll pardon the expression, Lookout, it sounds suspiciously like Adam has rubbed off on you. He's the only other one who thinks she was carried!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
that means she could not have fired the 2nd.and as the police couldnt have done it .that only leaves jb
Yeah, I go with that.
-
susan dont qoute me on this.but i think the only items that were soaking in buckets were sheila's blood stained knickers and the twins jogging top and bottoms.some might correct me if iam wrong
sami I agree with you I think that too I was just posting an alternative scenario for the sake of debate.
-
JB did NOT shoot anyone.
Of course he did.
-
susan dont qoute me on this.but i think the only items that were soaking in buckets were sheila's blood stained knickers and the twins jogging top and bottoms.some might correct me if iam wrong
That is correct Sami, we have had all manner of things in those buckets at one time or another! ;D ;D
-
that means she could not have fired the 2nd.and as the police couldnt have done it .that only leaves jb
If you're using logic, yes.
-
The video in 2:04 here shows the blood pattern, which does suggest to a non-expert that the two shots were made in close proximity to each other. https://youtu.be/sMUrBhYpduY
-
That is correct Sami, we have had all manner of things in those buckets at one time or another! ;D ;D
Yeah, funny they didn't overflow, isn't it?
-
Hello steve some on the forum do not believe a silencer was used and that Sheila's clothes were soaking in the buckets it has also been suggested on here that Sheila's hair looked damp indicating she had washed it. If Jeremy had murdered his family and planned it so well surely he would have been more astute and disposed or swapped the silencer. Just a suggestion as to what has been said before.
Who believes the bit in bold, Susan?
-
Would it not have been better to stage Sheila dead in the kitchen? Reports had gone over the radio one dead female in kitchen ( but we are told this was Neville) numerous officers see Sheila dead or think she is dead search the house and then find out Sheila is not dead so shoot her upstairs. Put one shell case to the left and one shell case to the right and stage the body upstairs? I would have thought someone would have said, hang on a minute how we going to get away with this we have reported over live radio she was dead downstairs, right lads take her back to the kitchen cover everything up and put them shell cases down stairs and bring that bible while your at it?
-
The video in 2:04 here shows the blood pattern, which does suggest to a non-expert that the two shots were made in close proximity to each other. https://youtu.be/sMUrBhYpduY
-
Would it not have been better to stage Sheila dead in the kitchen? Reports had gone over the radio one dead female in kitchen ( but we are told this was Neville) numerous officers see Sheila dead or think she is dead search the house and then find out Sheila is not dead so shoot her upstairs. Put one shell case to the left and one shell case to the right and stage the body upstairs? I would have thought someone would have said, hang on a minute how we going to get away with this we have reported over live radio she was dead downstairs, right lads take her back to the kitchen cover everything up and put them shell cases down stairs and bring that bible while your at it?
that is funny.justice
-
O - M - G!!!! If you'll pardon the expression, Lookout, it sounds suspiciously like Adam has rubbed off on you. He's the only other one who thinks she was carried!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I remember saying this when I first joined the forum. It would have taken 4 men to have carried a " dead " weight upstairs,but certainly not impossible and certainly not Jeremy.
Sheila was too "neat and tidy" to have been found as she lay in the bedroom. You see,I believe the fact that police saw a woman when they looked through the kitchen window.Where Neville was situated it was a blind corner and unless anyone could see round corners,then it was a woman that was seen and for that reason there could only have been one indication.
The kitchen light was on don't forget.
-
I remember saying this when I first joined the forum. It would have taken 4 men to have carried a " dead " weight upstairs,but certainly not impossible and certainly not Jeremy.
Sheila was too "neat and tidy" to have been found as she lay in the bedroom. You see,I believe the fact that police saw a woman when they looked through the kitchen window.Where Neville was situated it was a blind corner and unless anyone could see round corners,then it was a woman that was seen and for that reason there could only have been one indication.
The kitchen light was on don't forget.
It's not a blind corner - Vic has said so in the past and as he has been in WHF - he would know!
-
Would it not have been better to stage Sheila dead in the kitchen? Reports had gone over the radio one dead female in kitchen ( but we are told this was Neville) numerous officers see Sheila dead or think she is dead search the house and then find out Sheila is not dead so shoot her upstairs. Put one shell case to the left and one shell case to the right and stage the body upstairs? I would have thought someone would have said, hang on a minute how we going to get away with this we have reported over live radio she was dead downstairs, right lads take her back to the kitchen cover everything up and put them shell cases down stairs and bring that bible while your at it?
But she escaped from them, Justice. They lost her!!!! Actually there's an irony there because Mike once said there was evidence to suggest that Sheila had tied Nevill to the chair to prevent his escaping. The police missed a trick there. They could have done the same thing to Sheila.
-
Who believes the bit in bold, Susan?
Mat some do and also that there was three buckets not two I personally don't believe it but when I came on here at first I was convinced Sheila's clothes were soaking in the bucket and I always wondered why AE took away a dress of Sheila's and kept it for years. Don't think that now though moved on I guess. Think I was just making a point that many did think that way back ;D
-
But she escaped from them, Justice. They lost her!!!! Actually there's an irony there because Mike once said there was evidence to suggest that Sheila had tied Nevill to the chair to prevent his escaping. The police missed a trick there. They could have done the same thing to Sheila.
they missed a trick there .nicely put jane.
-
Steve many of the forums innocent and guilty supporters have stopped posting think it has become so repetitive they get bored and were hoping for something new from the latest books ah well maybe the next one by Scot Lomax we shall see ???
-
I remember saying this when I first joined the forum. It would have taken 4 men to have carried a " dead " weight upstairs,but certainly not impossible and certainly not Jeremy.
Sheila was too "neat and tidy" to have been found as she lay in the bedroom. You see,I believe the fact that police saw a woman when they looked through the kitchen window.Where Neville was situated it was a blind corner and unless anyone could see round corners,then it was a woman that was seen and for that reason there could only have been one indication.
The kitchen light was on don't forget.
Lookout, unless you have been to the farm and looked through that window, you have to accept only what others tell you and they may have an agenda. I believe Vic has been there and I think he tells it differently.
-
But she escaped from them, Justice. They lost her!!!! Actually there's an irony there because Mike once said there was evidence to suggest that Sheila had tied Nevill to the chair to prevent his escaping. The police missed a trick there. They could have done the same thing to Sheila.
Your right Jane, they tried their best though, you just presume they are dead and get on with it, you don't think people pretend to be dead. Who would have thought she would run upstairs, what did she go back upstairs for? I would have thought she would have gone back to the twins room had she rushed back upstairs?
-
Your right Jane, they tried their best though, you just presume they are dead and get on with it, you don't think people pretend to be dead. Who would have thought she would run upstairs, what did she go back upstairs for? I would have thought she would have gone back to the twins room had she rushed back upstairs?
Right. Well, she was intending to go to the twins room but -and we must remember that the first shot, however much some try to fudge it, effectively broke her neck and she'd have needed to hold her head up- she heard them coming so she quickly lay down on the far side of the room, hidden by the bed, from the view from the door.
-
good points that jb's defence team should have used.if he could produce all of them in court.it might have made a stronger case.webster has said its only a possibility.as for the others can it be proved they were not paid for their accounts.judging time of death by photos sounds very dubious to me
All this was produced long after the original trial, in hindsight it would have made the prosecutions life very difficult.
-
Right. Well, she was intending to go to the twins room but -and we must remember that the first shot, however much some try to fudge it, effectively broke her neck and she'd have needed to hold her head up- she heard them coming so she quickly lay down on the far side of the room, hidden by the bed, from the view from the door.
If Sheila went up the kitchen stairs she would have passed the twins room to get to her parents bedroom.
-
Even taking these "facts" as given the Defence still has to jump through a number of hoops before Jeremy becomes innocent. Sheila still has to remove the silencer from the weapon after killing four, return it to the gun cupboard
Not necessarily, Jeremy said he left the rifle in scullery with silencer unattached. So from a defence perspective she does not have to remove it as it was never on in the first place.
and proceed upstairs to finish herself off. Andrew Hunter mentioned a silencer mark on her neck spotted by two gun enthusiasts whilst perusing photographs in Ewen Smith's office, so they would have to be mistaken. She would have to burn her clothes in the Aga, ritualistically wash and change into the nightie. Of course all other Prosecution witnesses would be involved in the conspiracy too.
Enthusiasts are not experts which might explain why the experts come to a different conclusion.
As for the lack of gunshot residue on the nightdress, suicide or murder one should expect GSR on the nightdress as a result of both senarios. Shelia had two contact wounds to the neck one when she was sitting upright as the blood spatter shows so not only should there be traces of firearm discharge around the upper chest area of the nightdress, The position of the weapons cartridge ejection port and multiple ventilation holes is positioned around the waist area of the night dress. Two shots were fired while the weapon was in this position this would certainly expose the nightdress to Propellants, Powder residue and possibly firearm lubricants. On top of that we have a gun that is supposed to have fired 25 shots in a small space of time and as a result would have GSR on it then resting on Shelias nightdress that would yet expose even more GSR to the nightdress. Yet according to the prosecution there was no GSR at all!
Then Essex police destroy the nightdress? extremely perplexing and untrustworthy.
As for a conspiracy why all the nondisclosure and why do the COA and CCRC keep bending the rules and moving the goal posts? All Essex police and the Met police have to do is simply release their own records regarding the Murders at White House farm. If no conspiracy or monkey business took place, they would have nothing to fear, as their own records would support what they claimed in court. Yet it remains collecting dust.
-
Not necessarily, Jeremy said he left the rifle in scullery with silencer unattached. So from a defence perspective she does not have to remove it as it was never on in the first place.
Enthusiasts are not experts which might explain why the experts come to a different conclusion.
As for the lack of gunshot residue on the nightdress, suicide or murder one should expect GSR on the nightdress as a result of both senarios. Shelia had two contact wounds to the neck one when she was sitting upright as the blood spatter shows so not only should there be traces of firearm discharge around the upper chest area of the nightdress, The position of the weapons cartridge ejection port and multiple ventilation holes is positioned around the waist area of the night dress. Two shots were fired while the weapon was in this position this would certainly expose the nightdress to Propellants, Powder residue and possibly firearm lubricants. On top of that we have a gun that is supposed to have fired 25 shots in a small space of time and as a result would have GSR on it then resting on Shelias nightdress that would yet expose even more GSR to the nightdress. Yet according to the prosecution there was no GSR at all!
Then Essex police destroy the nightdress? extremely perplexing untrustworthy.
As for a conspiracy why all the nondisclosure and why do the COA and CCRC keep bending the rules and moving the goal posts? All Essex police and the Met police have to do is simply release their own records regarding the Murders at White House farm. If no conspiracy or monkey business took place, they would have nothing to fear, as their own records would support what they claimed in court. Yet it remains collecting dust.
I actually also posted an article that said with that type of weapon GSR would only be present in a percentage of shots not always every one . There was some interesting documents on the nightdress that I think only forensic experts would understand.
-
Steve,this is just it. If EP have nothing to fear then they'd release every last thing,especially after 30 years. It's things like this that makes the whole thing suspicious.
You can bet your life if there was something derogatory concerning Jeremy we'd have heard/seen it before today as it most definitely would have come out at the trial.
Then again,if there was anything in Jeremy's favour it would be destroyed,so I really can't understand why they're holding back. It doesn't make sense. What do they hope to gain ? Or are they waiting for everyone including Jeremy,to die ? A posthumous pardon for one and all.
-
david - documents on post 12 /13 on this thread . Wonder if we can get Mike to post all of them
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5650.0.html
-
Not necessarily, Jeremy said he left the rifle in scullery with silencer unattached. So from a defence perspective she does not have to remove it as it was never on in the first place.
Enthusiasts are not experts which might explain why the experts come to a different conclusion.
As for the lack of gunshot residue on the nightdress, suicide or murder one should expect GSR on the nightdress as a result of both senarios. Shelia had two contact wounds to the neck one when she was sitting upright as the blood spatter shows so not only should there be traces of firearm discharge around the upper chest area of the nightdress, The position of the weapons cartridge ejection port and multiple ventilation holes is positioned around the waist area of the night dress. Two shots were fired while the weapon was in this position this would certainly expose the nightdress to Propellants, Powder residue and possibly firearm lubricants. On top of that we have a gun that is supposed to have fired 25 shots in a small space of time and as a result would have GSR on it then resting on Shelias nightdress that would yet expose even more GSR to the nightdress. Yet according to the prosecution there was no GSR at all!
Then Essex police destroy the nightdress? extremely perplexing and untrustworthy.
As for a conspiracy why all the nondisclosure and why do the COA and CCRC keep bending the rules and moving the goal posts? All Essex police and the Met police have to do is simply release their own records regarding the Murders at White House farm. If no conspiracy or monkey business took place, they would have nothing to fear, as their own records would support what they claimed in court. Yet it remains collecting dust.
Then you're going down the road of the relatives' conspiracy, whereby they have to insert Sheila's, June's and Nevill's blood into the silencer and scratch the mantelpiece. We have to give Jeremy the benefit of the doubt in removing the sights,when there was no possible reason for doing so for shooting rabbits. We have to accept that he had a harmonious relationship with his parents, when Julie, James Richards, Chris Bamber, John Seward, Barbara Wilson and others state that he did not.
The nightdress was destroyed in 1996.
-
Then you're going down the road of the relatives' conspiracy, whereby they have to insert Sheila's, June's and Nevill's blood into the silencer and scratch the mantelpiece. We have to give Jeremy the benefit of the doubt in removing the sights,when there was no possible reason for doing so for shooting rabbits. We have to accept that he had a harmonious relationship with his parents, when Julie, James Richards, Chris Bamber, John Seward, Barbara Wilson and others state that he did not.
The nightdress was destroyed in 1996.
Barbara changed her mind and Jean Bouttel had worked there a LOT longer than her and she said she never saw any family arguments. One person who would have known the most seemed to keep the quietest - Pam.
I think he had a normal up and down relationship - probably had some resentments because of his schooling and adoption. But as colins book quite clearly sets out the main disharmony was between June and Sheila,
-
Steve,this is just it. If EP have nothing to fear then they'd release every last thing,especially after 30 years. It's things like this that makes the whole thing suspicious.
You can bet your life if there was something derogatory concerning Jeremy we'd have heard/seen it before today as it most definitely would have come out at the trial.
Then again,if there was anything in Jeremy's favour it would be destroyed,so I really can't understand why they're holding back. It doesn't make sense. What do they hope to gain ? Or are they waiting for everyone including Jeremy,to die ? A posthumous pardon for one and all.
I think they should turn over everything to Michael Mansfield QC and let him deal with it. But I really don't think there would be anything of significance left apart from some very distressing photographs.
-
I think they should turn over everything to Michael Mansfield QC and let him deal with it. But I really don't think there would be anything of significance left apart from some very distressing photographs.
you may be correct Steve. but I would like to see the full file on JM .
-
Barbara changed her mind and Jean Bouttel had worked there a LOT longer than her and she said she never saw any family arguments. One person who would have known the most seemed to keep the quietest - Pam.
I think he had a normal up and down relationship - probably had some resentments because of his schooling and adoption. But as colins book quite clearly sets out the main disharmony was between June and Sheila,
Barbara did change her mind but re Jean Boutell, I'm assuming that unless she lived in and was there 24/7 she wouldn't have been privy to all that went on. Then we have Jeremy being away at school, Jeremy being abroad, Jeremy living in Colchester and Jeremy living in Goldhanger and the most she could say was that she never saw family arguments. It's also worth noting that it's not possible for one person to argue alone. Jeremy MAY have been the type to remain silent.
-
Barbara changed her mind and Jean Bouttel had worked there a LOT longer than her and she said she never saw any family arguments. One person who would have known the most seemed to keep the quietest - Pam.
I think he had a normal up and down relationship - probably had some resentments because of his schooling and adoption. But as colins book quite clearly sets out the main disharmony was between June and Sheila,
I think June kept the peace by writing out personal cheques in Jeremy's favour, and as the ink ran dry her fate was sealed. Barbara knew Jeremy had done it because Nevill confided in her of sorts shortly before the murders, and Pam must have felt she still had some status and influence in the family by telephoning at the end of a long day when many people and especially farmers could be expected to be allowed to relax in bed.
-
Barbara did change her mind but re Jean Boutell, I'm assuming that unless she lived in and was there 24/7 she wouldn't have been privy to all that went on. Then we have Jeremy being away at school, Jeremy being abroad, Jeremy living in Colchester and Jeremy living in Goldhanger and the most she could say was that she never saw family arguments. It's also worth noting that it's not possible for one person to argue alone. Jeremy MAY have been the type to remain silent.
I never said they did not have arguments or disagreements - Colin explains that they did . Neville was the peacekeeper it seems - and they did have happy times as well . The family were private so I am sure most people did not know everything that went on . But I bet Pam knew a lot. I just think people have selective memories - they remember the bad bits if something bad happens. If my niece had killed her mother I would have remembered all the times she threatened it. As she did not I balance it up with her behaviour now.
-
I think they should turn over everything to Michael Mansfield QC and let him deal with it. But I really don't think there would be anything of significance left apart from some very distressing photographs.
Distressing as the photographs might be they could still give out clues of sorts.
-
I never said they did not have arguments or disagreements - Colin explains that they did . Neville was the peacekeeper it seems - and they did have happy times as well . The family were private so I am sure most people did not know everything that went on . But I bet Pam knew a lot. I just think people have selective memories - they remember the bad bits if something bad happens. If my niece had killed her mother I would have remembered all the times she threatened it. As she did not I balance it up with her behaviour now.
Aren't most families private? I don't think the Bambers were any different in that respect.
I agree people do remember the bad things BUT in this instance, they were more prepared to believe that Jeremy was the culprit, even though initially, it looked as though it had been Sheila. Clearly were things aabout Jeremy that heightened suspicion.
-
you may be correct Steve. but I would like to see the full file on JM .
You keep mentioning this, what could possibly be in there that it must remain hidden
-
david - documents on post 12 /13 on this thread . Wonder if we can get Mike to post all of them
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5650.0.html
What do they mention in regards to GSR?
-
david - documents on post 12 /13 on this thread . Wonder if we can get Mike to post all of them
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5650.0.html
mike will iam sure post all of them for you in triplicat.jan
-
Then you're going down the road of the relatives' conspiracy, whereby they have to insert Sheila's, June's and Nevill's blood into the silencer and scratch the mantelpiece.
That's the road I have been traveling for a while. It is very easy to dismantle the sound moderator with ones bare hands. The baffle plates then drop out of the tube. Flakes of dried blood or even fresh blood can then be placed onto the baffle plates or in between the muffler cups. Infact you could even plant the blood using the assembly rod alone and not even dismantle the silencer.
I don't for one minute believe his relatives knew in their minds he was innoncent and maliciously framed him. I believe they became convinced he done it and felt they were doing the right thing. The financial motive influencing them even more. Then again if the blood was planted its most likely the police played that role believing they had to it to do to bring justice by fooling the courts like they believed he fooled them.
We have to give Jeremy the benefit of the doubt in removing the sights,when there was no possible reason for doing so for shooting rabbits.
We have to accept that he had a harmonious relationship with his parents, when Julie, James Richards, Chris Bamber, John Seward, Barbara Wilson and others state that he did not.
You cant convict a man of five murders for not having a scope on his rifle and having a few unstable relationships with a few people. It don't sound very convincing
-
That's the road I have been traveling for a while. It is very easy to dismantle the sound moderator with ones bare hands. The baffle plates then drop out of the tube. Flakes of dried blood or even fresh blood can then be placed onto the baffle plates or in between the muffler cups. Infact you could even plant the blood using the assembly rod alone and not even dismantle the silencer.
I don't for one minute believe his relatives knew in their minds he was innoncent and maliciously framed him. I believe they became convinced he done it and felt they were doing the right thing. The financial motive influencing them even more. Then again if the blood was planted its most likely the police played that role believing they had to it to do to bring justice by fooling the courts like they believed he fooled them.
You cant convict a man of five murders for not having a scope on his rifle and having a few unstable relationships with a few people. It don't sound very convincing
I would go with that.
-
That's the road I have been traveling for a while. It is very easy to dismantle the sound moderator with ones bare hands. The baffle plates then drop out of the tube. Flakes of dried blood or even fresh blood can then be placed onto the baffle plates or in between the muffler cups. Infact you could even plant the blood using the assembly rod alone and not even dismantle the silencer.
I don't for one minute believe his relatives knew in their minds he was innoncent and maliciously framed him. I believe they became convinced he done it and felt they were doing the right thing. The financial motive influencing them even more. Then again if the blood was planted its most likely the police played that role believing they had to it to do to bring justice by fooling the courts like they believed he fooled them.
You cant convict a man of five murders for not having a scope on his rifle and having a few unstable relationships with a few people. It don't sound very convincing
I don't know whether such tampering took place or not. But the relatives were taking a huge risk if they embarked on this strategy.
-
I don't know whether such tampering took place or not. But the relatives were taking a huge risk if they embarked on this strategy.
if they did they were only sureing up the evidence against him.plus there were lots of other points apart from the silencer
-
i have to say the firearms team were brave men .they had it in back of their minds that some of them may not come out alive
-
I don't know whether such tampering took place or not. But the relatives were taking a huge risk if they embarked on this strategy.
If the tampering took place then its far more likely the police done the tampering as they knew they could get away with such dishonest or fraudulent conduct back then and they did do so in other cases.
-
if they did they were only sureing up the evidence against him.plus there were lots of other points apart from the silencer
The other points were not sufficient enough at his trial thou they would make an impression. At his original trial the Judge instructed the Jury they could find Jeremy guilty on three pieces of evidence. The blood in the silencer, the paint on the silencer and the testimony of July Mugford.
If you read the judges summing up its was the blood evidence that led to their decision. it can be found in the archive and library
-
ive read dcs harris's statement and i cant see any where .where it says he used the phone to call acc for 15 mins at 8.15am
-
hi maggie your right i shouldnt talk badly of the dead.i think he was fooled by bamber .theres some reports he was in a rush so he could play golf.but theres no proof.i think bamber fooled a lot of people that morning including the two doctors.ps bewes is one although he thought it was bamber from the start.so he claims now. he also claimed in a itv doc that when he approached the house with bamber .whf was in darkness no lights on.we know thats not true because raid team statements say lights were on in different parts of the house.
Reading information from different sources contained in reports and officers witness statements, it appears some lights inside the farmhouse were switched on and off between the police's first arrival at the scene at 3.48am and daybreak. Somebody must still have been alive inside the farmhouse moving around, and that person could not have been Jeremy Bamber because he was outside the farmhouse with the police at all times when different lights were described as being switched on, or off during the morning. It was one of the reasons which prevented the police from approaching the farmhouse because they knew with the contents of Ralph Bambers message to police earlier (03.26hrs) that 'his daughter had got one of my guns', and this information had also been rehearsed when Ralph had phoned his son Jeremy, a moment before, telling him that ' Sheila had got the gun'. Additionally, Jeremy had contacted the police himself at 03.36am, telling them that his 'father had phoned him', telling him that his sister 'had got the gun', and going was going 'crazy'. Certainly, with this collection of information in police possession by the time some lights were switched on, then off inside the farmhouse, police would have been somewhat foolish to simply approach the farmhouse and knock on the door and expect to get Sheila to give herself up, hand the rifle over, and free any hostages she might have been threatening with the rifle. Lights being turned off, then on in different parts of the farmhouse after the first arrival of police at the scene from 03.48hrs, onward, was a way of keeping track of a person, or people, who must have still been alive inside at these times. Until it started to get light with the onset of daylight. Then police had no idea whereabouts anyone alive inside might be, until WPC Jeapes saw 'the rifle' at the box room window at around 7.15am...
No sooner does 'sight' of 'the rifle' at the box room window appear, than the raid team are preparing to enter the farmhouse...
-
why would she wash her hands. She wiped the bloodied fingers of her right hand upon her own nightdress. There were also blood and marks on the top part of her right hand, as shown in a crime scene photograph, yet Cook and the other SOCO's all say that her hands were spotlessly clean. She obviously wiped the bloodied fingers of her right hand on her nightdress, and similar marks of blood staining were found on the pages of a bible which was photographed resting against Sheila's upper right / outside arm. The bloodied finger marks on the pages of the bible are important, because their presence there confirms that Sheila must have been handling the bible at some other point before police put it against her body when they staged her death scene. The presence of the bloodied finger marks on the front lower part of Sheila's nightdress, and the bloodied fingermarks of hers on the pages of the bible, were made when at some stage before police set about staging Sheila's death scene, Sheila herself had and must have 'wiped her hand' there at both locations. Her right hand, and in particular, the fingers she would have 'used' to pick up any additional rounds required or needed to carry out the shootings of the other four victims to be loaded into the gun, were obviously bloodstained. Now, what cannot be established is the precise moment that the fingers of her right hand got blood on them, or indeed, who's blood was present there? But there is a good chance that the blood in question got onto her right hand, and in particular the fingers of her right hand, before there arose the need to reload the gun with any additional rounds. Therefore in this circumstances, Sheila would have picked up the additional bullets and loaded these into the gun with use of her bloodied right hand thumb, and her bloodied index finger of the same hand. When she did this there must have been or infact was, an unnatural coating of blood on the corresponding fingers that she used to pick up bullets and load them into the gun. Any lead deposit which would ordinarily transfer onto a shooters fingers when handling and loading rounds into the gun in those circumstances would be absorbed in the blood on the fingers, and when Sheila wiped those same bloodied fingers (later on) upon the front lower part of her nightdress, and the pages of the bible, any lead which contaminated the blood there, would automatically be transferred onto the nightdress and the pages of the bible. SOCO's, Cook, Bird, Davidson and Hammersley have all testified that Sheila's hands were spotlessly clean when DC Hammersley took 'hand swabs', DRH/33, or if you like, DRH/44. Now, it must follow, that if Sheila's hands were spotlessly clean when DC Hammersley took those key hand swabs, that any lead deposit which had mixed with the blood on her fingers, had almost certainly been removed from the key fingers of her right hand, prior to the occasion when the key hand swabs were taken at the scene...
Verdict - Sheila's right hand and the fingers of the same hand, were cleaned at some stage between the last occasion she loaded the gun with additional rounds, and the taking of the hand swabs by DC Hammersley...
-
ive read dcs harris's statement and i cant see any where .where it says he used the phone to call acc for 15 mins at 8.15am
Refer to contents of police radio message logs, posted up on the forum...
-
The other points were not sufficient enough at his trial thou they would make an impression. At his original trial the Judge instructed the Jury they could find Jeremy guilty on three pieces of evidence. The blood in the silencer, the paint on the silencer and the testimony of July Mugford.
If you read the judges summing up its was the blood evidence that led to their decision. it can be found in the archive and library
if its true.its bad news the judge had no right to instruct them in that way.all the facts should have been looked at.
-
In my view, in order to resolve the presence of 'lead deposit' on Sheila's hands, it was necessary in all the circumstances to take other swabs in relation to the following, for comparisons to be made:-
(1) - trigger of anshuzt rifle
(2) - bloodied finger marks on nightdress
(3) - bloodied finger marks on pages of bible
(4) - fingerprint form of original fingerprints taken from Sheila Caffel
(5) - hand swabs taken from clean hands of Sheila Caffell
-
In my view, in order to resolve the presence of 'lead deposit' on Sheila's hands, it was necessary in all the circumstances to take other swabs in relation to the following, for comparisons to be made:-
(1) - trigger of anshuzt rifle
(2) - bloodied finger marks on nightdress
(3) - bloodied finger marks on pages of bible
(4) - fingerprint form of original fingerprints taken from Sheila Caffel
(5) - hand swabs taken from clean hands of Sheila Caffell
thats what they would do today mike.i like when you reply in red letters.'joke'
-
lets get one thing clear.the police are never off duty.if i was standing in a bank and a robber with a knife came in most people would try and remain out of harms reach.not so the police officer even if he was off duty he would tackle the robber'and not stand there with the frightend public.ITS MORE THAN JUST A JOB.for them its there way of life.iam proud of them.a few rotten apples will not make me change my mind.jb fooled a lot of officers that morning but not all of them.ie.DS JONES.the moral of the story is jb.you cant fool everyone
-
lets get one thing clear.the police are never off duty.if i was standing in a bank and a robber with a knife came in most people would try and remain out of harms reach.not so the police officer even if he was off duty he would tackle the robber'and not stand there with the frightend public.ITS MORE THAN JUST A JOB.for them its there way of life.iam proud of them.a few rotten apples will not make me change my mind.jb fooled a lot of officers that morning but not all of them.ie.DS JONES.the moral of the story is jb.you cant fool everyone
As with the off duty policeman in Clacton who was shot dead when he tried to apprehend the person responsible.
-
As with the off duty policeman in Clacton who was shot dead when he tried to apprehend the person responsible.
thank you jane.it only makes the news when one is killed but iam sure theres thousands of cases that havent resulted in death .therefor never get mentioned.brave men and women
-
thank you jane.it only makes the news when one is killed but iam sure theres thousands of cases that havent resulted in death .therefor never get mentioned.brave men and women
As with most things, Sami, my views tend to be middle if the road and as I'm naturally optimistic, I'm more likely to see the good in someone, as opposed to the bad. I'm aware that there exists corruption within the police -and every other agency one can name- but I don't believe most people join these agencies with the express intention of becoming corrupt. I've known enough police -in fact, there have been police in the family- to agree with you that it is a way of life and they're never "off duty," something which, on occasions, I've been grateful for.
-
As with most things, Sami, my views tend to be middle if the road and as I'm naturally optimistic, I'm more likely to see the good in someone, as opposed to the bad. I'm aware that there exists corruption within the police -and every other agency one can name- but I don't believe most people join these agencies with the express intention of becoming corrupt. I've known enough police -in fact, there have been police in the family- to agree with you that it is a way of life and they're never "off duty," something which, on occasions, I've been grateful for.
youre a good person jane.seeing the good in people is always the best route in life.there are our finest.for criminals there bad news but for us they are our knights in shining armour.
-
Reading information from different sources contained in reports and officers witness statements, it appears some lights inside the farmhouse were switched on and off between the police's first arrival at the scene at 3.48am and daybreak. Somebody must still have been alive inside the farmhouse moving around, and that person could not have been Jeremy Bamber because he was outside the farmhouse with the police at all times when different lights were described as being switched on, or off during the morning. It was one of the reasons which prevented the police from approaching the farmhouse because they knew with the contents of Ralph Bambers message to police earlier (03.26hrs) that 'his daughter had got one of my guns', and this information had also been rehearsed when Ralph had phoned his son Jeremy, a moment before, telling him that ' Sheila had got the gun'. Additionally, Jeremy had contacted the police himself at 03.36am, telling them that his 'father had phoned him', telling him that his sister 'had got the gun', and going was going 'crazy'. Certainly, with this collection of information in police possession by the time some lights were switched on, then off inside the farmhouse, police would have been somewhat foolish to simply approach the farmhouse and knock on the door and expect to get Sheila to give herself up, hand the rifle over, and free any hostages she might have been threatening with the rifle. Lights being turned off, then on in different parts of the farmhouse after the first arrival of police at the scene from 03.48hrs, onward, was a way of keeping track of a person, or people, who must have still been alive inside at these times. Until it started to get light with the onset of daylight. Then police had no idea whereabouts anyone alive inside might be, until WPC Jeapes saw 'the rifle' at the box room window at around 7.15am...
No sooner does 'sight' of 'the rifle' at the box room window appear, than the raid team are preparing to enter the farmhouse...
mike the statement of wpc jeapes .she only says she saw what' appeared ' to be a rifle.the fact she never mentioned it to anyone is because she coulnt be sure.if she had been sure she would have alerted the raid team who went in at 7.30am.they would surely want to know if a rifle had appeard by a window.does any one ealse make a mention of it mike
-
mike the statement of wpc jeapes .she only says she saw what' appeared ' to be a rifle.the fact she never mentioned it to anyone is because she coulnt be sure.if she had been sure she would have alerted the raid team who went in at 7.30am.they would surely want to know if a rifle had appeard by a window.does any one ealse make a mention of it mike
This rifle appears in the crime scene photos, exactly were WPC Jeapes said it was. seems you have allot of homework to do ;D
(http://s1.postimg.org/h03so0wtr/img030.jpg)
-
This rifle appears in the crime scene photos, exactly were WPC Jeapes said it was. seems you have allot of homework to do ;D
(http://s1.postimg.org/h03so0wtr/img030.jpg)
you also need to do some work.what part of the rifle in that photo did she see from 30 yards away.use your eyes and you will see that anyone outside would not be able to see enough of that rifle to say what it was .you think people are stupid.why did wpc jeapes not mention it to anyone .have you an answer for that.you seem to think you know everything on the case.i doubt that very much.you can clearly see in the photo that only about six ins of the barrel is visiable and that is if she was standing at the same height as the window she wasnt she was at least 30 yards away and at ground level.a six inch piece of tube is all she could have seen.ive read you want to be jb's lawer.he would sack you straight away.
-
you also need to do some work.what part of the rifle in that photo did she see from 30 yards away.use your eyes and you will see that anyone outside would not be able to see enough of that rifle to say what it was .you think people are stupid.why did wpc jeapes not mention it to anyone .have you an answer for that.you seem to think you know everything on the case.i doubt that very much
Not only did the same thought occur to me, but when I was contemplating placing something which "appeared to be a rifle" at the same angle at my own window to see what would be seen from outside, it also occurred to me that in order to facilitate the positioning of the WHF rifle, the curtains had been pulled so far back that it could look -from outside- as if there are no curtains.Why might this have happened when the gun could just as easily have rested against the correctly positioned curtains.
-
Not only did the same thought occur to me, but when I was contemplating placing something which "appeared to be a rifle" at the same angle at my own window to see what would be seen from outside, it also occurred to me that in order to facilitate the positioning of the WHF rifle, the curtains had been pulled so far back that it could look -from outside- as if there are no curtains.Why might this have happened when the gun could just as easily have rested against the correctly positioned curtains.
good point jane.i never thought of the curtains.
-
you also need to do some work.what part of the rifle in that photo did she see from 30 yards away.use your eyes and you will see that anyone outside would not be able to see enough of that rifle to say what it was .you think people are stupid.why did wpc jeapes not mention it to anyone .have you an answer for that.you seem to think you know everything on the case.i doubt that very much.you can clearly see in the photo that only about six ins of the barrel is visiable and that is if she was standing at the same height as the window she wasnt she was at least 30 yards away and at ground level.a six inch piece of tube is all she could have seen.ive read you want to be jb's lawer.he would sack you straight away.
Not only did the same thought occur to me, but when I was contemplating placing something which "appeared to be a rifle" at the same angle at my own window to see what would be seen from outside, it also occurred to me that in order to facilitate the positioning of the WHF rifle, the curtains had been pulled so far back that it could look -from outside- as if there are no curtains.Why might this have happened when the gun could just as easily have rested against the correctly positioned curtains.
Eye witness account of rifle besides window + crime scene photo of rifle in the exact same place as eye witness account stated.
Why bother trying to make up excuses for something beyond dispute?
(http://rummuser.com/wp-content/uploads/denial.jpg)
-
NO gunshot residue on her . No residue found on the trigger of the rifle...none on hands no residue on the trigger...none on nighty. no gun residue found on the trigger...the jury agreed with the ballistics expert that said had she fired 25 shots .there would have been massive amounts. These supposedly massive amounts would have ended up on the trigger of the rifle but there were non found on the trigger of the rifle at all, despite the claim that 25 bullets had supposedly been fired by way of activating it...yet not a trace . yes, it truly is remarkable that no gun residue or lead deposit was found on the trigger...read the experts report. refer me to where it makes mention of finding any gun residue or lead deposit on the trigger of the rifle in any of the super duper all embracing ballistics comic?
-
there were strange things happening that morning .bewes first thinking some one was at the window .wpc jeapes thinking she had seen a rifle at the window.plus the wrong report that a womans body was in the kitchen.
-
read the forensic report on sheila.it proves she didnt fire a gun.so what does the rifle near the window which was photoed from inside whf prove
Police state Sheila had clean hands, but she didn't, she had blood on her hands, and that blood was blood from the other victims that 'she' shot. Only one of the victims had blood on their hands and that was Sheila Caffell.Police went out of their way to try to deceive the jury that her hands were spotlessly clean, but we know they were saturated in blood, bloodied fingers which left trace evidence on the front lower part of her nightdress, on the pages of the bible, and there's a 50 / 50 chance the bloody fingermarks found on the edge of the worktop downstairs in the kitchen, were made by Sheila when she was reloading the gun with additional bullets, or as the case may be, when Ralph was making his call to Jeremy and the police at around 03.25 / 03.26am...
-
Eye witness account of rifle besides window + crime scene photo of rifle in the exact same place as eye witness account stated.
Why bother trying to make up excuses for something beyond dispute?
(http://rummuser.com/wp-content/uploads/denial.jpg)
what is beyond dispute.which eyewitness saw the rifle from outside whf.if your talking about wpc reapes than how could the rifle she saw in the window still be there and photos taken of it .who put it there sheila after shooting herself twice.photos of the rifle taken after entry to whf mean nothing
-
there were strange things happening that morning .bewes first thinking some one was at the window .wpc jeapes thinking she had seen a rifle at the window.plus the wrong report that a womans body was in the kitchen.
sami
I quite agree and why did Taff Jones say 4 murders one suicide after inspecting the crime scene he was a very experienced cop and one would have not expected him to come to that decision so quickly.
-
Eye witness account of rifle besides window + crime scene photo of rifle in the exact same place as eye witness account stated.
Why bother trying to make up excuses for something beyond dispute?
(http://rummuser.com/wp-content/uploads/denial.jpg)
David!!!!!!!!!!! What on earth make you think I'm in "the river" regarding the rifle somewhere near the window? I can see for myself that there's a rifle somewhere near the window. The picture shows me that there's a rifle somewhere near the window but from where that rifle is positioned in the picture I have real doubts about whether Jeapes could have seen it from where she was standing. Trouble is, David, I've been involved in enough photo shoots in my time to know I have to ask questions about what I see portrayed and I've seen enough hammy pictures on this forum to know that not everything presented as true, actually is. The first question I have to ask is WHEN was the rifle positioned thus? Then, who believed it necessary to pull the curtains back to where they were in order to position the rifle?
-
Police state Sheila had clean hands, but she didn't, she had blood on her hands, and that blood was blood from the other victims that 'she' shot. Only one of the victims had blood on their hands and that was Sheila Caffell.Police went out of their way to try to deceive the jury that her hands were spotlessly clean, but we know they were saturated in blood, bloodied fingers which left trace evidence on the front lower part of her nightdress, on the pages of the bible, and there's a 50 / 50 chance the bloody fingermarks found on the edge of the worktop downstairs in the kitchen, were made by Sheila when she was reloading the gun with additional bullets, or as the case may be, when Ralph was making his call to Jeremy and the police at around 03.25 / 03.26am...
was there a bloodie hand print found on the wallpaper in the stair passage near the kitchen
-
what is beyond dispute.which eyewitness saw the rifle from outside whf.if your talking about wpc reapes than how could the rifle she saw in the window still be there and photos taken of it .who put it there sheila after shooting herself twice.photos of the rifle taken after entry to whf mean nothing
Shelia could not have put it there after she shot herself twice. There were several guns kept in the gun cupboard including Anthony Pargeter's rifle. Put two and two together then you realise two rifles were used.
Unless you want to believe Mikes theory that Shelia left the rifle by the window then police shot her ::)
-
Eye witness account of rifle besides window + crime scene photo of rifle in the exact same place as eye witness account stated.
Why bother trying to make up excuses for something beyond dispute?
(http://rummuser.com/wp-content/uploads/denial.jpg)
its a bit funny .you say the rifle is in the exact place wpc reaves saw it and the photo proves it .but explain to me if that rifle never moved from the window how did sheila shoot herself twice and than replaced that rifle in the same place by the widow.she was dead on the floor.very funny david.i see i will have to read your posts with awareness.good laugh though
-
Shelia could not have put it there after she shot herself twice. There were several guns kept in the gun cupboard including Anthony Pargeter's rifle. Put two and two together then you realise two rifles were used.
Unless you want to believe Mikes theory that Shelia left the rifle by the window then police shot her ::)
we know that was the murder weapon blood and the broken stock.why would sheila play musical chairs with the rifles at whf .i mean why and how .sheila shoots herself dead with some other rifle than places it in the gun cupboard'than picks up the auto rifle and places it by the window or on herself.impossible.did mike say why the police would pick the rifle up from the window and shoot her.because mikes theory makes sheila still alive when found .why not phone an ambulance insted of trying to stage the rifle back on the body and shooting her by mistake.jb is the coldblooded killer.NOT.the police
-
we know that was the murder weapon blood and the broken stock.why would sheila plat musical chairs with the rifles at whf .i mean why and how .sheila shoots herself dead with some other rifle than places it in the gun cupboard'than picks up the auto rifle and places it by the window or on herself.impossible.did mike say why the police would pick the rifle up from the window and shoot her
If you actually thought it through instead of jumping to an impossible conclusion, The sequence of events would be Shelia runs out of ammunition in one rifle, then gets another rifle from the cupboard before she kills herself. Its rather easy to work out.
-
If you actually thought it through instead of jumping to an impossible conclusion, The sequence of events would be Shelia runs out of ammunition in one rifle, then gets another rifle from the cupboard before she kills herself. Its rather easy to work out.
ha ha ha ha ha that scenario is very funny.i hope your not serious.she takes the one that has run out of ammo back to the gun cupboard and picks another.all done while in a crazy rage.its what nevill told jb sheilas gone crazy.why did she not just reload the first rifle.after all she would have had to load the second one.NO firearms left in whf were loaded.being a ex magistrate nevill would not have broken the law by keep a loaded weapon in whf
-
ha ha ha ha ha that scenario is very funny.i hope your not serious.she takes the one that has run out of ammo back to the gun cupboard and picks another.all done while in a crazy rage.its what nevill told jb sheilas gone crazy.why did she not just reload the first rifle.after all she would have had to load the second one.NO firearms left in whf were loaded.being a ex magistrate nevill would not have broken the law by keep a loaded weapon in whf
sami would this scenario fit if Jeremy was the killer?
-
If you actually thought it through instead of jumping to an impossible conclusion, The sequence of events would be Shelia runs out of ammunition in one rifle, then gets another rifle from the cupboard before she kills herself. Its rather easy to work out.
Last week some said they hope I will stop lurking and post more. People like you are why I don't bother. When people post you rudely attack them. In this topic you just accused people of jumping to impossible conclusions and living in denial.
There was only a single rifle at the farm. The other firearms were shotguns. That single rifle was use to fire all bullets that injured the victims. The shotguns were not used. Your suggestion of Sheila using another rifle is what is an impossible conclusion under the circumstances.
You did the same thing when you suggested people were living in denial for ignoring that WPS Jeapes saw the murder weapon in the window of the bedroom. Countless times it has been discussed here that WPS Jeapes was looking in the window of the boxroom not the bedroom window. Her statement at most establishes she was something that looked like a rifle barrel in the boxroom window. Instead of being rude to people perhaps you would be better served by considering the actual facts. It is an impossibility that WPS Jeapes saw the murder weapon or anything else in the bedroom window given she was not in a position to even see the bedroom window and was referring to the boxroom window.
All I can say to those here who have the patience to challenge rude supporters who post the same false claims ad nauseam, is you are amazing chaps.
-
sami would this scenario fit if Jeremy was the killer?
susan.its just my opinion.but i dont think he would be running back and forth from the back office changing rifles. i feel he would have carried the ammo on him and only used the rifle found.it was the best weapon to kill with being a semi auto.so the answer is no it wouldnt fit jb
-
I like 'The Matrix'
When they run out of ammo on one gun, they chuck it and just start using another one which is on their person. While at the same time dodging bullets.
Neo really was 'The one'. But could he take on Luke Skywalker ?
-
Last week some said they hope I will stop lurking and post more. People like you are why I don't bother. When people post you rudely attack them. In this topic you just accused people of jumping to impossible conclusions and living in denial.
There was only a single rifle at the farm. The other firearms were shotguns. That single rifle was use to fire all bullets that injured the victims. The shotguns were not used. Your suggestion of Sheila using another rifle is what is an impossible conclusion under the circumstances.
You did the same thing when you suggested people were living in denial for ignoring that WPS Jeapes saw the murder weapon in the window of the bedroom. Countless times it has been discussed here that WPS Jeapes was looking in the window of the boxroom not the bedroom window. Her statement at most establishes she was something that looked like a rifle barrel in the boxroom window. Instead of being rude to people perhaps you would be better served by considering the actual facts. It is an impossibility that WPS Jeapes saw the murder weapon or anything else in the bedroom window given she was not in a position to even see the bedroom window and was referring to the boxroom window.
All I can say to those here who have the patience to challenge rude supporters who post the same false claims ad nauseam, is you are amazing chaps.
:)David is one of the more polite posters on here.
-
Last week some said they hope I will stop lurking and post more. People like you are why I don't bother. When people post you rudely attack them. In this topic you just accused people of jumping to impossible conclusions and living in denial.
There was only a single rifle at the farm. The other firearms were shotguns. That single rifle was use to fire all bullets that injured the victims. The shotguns were not used. Your suggestion of Sheila using another rifle is what is an impossible conclusion under the circumstances.
You did the same thing when you suggested people were living in denial for ignoring that WPS Jeapes saw the murder weapon in the window of the bedroom. Countless times it has been discussed here that WPS Jeapes was looking in the window of the boxroom not the bedroom window. Her statement at most establishes she was something that looked like a rifle barrel in the boxroom window. Instead of being rude to people perhaps you would be better served by considering the actual facts. It is an impossibility that WPS Jeapes saw the murder weapon or anything else in the bedroom window given she was not in a position to even see the bedroom window and was referring to the boxroom window.
All I can say to those here who have the patience to challenge rude supporters who post the same false claims ad nauseam, is you are amazing chaps.
very well said lemonhead.every ones view is they opinion.so being rude to someone will only stop them posting.and we will all be the poorer for that 'by reading all opinions our knowledge will grow .so very good point.
-
If you actually thought it through instead of jumping to an impossible conclusion, The sequence of events would be Shelia runs out of ammunition in one rifle, then gets another rifle from the cupboard before she kills herself. Its rather easy to work out.
. I think you have been watching too many Rambo films David? Why would the police hide the fact Sheila used another rifle?
-
. I think you have been watching too many Rambo films David? Why would the police hide the fact Sheila used another rifle?
perhaps they did not know? They just jumped to their conclusions and did not look for anything else. The housekeeper said the shotgun was not out where the police found it - so someone may have been to the gun cupboard after Neville put everything away?
-
perhaps they did not know? They just jumped to their conclusions and did not look for anything else. The housekeeper said the shotgun was not out where the police found it - so someone may have been to the gun cupboard after Neville put everything away?
yes that someone was jb.use his name insted of useing the word someone.
-
perhaps they did not know? They just jumped to their conclusions and did not look for anything else. The housekeeper said the shotgun was not out where the police found it - so someone may have been to the gun cupboard after Neville put everything away?
Sorry Jan don't get this no offence, are you saying the shotgun was used or are you saying another rifle was used then hid from police by either Sheila or Jeremy? Or are you saying another rifle was used and left out but the police missed it? Why would Sheila hide a rifle if she used 2?
-
Sorry Jan don't get this no offence, are you saying the shotgun was used or are you saying another rifle was used then hid from police by either Sheila or Jeremy? Or are you saying another rifle was used and left out but the police missed it? Why would Sheila hide a rifle if she used 2?
No- not saying that at all . I am here for discussion not just trying to prove a point.
what I am saying is that its obvious the police were not thorough . I am personally not convinced by AP story about his rifle not being there and I don't understand about where the extra ammunition came from .
-
Sorry Jan don't get this no offence, are you saying the shotgun was used or are you saying another rifle was used then hid from police by either Sheila or Jeremy? Or are you saying another rifle was used and left out but the police missed it? Why would Sheila hide a rifle if she used 2?
good point if your going to kill yourself.what does it matter where the rifle is found.no reason to hide it.
-
ha ha ha ha ha that scenario is very funny.i hope your not serious.she takes the one that has run out of ammo back to the gun cupboard and picks another.all done while in a crazy rage.its what nevill told jb sheilas gone crazy.why did she not just reload the first rifle.after all she would have had to load the second one.NO firearms left in whf were loaded.being a ex magistrate nevill would not have broken the law by keep a loaded weapon in whf
No read my post correctly, I shall elaborate. She runs out ammunition hence leaves that rife by the window then picks up the other rife to continue the shooting and turn that gun on herself. So you have one rifle by the windows and the other rifle across her body as the crime scene photos indicate.
Nevertheless one could argue Jeremy could have used both rifles.
-
good point if your going to kill yourself.what does it matter where the rifle is found.no reason to hide it.
Who said it was hidden? they left the family to collect the guns up . they were only interested in the one on her body.
-
No read my post correctly, I shall elaborate. She runs out ammunition hence leaves that rife by the window then picks up the other rife to continue the shooting and turn that gun on herself. So you have one rifle by the windows and the other rifle across her body as the crime scene photos indicate.
Nevertheless one could argue Jeremy could have used both rifles.
Ok so why would the police say one rifle was used when there were clearly 2 in your opinion?
-
Who said it was hidden? they left the family to collect the guns up . they were only interested in the one on her body.
So what did they do or think of the other rifle just laying around?
-
No read my post correctly, I shall elaborate. She runs out ammunition hence leaves that rife by the window then picks up the other rife to continue the shooting and turn that gun on herself. So you have one rifle by the windows and the other rifle across her body as the crime scene photos indicate.
Nevertheless one could argue Jeremy could have used both rifles.
where is the other rifle lemonhead has already told you there was only one rifle found at whf.read the post lemonhead has posted to you.if you can show me the police report saying more than one rifle was found at whf.and where did it disappear to.next youll be saying one of the firearms officers took it as a souvenier
-
If anyone reads Malcolm Fletchers report, after a microscopical comparison I am satisfied that the 25 cartridge case were fired by the rifle, he then goes on to say the cartridge cases bear the same marks as having been loaded into the same magazine.
-
. I think you have been watching too many Rambo films David? Why would the police hide the fact Sheila used another rifle?
I have only seen the Rambo trilogy once, I was not impressed. my favourite 80s classic is Predator.
Did they believe they were hiding the fact Shelia used two rifles or did they believe they were hiding the fact Jeremy used two rifles? who knows.
Essex police dismantled the crime scene and closed the case. A month later they have to put it all back together again and to save their own skin cut corners in doing so. The photo of the rifle by the window was only disclosed over two decades later, bit by bit Jeremy's legal team get more withheld
evidence given to them as time goes by, That indicates to me that major players in Essex police that were involved are retiering or passing away making it easier to obtain this information as the younger generation who now run Essex police don't personally have anything to worry about. The police hiding facts in my opinion is to prevent the embarrassment of the way they handled the situation.
-
If anyone reads Malcolm Fletchers report, after a microscopical comparison I am satisfied that the 25 cartridge case were fired by the rifle, he then goes on to say the cartridge cases bear the same marks as having been loaded into the same magazine.
that crystal clear justice .but i dont think david has read it.or just ignores it
-
I have only seen the Rambo trilogy once, I was not impressed. my favourite 80s classic is Predator.
Did they believe they were hiding the fact Shelia used two rifles or did they believe they were hiding the fact Jeremy used two rifles? who knows.
Essex police dismantled the crime scene and closed the case. A month later they have to put it all back together again and to save their own skin cut corners in doing so. The photo of the rifle by the window was only disclosed over two decades later, bit by bit Jeremy's legal team get more withheld
evidence given to them as time goes by, That indicates to me that major players in Essex police that were involved are retiering or passing away making it easier to obtain this information as the younger generation who now run Essex police don't personally have anything to worry about. The police hiding facts in my opinion is to prevent the embarrassment of the way they handled the situation.
Hi David was only joking about Rambo, you look the sort who doesn't take offence, not defending Essex police I have seen the firearms team in action in 2007 and make a cock up, li actually got chased in a mix up by them, just don't think they would hide the fact 2 rifles were used.
-
No read my post correctly, I shall elaborate. She runs out ammunition hence leaves that rife by the window then picks up the other rife to continue the shooting and turn that gun on herself. So you have one rifle by the windows and the other rifle across her body as the crime scene photos indicate.
Nevertheless one could argue Jeremy could have used both rifles.
How could Jeremy have used 2 rifles when only 1 rifle was at the scene? He would have to have brought another with him and left with it. He didn't own a rifle of his own to bring and nothing suggests he borrowed one from a chap. Given the circumstances if Jeremy had borrowed a rifle the owner would have contacted the police to say he had borrowed it.
Since a single rifle was at the scene police would have been thrilled if the lab had determined multiple rifles had been used and one was missing from the scene. That would prove someone else had been at the scene and left with the rifle.
-
Hi David was only joking about Rambo, you look the sort who doesn't take offence, not defending Essex police I have seen the firearms team in action in 2007 and make a cock up, li actually got chased in a mix up by them, just don't think they would hide the fact 2 rifles were used.
I know ;D maybe Jeremy was watching too much Rambo?
Put it this way
1. Jeremy writes out a map of the house and colour codes the walls, He marks the front of the rouse with an R for red.
2. WPC Jeapes in her writes before the raid team broke in. "I saw that the front door of the farm was shut and that a light was on in the room to the right of this which I understood was the kitchen. I could also see a window one the first floor of white/red side were the building is clad in grey brick in which was what appeared to be a rifle leaning against the window"
3. A photo taken from the stairs then shows a rifle leaning against the window of the main bedroom exactly as jeapes described.
4. You then have discrepancies of when the laboratory received the weapon/s one statement has testing being done on the rifle yet other statements claiming they first received the rifle weeks after they first tested the rife ???
All these points on their own raise eyebrows but put them together to find they all corroborate one another it would be a remarkable coincidence that defies reasonable probability if only one rifle was used. I don't think this can be ignored and should be seriously considered
-
Much has been made of the fact that two rifles were used but thus far no proof of it has been forthcoming. Wrong, evidence suggesting at least two different weapons 'had' been used, possibly as many as three of four, can be found by reference to the number of weapons which police 'fingerprinted' as part of their investigation, namely, the 12 bore shotgun, the .22 semi - automatic anshuzt rifle, and the .22 BSA air rifle... Nor is there proof that Nevill kept a rifle under his bed. Well, according to what Jeremy told police he did. The thing is however, on the morning of the incident when police searched the farmhouse they did not see or find such a loaded shotgun beneath the bed in the main bedroom. The shotgun in question was literally found in the gun cupboard of 'The Den', and was found to have an empty 12 bore cartridge case still lodged in its breach, suggesting someone must have fired it but not ejected or removed the spent cartridge immediately after firing it. Police took an interest in this shotgun because a locally based resident had reportedly heard the sound of a shotgun being discharged once from the direction and the vicinity of white house farm sometime between 9.30pm and 10.15pm, on the evening of the 6th August 1985... I believe a single print of Sheila's was found on THE rifle her prints were also found on the 12 bore Shotgun, and the .22 BSA air rifle... but I have no recall of proof of her prints being on A rifle. Well, its not surprising that her fingerprints were not found all over the anshuzt rifle, because it was manually handled by the police who moved it from its starting point at the box room window, brought it to Sheila's body and placed it on her body, as part of 'a gauging exercise' designed to clarify whether or not Sheila could have fired 'that' rifle at the time the other four victims were shot and killed. It is very interesting to note in some of the crime scene photographs, that Sheila's right hand is resting on top of the rifles ammunition magazine, yet none of her fingerprints were found there...
BTW, if you're not interested in what the forensic report say, does one presume you to be interested only in rumour?
-
I know ;D maybe Jeremy was watching too much Rambo?
Put it this way
1. Jeremy writes out a map of the house and colour codes the walls, He marks the front of the rouse with an R for red.
2. WPC Jeapes in her writes before the raid team broke in. "I saw that the front door of the farm was shut and that a light was on in the room to the right of this which I understood was the kitchen. I could also see a window one the first floor of white/red side were the building is clad in grey brick in which was what appeared to be a rifle leaning against the window"
3. A photo taken from the stairs then shows a rifle leaning against the window of the main bedroom exactly as jeapes described.
4. You then have discrepancies of when the laboratory received the weapon/s one statement has testing being done on the rifle yet other statements claiming they first received the rifle weeks after they first tested the rife ???
All these points on their own raise eyebrows but put them together to find they all corroborate one another it would be a remarkable coincidence that defies reasonable probability if only one rifle was used. I don't think this can be ignored and should be seriously considered
In the location where the rifle is in the photo it can't be seen by someone outside on the ground. It is to the side not directly in front of the window. Arguing any of the police standing outside observed the rifle while it was in the exact position in the photograph is sheer fallacy.
To make matters worse though you keep raising an alleged sighting that took place in the boxroom window. The window clad in grey above the kitchen is the boxroom not the bedroom. WPS Jeapes was looking at the boxroom window.
-
was there a bloodie hand print found on the wallpaper in the stair passage near the kitchen
I believe it was found on the wall near the top of the main stairs - 'O' type blood...
-
I know ;D maybe Jeremy was watching too much Rambo?
Put it this way
1. Jeremy writes out a map of the house and colour codes the walls, He marks the front of the rouse with an R for red.
2. WPC Jeapes in her writes before the raid team broke in. "I saw that the front door of the farm was shut and that a light was on in the room to the right of this which I understood was the kitchen. I could also see a window one the first floor of white/red side were the building is clad in grey brick in which was what appeared to be a rifle leaning against the window"
3. A photo taken from the stairs then shows a rifle leaning against the window of the main bedroom exactly as jeapes described.
4. You then have discrepancies of when the laboratory received the weapon/s one statement has testing being done on the rifle yet other statements claiming they first received the rifle weeks after they first tested the rife ???
All these points on their own raise eyebrows but put them together to find they all corroborate one another it would be a remarkable coincidence that defies reasonable probability if only one rifle was used. I don't think this can be ignored and should be seriously considered
I thought this had been cleared up and all been through several times David, she is looking at the kitchen side and the door that the police made an entry through, the bedroom she is looking at is the box room.
-
In the location where the rifle is in the photo it can't be seen by someone outside on the ground. It is to the side not directly in front of the window. Arguing any of the police standing outside observed the rifle while it was in the exact position in the photograph is sheer fallacy.
To make matters worse though you keep raising an alleged sighting that took place in the boxroom window. The window clad in grey above the kitchen is the boxroom not the bedroom. WPS Jeapes was looking at the boxroom window.
thank you lemonhead.i didnt notice that
-
In the location where the rifle is in the photo it can't be seen by someone outside on the ground. It is to the side not directly in front of the window. Arguing any of the police standing outside observed the rifle while it was in the exact position in the photograph is sheer fallacy.
To make matters worse though you keep raising an alleged sighting that took place in the boxroom window. The window clad in grey above the kitchen is the boxroom not the bedroom. WPS Jeapes was looking at the boxroom window.
Correct Lemonhead
-
Mike, my congratulations once again on your clever use of words. I say there is no evidence re..............you tell me "there is evidence to suggest......................" and "the police took an interest in because ..............." I say there is no evidence that Nevill kept a rifle under his bed, you tell me "according to Jeremy................." and you give the reason there is NO proof that Sheila's prints were on "A rifle" as being because "it was manually handled by the police............." and you've managed it all without actually providing one piece of hard evidence.
-
Mike, my congratulations once again on your clever use of words. I say there is no evidence re..............you tell me "there is evidence to suggest......................" and "the police took an interest in because ..............." I say there is no evidence that Nevill kept a rifle under his bed, you tell me "according to Jeremy................." and you give the reason there is NO proof that Sheila's prints were on "A rifle" as being because "it was manually handled by the police............." and you've managed it all without actually providing one piece of hard evidence.
that is funny jane youre very witty.love reading your posts.keep up the good work.
-
Mike, my congratulations once again on your clever use of words. I say there is no evidence re..............you tell me "there is evidence to suggest......................" and "the police took an interest in because ..............." I say there is no evidence that Nevill kept a rifle under his bed, you tell me "according to Jeremy................." and you give the reason there is NO proof that Sheila's prints were on "A rifle" as being because "it was manually handled by the police............." and you've managed it all without actually providing one piece of hard evidence.
You left out that he claims any firearm that was fingerprinted was used because otherwise the police would not have fingerprinted it. Thus instead of using the scientific test of matching the projectiles and spent cases to the weapon they were fired from, he uses the fanciful notion that police were omniscient and simply knew which weapons were used and fingerprinted all those used.
-
You left out that he claims any firearm that was fingerprinted was used because otherwise the police would not have fingerprinted it. Thus instead of using the scientific test of matching the projectiles and spent cases to the weapon they were fired from, he uses the fanciful notion that police were omniscient and simply knew which weapons were used and fingerprinted all those used.
Ooops!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ^-^
-
that is funny jane youre very witty.love reading your posts.keep up the good work.
You're very kind, Sami.......................sadly, I don't think Adam would agree ^-^
-
I thought this had been cleared up and all been through several times David, she is looking at the kitchen side and the door that the police made an entry through, the bedroom she is looking at is the box room.
thank you justice.now does that also means the photo mike and david keep mentioning the rifle is in the master bedroom.ie.nevill and junes room.if yes than its like i said that photo proves nothing.
-
You're very kind, Sami.......................sadly, I don't think Adam would agree ^-^
Go post in a thread Adam started so he can take credit for your work.
-
I thought this had been cleared up and all been through several times David, she is looking at the kitchen side and the door that the police made an entry through, the bedroom she is looking at is the box room.
I am satisfied at 'this' stage, that WPC Julia Jeapes, saw the rifle when it first appeared at one of the first floor windows, at 7.15am, that 'it' was the ' box room window', to which she was referring to. I argued until I was blue in the face that she had seen the rifle resting against the inside of the main bedroom window, but the truth is she saw it inside the box room window...
The real truth which many appear unable to grasp, is 'how' and under what circumstance, did 'that' rifle from its 'starting position' at the box room window, find its way onto Sheila's body, after 10.13am, when just prior to police photographing 'it' on her body as per crime scene photographs, numbered, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, 'the rifle' was 'photographed' leaning at the inside of the main bedroom window, as per crime scene photograph, No. 23...
We therefore know, with absolute certainty, that 'the' anshuzt rifle, had been 'resting' against the box room window at 7.15am, that at around 10.13am it had found its way to 'its' place against the main bedroom window, as per photo' No. 23, before eventually ending up on top of Sheila's body a short time later, to enable PC Bird to take photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, now showing 'that very same rifle', upon Sheila's body, designed to show how she 'had' taken her own life...
Clearly, without doubt, the rifle which is being said to have fired 'both of the bullets' that injured and killed Sheila Caffell, had journeyed from the box room window, at around 7.15am, to main bedroom window, at 10.13am, and then onto Sheila's body, afterwards...
-
thank you justice.now does that also means the photo mike and david keep mentioning the rifle is in the master bedroom.ie.nevill and junes room.if yes than its like i said that photo proves nothing.
The photo is taken from the stairs so has to be the bedroom June and Nevill used. The boxroom is not near any stairs.
-
I believe it was found on the wall near the top of the main stairs - 'O' type blood...
who had o type blood group mike
-
I am satisfied at 'this' stage, that WPC Julia Jeapes, saw the rifle when it first appeared at one of the first floor windows, at 7.15am, that 'it' was the ' box room window', to which she was referring to. I argued until I was blue in the face that she had seen the rifle resting against the inside of the main bedroom window, but the truth is she saw it inside the box room window...
The real truth which many appear unable to grasp, is 'how' and under what circumstance, did 'that' rifle from its 'starting position' at the box room window, find its way onto Sheila's body, after 10.13am, when just prior to police photographing 'it' on her body as per crime scene photographs, numbered, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, 'the rifle' was 'photographed' leaning at the inside of the main bedroom window, as per crime scene photograph, No. 23...
We therefore know, with absolute certainty, that 'the' anshuzt rifle, had been 'resting' against the box room window at 7.15am, that at around 10.13am it had found its way to 'its' place against the main bedroom window, as per photo' No. 23, before eventually ending up on top of Sheila's body a short time later, to enable PC Bird to take photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, now showing 'that very same rifle', upon Sheila's body, designed to show how she 'had' taken her own life...
Clearly, without doubt, the rifle which is being said to have fired 'both of the bullets' that injured and killed Sheila Caffell, had journeyed from the box room window, at around 7.15am, to main bedroom window, at 10.13am, and then onto Sheila's body, afterwards...
How do we know WPS Jeapes saw the rifle used to kill everyone in the boxroom window? She said she saw what appeared to be the barrel of a rifle. That doesn't prove what she saw actually was the barrel of a rifle let alone the barrel of the rifle used in the killings. If she was certain she saw the rifle used in the killings then instead of saying it appeared to be a rifle barrel she would have definitively stated she saw the barrel of the rifle used in the killings sitting against the window. Do you have a crime scene photo of the boxroom so we can see if there was anything near the window?
-
How do we know WPS Jeapes saw the rifle used to kill everyone in the boxroom window? She said she saw what appeared to be the barrel of a rifle. That doesn't prove what she saw actually was the barrel of a rifle let alone the barrel of the rifle used in the killings. If she was certain she saw the rifle used in the killings then instead of saying it appeared to be a rifle barrel she would have definitively stated she saw the barrel of the rifle used in the killings sitting against the window. Do you have a crime scene photo of the boxroom so we can see if there was anything near the window?
another good point lemonhead.she also would have alerted the raid team .not a single member of the firearms team mentions wpc jeapes seeing a rifle.it would have been vital infomation for them as they would then have approached that room with extra care.all she could see would be about 6ins of what looked like a round tube .from that distance it might well look like a broom handle
-
another good point lemonhead.she also would have alerted the raid team .not a single member of the firearms team mentions wpc jeapes seeing a rifle.it would have been vital infomation for them as they would then have approached that room with extra care.all she could see would be about 6ins of what looked like a round tube .from that distance it might well look like a broom handle
It sounds as if we all may be thinking that what Jeapes uttered was a throw away line which she didn't consider important enough to expand on and share.
-
another good point lemonhead.she also would have alerted the raid team .not a single member of the firearms team mentions wpc jeapes seeing a rifle.it would have been vital infomation for them as they would then have approached that room with extra care.all she could see would be about 6ins of what looked like a round tube .from that distance it might well look like a broom handle
Not only that Sami a trained officer would have kept an eye on any rifle in a window?
-
Not only that Sami a trained officer would have kept an eye on any rifle in a window?
yes true again justice.the raid team would want to know straight away from the watcher if it moved while they forced entry.
-
another good point lemonhead.she also would have alerted the raid team .not a single member of the firearms team mentions wpc jeapes seeing a rifle.it would have been vital infomation for them as they would then have approached that room with extra care.all she could see would be about 6ins of what looked like a round tube .from that distance it might well look like a broom handle
The lot of them should have gone to Spec-Savers with what was missed or " they didn't see " !
-
I thought this had been cleared up and all been through several times David, she is looking at the kitchen side and the door that the police made an entry through, the bedroom she is looking at is the box room.
There was clearly a great deal of confusion about which 'colour sides' of the farmhouse WPC Julia Jeapes 'believed' was 'white' and 'red' sides, when she was talking about the front door of the farmhouse, and the kitchen window of the farmhouse? One unifying feature being when she spoke about being 'at the corner of white red', it mattered not which side was 'white', and which side was 'red', or 'vice versa', at 'that' stage...
-
In the location where the rifle is in the photo it can't be seen by someone outside on the ground. It is to the side not directly in front of the window.
Go to WHF put a rifle in the same position then look outside from the ground while at night and if it cannot be seen I shall except it cannot be seen.
To make matters worse though you keep raising an alleged sighting that took place in the boxroom window. The window clad in grey above the kitchen is the boxroom not the bedroom. WPS Jeapes was looking at the boxroom window.
No WPS Jeapes was not looking in the box room.
I saw that the front door of the farm was shut and that a light was on in the room to the right of this which I understood was the kitchen. Jeapes is at the front door seeing it shut, then is under the impression the room to right is the kitchen. The room the right of the front door is not the kitchen. hence the term "which I understood was the kitchen"
"I could also see a window one the first floor of white/red side were the building is clad in grey brick in which was what appeared to be a rifle leaning against the window" This sentence begins after a full stop no conjunction or connectives therefore this sentence alone is not part of a clause together with what is said before it in a linier sense as you interpret it.
Then we have the photo illustrating exactly what was described by WPC Jeapes.
-
Not only that Sami a trained officer would have kept an eye on any rifle in a window?
Yes, they did, until after the firearms officers entered the farmhouse safely - rifle was still resting against the box room window...
-
It sounds as if we all may be thinking that what Jeapes uttered was a throw away line which she didn't consider important enough to expand on and share.
Before writing her statement she was shown the photo of the rifle. I'm thinking she didn't realize it was the rifle the raid team said was on Sheila's body, assumed it was some other rifle that had always been in that location, incorrectly thought it was the window she had been looking at and this all conflated to cause her to have a false recollection of seeing what appeared to be a rifle barrel.
-
Anything would have been seen with the light blazing. The place was lit up.
-
Yes, they did, until after the firearms officers entered the farmhouse safely - rifle was still resting against the box room window...
is there a crime scene photo of it in the boxroom.also mike who in the family had type o blood
-
I saw that the front door of the farm was shut and that a light was on in the room to the right of this which I understood was the kitchen. Jeapes is at the front door seeing it, then is under the impression the room to right is the kitchen. The room the right of the front door is not the kitchen. hence the term "which I understood was the kitchen"
I agree with the logic, but it is actually more in Jeremy's favour, if the barrel of the rifle to which WPC Jeapes refers, was resting against ' the box room window', rather than resting against the 'main bedroom window', as per photo' 23. This is because there is an extra explanation required for how the rifle in question moved the 'extra distance' from 'a different bedroom' into the main bedroom...
-
Yes, they did, until after the firearms officers entered the farmhouse safely - rifle was still resting against the box room window...
So how did it end up on Sheila?
-
So how did it end up on Sheila?
Well, it was not used to shoot the female who had apparently died downstairs in the main kitchen, as described, in the police radio phone log contents, between 7.37am, and 7.45am, during which time, 'the police', were talking in terms of 'two bodies', not one. A fact further established by reference to 'one of these two bodies' being 'male', and the 'second body' having been 'a dead female'. One of these two bodies, not only being of 'opposite sex' origin, but also by 7.45 am, that 'one of these two bodies' being described as 'a murder', the other being described as a 'suicide'...
-
mike please please tell me .who in the family had type o blood .ive asked you 4 times.i cant find it anywhere
-
mike please please tell me .who in the family had type o blood .ive asked you 4 times.i cant find it anywhere
Ralph Bamber, and the two child victims...
-
How do we know WPS Jeapes saw the rifle used to kill everyone in the boxroom window? She said she saw what appeared to be the barrel of a rifle. That doesn't prove what she saw actually was the barrel of a rifle let alone the barrel of the rifle used in the killings. If she was certain she saw the rifle used in the killings then instead of saying it appeared to be a rifle barrel she would have definitively stated she saw the barrel of the rifle used in the killings sitting against the window. Do you have a crime scene photo of the boxroom so we can see if there was anything near the window?
Your saying I should interpret the first sentence what Jeapes sais as saying the box room when Jeapes does not even know where the kitchen is or seems to be confused between the what door is which. then I should conveniently ignore the second sentence describing the gun leaning against the window upstairs. Then conveniently ignore the photo showing exactly what Jeapes described as a bizzare coincidence?
I'm not very confident in accepting this ::)
-
I don't know how to post within a quote so am just going to use quotation marks.
Quote:
"Go to WHF put a rifle in the same position then look outside from the ground while at night and if it cannot be seen I shall except it cannot be seen."
Response:
Is WHF some magical place where the laws of nature cease to exist? A rifle placed in that manner next to a first floor window will not be able to be seen from the ground unless the walls are made of glass. While there are some buildings made for voyeurs and exhibitionists that have glass walls WHF certainly is not one of them.
Quote:
"Jeapes is at the front door seeing it shut, then is under the impression the room to right is the kitchen. The room the right of the front door is not the kitchen. hence the term "which I understood was the kitchen"
Response
Jeapes referred to the kitchen door as the front door because so far as she knew she was at the front of the house. She said she witnessed the raid team enter the door she was looking at. They entered the kitchen.
Quote:
I could also see a window one the first floor of white/red side were the building is clad in grey brick in which was what appeared to be a rifle leaning against the window
"This sentence begins after a full stop no conjunction or connectives therefore this sentence alone is not part of a clause together with what is said before it in a linier sense as you interpret it."
Response:
WPS Jeapes was at the containment location facing the kitchen. From that perspective there is but a single first floor window clad in grey. That is why she selected the description of it being clad in grey. All 3 first floor windows at the front of the house are clad in grey so stating it was clad in grey would not assist in narrowing down which window she was referring to. There is no question she was at the kitchen side looking at the kitchen door and referring to the boxroom window.
Quote:
"Then we have the photo illustrating exactly what was described by WPC Jeapes."
Response:
The photo doesn't illustrate what WPS Jeapes claimed at all. The photo is of the rifle in a different room than WPS Jeapes was looking at and rifle is not leaning against the window it is against the wall thus out of sight from the ground.
Moreover, you ignore that this photo was taken hours later after the gun was removed from her body. The raid team and police brass who entered prior to the crime scene personnel all say the rifle was across Sheila's body not in this location. The photo was taken after the rifle was removed from her body and left there as they got ready to lift her body to look at her back. It is baffling how you could think this photo supports the rifle being against the bedroom window when the raid team and police brass entered.
-
Your saying I should interpret the first sentence what Jeapes sais as saying the box room when Jeapes does not even know where the kitchen is or seems to be confused between the what door is which. then I should conveniently ignore the second sentence describing the gun leaning against the window upstairs. Then conveniently ignore the photo showing exactly what Jeapes described as a bizzare coincidence?
I'm not very confident in accepting this ::)
WPS Jeapes among other police called the kitchen side the front of the house because police were treating it as the front and the other sides as sides. They set up their command post facing the kitchen side and chose that side to enter. She references being near a barn which is facing the kitchen. There is no question she was at the kitchen side, she witnessed the raid team enter and only from the kitchen side could one do this. Moments ago Mike even conceded WPS Jeapes was at the kitchen side looking in the boxroom window.
-
Ralph Bamber, and the two child victims...
thank you mike .good you earlier posted to me a statement saying .only sheila had blood on her hand and no one ealse.so how could nevill blooded hand print be found on the wall paper.sorry mike can you explain that
-
It was possible that Neville's DNA was on the silencer,along with June's-----------not Sheila's.
-
thank you mike .good you earlier posted to me a statement say .only sheila had blood on her hand and no one ealse.so how could nevill blooded hand print be found on the wall paper.sorry mike can you explain that
I think there was blood on the downstairs hallway outside the kitchen but have never seen a picture of this location.
-
thank you mike .good you earlier posted to me a statement saying .only sheila had blood on her hand and no one ealse.so how could nevill blooded hand print be found on the wall paper.sorry mike can you explain that
Well, the presence of 'O' type blood on the wall paper near the top of the main stairs, could have originated from one of three, or two or more of the three victims who were 'O' blood type donors. But their blood could easily have been carried into position upon Sheila Caffells own hands...
-
Well, the presence of 'O' type blood on the wall paper near the top of the main stairs, could have originated from one of three, or two or more of the three victims who were 'O' blood type donors. But their blood could easily have been carried into position upon Sheila Caffells own hands...
the 3 victims being the twins or nb.how would sheila transfer the blood she would be holding that rifle.and you know as well as i do it was nb's blooded handprint.come on mike
-
the 3 victims being the twins or rb.how would sheila transfer the blood she would be holding that rifle.and you know as well as i do it was rb's blooded handprint.come on mike
Do you mean Nevill Sami?
-
Do you mean Nevill Sami?
yes. thank you caroline
-
the 3 victims being the twins or rb.how would sheila transfer the blood she would be holding that rifle.and you know as well as i do it was rb's blooded handprint. No, I don't. It cannot even be deciphered as to whether or not the bloodstain you are referring to, was made when the person who's hand made the marks in question, was going 'downstairs', or coming back 'upstairs'. It is just as likely, if not almost certain, that 'this' bloodstain on the wallpaper of the stairs could have been made when Sheila fled upstairs after 8.10am, to become the fourth victims body which ended upstairs, after having originally being accounted for, downstairs, at a time when she had no rifle in her possession at all when she made her way up the stairs...come on mike
So, who's bloodied fingerprints were on Sheila's nightdress, and on the pages of the bible, and on the edge of the kitchen worktop? Were these bloodied fingermarks belonging to Mr Bamber senior?
-
WPS Jeapes among other police called the kitchen side the front of the house because police were treating it as the front and the other sides as sides. They set up their command post facing the kitchen side and chose that side to enter. She references being near a barn which is facing the kitchen. There is no question she was at the kitchen side, she witnessed the raid team enter and only from the kitchen side could one do this. Moments ago Mike even conceded WPS Jeapes was at the kitchen side looking in the boxroom window.
I conceded because to do so by agreeing that the rifle was at the box room window, rather than the main bedroom favours Bambers innocent more, than if 'it' was resting at the main bedroom window - it had to travel further before it ended up inevitibly on top of Sheila's body as per photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
-
So, who's bloodied fingerprints were on Sheila's nightdress, and on the pages of the bible, and on the edge of the kitchen worktop? Were these bloodied fingermarks belonging to Mr Bamber senior?
i dont know were they ever tested.
-
i dont know were they ever tested.
They are marks transferred from Shielas wrist.
Others will make up all sorts of fantastical alternatives though. :P
-
the 3 victims being the twins or rb.how would sheila transfer the blood she would be holding that rifle.and you know as well as i do it was rb's blooded handprint.come on mike
It wasn't a hand print. Nevill's wounded shoulder bumped the wall. It had to be made by him because he's the only one who was shot in the shoulder and only one with O blood who was moving around. The twins were killed in their sleep.
-
It wasn't a hand print. Nevill's wounded shoulder bumped the wall. It had to be made by him because he's the only one who was shot in the shoulder and only one with O blood who was moving around. The twins were killed in their sleep.
You are quite correct. Blood on the landing and stair wall could only have come from Neville.
-
It wasn't a hand print. Nevill's wounded shoulder bumped the wall. It had to be made by him because he's the only one who was shot in the shoulder and only one with O blood who was moving around. The twins were killed in their sleep.
mike has agreed it was a blooded hand print.have you a photo or report on it .thanks
-
I conceded because to do so by agreeing that the rifle was at the box room window, rather than the main bedroom favours Bambers innocent more, than if 'it' was resting at the main bedroom window - it had to travel further before it ended up inevitibly on top of Sheila's body as per photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
I am not saying the rifle seen by Jeapes and photographed in the bedroom was the same rifle on Shelia's body. I am suggesting there could have been two rifles involved, so you have one rifle across Shelia's body and at the same time another rifle by the main bedroom window.
I don't know why people who believe Jeremy is guilty are so closed minded about this possibility because if you are to believe Jeremy planned and engineered the mass murder it would make sense for him to conceal another rifle in the farm somewhere to grab as backup and not have to reload.
-
You are quite correct. Blood on the landing and stair wall could only have come from Neville.
Is there a crime scene photo of the stairs?
-
I conceded because to do so by agreeing that the rifle was at the box room window, rather than the main bedroom favours Bambers innocent more, than if 'it' was resting at the main bedroom window - it had to travel further before it ended up inevitibly on top of Sheila's body as per photo's 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
Instead of deciding what the truth is based on evidence you decide based on what would be best for Jeremy? All that means is that you are guided entirely by bias, why on earth would you admit to that?
The boxroom window is just as close to her body as the bedroom window so I see no difference but neither claim benefits Jeremy anyway. I fail to see how alleging the gun was too far away from Sheila's body for her to have killed herself with it therefore someone else must have shot her could be viewed as helping Jeremy. The defence went to great lengths trying to establish it was possible for Sheila to have killed herself. You are undermining their cause. I have to go to sleep now.
-
I am not saying the rifle seen by Jeapes and photographed in the bedroom was the same rifle on Shelia's body. I am suggesting there could have been two rifles involved, so you have one rifle across Shelia's body and at the same time another rifle by the main bedroom window.
I don't know why people who believe Jeremy is guilty are so closed minded about this possibility because if you are to believe Jeremy planned and engineered the mass murder it would make sense for him to conceal another rifle in the farm somewhere to grab as backup and not have to reload.
There wasn't another rifle in the house, Jeapes was mistaken and her account is not corroborated.
-
I am not saying the rifle seen by Jeapes and photographed in the bedroom was the same rifle on Shelia's body. I am suggesting there could have been two rifles involved, so you have one rifle across Shelia's body and at the same time another rifle by the main bedroom window.
I don't know why people who believe Jeremy is guilty are so closed minded about this possibility because if you are to believe Jeremy planned and engineered the mass murder it would make sense for him to conceal another rifle in the farm somewhere to grab as backup and not have to reload.
so where is the second rifle.did lemonhead not tell you earlier that no other rifles were found.
-
Is there a crime scene photo of the stairs?
There are photographs of the blood stains on the wall, but Mike does not have a copy and has not posted them on the forum.
They are referred to in a few statements though.
-
Come off it. You might be able to manipulate the brains of others but in the words of Thatcher " This lady's not for turning " !!
No other rifles were found ? Excuse me,it was a farmhouse !
-
Come off it. You might be able to manipulate the brains of others but in the words of Thatcher " This lady's not for turning " !!
No other rifles were found ? Excuse me,it was a farmhouse !
Yeah and they has 'shotguns!
-
There wasn't another rifle in the house, Jeapes was mistaken and her account is not corroborated.
Except there is a photograph of a rifle exactly as Jeapes described resting by the window.
-
There wasn't another rifle in the house, Jeapes was mistaken and her account is not corroborated.
..or her husband ordered her to remain silent. Strange that we haven't heard a whiff from her in thirty years..
-
Except there is a photograph of a rifle exactly as Jeapes described resting by the window.
The police indicate that is the rifle that they removed from the body of Sheila at around 10:30am.
Photograpgh 23 was taken after the rifle was removed.
Jeapes was not at White House Farm at that time.
In fact the photographer and Jeapes were never at the premises at the same time.
-
so where is the second rifle.did lemonhead not tell you earlier that no other rifles were found.
If there was two rifles id love to know. what lemonhead tells people is not nessisarily a fact.
-
The police indicate that is the rifle that they removed from the body of Sheila at around 10:30am.
Photograpgh 23 was taken after the rifle was removed.
Jeapes was not at White House Farm at that time.
In fact the photographer and Jeapes were never at the premises at the same time.
Bet that's not the first time you have typed that! :)) :))
-
..or her husband ordered her to remain silent. Strange that we haven't heard a whiff from her in thirty years..
What about all of the other police officers that you haven't heard from? There were many involved, why pick on Jeapes?
-
Bet that's not the first time you have typed that! :)) :))
Nope. >:( ;D
-
What about all of the other police officers that you haven't heard from? There were many involved, why pick on Jeapes?
Wasn't her expertise firearms? Mike will correct me if I'm mistaken.
-
The police indicate that is the rifle that they removed from the body of Sheila at around 10:30am.
Photograpgh 23 was taken after the rifle was removed.
Jeapes was not at White House Farm at that time.
In fact the photographer and Jeapes were never at the premises at the same time.
Its easy for Police to say that, and if so why did it take over two decades to get it disclosed? Its a rather bad way of handling the weapon
-
Yeah and they has 'shotguns!
Yeah,with Sheila's prints on it to boot.
-
Wasn't her expertise firearms? Mike will correct me if I'm mistaken.
Yes she was a weapons instructor for training armed police
-
Its easy for Police to say that, and if so why did it take over two decades to get it disclosed? Its a rather bad way of handling the weapon
It didn't. It was discussed at the trial.
I have previously posted that part of the transcript for you.
-
Yeah,with Sheila's prints on it to boot.
What would that matter, if true. A shotgun wasn't used in the crime.
-
..or her husband ordered her to remain silent. Strange that we haven't heard a whiff from her in thirty years..
Did she not die Steve ? I know one of them did,which would account for not hearing anything.
-
It didn't. It was discussed at the trial.
I have previously posted that part of the transcript for you.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=19113;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=19114;image)
-
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=19113;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=185.0;attach=19114;image)
So what is mikes answer to this?
-
So what is mikes answer to this?
Probably something like: ****** off you ******** head ******* and die! :-\
-
Probably something like: ****** off you ******** head ******* and die! :-\
that is quite a mouthful hartley.i hope his explaination is better than that.
-
that is quite a mouthful hartley.i hope his explaination is better than that.
Hehe, yes let's hope. Posting from previous experiences, that's all. ;)
-
that is quite a mouthful hartley.i hope his explaination is better than that.
I once told someone who used to keep challenging mikes theories, That challenging him was like playing chess with a chicken, you could be the best chess player in the world but the chicken will just knock all the pieces over and claim victory
-
I once told someone who used to keep challenging mikes theories, That challenging him was like playing chess with a chicken, you could be the best chess player in the world but the chicken will just knock all the pieces over and claim victory
;D
-
I once told someone who used to keep challenging mikes theories, That challenging him was like playing chess with a chicken, you could be the best chess player in the world but the chicken will just knock all the pieces over and claim victory
i like that phrase david
-
i like that phrase david
I said, i think I'm going to have to have a word with the forum moderators and ask them to do an Anne Robinson on you...
-
I said, i think I'm going to have to have a word with the forum moderators and ask them to do an Anne Robinson on you...
as you wish .but iam not going to answer anymore of your posts.goodnight.you can talk to your self now.
-
Your saying I should interpret the first sentence what Jeapes sais as saying the box room when Jeapes does not even know where the kitchen is or seems to be confused between the what door is which. then I should conveniently ignore the second sentence describing the gun leaning against the window upstairs. Then conveniently ignore the photo showing exactly what Jeapes described as a bizzare coincidence?
I'm not very confident in accepting this ::)
It is true that WPC Jeapes account is somewhat confusing as to the exact window to which she is referring to when she makes mention of seeing 'the' rifle. One clue which stands out is that she was at the 'corner' of the farmhouse, which she has described as 'White / Red'. She appears to be confused by which side was 'White side', and which was 'Red side'. But she does mention that she was standing at the corner of that part of the building which is cladded in grey brick. So, based on that information, she could have had a view of ' the main bedroom window', on 'Red side', and a view of the 'box room window' on 'White side', from 'that' vantage point. If she was referring to a rifle at the 'box room window' any such rifle would have had to be resting against the 'left hand side' of the 'box room Window', as viewed from her vantage point at the corner of 'White / Red', whereas, from the same vantage point, she could only have seen such a rifle on the 'right hand side' of the 'main bedroom window'...
The fact that 'the rifle' is photographed at 23, leaning against the main bedroom window, before 'it' was later removed and planted onto Sheila's body, and only then was 'it' photographed with Sheila's body, as per the photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, is more than a simple coincidence. The chief feature, as far as I can tell, is not really 'which' window Jeapes actually saw the rifle leaning against, but rather that 'the rifle in photograph No. 23, was without doubt or question, photographed, there at the ' main bedroom window, before 'it' was photographed, upon Sheila's body, in sequential order'...
That is ' a fact'...
The sequence with which those '9 key photographs' were taken, 'confirms' this to be an absolute truth...
I have already posted up the photographic records which support this matter, and nobody can alter the 'fact' that 'the rifle' was photographed resting near to the main bedroom window, 'before' somebody took 'it' from there and decided to position 'it' on Sheila's body and to photograph it there. This is the true explanation about 'movement of the gun' from the bedroom window onto the body. What this means, is that the sequence of 8 consecutive photographs, these being photograph numbers, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, 'do not' show the true position of Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, with the rifle in her possession, as could have been found by firearms officers, as per their witness statement versions which set the positions of the bodies at the time of discovery as having been one body downstairs, the other four bodies being found upstairs, of which they claim Sheila's had been one of the four bodies found upstairs. Of course, by a reliance upon the police radio message log account, two bodies were found in the kitchen, and only three bodies found upstairs. By reliance on this account, Sheila's body had to have been the reference to a dead female, who had apparently committed suicide, downstairs in the kitchen, the same room where Ralph Bamber was murdered ('the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found upon entry to the kitchen'). With Sheila being reported as having been found dead downstairs in the kitchen, how then had the rifle at whichever upstairs window been used to shoot her downstairs in the kitchen?
How can she possibly have committed 'suicide' downstairs in the kitchen before 7.45am, with use of 'the rifle which from 7.15am, onward, had been resting against a window upstairs' in another part of the farmhouse?
That 'first' shot, bullet PV/20, was 'badly fragmented' and had broken into at least 15 pieces when part of it was Xrayed, and then recovered from her body during autopsy, performed by pathologist, Peter Venezis, on 7th August 1985. However, by the 20th September a 'different' bullet had been introduced, a bullet described by the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, as ' a whole bullet', which Fletcher was able to state 'had' been fired through the rifle at the time Sheila was shot across the neck. But, as far as I know, bullets don't grow whole again, once they have been shattered into at least 15 separate pieces. Therefore, I say, and it is the absolute truth, there is 'no need' for me to make anything up, there is clearly a huge suspicion that Essex police and its ballistics expert, and the pathologist, have all been involved 'in a joint enterprise' with a view to presenting 'a whole bullet', when the original PV/20 had been a badly fragmented one, and that this was done so that it could be argued that the very same rifle had fired both the shots (bullets PV/20 and PV/19) which wounded and killed Sheila Caffell - but it was all a lie...
-
..or her husband ordered her to remain silent. Strange that we haven't heard a whiff from her in thirty years..
Whoa Steve!!!! A husband forbidding his wife to speak :o That sounds like something from the dark ages. I don't really see why we should have heard anything from her. She may well be of the opinion that there is nothing she can say that hasn't already been said OR that she's required to explain herself. Personally, if anyone came forward, at this stage, I MIGHT think they were trying to cover up.
Just an aside, and certainly not aimed at you, Steve. It may be worth remembering that the job of the police ended when they got Jeremy referred to court. It was the legal process which convicted him. I don't feel that there's any necessity for EP to give ANY further explanation. I imagine that any involved with the case are, by now, deceased or incapable of clear recollection. Anything the current force MAY say would be their own opinion based on present police practice.
-
Nothing quite like selective dementia. Especially when it comes to remembering or not remembering things that happened in the past. BW had a " lapse " of her memory.
Usually it's the things from the past that are remembered !
-
Nothing quite like selective dementia. Especially when it comes to remembering or not remembering things that happened in the past. BW had a " lapse " of her memory.
Usually it's the things from the past that are remembered !
You can ONLY remember things from the past, you can't remember it if it hasn't happened yet!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
You can ONLY remember things from the past, you can't remember it if it hasn't happened yet!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
But some have a habit of remembering things that DIDN'T happen. Hahahahahaha.HA !
-
But some have a habit of remembering things that DIDN'T happen. Hahahahahaha.HA !
I expect you do, Lookout. Never mind, eh? If there's no one who can correct you, who can prove you wrong when there's just a chance you could be right? :)) :)) :))
-
I expect you do, Lookout. Never mind, eh? If there's no one who can correct you, who can prove you wrong when there's just a chance you could be right? :)) :)) :))
There's always someone somewhere lurking in the shadows. You're never alone with a Hamlet. ;D ;D ;D
-
It is true that WPC Jeapes account is somewhat confusing as to the exact window to which she is referring to when she makes mention of seeing 'the' rifle. One clue which stands out is that she was at the 'corner' of the farmhouse, which she has described as 'White / Red'. She appears to be confused by which side was 'White side', and which was 'Red side'. But she does mention that she was standing at the corner of that part of the building which is cladded in grey brick. So, based on that information, she could have had a view of ' the main bedroom window', on 'Red side', and a view of the 'box room window' on 'White side', from 'that' vantage point. If she was referring to a rifle at the 'box room window' any such rifle would have had to be resting against the 'left hand side' of the 'box room Window', as viewed from her vantage point at the corner of 'White / Red', whereas, from the same vantage point, she could only have seen such a rifle on the 'right hand side' of the 'main bedroom window'...
I don't find WPS Jeapes' statement confusing at all. The containment site near the kitchen was not very far from the corner of the house. That corner touches the red/white sides. So she called it the red/white in firearms terms. There were 2 containment sites near the red/white corner. We know which one she was at because of she said she was near the kitchen and described a single first floor window clad in grey.
The raid team treated the kitchen side as the front of the house for their operation so she called it the front. By stating she watched the raid team break in that ends any ability to claim she was at the actual front of the house and confused the front door as being the kitchen door.
It is only confusing if one sets out to try to confuse things in an effort to distort.
-
I don't find WPS Jeapes' statement confusing at all. The containment site near the kitchen was not very far from the corner of the house. That corner touches the red/white sides. So she called it the red/white in firearms terms. There were 2 containment sites near the red/white corner. We know which one she was at because of she said she was near the kitchen and described a single first floor window clad in grey.
The raid team treated the kitchen side as the front of the house for their operation so she called it the front. By stating she watched the raid team break in that ends any ability to claim she was at the actual front of the house and confused the front door as being the kitchen door.
It is only confusing if one sets out to try to confuse things in an effort to distort.
I agree, Jeapes simply said she thought she saw what could be a rifle - hardly surprising when she was under the impression that 'someone had gone crazy' with one. The totally unrelated picture of the rifle in the bedroom, is just that 'unrelated'. If there was anything suspicious about the picture, I don't think EP would be stupid enough to first of all take the picture and secondly, include it in the CS pictures.
-
I agree, Jeapes simply said she thought she saw what could be a rifle - hardly surprising when she was under the impression that 'someone had gone crazy' with one. The totally unrelated picture of the rifle in the bedroom, is just that 'unrelated'. If there was anything suspicious about the picture, I don't think EP would be stupid enough to first of all take the picture and secondly, include it in the CS pictures.
I wonder if, buried deep within the bowls of Police HQ, there's a secret "gallery" where are displayed all those incriminating photos that Mike tell us exist. Mayhap rookies, once past a certain level of training and having sworn to uphold the OSA, are allowed to gaze in awe and wonder at what levels of corruption they, too, may be able to attain.
-
i doubt if ep have got any info that proves jb is innocent.even in the police we get whistle blowers so if anything was there it might have come out by now.
-
The fact that 'the rifle' is photographed at 23, leaning against the main bedroom window, before 'it' was later removed and planted onto Sheila's body, and only then was 'it' photographed with Sheila's body, as per the photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, is more than a simple coincidence. The chief feature, as far as I can tell, is not really 'which' window Jeapes actually saw the rifle leaning against, but rather that 'the rifle in photograph No. 23, was without doubt or question, photographed, there at the ' main bedroom window, before 'it' was photographed, upon Sheila's body, in sequential order'...
That is ' a fact'...
The sequence with which those '9 key photographs' were taken, 'confirms' this to be an absolute truth...
I have already posted up the photographic records which support this matter, and nobody can alter the 'fact' that 'the rifle' was photographed resting near to the main bedroom window, 'before' somebody took 'it' from there and decided to position 'it' on Sheila's body and to photograph it there. This is the true explanation about 'movement of the gun' from the bedroom window onto the body. What this means, is that the sequence of 8 consecutive photographs, these being photograph numbers, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, 'do not' show the true position of Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, with the rifle in her possession, as could have been found by firearms officers, as per their witness statement versions which set the positions of the bodies at the time of discovery as having been one body downstairs, the other four bodies being found upstairs, of which they claim Sheila's had been one of the four bodies found upstairs. Of course, by a reliance upon the police radio message log account, two bodies were found in the kitchen, and only three bodies found upstairs. By reliance on this account, Sheila's body had to have been the reference to a dead female, who had apparently committed suicide, downstairs in the kitchen, the same room where Ralph Bamber was murdered ('the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found upon entry to the kitchen'). With Sheila being reported as having been found dead downstairs in the kitchen, how then had the rifle at whichever upstairs window been used to shoot her downstairs in the kitchen?
How can she possibly have committed 'suicide' downstairs in the kitchen before 7.45am, with use of 'the rifle which from 7.15am, onward, had been resting against a window upstairs' in another part of the farmhouse?
That 'first' shot, bullet PV/20, was 'badly fragmented' and had broken into at least 15 pieces when part of it was Xrayed, and then recovered from her body during autopsy, performed by pathologist, Peter Venezis, on 7th August 1985. However, by the 20th September a 'different' bullet had been introduced, a bullet described by the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, as ' a whole bullet', which Fletcher was able to state 'had' been fired through the rifle at the time Sheila was shot across the neck. But, as far as I know, bullets don't grow whole again, once they have been shattered into at least 15 separate pieces. Therefore, I say, and it is the absolute truth, there is 'no need' for me to make anything up, there is clearly a huge suspicion that Essex police and its ballistics expert, and the pathologist, have all been involved 'in a joint enterprise' with a view to presenting 'a whole bullet', when the original PV/20 had been a badly fragmented one, and that this was done so that it could be argued that the very same rifle had fired both the shots (bullets PV/20 and PV/19) which wounded and killed Sheila Caffell - but it was all a lie...
This will probably be a loveless endeavour but I will try anyway.
In the above long-winded post you repeatedly state you have proof that the photo of the rifle used in the killings taken near the window was taken prior to the rifle ever being on Sheila's body. In order for this to be true it would require the rifle to have been near the window when the raid team entered, when the police brass entered and when the crime scene police entered. All three classes of police say the rifle was on her body.
The only proof you ultimately offer to try to disprove their claims is the log that records 2 bodies were found in the kitchen. You insist the log account must be true. The problem is that the log account doesn't have to be true it could be an error. According to the eyewitnesses the person keeping the log misunderstood and was in error. An assertion by a non-witness keeping a log is hearsay. Hearsay cannot disprove a claim of a witness let alone multiple witnesses. That hearsay doesn't even assert the second body in the kitchen was Sheila. You just say it was Sheila because that helps your allegations more than saying it was June.
You also say it is a fact the photo of the rifle near the window was taken prior to the photos of the rifle on Sheila's body. Just because you say it is a fact doesn't make it so. There are only 3 ways to prove it to be a fact. The actors taking the photos would have to state that they took the photo of the gun near the window before the photos of the gun on her body. But the photographer and crime scene police all say the photos of the rifle on her body were taken first.
The second way to prove it would be if the camera left time stamps on the photos but the camera in question did not.
The final way to prove it would be if the photos had been taken on the same roll of film and the negatives were all still attached so one could observe the sequence in which the photos on that particular roll were taken. The testimony is that they were taken on different film rolls and that the film roll with the gun near the window was taken last. The negatives tolls were not kept intact so there is no way to disprove their claims.
At the end of the day you simply level allegations you can't prove that the police lied about the order in which the photos were taken. It is not a particularly useful allegation because even if police had done the senseless act of taking photos of the hallway and entire scene before taking photos of the bodies this would not establish the gun had not originally been on Sheila's body when the raid team, police brass and crime scene police entered.
Police could have had removed the gun from her body, took photos of the house, then placed the gun back on her body to take the photos of her body in order to depict where it had been when the police initially found her. But this is not what police say happened. The actors all say the rifle never left her body until after they took the photos of it on her and there is no evidence available that proves otherwise.
This whole line of attack seems like a giant waste of time and energy that could better be devoted elsewhere if one wants to try to help Jeremy.
-
This will probably be a loveless endeavour but I will try anyway.
In the above long-winded post you repeatedly state you have proof that the photo of the rifle used in the killings taken near the window was taken prior to the rifle ever being on Sheila's body. In order for this to be true it would require the rifle to have been near the window when the raid team entered, when the police brass entered and when the crime scene police entered. All three classes of police say the rifle was on her body.
The only proof you ultimately offer to try to disprove their claims is the log that records 2 bodies were found in the kitchen. You insist the log account must be true. The problem is that the log account doesn't have to be true it could be an error. According to the eyewitnesses the person keeping the log misunderstood and was in error. An assertion by a non-witness keeping a log is hearsay. Hearsay cannot disprove a claim of a witness let alone multiple witnesses. That hearsay doesn't even assert the second body in the kitchen was Sheila. You just say it was Sheila because that helps your allegations more than saying it was June.
You also say it is a fact the photo of the rifle near the window was taken prior to the photos of the rifle on Sheila's body. Just because you say it is a fact doesn't make it so. There are only 3 ways to prove it to be a fact. The actors taking the photos would have to state that they took the photo of the gun near the window before the photos of the gun on her body. But the photographer and crime scene police all say the photos of the rifle on her body were taken first.
The second way to prove it would be if the camera left time stamps on the photos but the camera in question did not.
The final way to prove it would be if the photos had been taken on the same roll of film and the negatives were all still attached so one could observe the sequence in which the photos on that particular roll were taken. The testimony is that they were taken on different film rolls and that the film roll with the gun near the window was taken last. The negatives tolls were not kept intact so there is no way to disprove their claims.
At the end of the day you simply level allegations you can't prove that the police lied about the order in which the photos were taken. It is not a particularly useful allegation because even if police had done the senseless act of taking photos of the hallway and entire scene before taking photos of the bodies this would not establish the gun had not originally been on Sheila's body when the raid team, police brass and crime scene police entered.
Police could have had removed the gun from her body, took photos of the house, then placed the gun back on her body to take the photos of her body in order to depict where it had been when the police initially found her. But this is not what police say happened. The actors all say the rifle never left her body until after they took the photos of it on her and there is no evidence available that proves otherwise.
This whole line of attack seems like a giant waste of time and energy that could better be devoted elsewhere if one wants to try to help Jeremy.
i totally agree lemonhead.
-
This will probably be a loveless endeavour but I will try anyway.
In the above long-winded post you repeatedly state you have proof that the photo of the rifle used in the killings taken near the window was taken prior to the rifle ever being on Sheila's body. In order for this to be true it would require the rifle to have been near the window when the raid team entered, when the police brass entered and when the crime scene police entered. All three classes of police say the rifle was on her body.
The only proof you ultimately offer to try to disprove their claims is the log that records 2 bodies were found in the kitchen. You insist the log account must be true. The problem is that the log account doesn't have to be true it could be an error. According to the eyewitnesses the person keeping the log misunderstood and was in error. An assertion by a non-witness keeping a log is hearsay. Hearsay cannot disprove a claim of a witness let alone multiple witnesses. That hearsay doesn't even assert the second body in the kitchen was Sheila. You just say it was Sheila because that helps your allegations more than saying it was June.
You also say it is a fact the photo of the rifle near the window was taken prior to the photos of the rifle on Sheila's body. Just because you say it is a fact doesn't make it so. There are only 3 ways to prove it to be a fact. The actors taking the photos would have to state that they took the photo of the gun near the window before the photos of the gun on her body. But the photographer and crime scene police all say the photos of the rifle on her body were taken first.
The second way to prove it would be if the camera left time stamps on the photos but the camera in question did not.
The final way to prove it would be if the photos had been taken on the same roll of film and the negatives were all still attached so one could observe the sequence in which the photos on that particular roll were taken. The testimony is that they were taken on different film rolls and that the film roll with the gun near the window was taken last. The negatives tolls were not kept intact so there is no way to disprove their claims.
At the end of the day you simply level allegations you can't prove that the police lied about the order in which the photos were taken. It is not a particularly useful allegation because even if police had done the senseless act of taking photos of the hallway and entire scene before taking photos of the bodies this would not establish the gun had not originally been on Sheila's body when the raid team, police brass and crime scene police entered.
Police could have had removed the gun from her body, took photos of the house, then placed the gun back on her body to take the photos of her body in order to depict where it had been when the police initially found her. But this is not what police say happened. The actors all say the rifle never left her body until after they took the photos of it on her and there is no evidence available that proves otherwise.
This whole line of attack seems like a giant waste of time and energy that could better be devoted elsewhere if one wants to try to help Jeremy.
Eloquently said, Lemonhead.
-
I don't find WPS Jeapes' statement confusing at all. The containment site near the kitchen was not very far from the corner of the house. That corner touches the red/white sides. So she called it the red/white in firearms terms. There were 2 containment sites near the red/white corner. We know which one she was at because of she said she was near the kitchen and described a single first floor window clad in grey.
The raid team treated the kitchen side as the front of the house for their operation so she called it the front. By stating she watched the raid team break in that ends any ability to claim she was at the actual front of the house and confused the front door as being the kitchen door.
It is only confusing if one sets out to try to confuse things in an effort to distort.
Same old,eh,Scipio ? The accusing sticks out like a sore thumb.
-
I don't find WPS Jeapes' statement confusing at all. but the COLP investigators did, so that puts your interpretation at odds with them...The containment site near the kitchen was not very far from the corner of the house. Jeapes could see along both sides, and the main bedroom window was in the grey brick part of the farmhouse. She saw the barrel of the rifle through the scope on her own weapon. The most interesting feature in all of this, is that when Jeapes saw the barrel of the rifle, she did not see a silencer fitted to the end of it. It doesn't really matter which upstairs window it was seen at, only the fact that it 'was' seen, and that there was no silencer attached, either there and then, or later when police moved it to the body of Sheila on the bedroom floor... That corner touches the red/white sides. Exactly, as do both windows in question, but as I say if you want the window in question to be 'the box room window', it actually benefits Bambers claim of innocent more greatly, than if say the rifle seen by Jeapes was against the 'main bedroom window'... [color] So she called it the red/white in firearms terms. yes, and it doesn't matter whether she saw the rifle at one window, as opposed to any other window, the key point is that she did not report seeing a silencer fitted to the end of that rifles barrel... There were 2 containment sites near the red/white corner. still doesn't alter the fact that Jeapes saw a rifle barrel minus a silencer when she saw it.. We know which one she was at because of she said she was near the kitchen and described a single first floor window clad in grey. yes, she saw tthe rifles barrel, but as you know she did not see a silencer...
The raid team treated the kitchen side as the front of the house for their operation no, they did not, they knew which was the front of the farmhouse and which was the rear... so she called it the front. it was not her job to call it the front, senior command officers decided which was which...By stating she watched the raid team break in that ends any ability to claim she was at the actual front of the house and confused the front door as being the kitchen door. it does not. Since if she was at the corner of White red, she could have seen both the front door and the rear door from the same vantage point, it would simply have been a case of looking right to see the front door on red side, and simply a matter of turning her head left to see in the direction of the rear door.
It is only confusing if one sets out to try to confuse things which was why Essex police failed to disclose her witness statement which makes mention of the rifle in question being lent against the window...in an effort to distort. the only people distorting anything were Essex police, I mean by bringing 'that' rifle from whichever window and planting it on Sheila's body so that they could try to sweep her death under the carpet by describing it as 'a suicide'...
-
This will probably be a loveless endeavour but I will try anyway.
US, New Jersey...
I thought you were banned?
In the above long-winded post you repeatedly state you have proof that the photo of the rifle used in the killings taken near the window was taken prior to the rifle ever being on Sheila's body. Yes, it is In order for this to be true it would require the rifle to have been near the window when the raid team entered, when the police brass entered and when the crime scene police entered. All three classes of police say the rifle was on her body.
The only proof you ultimately offer to try to disprove their claims is the log that records 2 bodies were found in the kitchen. You insist the log account must be true. The problem is that the log account doesn't have to be true it could be an error. According to the eyewitnesses the person keeping the log misunderstood and was in error. An assertion by a non-witness keeping a log is hearsay. Hearsay cannot disprove a claim of a witness let alone multiple witnesses. That hearsay doesn't even assert the second body in the kitchen was Sheila. You just say it was Sheila because that helps your allegations more than saying it was June.
You also say it is a fact the photo of the rifle near the window was taken prior to the photos of the rifle on Sheila's body. Just because you say it is a fact doesn't make it so. There are only 3 ways to prove it to be a fact. The actors taking the photos would have to state that they took the photo of the gun near the window before the photos of the gun on her body. But the photographer and crime scene police all say the photos of the rifle on her body were taken first.
The second way to prove it would be if the camera left time stamps on the photos but the camera in question did not.
The final way to prove it would be if the photos had been taken on the same roll of film and the negatives were all still attached so one could observe the sequence in which the photos on that particular roll were taken. The testimony is that they were taken on different film rolls and that the film roll with the gun near the window was taken last. The negatives tolls were not kept intact so there is no way to disprove their claims.
At the end of the day you simply level allegations you can't prove that the police lied about the order in which the photos were taken. It is not a particularly useful allegation because even if police had done the senseless act of taking photos of the hallway and entire scene before taking photos of the bodies this would not establish the gun had not originally been on Sheila's body when the raid team, police brass and crime scene police entered.
Police could have had removed the gun from her body, took photos of the house, then placed the gun back on her body to take the photos of her body in order to depict where it had been when the police initially found her. But this is not what police say happened. The actors all say the rifle never left her body until after they took the photos of it on her and there is no evidence available that proves otherwise.
This whole line of attack seems like a giant waste of time and energy that could better be devoted elsewhere if one wants to try to help Jeremy.
-
Nothing comes up when I try to quote your post but I will address your points to the extent I can.
It doesn't really matter whether the COLP investigators were confused or not. An objective reading is quite clear irrespective of whether a minority fail to understand it.
Please post the portion of the COLP Report that concludes WPS Jeapes wrote in her statement that she saw a rifle in the bedroom window. What you will find if that the defence made such allegations not that COLP found such to be true.
If you go to Reply 1 of this topic you will see a number of photographs posted.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,887.0.html
There is a photo with the name whf9.jpg and in this photo you will see a small barn shed facing the kitchen side at the right hand corner. To the left of this barn shed is where WPS Jeapes was positioned. She could not see the front of the house from this position. She could only see the kitchen side of the house. She saw the raid team enter because the kitchen door is clearly visible from this position. Since the bedroom window was sealed off instead of two grey clad first floor windows there is only one. Thus identifying a first floor window as grey clad isolates a single window, the boxroom window.
The police position in the front left corner of the house provides neither sight of the kitchen door nor of the boxroom window. It only provides sight of the front of the house. Police in that position stated could not see the raid team entering they only heard the breaking down of the door. These police fail to list WPS Jeapes as being with them in this location. All three first floor windows in the front of the house are clad in grey so trying to isolate a single window by referring to it as grey clad is a useless endeavour. Taking everything as a whole there is no question that WPS Jeapes was claiming to be at the White side of the house looking at the boxroom window.
-
Nothing comes up when I try to quote your post but I will address your points to the extent I can.
It doesn't really matter whether the COLP investigators were confused or not. An objective reading is quite clear irrespective of whether a minority fail to understand it.
Please post the portion of the COLP Report that concludes WPS Jeapes wrote in her statement that she saw a rifle in the bedroom window. What you will find if that the defence made such allegations not that COLP found such to be true.
If you go to Reply 1 of this topic you will see a number of photographs posted.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,887.0.html
There is a photo with the name whf9.jpg and in this photo you will see a small barn shed facing the kitchen side at the right hand corner. To the left of this barn shed is where WPS Jeapes was positioned. She could not see the front of the house from this position. She could only see the kitchen side of the house. She saw the raid team enter because the kitchen door is clearly visible from this position. Since the bedroom window was sealed off instead of two grey clad first floor windows there is only one. Thus identifying a first floor window as grey clad isolates a single window, the boxroom window.
The police position in the front left corner of the house provides neither sight of the kitchen door nor of the boxroom window. It only provides sight of the front of the house. Police in that position stated could not see the raid team entering they only heard the breaking down of the door. These police fail to list WPS Jeapes as being with them in this location. All three first floor windows in the front of the house are clad in grey so trying to isolate a single window by referring to it as grey clad is a useless endeavour. Taking everything as a whole there is no question that WPS Jeapes was claiming to be at the White side of the house looking at the boxroom window.
They never did identify the blood spots on the kitchen floor by the blue and white chequered worktop. I wonder what Sheila's handbag was doing in that area? Why did the table not crash in the struggle?
Some of those family photographs are heartbreaking..
-
They never did identify the blood spots on the kitchen floor by the blue and white chequered worktop. I wonder what Sheila's handbag was doing in that area? Why did the table not crash in the struggle?
I have wondered the same thing and mentioned this before, The location of the alleged struggle/beating is absent of any blood spatter, all you have is blood pooling under were Neville's head is resting
-
They never did identify the blood spots on the kitchen floor by the blue and white chequered worktop. I wonder what Sheila's handbag was doing in that area? Why did the table not crash in the struggle?
Some of those family photographs are heartbreaking..
Are you are referencing a myth? No case documents indicate the police located blood on the floor near the worktop that contained the telephone.
-
The rifle at the window whichever window that may be, could not have been on the body at the same time it was seen at the window in question. In order for the raid team member witness statements to be true when they first entered the farmhouse 'that' rifle was by then on Sheila's body, somebody still inside alive had to pick up the rifle, use it and it end up on Sheila's body after 7.15am, that person could not be Jeremy Bamber...
-
What is absolutely clear, is that by 'the time' the rifle in photograph No. 23 was taken, it had already been used to kill Sheila Caffell during 'a gauging exercise' conducted after 9am, and put there at the main bedroom window. Then, brought back to her body afterwards, planted upon it and then PC Bird took photographs 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, showing the rifle on Sheila's body...
This is the actual sequence of the key 9 photographs were taken - 23, then 26, then 27, then 28, then 29, then 30, then 31, then 32 and then 33...
-
I am trying to reconstruct the movement of the rifle, from whichever window Jeapes saw it at around 7.15am? That sighting has to be treated as a starting point of the gun (the weapon police claim fired both bullets into Sheila Caffells neck). It was definitely 'not' used to inflict the first shot across her neck, but certainly used to inflict the fatal shot under her chin. This means that at some stage, the rifle was brought from that window to her body. This did not happen until after PS Adams left the bedroom at around 9am, at a time when he says there was no rifle at all present upon Sheila's body...
At around this stage, a training exercise got underway (familiars) which involved someone bringing the rifle from the window to her body to see if she could have used it on the other four victims. At this time Sheila's right hand fingers were being manipulated against the trigger mechanism, and upon trying to identify it as being capable of activating the trigger, it discharged the fatal round still loaded in the gun up through her chin, mouth and deposited itself in her brain. No sooner did this happen, than someone removed the rifle from her body and stood it against the main bedroom window as per photograph No. 23. This took place at around 9.13am, and it remained there at the bedroom window, until someone brought it back to Sheila's body after 10.13am, when it was positioned back upon Sheila Caffells body and PC Bird took photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. After this, Ron Cook himself removed the rifle from Sheila's body and replaced it against the main bedroom window, but not as shown in photo' 23...
-
I am trying to reconstruct the movement of the rifle, from whichever window Jeapes saw it at around 7.15am? That sighting has to be treated as a starting point of the gun (the weapon police claim fired both bullets into Sheila Caffells neck). It was definitely 'not' used to inflict the first shot across her neck, but certainly used to inflict the fatal shot under her chin. This means that at some stage, the rifle was brought from that window to her body. This did not happen until after PS Adams left the bedroom at around 9am, at a time when he says there was no rifle at all present upon Sheila's body...
At around this stage, a training exercise got underway (familiars) which involved someone bringing the rifle from the window to her body to see if she could have used it on the other four victims. At this time Sheila's right hand fingers were being manipulated against the trigger mechanism, and upon trying to identify it as being capable of activating the trigger, it discharged the fatal round still loaded in the gun up through her chin, mouth and deposited itself in her brain. No sooner did this happen, than someone removed the rifle from her body and stood it against the main bedroom window as per photograph No. 23. This took place at around 9.13am, and it remained there at the bedroom window, until someone brought it back to Sheila's body after 10.13am, when it was positioned back upon Sheila Caffells body and PC Bird took photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. After this, Ron Cook himself removed the rifle from Sheila's body and replaced it against the main bedroom window, but not as shown in photo' 23...
mike wpc jeapes said in her statement she saw what 'appeared' to be a rifle.it is not proven that it was a rifle also no one else mentions it.how by placing the rifle on the body would they be able to see if she killed the other four.pc delgado says on seeing sheila.'she had injures to neck and chin and that was between 7.30.and 8am.so could police shoot her sometime after 9am as you said above.
-
does anybody know how high off the ground nevill's bedroom window is.
-
mike wpc jeapes said in her statement she saw what 'appeared' to be a rifle. it was the rifle, which triggered the raid team to make their way to the rear farmhouse door...it is not proven that it was a rifle it was definitely the rifle, nothing else at that window she could have mistaken it for...also no one else mentions it. you don't really know that...how by placing the rifle on the body would they be able to see if she killed the other four. Simply be checking to see that she could reach the trigger and activate it...pc delgado says on seeing sheila.'she had injures to neck and chin and that was between 7.30.and 8am. all the firearm officers were told to write up their notes, as per the position of the bodies shown in the photographs, as though what they were dealing with was a case of four murders and a suicide. The thing is, the photographs of Sheila had been taken showing the gun on the body after it had already been photographed resting near the main bedroom windowso could police shoot her sometime after 9am easy, they brought the rifle to her body and mishandled the situation at 9.13am, they shot Sheila, killed her, no doubt whatsoever about it ...as you said above. Easy...
-
sounds reasonable.do you know how high off the ground nevills bedroom window is mike .please
-
sounds reasonable.do you know how high off the ground nevills bedroom window is mike .please
Not specifically, no...
However, in response to any suggestion that WPC Jeapes could not possibly see any rifle at the main bedroom window from her vantage point at the corner of White / Red, through the scope of her police weapon, I would disagree. I shall tell you why. Since, let's just say the rifle she says she saw was in a similar position as that shown of the same rifle in photograph 23 (the position of the rifle in photograph 23 did not get put there until after 9.13am, when police shot her when routine 'familiars' went wrong). If Jeapes was stood underneath the main bedroom window at the corner of 'white / red' she would not be able to see any rifle resting in a similar position inside the main bedroom as shown in photograph No. 23 (which I must say was not put there until after 9.13am, and so 'that' photograph cannot be the rifle Jeapes saw, albeit, technically speaking 'the' rifle could have been in a similar position previous to that). You would have to move away from the corner base of White / Red, in stages, until the correct angle was achieved whereby you could see above the level of the windowsil into the room beyond. Once that point is achied, you can measure the distance from the wall at the corner of white / red to 'that' point where it becomes possible to view the barrel of the rifle ( basically by adopting 'Pythagoras theory') at the main bedroom window. Anyone who says somebody like Jeapes who was using the scope of her police weapon would not have been able to see any gun resting against or near the side of the window from her vantage point outside in the grounds of the farmhouse do not know what they are talking about. Since by applying the principles of 'Pythagarous theorum', it becomes possible to confirm that 'I am right', in this instance...
-
WPC Julia Jeapes sees barrel of rifle (using the scope of her weapon) at first floor window, from her vantage point, covering the corner of White / Red
07.15 am- Rifle at 'a' window (box room window, versus, main bedroom window, scenario)
Members of raid team are deployed to enter the farmhouse, after mention made of the sighting of gun near upstairs window
Officers take part in 'familiars' with bodies of victims still insitu. SOCO are prevented from accessing the scene until after the training exercise is completed...
09.13 am - Rifle brought to Sheila's body, from window, for 'gauging' purposes, Sheila killed by bullet discharged from rifle, 'it' was removed, and her body was put into recovery position
SOCO, Cook, Bird, Hammersley and Davidson, take control of crime scene, to take photographs and gather exhibits, in the immediate aftermath of the police training exercise that had just finished involving movement of furniture, exhibits and the bodies of the three adult victims
10.13 am - Rifle at 'main bedroom window' (photograph No. 23 taken)
At this stage Sheila's body was on the floor, in the recovery position, without any weapon whatsoever upon it, or next to it. Then, her body was rolled onto its back in readiness for the rifle (as shown in photograph No. 23) to be brought from the main bedroom window, and positioned upon her body, and only then photographed, thus producing a false set of photographs which would supposedly show how Sheila's body had been found on the very first occasion police came into contact with her, but this was a deliberate lie. Police staged Shgeila's death scene, to framne her for her own suicide by preparing the rifle in her possession, photographing what they themselves had done, and then in the first instance, using those images to support the case that Sheilka had killed the other four victims, before taking her own life (inquest proceedings), and then later, using the very same photographs to allege that this was evidence showing how Jeremy Bamber himself had staged his sisters death scene, after he had allegedly killed everyone including his sister, to fool police into thinking Sheila had taken her own life...
10.27 am - Rifle poisitioned on Sheila's body, then photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 were taken
Rifle removed from body by Cook and replaced at bedroom window, where it had been taken from previously to the body ( not photographed on this occasion)...[/list]
-
I am trying to reconstruct the movement of the rifle, from whichever window Jeapes saw it at around 7.15am? That sighting has to be treated as a starting point of the gun (the weapon police claim fired both bullets into Sheila Caffells neck). It was definitely 'not' used to inflict the first shot across her neck, but certainly used to inflict the fatal shot under her chin. This means that at some stage, the rifle was brought from that window to her body. This did not happen until after PS Adams left the bedroom at around 9am, at a time when he says there was no rifle at all present upon Sheila's body...
At around this stage, a training exercise got underway (familiars) which involved someone bringing the rifle from the window to her body to see if she could have used it on the other four victims. At this time Sheila's right hand fingers were being manipulated against the trigger mechanism, and upon trying to identify it as being capable of activating the trigger, it discharged the fatal round still loaded in the gun up through her chin, mouth and deposited itself in her brain. No sooner did this happen, than someone removed the rifle from her body and stood it against the main bedroom window as per photograph No. 23. This took place at around 9.13am, and it remained there at the bedroom window, until someone brought it back to Sheila's body after 10.13am, when it was positioned back upon Sheila Caffells body and PC Bird took photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. After this, Ron Cook himself removed the rifle from Sheila's body and replaced it against the main bedroom window, but not as shown in photo' 23...
The movement was already reconstructed at trial. Someone posted some of that trial testimony earlier in this thread. The rifle used in the killings was seen on Sheila by the raid team. It was still there when the police brass did their walks through. It was still there when crime scene police entered. After being photographed on Sheila the crime scene police had it moved to near the bedroom window and photos taken from the stairs captured it near the bedroom window. Alleging they all lied is a wasted endeavour because instead of helping Jeremy it contradicts the defence claims that Sheila committed suicide. The police convinced of Jeremy's guilt and prosecutors would have been well chuffed if the gun that killed Sheila had been found too far away from her body for her to have committed suicide.
-
[mike are you saying sheila was alive from 7.45 to 9.15am.if yes why would the police not call an ambulance.it is immposible that no police man checked to see if sheila was alive and than started a training exicise while she was alive .why did taff jones not notice she was alive .he spent several minutes looking at sheila he would have noticed signs of life.and so would 15 other officers .iam sorry but its impossible
-
WPC Julia Jeapes sees barrel of rifle (using the scope of her weapon) at first floor window, from her vantage point, covering the corner of White / Red
07.15 am- Rifle at 'a' window (box room window, versus, main bedroom window, scenario)
Members of raid team are deployed to enter the farmhouse, after mention made of the sighting of gun near upstairs window
Officers take part in 'familiars' with bodies of victims still insitu. SOCO are prevented from accessing the scene until after the training exercise is completed...
09.13 am - Rifle brought to Sheila's body, from window, for 'gauging' purposes, Sheila killed by bullet discharged from rifle, 'it' was removed, and her body was put into recovery position
SOCO, Cook, Bird, Hammersley and Davidson, take control of crime scene, to take photographs and gather exhibits, in the immediate aftermath of the police training exercise that had just finished involving movement of furniture, exhibits and the bodies of the three adult victims
10.13 am - Rifle at 'main bedroom window' (photograph No. 23 taken)
At this stage Sheila's body was on the floor, in the recovery position, without any weapon whatsoever upon it, or next to it. Then, her body was rolled onto its back in readiness for the rifle (as shown in photograph No. 23) to be brought from the main bedroom window, and positioned upon her body, and only then photographed, thus producing a false set of photographs which would supposedly show how Sheila's body had been found on the very first occasion police came into contact with her, but this was a deliberate lie. Police staged Shgeila's death scene, to framne her for her own suicide by preparing the rifle in her possession, photographing what they themselves had done, and then in the first instance, using those images to support the case that Sheilka had killed the other four victims, before taking her own life (inquest proceedings), and then later, using the very same photographs to allege that this was evidence showing how Jeremy Bamber himself had staged his sisters death scene, after he had allegedly killed everyone including his sister, to fool police into thinking Sheila had taken her own life...
10.27 am - Rifle poisitioned on Sheila's body, then photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 were taken
Rifle removed from body by Cook and replaced at bedroom window, where it had been taken from previously to the body ( not photographed on this occasion)...[/list]
how can you prove there was a training exicise .also which officers were involved in the cover up.
-
The movement was already reconstructed at trial. You were banned, why are you persisting in breaching forum rules. If you do not give a truthful answer, I will ban you again. However, if for once in your life you admit to your deception and promise on the open forum not to carry out personal attacks against any other member, including myself, I may consider reinstating your membership under your original User name...Someone posted some of that trial testimony earlier in this thread. The rifle used in the killings was seen on Sheila by the raid team. It was still there when the police brass did their walks through. It was still there when crime scene police entered. After being photographed on Sheila the crime scene police had it moved to near the bedroom window and photos taken from the stairs captured it near the bedroom window. Alleging they all lied is a wasted endeavour because instead of helping Jeremy it contradicts the defence claims that Sheila committed suicide. The police convinced of Jeremy's guilt and prosecutors would have been well chuffed if the gun that killed Sheila had been found too far away from her body for her to have committed suicide.
-
[mike are you saying sheila was alive from 7.45 to 9.15am. Deeply unconscious, but certain barely alive, yes. Hers was the 'dead female body' found in the kitchen, at 7.37am, after 'a male body' had already been found.if yes why would the police not call an ambulance. Woodcock and the others believed she had been killed during the struggle he had with Sheila, as Woodcock came around the outside edge of the opening internal kitchen door. Sheila got shot according to the actual contents of his report because (he says) 'she pulled the muzzle of his weapon which was fitted with a suppressor, silencer, sound moderator, call it whatever you want to, into her own neck, which left a mark bearing the same 1" diameter from the silencer upon her neck, around the bullet entry hole, which was caused because during that struggle, Woodcocks weapon came into direct contact with the aga fireplace surround and marked it. When Sheila collapsed he thought she was dead. Other officers back at the control room who were at that stage eavesdropping this activity, overheard the shouting and disturbance caused by Woodcocks struggle with Sheila, and 'interpreted what they heard, as Sheila 'having committed suicide'. This was the source from which 'Linda' in the control room relied upon when at 7.45am she contacted (SOCO) DS Davidson at his home address, to request him ' to come into the office, because police were dealing with an incident at whf, involving A MURDER, and A SUICIDE'. let us 'not forget', that although on the first page of Woodcocks witness statement, it clearly states for all and everyone to see, that it states, ' I make this statement consisting of 15 pages', but that there is only 10 pages in his disclosed witness statement. A total of 5 pages of evidence is ' missing'. In addition, a completely 'different typewriter' has been used in the body of 'that' 10 page version of his 15 page witness statement', to describe, 'Woodcocks entry into the kitchen'. It is my argument, that this 'added' retyped page 'content' has been introduced, to cover up the detail of what really did happen, once Woodcock, came around the edge of 'that' internal door, situated between the back door entrance hall and the main kitchen. 'Two' bodies found upon entry, 'not one mistaken for two bodies'. If you don't understand what I'm saying there is no possibility of me answering any further questions from you about this matter. This is because I would be wasting my time, putting across the real circumstance which unfolded.,.it is immposible that no police man checked to see if sheila was alive Listen up, and listen up good. 'I do not suffer fools, gladly'. I wish the lot of you would stop trying to take the piss, you are all full of shit, and do not know what you are talking aboutand than started a training exicise while she was alive . They thought they had killed her. Also, the rifle was brought from which ever window to her body, to see whether or not it was possible for Sheila to have used the rifle (which they had brought from whichever window to her body) to shoot and kill each of the other four victims - they established during these 'familiars', that she could have (and did) shoot and kill the others. Unfortunately, police did shoot and kill Sheila when they arranged the fingers of her right hand upon, against, and around the trigger mechanism, BANG!!!, she was shot under the chin. She did not kill herself, they shot and killed her, at around 9.13am. Once the shot was fired by use of Woodcocks weapon, 'it' was moved to the side of the ' main bedroom window', where it was subsequently photographed at 10.13am...why did taff jones not notice she was alive .he spent several minutes looking at sheila he would have noticed signs of life.and so would 15 other officers .iam sorry but its impossible it was not as easy as 'that', she was deeply unconscious after exerting herself recovering from the 'initial shot across her throat' when PS Woodcock shot her during the initial struggle as he entered the kitchen. After this she eventually regained consciousness, and made her way to the upstairs main bedroom. Where she initially collapsed upon the bed. Her body was on 'the far side of the bed', from as early as 8.44am, as described by the police surgeon, Dr Craig, and Police Inspector, 'Bob Miller'. Some time later the police removed her body from the bed and positioned it on the bedroom floor at which stage they brought the 'anshuzt rifle from the main bedroom window, and they 'planted it' on Sheila's body. This took place after 10.13am. The rifle at the main bedroom window, as photographed there, at 10.13am, crime scene photograph No. 23 was taken then. It was photographed leaning close to the main bedroom window (23) before it was eventually taken from 'that' window and put onto Sheila's body. Once police moved the rifle from the main bedroom window (23) onto her body, PC Bird took photographs, numbered, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, to prove the gun was 'on the body'. Surely, you can work the rest out yourself...
-
Detective Inspector Cook, and Police Constable Bird, both gave false testimony regarding the order with which photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 23 had allegedly been taken. The truth is that the 'photograph No. 23' was taken before the others, 'not' the other way around. Cook and Bird, are therefore Criminals who should both have been prosecuted, for offences of 'perverting the course of justice', and 'Conspiracy'...
-
I would now like to address the question of firearm officers stating that they found Sheila's body, on the bedroom floor, with the rifle on her body?
It is a blatent lie, by each and everyone of them. The contents of their witness statements do not correspond to the contents of the police message log contents...
-
why is there no blood onthe front of her nighty not even a speck.if she ran upstairs there surely would be so ..your claiming all the officers lied.i doubt it .when it was showen to you that rifle was not in the bedroom that wpc jeapes claims/you and others changed it and introduced the second rifle.keep the abuse out of your replys please.why is there no blood on the bed or pillow if she collapsed there.are you saying ps woodcock inflicted seilas first wound in the kitchen upon entry.
-
I would now like to address the question of firearm officers stating that they found Sheila's body, on the bedroom floor, with the rifle on her body?
It is a blatent lie, by each and everyone of them. The contents of their witness statements do not correspond to the contents of the police message log contents...
Moreover, I am inclined to believe and accept the police message log details are more accurate and reliable than the contents of witness statements made by the firearm officers, because the messages in the police logs are all timed events, whereas, the contents of firearm officers witness statements are not, there are no 'timed references', to any of the alleged events written in these witness statements
-
There was no mistake about which bodies, and what body was presented to the firearm officers once they smashed down the external farmhouse door, and managed to push open the inner door situated between the back door hallway and the main kitchen. Collins said that he could see the body of a female, behind the door, a sighting which took place whilst the rifle which WPC Jeapes had seen resting near a window on the first floor about 15 minutes earlier was still resting in exactly the same position. Bearing in mind that from his vantage point outside the kitchen window Collins could only see two doors that the body which he had described could have been behind. One of these doors was 'the spiral stair, door', the other was, 'the pantry door'. It should be pointed out simply for the purpose of accuracy that no-one has claimed or is claiming, and certainly there are no crime scene photographs showing the body of Ralph Bamber behind any of the 4 internal kitchen doors of the main kitchen. So, it is undisputable then that the body of 'a female' was seen by Collins when he peered into the kitchen window prior to the first blow of the sledge hammer that forced open the external back out the house, court yard door. " I can see the body of a female behind the door"...
There was a female behind one of the 4 internal kitchen doors, of which Collins could only possibly have been referring to one of two of these. The female body he saw at that stage could only have been seen behind the 'spiral stair case door', or ' behind the pantry door'. Collins could not even see the door situated at the far left hand corner of the kitchen from his vantage point because the 'angle" was too acute. And in any event, even if he had been able to see the door in question, he would not have been able to see a body, behind it, only in front of it. Then the raid team smashed down the court yard door and ventured into the farmhouse. It has since the time of the trial now been claimed because of the emergence of the 'key' police message logs, that Collins discovered his mistake once he entered the main kitchen, it is said at 'that' stage, he realised the body he had seen earlier which he thought was a female, had in fact been the body of Ralph Bamber. But the contents of the police log tell a completely different story. Since, at 7.37am the following message was passed, " the body of one dead male', and 'the body of one female, found upon entry to the kitchen'...
On this account, how could Collins have rectified his mistake, by discovering the body of Ralph Bamber, to have been the body he had seen from his vantage point outside the kitchen window (the body of a female), when no sooner is it being reported (7.37am) " the body of one dead male' than it is being confirmed in the exact same timed message, 'AND' (not in place of) 'the body of one dead female'. Clearly, this was a reference to two different bodies, not one mistaken at different times for one type of body, or another. Back in the control room, that very first entry into the kitchen was being 'listened in', on, and even the hammer blows against the outside court yard door were heard, recognised, and documented. Then 'movement' was heard inside the kitchen, oh and not a voice, but 'vioces', followed by (7.37am) ' the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found upon entry to the kitchen'. If, and it is a very big "if", Collins had genuinely made the mistake of misidentifying Ralph Bambers body for that of a dead female, such a mistake would almost certainly be rectified when he set foot in the kitchen. His explanation does not add up. Since from Collins vantage point outside the kitchen window looking inward of the kitchen, there is no way the position of Ralph Bambers body could be described as being behind any door, when compared to the position of his body on the kitchen floor near the corner of aga (as shown in crime scene photographs). Back in the control room, staff monitoring the eavesdrop via the open phone link, were left in no doiubt that police inside whf had been met with 'two bodies', not one. Indeed, not only were control room staff satisfied that there 'were two bodies', but it became clear that one of these bodies was 'male', and the other body was a 'female' one. Even more astonishingly, staff in the control room knew from a very early stage (certainly, prior to 7.45am) that one of the two bodies had been described, or reported, or that this information had been transmitted via the telephone eavesdrop link, was 'a murder', whilst the other body was being treated as 'a suicide'. Now all this knowledge, information intelligence, had to have been passed, sent, overheard, transmitted within an 8 minute window of opportunity, to enable 'Linda' to be contacting DS Davidson (SOCO) at his home at 7.45am, asking him to come on duty into the office, because police are dealing with an incident at white house farm, involving 'a murder' and 'a suicide'...
At 7.38am, ' One dead male, one dead female'...
At 7.42am, ' Can someone contact the police surgeon, and Coroners officers, regarding TWO BODIES'...
-
Sheila, was the female, hers was the 'suicide' being spoken about. The crime scene photographs do not depict the original scene that police were met with on the first entry. The photographs depict the various crime scenes after the 'training exercise' finished at around 10 O'clock....
-
There was no mistake about which bodies, and what body was presented to the firearm officers once they smashed down the external farmhouse door, and managed to push open the inner door situated between the back door hallway and the main kitchen. Collins said that he could see the body of a female, behind the door, a sighting which took place whilst the rifle which WPC Jeapes had seen resting near a window on the first floor about 15 minutes earlier was still resting in exactly the same position. Bearing in mind that from his vantage point outside the kitchen window Collins could only see two doors that the body which he had described could have been behind. One of these doors was 'the spiral stair, door', the other was, 'the pantry door'. It should be pointed out simply for the purpose of accuracy that no-one has claimed or is claiming, and certainly there are no crime scene photographs showing the body of Ralph Bamber behind any of the 4 internal kitchen doors of the main kitchen. So, it is undisputable then that the body of 'a female' was seen by Collins when he peered into the kitchen window prior to the first blow of the sledge hammer that forced open the external back out the house, court yard door. " I can see the body of a female behind the door"...
There was a female behind one of the 4 internal kitchen doors, of which Collins could only possibly have been referring to one of two of these. The female body he saw at that stage could only have been seen behind the 'spiral stair case door', or ' behind the pantry door'. Collins could not even see the door situated at the far left hand corner of the kitchen from his vantage point because the 'angle" was too acute. And in any event, even if he had been able to see the door in question, he would not have been able to see a body, behind it, only in front of it. Then the raid team smashed down the court yard door and ventured into the farmhouse. It has since the time of the trial now been claimed because of the emergence of the 'key' police message logs, that Collins discovered his mistake once he entered the main kitchen, it is said at 'that' stage, he realised the body he had seen earlier which he thought was a female, had in fact been the body of Ralph Bamber. But the contents of the police log tell a completely different story. Since, at 7.37am the following message was passed, " the body of one dead male', and 'the body of one female, found upon entry to the kitchen'...
On this account, how could Collins have rectified his mistake, by discovering the body of Ralph Bamber, to have been the body he had seen from his vantage point outside the kitchen window (the body of a female), when no sooner is it being reported (7.37am) " the body of one dead male' than it is being confirmed in the exact same timed message, 'AND' (not in place of) 'the body of one dead female'. Clearly, this was a reference to two different bodies, not one mistaken at different times for one type of body, or another. Back in the control room, that very first entry into the kitchen was being 'listened in', on, and even the hammer blows against the outside court yard door were heard, recognised, and documented. Then 'movement' was heard inside the kitchen, oh and not a voice, but 'vioces', followed by (7.37am) ' the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found upon entry to the kitchen'. If, and it is a very big "if", Collins had genuinely made the mistake of misidentifying Ralph Bambers body for that of a dead female, such a mistake would almost certainly be rectified when he set foot in the kitchen. His explanation does not add up. Since from Collins vantage point outside the kitchen window looking inward of the kitchen, there is no way the position of Ralph Bambers body could be described as being behind any door, when compared to the position of his body on the kitchen floor near the corner of aga (as shown in crime scene photographs). Back in the control room, staff monitoring the eavesdrop via the open phone link, were left in no doiubt that police inside whf had been met with 'two bodies', not one. Indeed, not only were control room staff satisfied that there 'were two bodies', but it became clear that one of these bodies was 'male', and the other body was a 'female' one. Even more astonishingly, staff in the control room knew from a very early stage (certainly, prior to 7.45am) that one of the two bodies had been described, or reported, or that this information had been transmitted via the telephone eavesdrop link, was 'a murder', whilst the other body was being treated as 'a suicide'. Now all this knowledge, information intelligence, had to have been passed, sent, overheard, transmitted within an 8 minute window of opportunity, to enable 'Linda' to be contacting DS Davidson (SOCO) at his home at 7.45am, asking him to come on duty into the office, because police are dealing with an incident at white house farm, involving 'a murder' and 'a suicide'...
At 7.38am, ' One dead male, one dead female'...
At 7.42am, ' Can someone contact the police surgeon, and Coroners officers, regarding TWO BODIES'...
fantastic thoery mike .its totally bamboozled me.i will try and figue it out.you left out the answer to my question did woodcock shoot sheila in the kitchen .as you mentioned earlier.
-
fantastic thoery mike .its totally bamboozled me.i will try in figue it out.you left out the answer to my question did woodcock shoot sheila in the kitchen .as you mentioned eartlier.
The rifle he had possession of fired the first shot across Sheila's neck during 'a struggle' between them. It started as Woodcock was coming around the opening edge of the inner door on his way into the main kitchen. The barrel and muzzle of his weapon became visible to Sheila due to the face that the door in question was hinged on the right (as viewed from inside the main kitchen.) When the latch of this door was lifted, the opening edge of the door swung from right to left in an arc. The muzzle of Woodcocks weapon protruded beyond the edge of the door, pointing toward the outside kitchen wall of the kitchen. This was a 'flaw' in the operation, because it exposed the muzzle and barrel to be 'grabbed' before Woodcock himself came around the edge of the same door. This in fact proved to be the case. Once Woodcock got around the gap in the aforementioned door there ensued a huge struggle between Sheila and himself over possession and control of the rifle in question. The struggle knocked the kitchen table askew, and at least two wooden stools were knocked over, the muzzle of Woodcocks rifle, swung first this way, then that, and probably came into contact with the underside of the aga mantelpiece shelf and marked it. Then in a dramatic change of tact Sheila pulled the muzzle of the rifle quickly into her own neck which caused Woodcocks trigger finger to exert sufficient pressure to activate a single shot from his gun. It is without doubt and without question that the Quick pulling of the guns barrel into her own neck contributed to the change in pressure involving Woodcocks trigger finger against the trigger. BANG!!!
-
Staff in the control room 'eavesdropped' this struggle, and heard Woodcock and the others talking about the incident in terms of Sheila having committed suicide by pulling the muzzle of the gun into her own neck, which had unwittingly increased the pressure of Woodcocks trigger finger against the trigger. We now know that this shooting incident was discussed amongst the firearm officers after the operation came to its conclusion at around 9 O' clock. At that time Sheila's body had found its way upstairs into the main bedroom, atop the bed itself. PS Adams visited the bedroom scene before he and some other firearm officers left the farmhouse. At that stage, there was no gun with Sheila'body...
-
Staff in the control room 'eavesdropped' this struggle, and heard Woodcock and the others talking about the incident in terms of Sheila having committed suicide by pulling the muzzle of the gun into her own neck, which had unwittingly increased the pressure of Woodcocks trigger finger against the trigger. We now know that this shooting incident was discussed amongst the firearm officers after the operation came to its conclusion at around 9 O' clock. At that time Sheila's body had found its way upstairs into the main bedroom, atop the bed itself. PS Adams visited the bedroom scene before he and some other firearm officers left the farmhouse. At that stage, there was no gun with Sheila'body...
Sheila had only one shot in her neck, by this time...
-
Between 9 and 10pm, a training exercise took place and got underway (familiars)...
SOCO' who had all arrived at the scene by 9.20am, had to wait outside whilst a group of the most senior police officers in the Essex force at that time, plus firearm officers, re-staged the death scenes of the three adult victims...
Sheila was shot and killed at precisely 9.13am, during a 'gauging exercise' after the rifle was brought from the box room into the main bedroom and positioned on Sheila's body to see whether or not she could have fired all the shots with use of it, which killed the other four victims...
BANG!!!
-
Staff in the control room 'eavesdropped' this struggle, and heard Woodcock and the others talking about the incident in terms of Sheila having committed suicide by pulling the muzzle of the gun into her own neck, which had unwittingly increased the pressure of Woodcocks trigger finger against the trigger. We now know that this shooting incident was discussed amongst the firearm officers after the operation came to its conclusion at around 9 O' clock. At that time Sheila's body had found its way upstairs into the main bedroom, atop the bed itself. PS Adams visited the bedroom scene before he and some other firearm officers left the farmhouse. At that stage, there was no gun with Sheila'body...
sorry mike that thoery in my opinian has some flaws.you agree with collins and the radio logs.one dead male and one dead female seen through the kitchen window.how than could sheila get up and struggle with woodcock and receive a shot from woodcocks weapon.also despite what you say there would be blood on the front of her nighty and not just on her right hand side .had your scenenario happened the bullets recoverd from sheila would be alot different in size and weight as police never have and never will use a .22 fireing weapon immpossible.police use high powerd and automatic machine guns.the rounds recoverd from sheila were almost identical in size and weight that can be proved from the report on sheila.now you might mention the 2 rifles thoery just what was woodcock doing putting down his own weapon and picking up and carrying some rifle he had come across as he enterd whf immpossible.when dci jones was looking at her body in the bedroom before the training had began.he did not spot her chest going up and down as she breathed he stood looking at her for quite some time .impossible in my opinion.
-
mike you said earlier that collins is weapon was fitted with a sound modirator because it left a 1in dieamiter mark on sheilas neck.i can tell you now thats impossible.for the simple reason police have never used silencers on there weapons .never.if any member on this forum can show me a photo of a police officer carrying any sort of firearm with a silencer on it .i will like to see it.why would police want to muffle their shots every time they discharge a weapon its within the framework of the law they dont care who hears their shots.
-
mike you said earlier that collins is weapon was fitted with a sound modirator because it left a 1in dieamiter mark on sheilas neck.i can tell you now thats impossible.for the simple reason police have never used silencers on there weapons .never.if any member on this forum can show me a photo of a police officer carrying any sort of firearm with a silencer on it .i will like to see it.why would police want to muffle their shots every time they discharge a weapon its within the framework of the law they dont care who hears their shots.
It would be helpful to have this photograph, which two gun enthusiasts in Ewen Smith's office in Birmingham studied, available for public viewing.
-
It would be helpful to have this photograph, which two gun enthusiasts in Ewen Smith's office in Birmingham studied, available for public viewing.
Which photograph Steve?
-
Which photograph Steve?
The one alluded to in the Andrew Hunter Book Draft, allegedly showing Sheila in the bedroom with a silencer mark round her neck.
-
The one alluded to in the Andrew Hunter Book Draft, allegedly showing Sheila in the bedroom with a silencer mark round her neck.
If she had a silencer mark around her neck, it would be visible on the CS photographs. It's like the foot that was supposed to be Sheila's, it's too old and too small - no disrespect the AH but I think he's a little gullible.
-
It was June's foot. Which would make more sense because it was she who was walking about.
-
It was June's foot. Which would make more sense because it was she who was walking about.
Oh I agree, defo June's foot but Andrew Hunter claimed it was Sheila's.
-
is it adnrew hunter who has turned coat now.mike still waiting on your reply for the 2 posts from me earlier.thanks
-
is it adnrew hunter who has turned coat now.mike still waiting on your reply for the 2 posts from me earlier.thanks
Not as far as I know Sami - he is still a supporter so not sure why he claimed to have seen a silencer mark - that puts Bamber IN the frame, not out!! ???
-
Not as far as I know Sami - he is still a supporter so not sure why he claimed to have seen a silencer mark - that puts Bamber IN the frame, not out!! ???
mike has come up with an immpossibe thoery as to how it got there.which trys to give credence to the book.pure fantasy.cause like you said works in favour of the guilty case.
-
mike has come up with an immpossibe thoery as to how it got there.which trys to give credence to the book.pure fantasy.cause like you said works in favour of the guilty case.
OK, don't understand that as there are hundreds of posts that explain (in theory) how the police faked the silencer. Too many contraindicative theories.
-
OK, don't understand that as there are hundreds of posts that explain (in theory) how the police faked the silencer. Too many contraindicative theories.
mikes one is a classic cause he genuinly belives it
-
sorry mike that thoery in my opinian has some flaws.you agree with collins and the radio logs.one dead male and one dead female seen through the kitchen window.how than could sheila get up and struggle with woodcock and receive a shot from woodcocks weapon. Collins only reported seeing the body of a female, through the kitchen window. He never said he could see a dead female body through the kitchen window. Reference to ' the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found upon entry into the kitchen', was not spoken until after Woodcock entered the kitchen himself...also despite what you say there would be blood on the front of her nighty and not just on her right hand side . No, I am correct. She did bleed vertically down her neck, visible if you look with great care at a close up of the two bullet wounds present upon her neck. Furthermore, there is clear evidence of expiated blood on the top front part of her nightdress...had your scenenario happened the bullets recoverd from sheila would be alot different in size and weight No, they wouldn't... as police never have and never will use a .22 fireing weapon immpossible. yes, they do, police use a variety of different calibred weapons for potential use in different situations... police use high powerd and automatic machine guns. so...the rounds recoverd from sheila were almost identical in size and weight No, they were not. One of the two bullets fired into Sheila's neck, badly fragmented into at least 15 pieces. However, by the 20th September 1985, dodgy Malcolm Fletcher, produced a ballistics report, stating that both bullets recovered from Sheila's body had been 'whole', in appearance, and that both had been fired via the anshuzt rifle... that can be proved from the report on sheila. You are wrong, since a close study of the now known facts, reveals that the 'original' PV/20 badly fragmented bullet which got fired across Sheila's neck, which had broken into 15 pieces, could grow back into a 'Whole', bullet, just so the ballistic expert could say 'it' had been fired through the same gun that had fired the same bullet (PV/19) that killed her off...now you might mention the 2 rifles thoery just what was woodcock doing putting down his own weapon Woodcock did not put down his own weapon, such an idea has come from you, and nobody else... and picking up and carrying some rifle he had come across as he enterd whf immpossible. I never said that he did that, but you have..when dci jones was looking at her body in the bedroom before the training had began. The training exercise had already got underway before the arrival of DCI Jones, so, you need to be more precise with your timings...he did not spot her chest going up and down I have never claimed Sheila's chest raised itself up and down, but you have just now... as she breathed he stood looking at her for quite some time you can't always tell that someone is still alive simply by noticing the rise and fall of someone's chest. Additionally, when someone goes into deep unconsciousness it can be difficult to detect a heart beat... .impossible in my opinion. your entitled to your opinion...
-
thank mike its only my opinion.you never said what weapon c9ollins was useing when inflicting the shot in the kitchen.thanks
-
why is there no blood onthe front of her nighty not even a speck.Oh, but there is, your just not looking in the right places...if she ran upstairs there surely would be so Not necessarily, particularly since I have never claimed that Sheila had remained upright at all times, after she had received the first shot across her neck downstairs. She didn't, she collapsed on the kitchen floor and remained unconscious for a good half an hour, before regaining conscioussness , getting to her feet, and in less than a couple of minutes, she found herself upstairs in the main bedroom where she collapsed once again onto the 'top of the bed'... ..your claiming all the officers lied.they all did..i doubt it doubt whatever you like....when it was showen to you that rifle was not in the bedroom that wpc jeapes claims/you and others changed it and introduced the second rifle.no, you have grasped it all wrong, the rifle Jeapes saw at the box room window is the only rifle which Essex police are claiming had fired all 25 shots. The use of a second rifle in the shooting of Sheila involves the fact that somebody switched one of the badly fragmented bullets shot into her neck, substituted it, and claimed that both rounds had been fired via the anshuzt rifle...keep the abuse out of your replys please. Stop trying to put words into my mouth xxx x xxxx, and if I want to reply with abuse its got xxxx xxx to do with you, you xxxx xxxx xxxx..why is there no blood on the bed or pillow look for it, yourself... if she collapsed there. She did, but somebody like you will never accept the truth...are you saying ps woodcock inflicted seilas first wound in the kitchen upon entry.work it out yourself...
-
Not as far as I know Sami - he is still a supporter so not sure why he claimed to have seen a silencer mark - that puts Bamber IN the frame, not out!! ???
No, it doesn't...
-
No, it doesn't...
How can you claim the silencer was planted by the police/relatives one minute and then suggest it was used the next. The silencer being on the rifle does indeed put Bamber in the frame, the case was built around it.
-
Once Woodcock got around the gap in the aforementioned door there ensued a huge struggle between Sheila and himself over possession and control of the rifle in question.
She must have been one hell of a powerhouse Sheila, battered and overcame Neville and then wrestled with Woodcock and gained control of his rifle, makes you wonder why control never reported hearing a gun shot? They heard everything else? When they stage the scene upstairs they put one shell case to the left and one shell case to the right? Wonder why they did that?
-
has anyone got the link for the repiort of the bullets recoverd from sheilas neck.thanks
-
has anyone got the link for the repiort of the bullets recoverd from sheilas neck.thanks
Here is a link to a thread that discusses ballistics and a couple of picures which might be useful.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4465)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4466
-
Once again it failed to quote your site doesn't function properly.
You wrote, "You were banned, why are you persisting in breaching forum rules. If you do not give a truthful answer, I will ban you again. However, if for once in your life you admit to your deception and promise on the open forum not to carry out personal attacks against any other member, including myself, I may consider reinstating your membership under your original User name..."
I can't get my head round your meaning. I registered well more than a year ago and since have popped in time to time. After dithering a long while I elected to post for the initial time perhaps a week ago. What impiety have I committed?
No worries though I won’t post anymore. I’m just got back from the long holiday and am still knackered so will go knock off.
-
Once again it failed to quote your site doesn't function properly.
You wrote, "You were banned, why are you persisting in breaching forum rules. If you do not give a truthful answer, I will ban you again. However, if for once in your life you admit to your deception and promise on the open forum not to carry out personal attacks against any other member, including myself, I may consider reinstating your membership under your original User name..."
I can't get my head round your meaning. I registered well more than a year ago and since have popped in time to time. After dithering a long while I elected to post for the initial time perhaps a week ago. What impiety have I committed?
No worries though I won’t post anymore. I’m just got back from the long holiday and am still knackered so will go knock off.
They think you are Scipio - people shouldn't jump to conclusions but there are far worse people than Scipio ever was and they get away with just about anything.
-
Once again it failed to quote your site doesn't function properly.
You wrote, "You were banned, why are you persisting in breaching forum rules. If you do not give a truthful answer, I will ban you again. However, if for once in your life you admit to your deception and promise on the open forum not to carry out personal attacks against any other member, including myself, I may consider reinstating your membership under your original User name..."
I can't get my head round your meaning. I registered well more than a year ago and since have popped in time to time. After dithering a long while I elected to post for the initial time perhaps a week ago. What impiety have I committed?
No worries though I won’t post anymore. I’m just got back from the long holiday and am still knackered so will go knock off.
your posts are excellent and also your knowledge.keep posting.dont bullies stop you.
-
Once again it failed to quote your site doesn't function properly.
You wrote, "You were banned, why are you persisting in breaching forum rules. If you do not give a truthful answer, I will ban you again. However, if for once in your life you admit to your deception and promise on the open forum not to carry out personal attacks against any other member, including myself, I may consider reinstating your membership under your original User name..."
I can't get my head round your meaning. I registered well more than a year ago and since have popped in time to time. After dithering a long while I elected to post for the initial time perhaps a week ago. What impiety have I committed?
No worries though I won’t post anymore. I’m just got back from the long holiday and am still knackered so will go knock off.
Bye...
-
Here is a link to a thread that discusses ballistics and a couple of picures which might be useful.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4465)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4466
thank you caroline.
-
Bullies ?
-
Bullies ?
yes people who abuse and insult and swear at people in the name of debate.iam sure you know what i mean.
-
There were four categories of recovered bullets, (1) Whole ones, (2) nearly whole ones, (3) half a bullet, and (4) fragmented bullets. There were 12 whole bullets, 9 nearly whole bullets, 1 half a bullet, and 3 fragmented bullets. Originally, there were only 11 whole bullets, and there were 4 fragmented bullets - this all changed when somebody who had access to the 11 whole bullets, and the 4 fragmented bullets swapped one of the 4 fragmated bullets with one of the whole bullets, just so police could say there were only looking for one murder weapon...
-
There were four categories of recovered bullets, (1) Whole ones, (2) nearly whole ones, (3) half a bullet, and (4) fragmented bullets. There were 12 whole bullets, 9 nearly whole bullets, 1 half a bullet, and 3 fragmented bullets. Originally, there were only 11 whole bullets, and there were 4 fragmented bullets - this all changed when somebody who had access to the 11 whole bullets, and the 4 fragmented bullets swapped one of the 4 fragmated bullets with one of the whole bullets, just so police could say there were only looking for one murder weapon...
Ratio was as follows:-
11 whole and 4 fragmented ( of which bullet PV /20 was one of the original 4 fragmented bullet exhibits ) the switch of one round from the four badly fragmented bullets by replacing it with an anonymous whole bullet, increased the total of whole bullets by one, to 12...
-
They think you are Scipio - people shouldn't jump to conclusions but there are far worse people than Scipio ever was and they get away with just about anything.
you can find him preaching on the red forum. Amen...
-
yes people who abuse and insult and swear at people in the name of debate.iam sure you know what i mean.
Tut tut. Yes,the guilts are reknowned for that.
-
Tut tut. Yes,the guilts are reknowned for that.
And I suppose you're going to say that "innocents" aren't. Or do you never see them?
-
And I suppose you're going to say that "innocents" aren't. Or do you never see them?
Considering there's only myself,besides Mike of course, I fail to see any bullying coming from our corner.
-
Considering there's only myself,besides Mike of course, I fail to see any bullying coming from our corner.
calling other members p---k and useing swear words like f--k.is bullying in my mind.but it means i was doing something right.
-
Tut tut. Yes,the guilts are reknowned for that.
What utter rubbish, you seem to be the one with her claws out at the moment Lookout. You have been rude to Sami since they joined - no wonder new members are like hens teeth!
-
Considering there's only myself,besides Mike of course, I fail to see any bullying coming from our corner.
And neither of you would dream of using abusive language, would you?
-
And neither of you would dream of using abusive language, would you?
Not unless it was necessary,no.
-
Not unless it was necessary,no.
And when would that be Lookout? When you're losing the argument? ;)
-
And when would that be Lookout? When you're losing the argument? ;)
No,when there's an annoyance around.
-
No,when there's an annoyance around.
Like I said, when you're losing the argument!
-
Not unless it was necessary,no.
So it can be excused in your case, can it?
-
Like I said, when you're losing the argument!
No,it's you who gets tetchy not me.
-
No,it's you who gets tetchy not me.
Tetchy? I think not but when you're losing you get personal and it's clear you wound up. It's OK Lookout, nothing to be ashamed of ;)
-
No,it's you who gets tetchy not me.
Could be we all have different ideas of what constitutes "tetchy".
-
Could be we all have different ideas of what constitutes "tetchy".
Irritability.
-
And when would that be Lookout? When you're losing the argument? ;)
very nicely put caroline .when they are losing an argument.unlike them if someone can show with proof that we are wrong then we just accept it and move on .not get abusive
-
Ratio was as follows:-
11 whole and 4 fragmented ( of which bullet PV /20 was one of the original 4 fragmented bullet exhibits ) the switch of one round from the four badly fragmented bullets by replacing it with an anonymous whole bullet, increased the total of whole bullets by one, to 12...
and reduced the number of fragmented bullets from 4 to 3...
-
Irritability.
does the proof make you feel irritabal then
-
I wonder why there was such a significant change in the number of whole bullets from 11 to 12? And, why there was a decrease in the number of fragmented bullets from an original total of 4 to 3?
This dramatic change in the detail of types of recovered bullets amongst the different categories (whole, nearly whole, half bullet and fragmented) is very telling, indeed. It can be linked only to the original badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) which the pathologist, Peter Venezis, recovered from inside Sheila Caffells neck. This shot went across her neck, it was non fatal in nature, it had broken into at least 15 separate pieces, confirmed by reference to Xray taken which shows the badly fragmented bullet still in situ inside her neck, before it was removed by Venezis during autopsy...
-
does the proof make you feel irritabal then
Enjoying yourself,are you ? You nasty individual.
-
I wonder 'who' authorised the 'changeover' of that 'original' badly fragmented PV/20, by replacing 'it' with 'a whole' bullet?
-
I wonder who authorised the 'changeover' of that 'original' badly fragmented PV/20, by replacing 'it' with 'a whole' bullet?
I don't know Mike but it would be interesting to find out.
-
Can anyone tell me what rifles Essex police had with them when they entered WHF, I thought they were issued Heckler & Koch MP5 from 1970?
-
I don't know Mike but it would be interesting to find out.
Ignore them Lookout, let them have their say, there is no evidence that Jeremy Bamber killed anybody...
Whoever authorised the original badly fragmented PV/20 bullet (recovered from inside Sheila's neck) by swapping it with a whole test fired round, fired much later via the anshuzt rifle, must have had the consent of top brass involved in the handling, and the investigation of the 'four murders, and a suicide case', once it changed into a 'full scale murder investigation'. There would have been no need 'to swap' that bullet over before the nature of the investigation 'changed' on or after 7th September 1985...
-
I am minded to strongly suspect Detective Sergeant 'Stan' Jones of being involved, because he is the only Essex police officer who's signature appears on several of the Lab' General Examination Records, involving the batch of crime scene bullets, and spent cartridge cases. His signature (dated) appears alongside the ballistic expert (Malcolm Fletchers) signature, on several of these Lab' forms without explanation...
-
I am minded to strongly suspect Detective Sergeant 'Stan' Jones of being involved, because he is the only Essex police officer who's signature appears on several of the Lab' General Examination Records, involving the batch of crime scene bullets, and spent cartridge cases. His signature (dated) appears alongside the ballistic expert (Malcolm Fletchers) signature, on several of these Lab' forms without explanation...
But, if DS Jones was 'involved', he did not act alone...
-
Can anyone tell me what rifles Essex police had with them when they entered WHF, I thought they were issued Heckler & Koch MP5 from 1970?
i would also like to know that.also if they ever used silencers on their weapons .my school friends dad was a police man at the time and says police never muzzelerd they weapon.may be jane might know the answer .having had police in the family.
-
i would also like to know that.also if they ever used silencers on their weapons .my school friends dad was a police man at the time and says police never muzzelerd they weapon.may be jane might know the answer .having had police in the family.
After research Sami Essex police used either of these rifles, Parker Hale M82 Sniper rifle (7.62mm) and the Ruger Mini-14. Not the same bullets as the ashultz, but at close quarters any of these rifles would have killed and the bullet would have gone straight through the neck. They don't issue police with pop guns that require 4 or 5 shots to kill?
-
After research Sami Essex police used either of these rifles, Parker Hale M82 Sniper rifle (7.62mm) and the Ruger Mini-14. Not the same bullets as the ashultz, but at close quarters any of these rifles would have killed and the bullet would have gone straight through the neck. They don't issue police with pop guns that require 4 or 5 shots to kill?
thank you justce .that is important info.what about the silencers
-
thank you justce .that is important info.what about the silencers
Hi Sami , Why would they need to? They're not trying to be covert. They have a loud bang as well
-
Hi Sami , Why would they need to? They're not trying to be covert. They have a loud bang as well
thank you .just as i was told.who cares if their firearms are heard they are the law.
-
if the police was involved in a cover up why wasnt ds jones told about it .had it happened ds jones would have been warned by top brass that its a shut case 4 murders and a suicide .and if you interfere you will be taken off the case .he wasnt.i also find it hard to belive that if it was coverd up they would allow ds jones to point a finger at someone.no retired or serving officer has come forward with any remark regarding a cover up.because there wasnt one.
-
if the police was involved in a cover up why wasnt ds jones told about it .had it happened ds jones would have been warned by top brass that its a shut case 4 murders and a suicide .and if you interfere you will be taken off the case .he wasnt.i also find it hard to belive that if it was coverd up they would allow ds jones to point a fingert at someone.no retired or serving officer has come forward with any remark regarding a cover up.because there wasnt one.
If something happened that was so important that EP needed to cover it up - they would be LESS likely to want to change from Sheila to Jeremy because it would be more likely that someone would find out. I can't think of anything that would be so serious to require all the cloak and dagger stuff claimed on here. If they had shot Sheila, she was a suspect and it won't be the first or last time a suspect has been killed during a siege.
-
If something happened that was so important that EP needed to cover it up - they would be LESS likely to want to change from Sheila to Jeremy because it would be more likely that someone would find out. I can't think of anything that would be so serious to require all the cloak and dagger stuff claimed on here. If they had shot Sheila, she was a suspect and it won't be the first or last time a suspect has been killed during a siege.
yes that is correct caroline.they would have said she pointed the rifle at officers after being warned to drop it so they fired in self defence .case closed.would have been much easier.no reason to frame anyone.
-
yes that is correct caroline.they would have said she pointed the rifle at officers after being warned to drop it so they fired in self defence .case closed.would have been much easier.no reason to frame anyone.
And what's more -other than possibly confessing ONLY to a priest or a therapist- they'd have all kept their mouths SHUT. They'd have learned, early on, that grassing on brother officers wasn't done and a secret shared outside the force was no longer a secret. It's for this reason that I don't believe loose cannons are roaming the country divulging, hitherto, untold secrets, re the Bamber case, which, most concerned have probably now taken to their graves or are suffering dementia......................besides which, there are now newer and more interesting cases surrounding police corruption.
-
yes that is correct caroline.they would have said she pointed the rifle at officers after being warned to drop it so they fired in self defence .case closed.would have been much easier.no reason to frame anyone.
Especially someone they KNEW was innocent. Also they must have decided to frame him even BEFORE the scene was discovered because it is claimed that West and Bonnet knew that Neill called the police but didn't tell Jeremy.
-
But, if DS Jones was 'involved', he did not act alone...
We now "know' that at least 'one of the 25 bullets', which are said to have been fired during the incident 'WAS DEFINATELY TAMPERED WITH'. We also now 'know' (something which at the time of the October 1986, Chelmsford Crown Court trial, and the court, the jury, or Bambers legal team did not know. Furthermore, something in 2002 which the appellate court also did not know), that the 'only' bullet which has 'SO BLATANTLY'' been tampered with, is 'PV/20', but there are other bullets amongst the 'final batch' of Crime Scene Ammunition, which 'are too heavy', or 'too light', to have ever 'originated' from the 'same' batch of 'Eley .22LR Ammunition, said to have been the only source from which all the bullets had 'belonged' to? It becomes 'blatantly clear', when studying the ballistics report, and studying the details recorded on the relevant 'General Examination Reports' at the Lab' (Huntingdon) which deal with each of the 25 bullets, and each of the 'supposed' corresponding Eley Cartridge cases, that all of the '12 whole bullets', are supposed to have been associated with, or part of, 7 of them are 'too heavy', whilst the other 5 'whole' ones are 'too light'. In addition, and this is the most astounding part of the jigsaw, the 'exhibit bag' in which these bullets arrived at the lab' on the very 'first occasion' had 'BEEN CUT OPEN', and 'RESEALED WITH CELLOTAPE'...
So, the police must 'have' tampered with the batch of Crime Scene Ammunition before they sent it all to the Lab' to be examined 'officially' by the ballistic Expert, Malcolm Fletcher, from the 20th September 1985, onward (despite evidence existing that shows he was also 'unofficially' involved beforehand in comparison tests, on dates, 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September1985, proveable because his (dated) signature, appears along with DS 'Stan' Jones (dated) signature, on key 'General Examination Records', kept at the Lab'...
We 'know' who tampered with the 'bullets' and the 'Eley cartridge cases', and that person was 'not' Jeremy Bamber. He is 'not' the person who made the bullets and bullet cases all fit to the Anshuzt rifle...
-
The batch of crime scene ammunition, was collected at the scene, and during autopsies performed on the 7th and the 8th August 1985. It becomes possible to reconstruct the 'batches' of crime scene ammunition which were recovered by reference to the content of police witness statements, police reports, and police pocketbook entries, amongst other sources. For example, bullet cases and loose bullets were recovered at the scene on the first day of the investigation (a). Bullets were recovered from the bodies of Ralph Bamber, and Sheila Caffell, during autopsy on 7th August 1985 (b). Bullets / cases were recovered from the scene on the 8th August 1985 (c). Finally, bullets were recovered from the bodies of June Banner, Daniel Caffell, and Nicholas Caffell, during autopsy performed on 8th August 1985 (d)...
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
-
The batch of crime scene ammunition, was collected at the scene, and during autopsies performed on the 7th and the 8th August 1985. It becomes possible to reconstruct the 'batches' of crime scene ammunition which were recovered by reference to the content of police witness statements, police reports, and police pocketbook entries, amongst other sources. For example, bullet cases and loose bullets were recovered at the scene on the first day of the investigation (a). Bullets were recovered from the bodies of Ralph Bamber, and Sheila Caffell, during autopsy on 7th August 1985 (b). Bullets / cases were recovered from the scene on the 8th August 1985 (c). Finally, bullets were recovered from the bodies of June Banner, Daniel Caffell, and Nicholas Caffell, during autopsy performed on 8th August 1985 (d)...
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Four separate occasions, when bullets and spent cartridge cases were either collected, found, or recovered. It surely must follow then, that the original batch's of crime scene bullets and bullet cases must have been retained in 'four separate packages', but according to the lab' records which deals with first reception at the lab', packaging has been cut open and resealed with celotape...
I will now be taking a closer look at this 'crucial feature', of the investigation, because it seems to me, that this is 'the hub' around which Jeremy Bambers convictions have been fabricated...
Police have made this case into 'a one gun crime' - when 'it was NOT'...
-
Associated with these 'four' separate categories of Crime Scene Ammunitions, are specific personnel, for example, people who found it, or people who recovered it, or people who were given it, people who handled it, people who accepted it into police storage, people who logged and documented its movement within the police system, people who took possession of it all, or part of the whole, and transported it to the lab', on this, or that occasion, people who received it at the lab' on the first, and any other subsequent occasion, people who examined it, and so on, and so forth. The task of tracing and tracking the movement of these / those 50 key pieces of original crime scene ammunition is a mammoth task, but one that I will endeavour to complete, until every piece of the jigsaw is captured and pieced together, so that the full picture is finalised, so that anybody or everybody can see for themselves, exactly how the police, the pathologist, the ballistic expert, everybody who has ever had anything whatsoever to do with any of this ammunition, helped, or contributed in some way, to frame Jeremy Bamber for these murders, by making these shootings into a One gun crime, when it most certainly 'WAS NOT'...
-
I will now start 'this journey' that I am fully committed to, by discussing the 'absolute lack of any evidence, whatsoever' linking any of the 'individual' 25 spent cartridge cases, to any of the 25 'individual' bullets, which formed part and parcel of 'THE REVISED BATCH OF CRIME SCENE AMMUNITION'...
No manufacturers crimping marks where the bullets and the primed cartridge cases were 'joined' together, to form complete rounds...
-
We know, because it is documented, and photographic evidence exists, which refer to or show a total of 29 loose rounds on, and subsequently taken (DRH/42) from the kitchen worktop, situated in close proximity to the telephone handset resting off its cradle, photographed there after 10 O'clock, once Detective Chief Inspector Harris had completed his 15 minute telephone conversation with Assistant Chief Constable, Peter Simpson - we know that the photographs which were taken do not necessarily show the true location or the true position of these 29 live bullets at the point when firearm officers first made entry into the main kitchen at 7.37am, when according to the contents of police message logs, police evidence in the form of these contemporaneous logs, confirm, ' the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, found upon entry to the kitchen'. The position of 'these' key 29 live rounds was only there with certainty after 10 am when the 'senior officers' handed the crime scene over to SOCO. This was done at this (10am) time, because between 9 and 10 O' clock senior officers were present inside the farmhouse when some firearm officers carried out a 'training exercise' with the bodies of the five victims still in situ. During these 'familiars', the bodies of the 'three adult victims', were touched and put into different positions, items of furniture and exhibits with potential evidential value, were removed, or added, until it came to the point when the farmhouse was handed over to Detective Inspector 'Ron' Cook, Detective Sergeant Davidson, Detective Constable Hammersley, and Police Constable Bird - somebody had then to bring the gun which was resting at the bedroom window and which had already been photographed there (23), to Sheila Caffells body, and stage her death scene, as part of the instruction given to Cook by senior officers to make sure that the position of the rifle was set correctly on Sheila's body, to support 'suicide'...
-
So to be clear Mike you are saying that the later officers bought in to investigate the case knew nothing of what the original officers did? Because otherwise it does not make any sense . Instead of "framing " Jeremy the most simple thing would have been for them to continue the cover up by continuing to say it was murder suicide rather than risking going through a court case?
-
So to be clear Mike you are saying that the later officers bought in to investigate the case knew nothing of what the original officers did? Because otherwise it does not make any sense . Instead of "framing " Jeremy the most simple thing would have been for them to continue the cover up by continuing to say it was murder suicide rather than risking going through a court case?
They knew that one of the victims, had been shot upon entry, and that the other victims had been shot before the first entry. Furthermore, not all the firearm officers who stayed behind to help conduct 'a reconstruction' so that the confusion which resulted 'after the shooting incident in the kitchen', had occurred, had themselves been part of the first six man raid team, and part of the command situated in a nearby forward control point when PS Woodcock (Special Branch officer) shot Sheila during a struggle as he himself entered the main kitchen. An 'officers Report' covering these circumstances was completed by PS Woodcock, later that same day, after the training exercise, and after the debrief held at Witham Police Station later that night, by which stage, SOCO had photographed Sheila Caffells death scene in the main bedroom, showing the anshuzt rifle on her body in crime scene photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, which were not taken until 'after' the same rifle had already been photographed resting against the bedroom window, in crime scene photograph No. 23. PS Woodcock was one of the original firearm officers that stayed behind after 9am, to take part in the aforementioned training exercise. PS Adams who was the 'Commander' of the operation at the time Woodcock shot Sheila in the kitchen 'refused to take part in the reenactment of the operation because senior officers at the scene by 9 O'clock wanted to reconstruct the entry in keeping with where the bodies ended up by 8.44am, when the police surgeon, Dr Craig, and Police Inspector 'Bob' Miller, certified the deaths, when Sheila's body was confirmed as being present on the far side of the bed in the main bedroom, June Bambers body was near the door of the same bedroom, and Ralph Bambers body was crumpled upon an overturned chair near the left corner of the aga surround. Consequently, police Inspector 'Ivor' Montgomery, took the 'role of Commander' during the same 'familiars'. PS Adams had a fall out with Montgomery, and the other senior officers, because they wanted everyone to 'miss out' the shooting incident in the kitchen where Woodcock had shot Sheila. The senior officers, and Montgomery, and Woodcock all agreed at the 'debrief held later that evening' that all the firearm officers would make their notes along the lines that the bodies had all been found where they had 'eventually been photographed' by PC Bird after 10 O'clock, and that what they were dealing with, was ' a case of four murders and a suicide', and that is what 'Did' happen...
-
But if that was true , the later senior officers that took over the case would have still been better off sticking to the 4 murders one suicide story and producing false evidence to support that ? Because the shooting by the police would have still been covered up with no risk of being exposed during a court case. Why did they change track to Jeremy being the murderer? What forced them on to that route?
-
I would have said that it was pressure that drove EP to secure a conviction. From all quarters.
-
But if that was true , the later senior officers that took over the case would have still been better off sticking to the 4 murders one suicide story and producing false evidence to support that ? Because the shooting by the police would have still been covered up with no risk of being exposed during a court case. Why did they change track to Jeremy being the murderer? What forced them on to that route?
Jan I have never understood that either Taff Jones was a very experienced officer and he was convinced Jeremy was innocent . Stan Jones thought differently and it is my opinion he had no evidence against Jeremy so they engineered some I have always found the silencer evidence difficult to accept and Julie's statement leaves me in doubt as well.
-
Jan I have never understood that either Taff Jones was a very experienced officer and he was convinced Jeremy was innocent . Stan Jones thought differently and it is my opinion he had no evidence against Jeremy so they engineered some I have always found the silencer evidence difficult to accept and Julie's statement leaves me in doubt as well.
I do think that once the press and family had exerted pressure they had to prove they were doing their job and IF Julie came to them as a woman scorned then they had no choice but to pursue that angle - then if Jeremy had got off in court can you imagine the headlines?
-
But if that was true , the later senior officers that took over the case would have still been better off sticking to the 4 murders one suicide story and producing false evidence to support that ? Because the shooting by the police would have still been covered up with no risk of being exposed during a court case. Why did they change track to Jeremy being the murderer? What forced them on to that route?
Why would they cover up a shooting by police? Sheila was a suspect - there would be no need to cover that up. Also, when did the frame up of Jeremy start because it is also argued that West and Bonnett conspired to keep the call from Nevill from Jeremy?? This was even before the scene was discovered. Doesn't make any sense.
-
Why would they cover up a shooting by police? Sheila was a suspect - there would be no need to cover that up. Also, when did the frame up of Jeremy start because it is also argued that West and Bonnett conspired to keep the call from Nevill from Jeremy?? This was even before the scene was discovered. Doesn't make any sense.
I don't think the second call happened .
unless the police were totally stupid and did not realise themselves it had occurred - then it did not happen .
It would have been easier to keep it as murder and suicide .
-
I don't think the second call happened .
unless the police were totally stupid and did not realise themselves it had occurred - then it did not happen .
It would have been easier to keep it as murder and suicide .
I know you don't but it has been suggested and not just here.
-
But if that was true , the later senior officers that took over the case would have still been better off sticking to the 4 murders one suicide story and producing false evidence to support that ? Because the shooting by the police would have still been covered up with no risk of being exposed during a court case. Why did they change track to Jeremy being the murderer? What forced them on to that route?
No, they would not, that is only your opinion...
For a start, those very same officers, from around 9am, onward, were guilty of allowing 'a training exercise' to get underway, after the 'shooting incident downstairs in the kitchen' had resulted in the displacement of a ' reported dead female body' downstairs in the main kitchen, to the main bedroom upstairs some 44 minutes after the firearms operation had seemingly concluded with the discovery of only three bodies found upstairs making 'five dead' in total. You must surely know, that once these very same senior officers 'allowed' the training exercise to take place, that they were sanctioning 'the annihilation of the original crime scene'. That is the first hurdle you and the others will have to overcome - 'Senior Officers' sanctioned the destruction of the crime scenes in the main kitchen downstairs, and the main bedroom upstairs. If you think that this is just coincidental, then I have got news for you and the other 'doubters'. There were clearly 'two bodies' downstairs in the kitchen found upon entry at 7.37am, and by 8.10am, 'only' a further three bodies upstairs. Anyone who denies this as being true, is an xxxxx and favours xxx xxx xxxxxxxxxx and x xxxx xxxxxxxccx. The police 'do not make such 'gigantic errors', either in cases where they do make mistakes, or even in cases where they set out to deliberately frame someone. They are usually a lot more careful when they get their heads together intent on falsifying a bit of evidence here, and a bit of evidence there. They got themselves into a pickle, and the reason they did is because they took on too much. It was hard enough for them to all get their heads together just to frame one person, but in this instance, it involved 'not one attempt to build a false case against one person ( they staged Sheila's death scene), so that the investigation could be dealt with, as 'four murders and a suicide', which they thought they could push through the 'Coroners court system' without a hitch. But things did not go to plan, they had to back track, and change tact, once the relatives 'kicked off', and the 'jilted' girlfriend, came toward. Those very same senior officers chose not to hold their hands up, to the 'conspiracy' they were all involved in, which if you haven't worked it out yet, involved the police 'fabricating the evidence', to blame Sheila Caffell, for shooting the other four victims, and then killing herself'. It wasn't Jeremy Bamber, or any as yet unidentified hitman who brought the anshuzt rifle from the bedroom window after it had been photographed there by PC Bird at 10.13am, don't blame Jeremy for doing things he could not possibly have done or been responsible for doing. The police (SOCO) brought that rifle from the bedroom window after it had been photographed there in crime scene photograph No. 23. SOCO brought the rifle from 'that' window, and positioned 'it' onto Sheila Caffells body. Once SOCO had done this, 'Ron' Cook, got PC 'David Bird to take photographs showing the rifle with the body. He did this by taking 8 consecutively taken photographs showing the rifle on her body, refer to crime scene photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. I am not bothered whether you and the other idiots who process to claim that all these photographs were taken before the same rifle was photographed at the bedroom window as per photograph No. 23. The true sequence of events is that the rifle was photographed at the bedroom window, before police photographed it on Sheila's body. Anyone who professes to claim it the other way around is a xxxx xxxx, full of xxxx, and obviously a supporter of police corruption and a dishonest state. Essex police 'xxxxxx xx', by taking on too much. Their problems started when it suddenly dawned on them with the coming forward of the dodgy relatives, and the jilted girlfriend. They could have held their hands up then, and come clean, but xxxxxxx xxxxxx do not know the true meaning of the woird, 'honesty'. They had made the choice one month earlier to frame Sheila for being responsible four her own suicide. When the defining moment arrived, to change the course of the police investigation, Senior Officers, started to blame Jeremy for having killed his sister, and staging her death scene...
I am not bothered whether or not you believe or accept what I am saying. After all, I know the truth, and you do not, and neither do the others who think like you.
Essex police thought they had got away with framing Sheila for killing herself, so much so that they did not even bother to do any ballistic tests to verify one way or another, which gun had fired the shots? The xxxx xxx xxxxxxxx kept well away from the ballistics during that first month, and only conducted ballistic tests once the dodgy relatives had cottened on to the serious 'flaws' in the police investigation...
-
Mike you are mistaken - I think JB is probably innocent but I am struggling to think how the case turned and why and I am not sure your explanation explains everything.
-
But if that was true , the later senior officers that took over the case would have still been better off sticking to the 4 murders one suicide story and producing false evidence to support that ? that is exactly, and precisely what did happen. Then relatives were still not satisfied with that, and Robert Boutflour did the rest. The funny thing was, is that Robert Boutflour had the advantage of being close to a Metropolitan police officer (Robbie Carr) who stuck his nose into the investigation at an early stage (13th August 1985). Boutflour got 'wind' of PS Woodcocks Report concerning the shooting incident which had occurred after police entered the main kitchen. He obtained information about the shooting of Sheila Caffell by Woodcock during a struggle as he came around the edge of the inner kitchen door, because with it being a firearm related matter, Woodcocks Report had to be lodged centrally at Westminster. When Robert Boutflour went to see Assistant Chief Constable Peter Simpson ( a fellow mason) at police headquarters on the 6th September 1985, Simpson found himself confronted with a living member of the public who had knowledge of the cover up involving the initial shooting of Sheila Caffell by PS Woodcock downstairs in the kitchen. Robert Boutflour made it clear to Simpson, that he had received 'inside information' about not only the shooting of Sheila downstairs, but also that 'that' part of the operation had been written out of the events so that the police could proceed with an investigation (SC/886/85) of four murders and a suicide, with Sheila having shot the other four victims, and then shooting herself 'twice' in the vicinity of the main bedroom. Boutflour told Simpson at that meeting on the 6th September 1985, that not only did he know that what the police were saying 'was not true', but hge also had a copy of 'the officers report' detailing the shooting incident which had occurred in the kitchen when a female believed to have been Sheila Caffell had in fact been shot, and mistakenly presumed dead...
Robert Boutflour had got Essex police by the balls, and Simpson had no alternative but to order a new investigation, with Jeremy Bamber the chief suspect...Because the shooting by the police would have still been covered up with no risk of being exposed during a court case. Simpson did not think so, since the contents of 'the officers report' which details the shooting of Sheila Caffell across the neck by PS Woodcock whilst she was downstairs and unarmed was considered to be more than capable of bring his own career, and the careers of many senior detectives involved in the cover up to an abrupt halt, with not only loss of pension rights, but also the pending certainty that prosecutions, convictions a very long terms of imprisonment would be imposed upon the lot of them... Why did they change track to Jeremy being the murderer? What forced them on to that route?
-
Step forward Detective Chief Superintendent 'Mick' Ainsley - the man put in charge of the new investigation, with Jeremy Bamber as the chief suspect...
Once Bambers conviction had been secured in October 1986, and following his 'retirement' from the police, he took up employment as a 'security advisor', at Osea Road, Camp Site, a business run by Robert Boutflour, and the 'other relatives' who all played some part in helping to frame Jeremy Bamber as the killer...
-
Listen up, and listen up good, we are now 30 years + down the road, and still the contents of 'the officers Report' into the shooting incident which occurred in the kitchen when the police 'entered', has not yet been disclosed - don't hold your breath, the 'authorities' are waiting for all the 'Conspirators' to die off before they finally get around to admitting what took place, all in the good name, of the British Criminal Justice System. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx the lot of them......
-
Robbie Carr, Metropolitan police officer - his father was the manager of Osea Road Camp Site, owned by the Boutflours / Bambers at the time of the shootings in August 1985...
-
I confronted Robert Boutflour on one occasion, about him calling me, ' nothing but a common house burglar'. I told him to keep his lousy masonic gob shut, and gave the old bastard a piece of my mind. He was a cocky old fucker, confident with it. He thought he was something because he had got the cops eating out of his hand. I told the fukker that his antics did not fool or impress me, and that if I could I would make sure I nailed him along with the fukkers who framed Jeremy for these murders, but the old fukker died before his time. I have so much wanted to nail the lot of them, all corrupt bent bastards, I fucking hate bent coppers and bent officials, and people in general who think they are better than everyone else - of course they are...
-
Second time I met Robert Boutflour was at a general shareholders meeting at Osea Road, Camp site. I attended with 'another' expecting to be allowed in representing Jeremy's interests in the business but the x xxxx xxxxxx wouldn't allow me into the meeting. Kept me waiting outside and gave me a cup of tea for my troubles...
-
Mike you are mistaken - No, I am not mistaken, I am revealing the truth, I have no reason to try to mislead anyone. I think JB is probably innocent but I am struggling to think how the case turned and why I have given a comprehensive explanation about 'why' the nature of the investigation changed, when it did, who caused it to change, and why Essex police had no option but to arrest Jeremy Bamber and treat him as a suspect, whereas previously they had been treating him as a victim. I have drawn attention to the existence of the 'key officers Report' relating to 'the shooting incident' which 'did' occur in the kitchen upon entry. That report is 'still' being withheld 30+ years later...and I am not sure your explanation explains everything.
-
When Detective Inspector 'Ron' Cook arrived at the scene (9.20am), he was spoken to by senior officers at the scene, and he was 'told' specific information by one or more of them. Present at the scene on 'that' occasion, were DCI 'Taff' Jones, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, DCI 'George' Harris, and other senior detectives, including, DCS Gibbons, DCI Clarke, and PI 'Bob' Miller. What one or other, told him was duplicated at the beginning of Cooks Scenes of Crime Register -
-
............................I am not bothered whether or not you believe or accept what I am saying. After all, I know the truth, and you do not, and neither do the others who think like you...........................
Mike, I think it is good that you don't care whether or not you're believed, otherwise it could be a great frustration to be the only one who "knows" whatever it is they consider the truth to be.
Most people require proof of something before they believe it -after all, I'm certain that you wouldn't be prepared to believe the person on the phone who tells you that if you send them a small fortune, they will forward you the large fortune that you've won- the ONLY exception to that rule is religion which, if it's to be believed, MUST be taken on trust.
-
Mike, I think it is good that you don't care whether or not you're believed, otherwise it could be a great frustration to be the only one who "knows" whatever it is they consider the truth to be.
Police moved the rifle from the window (23) and physically placed, 'it' on Sheila's body, the took photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29 30, 31, 32 and 33, which they have relied upon as 'evidence' which proves Jeremy Bamber stage his sisters death scene. To ordinary folk this 'cannot be acceptable', since the police brought the rifle from the window, and physically placed it on Sheila Caffells body, Jeremy didn't do what the police themselves are responsible for having done. Only someone with a corrupt and bias mind, would ignore the significance of such an act of dishonesty. Anyone who can't see 'the truth' in what I am pointing out is not interested in what really 'did happen', otherwise, they would know police lied, are liars, and would be supporting Jeremys cause...
-
Police moved the rifle from the window (23) and physically placed, 'it' on Sheila's body, the took photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29 30, 31, 32 and 33, which they have relied upon as 'evidence' which proves Jeremy Bamber stage his sisters death scene. To ordinary folk this 'cannot be acceptable', since the police brought the rifle from the window, and physically placed it on Sheila Caffells body, Jeremy didn't do what the police themselves are responsible for having done. Only someone with a corrupt and bias mind, would ignore the significance of such an act of dishonesty. Anyone who can't see 'the truth' in what I am pointing out is not interested in what really 'did happen', otherwise, they would know police lied, are liars, and would be supporting Jeremys cause...
Mike, it isn't simply a question of seeing your/"the truth." The truth has to be proved. Although I suspect it to be true of some, I can't label police liars en masse on the grounds that it's how you see them, when in this case there is only your word for it.
-
Mike you are mistaken - I think JB is probably innocent but I am struggling to think how the case turned and why and I am not sure your explanation explains everything.
jan in future dont question mikes thoerys.because he will get confused and think your a supporter of jbs guilt.
-
Tsk.
-
jan in future dont question mikes thoerys.because he will get confused and think your a supporter of jbs guilt.
As I have said before I am here to question and debate. Mike has known me on here for some time and I am sure he knows my methods and reasons . I have always been honest.
-
Mike, it isn't simply a question of seeing your/"the truth." The truth has to be proved. Although I suspect it to be true of some, I can't label police liars en masse on the grounds that it's how you see them, when in this case there is only your word for it.
You and many others don't get it, do you. I will try to explain it one last time, in the hope that 'the gist' of what I have been saying, finally sinks in. 'Police Corruption' is rife. It's worse now , than it ever was before. The 'so-called safe guards' which have apparently been put into place to try to prevent 'dishonesty' and 'corruption' amongst the controlling elite, has not worked. If anything, it has helped to do 'the opposite' of 'that' to which it was 'intended' to achieve. It doesn't matter what so called safe guards are introduced into the system to try to prevent dishonesty amongst police officers and public officials, they will find ways around it. The underlying problem which occurs over and over again, is that in most miscarriages of justice, a person is wrongly treated as 'a suspect', rather than, 'a victim'. In Jeremy Bambers case, however, he was treated as 'a victim' initially, but then later treated as 'a suspect'. The original file which spanned the first month of the investigation at a time when Bamber was being treated as 'a victim', went 'missing'. Some officers claim such 'a file' ( four murders and a suicide, under SC/688/85) never existed at all separately. But it did...
Police are concealing the contents, ' of that original file', which contains 'all' the information and evidence' capable of supporting Jeremy Bambers 'innocence'. Some of the information and evidence contained in the withheld 'original file' (SC/688/85), has been 'edited', or 're-written' and been incorporated into the later investigation (under SC/786/85), differently, justified by treating Bamber as 'a suspect', rather than 'a victim' - therefore, depending upon how police treat a person, will almost certainly result in the information and evidence which has been, or does get gathered, being 'recorded', and 'presented' differently in any criminal proceedings, or procedures...
Once you 'become' a suspect, the odds of you receiving a so called 'fair trial', become dramatically influenced negatively. The age old saying, that 'you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty', takes on a new meaning. In fact, the opposite might actually be true, 'if' police treat you as 'a suspect', you will find that 'the system' tends to treat you, as 'guilty until proven innocent'...
Therefore, in response to any suggestion that 'all coppers' and 'public officials' are not 'dishonest' or 'corrupt', it is true to say that they do not act dishonestly or corruptly when dealing with a person who is 'a victim', but that there is always going to be 'the potential' for them to 'act dishonestly' and 'Corruptly', when dealing with the same person, as ' a suspect'. When this happens, there is always going to be the chance that 'a miscarriage of justice' occurs...
-
One of the chief reasons why there appears to exist so much confusion in this particular case, is because 'Jeremy Bamber' was treated as both 'a victim', and 'a suspect' at different stages of the overall police handling of the case. It does matter whether or not the information, and evidence which is gathered or which might get gathered, is interpreted by the police. If you are treated as 'a victim' any information or evidence gathered may be treated innocently, whereas, if you are treated as 'a suspect', that same piece of information or evidence will almost certainly be regarded as suspicious, and capable of establishing guilt...
-
One of the chief reasons why there appears to exist so much confusion in this particular case, is because 'Jeremy Bamber' was treated as both 'a victim', and 'a suspect' at different stages of the overall police handling of the case. It does matter whether or not the information, and evidence which is gathered or which might get gathered, is interpreted by the police. If you are treated as 'a victim' any information or evidence gathered may be treated innocently, whereas, if you are treated as 'a suspect', that same piece of information or evidence will almost certainly be regarded as suspicious, and capable of establishing guilt...
In Bambers case, that part of the police investigation when they regarded him as 'a victim' has been 'deliberately withheld', because 'its content' will tend to favour his 'innocence' as seen, and witnessed through the eyes of the police, at 'that' stage.
-
Whoever made the decision to arrest, and prosecute Jeremy Bamber, for these five murders was 'bias', and ignored the original interpretation of the evidence, and the facts which the police themselves had gathered during the first month of the police handling of the case. It is all well and good saying that Bambers legal team could use whatever defence they had available to them in response to any allegation during the trial, but if you are the police and you are withholding important information and evidence which they have gathered at a cost to the public purse, then how on earth can a defendant such as Bamber expect his solicitors and legal representative to challenge the prosecutions case 'fairly' if police are 'hiding' all the evidence they have gathered which would tend to significantly weaken the case being brought?
-
Key police officers played 'a significant role' in both parts of the investigation. Others were 'bit Part players', only involved in either the first part under SC/688/85, or the second part under SC/786/85. 'At the heart' of both investigations were the 'SOCO', Detective Inspector 'Ron' Cook, Detective Sergeant Davidson, Detective Constable Hammersley, and Police Constable 'David' Bird....
There were 'others' who I shall name in due course...
-
Key police officers played 'a significant role' in both parts of the investigation. Others were 'bit Part players', only involved in either the first part under SC/688/85, or the second part under SC/786/85. 'At the heart' of both investigations were the 'SOCO', Detective Inspector 'Ron' Cook, Detective Sergeant Davidson, Detective Constable Hammersley, and Police Constable 'David' Bird....
There were 'others' who I shall name in due course...
In a nutshell, 'SOCO's used the photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, intending to show that Sheila Caffell had killed herself' in the first part of the investigation. Then, they used the 'same sequence' of photographs, to show 'How...' Jeremy Bamber, had 'staged, his sisters death scene' in the second part of the same investigation...
-
But...
It was 'SOCO's who brought the rifle from the main bedroom window after it had been photographed there in photograph No. 23, and put 'it' on her body. The police, no-one else, staged Sheila Caffells death scene. Sheila did not have possession of her own weapon on either of the two occasions she got shot, she did not shoot herself, and end up in the position which SOCO Bird photographed her in after 10.13am, when the gun from the bedroom window had mysteriously migrated onto her body...
-
But...
It was 'SOCO's who brought the rifle from the main bedroom window after it had been photographed there in photograph No. 23, and put 'it' on her body. The police, no-one else, staged Sheila Caffells death scene. Sheila did not have possession of her own weapon on either of the two occasions she got shot, she did not shoot herself, and end up in the position which SOCO Bird photographed her in after 10.13am, when the gun from the bedroom window had mysteriously migrated onto her body...
How can Jeremy Bamber, therefore, ever be responsible for shooting dead his sister, and stage managing her death scene?
-
How can Jeremy Bamber, therefore, ever be responsible for shooting dead his sister, and stage managing her death scene?
Because Jeremy Bamber 'did not' shoot dead his sister, and because it 'was not he' who staged Sheila Caffells death scene, 'why' would Jeremy 'make up' a story about receiving a distress call from his father? He wouldn't have needed to, because ' it was not he' who shot Sheila downstairs in the kitchen before 7.37am, nor was he responsible 'for shooting her' upstairs in the main bedroom at around 9.13am...
It was not Jeremy Bamber, who brought the anshuzt rifle from the main bedroom window after 10.13am, and 'planted it' on her body - but the police 'did'...
-
In the cold light of day, once you 'know' that the police 'shot' Sheila, that 'it was' the police who had shot her, that it was the police who photographed the rifle, ' at ' the bedroom window before police 'photographed that 'same' rifle insitu on Sheila's body, it was not necessary for Jeremy to make up anything about ' the phone calls', other then to say that such a call must have, or had indeed been made, by Ralph to Jeremy...
-
In the cold light of day, once you 'know' that the police 'shot' Sheila, that 'it was' the police who had shot her, that it was the police who photographed the rifle, ' at ' the bedroom window before police 'photographed that 'same' rifle insitu on Sheila's body, it was not necessary for Jeremy to make up anything about ' the phone calls', other then to say that such a call must have, or had indeed been made, by Ralph to Jeremy...
The bottom line is that 'Jeremy killed no-one', he had certainly 'not shot and killed' his sister, nor had he played any role in 'staging her death' scene. Whoever had 'staged' Sheila's death scene, had 'done so' to support the case for 'her having taken her own life'. I have secretly suspected, that if Jeremy had planned to do away with his family, that he would have almost certainly 'not wanted his sister to have died'...
-
The bottom line is that 'Jeremy killed no-one', he had certainly 'not shot and killed' his sister, nor had he played any role in 'staging her death' scene. Whoever had 'staged' Sheila's death scene, had 'done so' to support the case for 'her having taken her own life'. I have secretly suspected, that if Jeremy had planned to do away with his family, that he would have almost certainly 'not wanted his sister to have died'...
And is it too big a secret for you to say why?
-
Jeremy needed his sister to be alive, 'not dead', if he had been planning to kill his family, to get his hands on his parents wealth, and succeed in carrying out, 'the perfect murder''. Rest assured 'that' he did not kill his sister, or stage manage 'her death scene'. It was never proven or established that 'in order for Jeremy to 'benefit completely' from his parents wealth', that 'his sister had to die', or 'be dead'...
-
The bottom line is that 'Jeremy killed no-one', he had certainly 'not shot and killed' his sister, nor had he played any role in 'staging her death' scene. Whoever had 'staged' Sheila's death scene, had 'done so' to support the case for 'her having taken her own life'. I have secretly suspected, that if Jeremy had planned to do away with his family, that he would have almost certainly 'not wanted his sister to have died'...
He'd have left her alive to tell the police HE killed everyone? How would that work in his favour?
-
The most telling 'confrontational' event to date which occurred between Jeremy and myself, is a moment 'etched in my memory'. I suggested to him (face to face) that 'I believed Sheila had had an accomplice'. Further, when encouraged to expound upon those beliefs, I put it to Jeremy, that ' in order for him' to have been responsible for almost getting away with committing the 'perfect murder', I said, ' he would have to be, his sisters accomplice'...
He was grinning when he 'responded' with, ' you clever bastard'...
-
He'd have left her alive to tell the police HE killed everyone? How would that work in his favour?
Who said 'anything' about 'me saying', that 'Jeremy had shot and killed, the other victims'?
-
What becomes clear to me, is that on 'that' last evening, how inextricably noticeable in contrast to her behaviour as viewed and witnessed by countless folk during the morning, and the afternoon of that last full day on this earth, how her demeanour and approachability seemed to have altered so dramatically, by the time of 'the last supper'. What, if anything had caused this 'sudden change' in her behaviour?
-
Well, we know that she 'had visited Jeremy in the field', that afternoon. 'He' had been working with the farm tractor, when 'Sheila' and one of 'the boys' brought him his lunch. 'What', if anything, had Jeremy, and Sheila, 'been talking about' on this occasion, and ' Why' did she bring along 'only one' of 'her two children'?
-
What becomes clear to me, is that on 'that' last evening, how inextricably noticeable in contrast to her behaviour as viewed and witnessed by countless folk during the morning, and the afternoon of that last full day on this earth, how her demeanour and approachability seemed to have altered so dramatically, by the time of 'the last supper'. What, if anything had caused this 'sudden change' in her behaviour?
A change from what to...............what? The last known description of her was from June to Pam. June said she was concerned about her behaviour -she'd taken no interest in anything since she'd been a WHF- and Pam said she was quiet. There is ONE description of her skipping with the children that day, but every other description of her has her as listless and monosyllabic.
-
We also know, that from the build up to Sheila's visit to see 'Jeremy on the farm tractor' that afternoon, that 'everything had appeared normal' to people who had come 'into contact' with 'her', her 'mother' (June) and 'both' children, (Daniel and Nicholas). By tea time, 'Sheila's behaviour had taken a turn for the worst'. Mother and daughter 'had come to blows', word has it, that 'she had cancelled her weekly tuesday night bible class,' without any declared explanation. But it is believed that Sheila 'had given' June Bamber, a 'black eye'...
-
We also know, that from the build up to Sheila's visit to see 'Jeremy on the farm tractor' that afternoon, that 'everything had appeared normal' to people who had come 'into contact' with 'her', her 'mother' (June) and 'both' children, (Daniel and Nicholas). By tea time, 'Sheila's behaviour had taken a turn for the worst'. Mother and daughter 'had come to blows', word has it, that 'she had cancelled her weekly tuesday night bible class,' without any declared explanation. But it is believed that Sheila 'had given' June Bamber, a 'black eye'...
It doesn't tally with what was said of her by various Tiptree shop keepers when she visited with June that afternoon, nor the old friend of June's who they visited after they had shopped so there can be no indication that her behaviour had taken a turn for the worst. It's more than reasonable to assume that, if Sheila was doing nothing to help June in the house, June's work load would have increased, causing her to run late and having to cancel her church meeting as a result. It is believed BY WHOM that Sheila had blackened her mother's eye?
-
By supper time, the situation had 'intensified', with Ralph Bamber now having been 'drawn into' the 'conflict'. It was being pointed out that 'Sheila' was 'not a fit mother'. Her parents were trying to make her see, that 'it would be better' if 'she got some help of sorts, from 'Social services', or even 'a foster carer'. But Sheila was having 'none of it', she was 'unresponsive'. Her mind was already made up. It had been made up once she had spoken with Jeremy on the tractor, in the field that very afternoon. 'Tonight was going to be, the night'...
-
By supper time, the situation had 'intensified', with Ralph Bamber now having been 'drawn into' the 'conflict'. It was being pointed out that 'Sheila' was 'not a fit mother'. Her parents were trying to make her see, that 'it would be better' if 'she got some help of sorts, from 'Social services', or even 'a foster carer'. But Sheila was having 'none of it', she was 'unresponsive'. Her mind was already made up. It had been made up once she had spoken with Jeremy on the tractor, in the field that very afternoon. 'Tonight was going to be, the night'...
As Sheila was unresponsive, it would be very difficult to say what, if anything, she was having none of. It's possible that she may not even have been aware of what was being said.
-
Later that same evening, whilst both parents were 'engrossed' in 'trying to convince', Sheila, that 'she needed some help with bringing her two boys up', Jeremy had 'popped' his head in, in between journeys 'to and from the fields' driving tractor and trailor. He had spotted 'some rabbits' near one of the barns, and he took the 'opportunity' to go into the farmhouse, grab the family owned rifle, load it with bullets, and leave it resting on 'a settle' which was situated in the rear hallway, adjacent to a room known as 'the Den', or sometimes referred to, as 'the downstairs office', without him physically going outside to 'see' if the rabbits were 'still there'?
-
During 'that' same visit, Jeremy had brought a 'fresh' unopened box of .22 ammunition, and left them on the kitchen worktop, in 'full view of his sister'...
-
During 'that' same visit, Jeremy had brought a 'fresh' unopened box of .22 ammunition, and left them on the kitchen worktop, in 'full view of his sister'...
We now know that (if we are to believe what Essex police have thus far told us) the rifle which Jeremy had brought into the kitchen, must have already been loaded with '5 Live rounds'. Therefore, whilst 'he' was present in the kitchen, 'he had loaded, a further 5 Live rounds' , from the new box of 50 rounds, into the 'rifles' ammunition magazine so that the rifle itself, was 'fully loaded', whilst 'leaving' only 45 Live rounds in 'the box' on the kitchen (worktop) side...
-
We now know that (if we are to believe what Essex police have thus far told us) the rifle which Jeremy had brought into the kitchen, must have already been loaded with '5 Live rounds'. Therefore, whilst 'he' was present in the kitchen, 'he had loaded, a further 5 Live rounds' , from the new box of 50 rounds, into the 'rifles' ammunition magazine so that the rifle itself, was 'fully loaded', whilst 'leaving' only 45 Live rounds in 'the box' on the kitchen (worktop) side...
10 hours later, a 'set of bloody fingerprints', would be found 'on the edge of the kitchen worktop, close to the live rounds (29 unfired bullets in total) which had been 'tipped out' there. Additionally, 'multiple spots of blood' adorned the kitchen floor, 'directly beneath', in the same general area...
-
In all the many occasions I have ever spoken face to face with Jeremy, or indeed, when we have written letters to each other, regarding the 'same' topic, I have never been entirely 100% satisfied that Jeremy' has told the actual truth regarding his attempt to shoot the rabbits which he had seen earlier. I am not convinced that 'he' actually went back outside the farmhouse, once he had 'added' additional bullets into the rifle. I believe it more than likely that 'he' simply put the loaded rifle onto the aforementioned settle, in the back passage...
-
Jeremy, then did something extraordinary, 'something' which would provide his sister, with some respite (breathing space)...
-
Jeremy, then did something extraordinary, 'something' which would provide his sister, with some respite (breathing space)...
He 'deliberately' left the 'farm tractor and trailer', parked up in the farm yard, and 'instead', he got into his astra 'GTE', and 'sped away from the court yard' at the rear of the farmhouse, then along 'Pages Lane', beyond the 'farm cottages', and out onto the 'Tollsbury Road', towards home...
-
He 'deliberately' left the 'farm tractor and trailer', parked up in the farm yard, and 'instead', he got into his astra 'GTE', and 'sped away from the court yard' at the rear of the farmhouse, then along 'Pages Lane', beyond the 'farm cottages', and out onto the 'Tollsbury Road', towards home...
Jeremy 'had' told one of the farm workers prior to leaving the field in his tractor and trailer, that ' his father would be down later on to collect the last trailer load of crop'. I strongly suspect that this was merely Jeremy's way of telling the farmhand, that 'he was going home'. I don't think there had been any such arrangement between Ralph and Jeremy to this end - which later served to anger his father, who had 'other things on his mind'....
Jeremy had 'driven off', without so much as a 'good bye', or a 'good night', leaving Ralph to have to take the tractor from the farmhouse, down to the field to collect a trailer filled with crop. But, Ralph never made 'that' last trip...
Instead, 'Ralph Neville', a distant relative, whose 'camper van' was parked up at the farmhouse that night, promised to take the tractor and park it up at Osea Road, Caravan Park, where he was staying, courtesy of the family, on the understanding that 'first thing in the morning' , he would take the tractor to the field, hook up the loaded trailer of crop, and bring it back to the farmhouse...
-
Jeremy 'had' told one of the farm workers prior to leaving the field in his tractor and trailer, that ' his father would be down later on to collect the last trailer load of crop'. I strongly suspect that this was merely Jeremy's way of telling the farmhand, that 'he was going home'. I don't think there had been any such arrangement between Ralph and Jeremy to this end - which later served to anger his father, who had 'other things on his mind'....
Jeremy had 'driven off', without so much as a 'good bye', or a 'good night', leaving Ralph to have to take the tractor from the farmhouse, down to the field to collect a trailer filled with crop. But, Ralph never made 'that' last trip...
Instead, 'Ralph Neville', a distant relative, whose 'camper van' was parked up at the farmhouse that night, promised to take the tractor and park it up at Osea Road, Caravan Park, where he was staying, courtesy of the family, on the understanding that 'first thing in the morning' , he would take the tractor to the field, hook up the loaded trailer of crop, and bring it back to the farmhouse...
Jeremy, was in fact, unaware that 'these' arrangements, had been made. He did not find out about this until 'after' his failed, 2002, appeal decision...
-
Now, here's the ' interesting' thing, ' we know' that on the following morning, that 'Ralph Neville' turned up at whf, and was turned away near the entrance with the 'Tollsbury Road' because of the 'on going' police operation. At this time, 'Ralph Neville' was driving the farm tractor, and his 'Camper van' was supposed to have been left parked up in ' the court yard' on the following evening...
-
Now, here's the ' interesting' thing, ' we know' that on the following morning, that 'Ralph Neville' turned up at whf, and was turned away near the entrance with the 'Tollsbury Road' because of the 'on going' police operation. At this time, 'Ralph Neville' was driving the farm tractor, and his 'Camper van' was supposed to have been left parked up in ' the court yard' on the following evening...
However, the next thing of note that we hear about 'him', if the 'rumours' are true, is that he is 'the hitchiker', picked up by a local resident, who tells the local resident 'that' he has been 'staying on a farm with a family nearby, 'who have all been shot dead', and that he is trying to get to a port to leave the country to go back to 'South Africa'...
-
In my eyes, 'Ralph Neville' has to be regarded as 'a suspect'....
Was, 'he' Sheila Caffells, 'accomplice'?
Was 'he' Jeremy Bambers, 'accomplice'?
-
In my eyes, 'Ralph Neville' has to be regarded as 'a suspect'....
Was, 'he' Sheila Caffells, 'accomplice'?
Was 'he' Jeremy Bambers, 'accomplice'?
OK. So now it wasn't the police who shot her? Perhaps RN was in it with them!!!!!
-
In my eyes, 'Ralph Neville' has to be regarded as 'a suspect'....
Was, 'he' Sheila Caffells, 'accomplice'?
Was 'he' Jeremy Bambers, 'accomplice'?
He didn't have a camper van, he was staying at Osea, in a caravan. He drove the tractor home and left his car at WHF. He just worked there.
-
He didn't have a camper van, he was staying at Osea, in a caravan. He drove the tractor home and left his car at WHF. He just worked there.
Yes, he did...
He had 'a camper van', which was parked up at whf, but he stayed in one of the caravans, at Osea Road, Camp site, on 'some' occasions, and in 'his' camper van, 'sometimes' at whf. It just so happens according to the evidence, that he took the tractor to Osea Road that night, and slept in the caravan...
-
Ralph Neville had been living in 'South Africa', but word has it that he fled some 'trouble' or other there, and fled to the UK, found work at whf, and fled the UK on the day of the shootings...
-
Ralph Neville had been living in 'South Africa', but word has it that he fled some 'trouble' or other there, and fled to the UK, found work at whf, and fled the UK on the day of the shootings...
A bad case of fleas, then.
-
Yes, he did...
He had 'a camper van', which was parked up at whf, but he stayed in one of the caravans, at Osea Road, Camp site, on 'some' occasions, and in 'his' camper van, 'sometimes' at whf. It just so happens according to the evidence, that he took the tractor to Osea Road that night, and slept in the caravan...
Exactly.
-
I have never said, that 'anyone' other than the police 'shot' Sheila, or that anyone other than the police, 'staged her death scene'. I know Jeremy didn't, and I know that 'Ralph Neville' did not have anything whatsoever to do with Sheila's death. I'm not suggesting that either Jeremy or Ralph Neville had anything to do with the shooting of Sheila. I am saying that one or other or both could have been an accomplice of Sheila's in the murders of the 'other' four victims...
-
I have never said, that 'anyone' other than the police 'shot' Sheila, or that anyone other than the police, 'staged her death scene'. I know Jeremy didn't, and I know that 'Ralph Neville' did not have anything whatsoever to do with Sheila's death. I'm not suggesting that either Jeremy or Ralph Neville had anything to do with the shooting of Sheila. I am saying that one or other or both could have been an accomplice of Sheila's in the murders of the 'other' four victims...
So, you are admitting that Jeremy could have been involved?
-
In my eyes, 'Ralph Neville' has to be regarded as 'a suspect'....
Was, 'he' Sheila Caffells, 'accomplice'?
Was 'he' Jeremy Bambers, 'accomplice'?
Well, you've suggested he has to be regarded as a suspect and asked if he could have been Jeremy's accomplice which would put Jeremy at the scene of the crime, would it not?
-
Exactly.
Jeremy told me, that he (not Jeremy) had purchased a camper van and that 'Ralph Neville' slept in at whf some nights, but 'that' because he had started to work regularly on the farm, the family organised one of the caravans on the Osea Road, Camp Site, where he could stay. Jeremy told me lots of things about him. Said he'd been driven out of South Africa because of his involvement in gun crime, and that people over there had been trying to kill him. Apparently, 'Ralph Neville' had a great deal of experience handling and using various types of weapons. At one time, Jeremy 'thought' that he could have been the killer. But, whenever it came around to 'who killed Sheila', the writing was always written on the wall, that police had shot her, then 'shot her again', in a different part of the farmhouse, albeit Jeremy himself kept insisting that his sister had killed herself...
-
Jeremy told me, that he (not Jeremy) had purchased a camper van and that 'Ralph Neville' slept in at whf some nights, but 'that' because he had started to work regularly on the farm, the family organised one of the caravans on the Osea Road, Camp Site, where he could stay. Jeremy told me lots of things about him. Said he'd been driven out of South Africa because of his involvement in gun crime, and that people over there had been trying to kill him. Apparently, 'Ralph Neville' had a great deal of experience handling and using various types of weapons. At one time, Jeremy 'thought' that he could have been the killer. But, whenever it came around to 'who killed Sheila', the writing was always written on the wall, that police had shot her, then 'shot her asgain', in a different part of the farmhouse...
Yes, but Jeremy would tell you that. Jeremy told me that he doesn't think the police shot Sheila so there you go, he isn't always consistent.
-
Yes, but Jeremy would tell you that. Jeremy told me that he doesn't think the police shot Sheila so there you go, he isn't always consistent.
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
-
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
"Heat of the moment" talk, Mike? Telling one story to you and another version to Caroline is hardly what I'd rate as consistent though.
-
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
The 'problem Jeremy had' by the time police decided to treat him as 'a suspect' was that he had 'forgotten' that he had made the 'complaint' to PS Saxby, at the scene, on the morning of the shootings, where Jeremy 'accused' police of 'shooting his family dead'. He 'forgot' it all, and chose to believe instead, that 'Sheila had killed herself'. How had she done 'that' then without being in possession of her own weapon at the time she got shot downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the main bedroom? Sheila did not shoot herself, she was shot by the police...
-
He was hardly in a position to accuse..
-
He was hardly in a position to know..
I beg to differ...
Jeremy told me on many occasions, that everyone at the scene that morning believed Sheila was 'still alive' inside the farmhouse, armed with a gun, ready to shoot the other victims, shoot at the police once they started their approach to enter the farmhouse, and ultimately shoot herself. There had been sightings of a person moving around in the main bedroom upstairs. There had been 'intelligence' gleaned from 'eavesdropping' via the kitchen telephone with its handset off its cradle (being used as a microphone), there was also a 'shout' at around 6.30am, for the requirement of two ambulances to 'attend the incident', one of which was 'requested' to go 'directly to the farmhouse', with the second ambulance to be 'held' on 'standby in pages lane'. There was the 'sighting' of the rifle (confirming that someone inside the farmhouse who must have been alive, and)... had been able to place 'that' rifle against the ' box room window' on the very same side (white) of the farmhouse which had been chosen for the firearm officers 'to enter' into the farmhouse, a decision made within minutes of the first sighting of the rifle at 'that' window. There was every reason for everybody outside the farmhouse, to believe that there was 'still someone alive' inside the farmhouse, before the 'moment' they went in. A fact confirmed when 'Sheila grabbed the barrel of the gun' as it came into view around the opening edge of the inner door...
-
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
Yeah, that was when he was ham acting grief. He also asked to speak to his dad knowing full well he was dead.
-
Yeah, that was when he was ham acting grief. He also asked to speak to his dad knowing full well he was dead.
He did not know that 'anyone was dead', until the news was broken to him by the police. And, 'there is no evidence', and there 'never was any evidence' to support what you have just said. If there was any 'such evidence', then you need to spell it out to me, and everybody else, because 'that's news to me. There has never been 'any evidence', whatsoever, either 'suggested' or otherwise, that Jeremy even knew that anyone had 'ever' been shot, let alone 'killed', prior to the police 'informing him', and the first words 'uttered out of his gob' upon having the news broken to him that all his family 'had' been shot and killed, was to 'accuse' the police, not Sheila, the police of shooting everyone, including Sheila, herself...
-
I beg to differ...
Jeremy told me on many occasions, that everyone at the scene that morning believed Sheila was 'still alive' inside the farmhouse, armed with a gun, ready to shoot the other victims, shoot at the police once they started their approach to enter the farmhouse, and ultimately shoot herself. There had been sightings of a person moving around in the main bedroom upstairs. There had been 'intelligence' gleaned from 'eavesdropping' via the kitchen telephone with its handset off its cradle (being used as a microphone), there was also a 'shout' at around 6.30am, for the requirement of two ambulances to 'attend the incident', one of which was 'requested' to go 'directly to the farmhouse', with the second ambulance to be 'held' on 'standby in pages lane'. There was the 'sighting' of the rifle (confirming that someone inside the farmhouse who must have been alive, and)... had been able to place 'that' rifle against the ' box room window' on the very same side (white) of the farmhouse which had been chosen for the firearm officers 'to enter' into the farmhouse, a decision made within minutes of the first sighting of the rifle at 'that' window. There was every reason for everybody outside the farmhouse, to believe that there was 'still someone alive' inside the farmhouse, before the 'moment' they went in. A fact confirmed when 'Sheila grabbed the barrel of the gun' as it came into view around the opening edge of the inner door...
And who will be prepared to stand up in court and tell a jury that "Sheila grabbed the barrel of the gun"?
-
Ralph Neville could 'not' possibly have shot Sheila, 'downstairs' in the kitchen, with use of a 'police weapon', nor 'upstairs' in the main bedroom, with the 'use' of the anshuzt rifle, that 'was' leaning against 'that' window, from around 7.15am, onward, as compared to the actual time Sheila had been shot and 'killed' upstairs in the bedroom at 9.13am. How did the 'South African' manage to get past all the police on duty and surrounding the farmhouse to enable him to do that then? His real name wasn't, ' Harry Houdini', by any chance was it? Not even 'Spring heeled jack' (in his prime) could have got into and out of the farmhouse, and carried out such a 'double shooting', and then manage to 'stage Sheila's death scene', without being seen...
No, Sheila's killers, were the police. No-one else was involved in her death, and the 'creation' of her 'death scene'...
-
The funny thing is, there are far too many people who think they are so clever and better than almost everyone else, but they can't even 'grasp' simply facts, and apply those 'same facts', within the 'grand scheme of things'. I mean, because police 'are' responsible, and because police did shoot Sheila, and kill her, they 'know', and they 'knew', right from the outset that (1) Sheila had not killed herself, (2) that two different weapons were used to shoot and to kill her, (3) that 'bullets' used in her shooting were not from the same batch of ammunition, (4) that 'the family owned' silencer had not been 'fitted' to the end of the guns barrel, when Sheila was shot and killed with use of the anshuzt rifle, upstairs in the main bedroom...
-
I cannot ever see the day coming when so long as 'he' continues to believe, and to promote the case that his sister killed, ' herself', that Jeremy Bambers convictions will ever get quashed on appeal. And, the reason why it won't happen is because Sheila 'did not' shoot herself, "once", let alone 'twice"...
-
He did not know that 'anyone was dead, until the news was broken to him by the police. And, there is no evidence, and there 'never was any evidence' to support what you have just said. If there was any 'such evidence', then you need to spell it out to me, and everybody else, because 'that's news to me. There has never been any evidence whatsoever, either 'suggested' or otherwise, that Jeremy even knew that anyone had ever been shot, let alone killed, prior to the police informing him, and the first words 'uttered out of his gob' upon having the news broken to him that all his family 'had' been shot and killed, was to 'accuse' the police, not Sheila, the police of shooting everyone, including Sheila, herself...
He asked to speak to his dad after being told they were ALL dead.
-
He asked to speak to his dad after being told they were ALL dead.
Yes, 'he did', but that was 'after' the news that 'all his family' had been shot 'dead' inside the farmhouse. But the point I was making is that 'at no stage prior to being told by police that everyone inside the farmhouse was dead', that 'Jeremy' did know that anyone had even been shot, let alone killed. It was never part of the prosecutions case that Jeremy had indicated that he knew someone had been shot, until he was told by the police, other than drawing an 'inference' through claiming that 'he' had shot and killed his sister, then staged her death scene in the bedroom, including the 'lie', that he had used 'the family owned silencer' on the barrel of the weapon used to shoot her twice inside the main bedroom, when she 'had' only been shot 'once' there. That he had 'staged her death scene' there in the main bedroom, then somehow managed to 'remove' that silencer, and 'transport' it all the way back downstairs to hide it, in 'one or two places' inside the so called gun cupboard in 'the den'...
The 'family owned silencer' was not 'used' in the shootings of Sheila Caffell...
I can safely say that if Jeremy had been involved in the shootings of Sheila, downstairs in the kitchen, or upstairs in the main bedroom, with use of the 'family owned silencer', that he would have been 'stupid' to put the silencer, back in the same gun cupboard, from where 'the anshuzt rifle' and the 'box of ammunition' tipped out on the kitchen worktop, all 'had' come from beforehand. Why would somebody like Jeremy Bamber try to 'hide' or 'conceal' a bloodstained silencer in the very place where he would surely have known or realised police would go looking once they became 'alerted' to the circumstances of these five deaths?
Jeremy was 'alleged' to have 'almost got away with the perfect murders', but if he had been the killer, do you honestly think he would have been so stupid not to (a) first of all clean the bloodstained silencer, and (b) hide it if he forgot to clean it, in the most obvious place you'd expect to find it?
I 'don't' think so...
-
Yes, 'he did', but that was 'after' the news that 'all his family' had been shot 'dead' inside the farmhouse. But the point I was making is that 'at no stage prior to being told by police that everyone inside the farmhouse was dead', that 'Jeremy' did know that anyone had even been shot, let alone killed. It was never part of the prosecutions case that Jeremy had indicated that he knew someone had been shot, until he was told by the police, other than drawing an 'inference' through claiming that 'he' had shot and killed his sister, then staged her death scene in the bedroom, including the 'lie', that he had used 'the family owned silencer' on the barrel of the weapon used to shoot her twice inside the main bedroom, when she 'had' only been shot 'once' there. That he had 'staged her death scene' there in the main bedroom, then somehow managed to 'remove' that silencer, and 'transport' it all the way back downstairs to hide it, in 'one or two places' inside the so called gun cupboard in 'the den'...
The 'family owned silencer' was not 'used' in the shootings of Sheila Caffell...
I can safely say that if Jeremy had been involved in the shootings of Sheila, downstairs in the kitchen, or upstairs in the main bedroom, with use of the 'family owned silencer', that he would have been 'stupid' to put the silencer, back in the same gun cupboard, from where 'the anshuzt rifle' and the 'box of ammunition' tipped out on the kitchen worktop, all 'had' come from beforehand. Why would somebody like Jeremy Bamber try to 'hide' or 'conceal' a bloodstained silencer in the very place where he would surely have known or realised police would go looking once they became 'alerted' to the circumstances of these five deaths?
Jeremy was 'alleged' to have 'almost got away with the perfect murders', but if he had been the killer, do you honestly think he would have been so stupid not to (a) first of all clean the bloodstained silencer, and (b) hide it if he forgot to clean it, in the most obvious place you'd expect to find it?
I 'don't' think so...
. Strange how he did not think anyone had been shot? He gets a telephone call telling him Sheila is going berserk with a gun? He phones Julie to tell her something appeared wrong at the farmhouse? He alerts police? When he gets there the dog is whimpering in a distressed manner, then he again phones Julie at 5.45 to tell her not to go to work because it is EVIDENT at this stage something is wrong? He prob been stood outside near on 2 hours at this stage?
-
. Strange how he did not think anyone had been shot? He gets a telephone call telling him Sheila is going berserk with a gun? He phones Julie to tell her something appeared wrong at the farmhouse? He alerts police? When he gets there the dog is whimpering in a distressed manner, then he again phones Julie at 5.45 to tell her not to go to work because it is EVIDENT at this stage something is wrong? He prob been stood outside near on 2 hours at this stage?
Justice, I think you'll find that Mike is presenting us with a surfiet of lexical semantics. Working them out is rather like doing a cryptic crossword :)) :)) :))
-
I don't think anyone at any stage would have believed anyone was shot or even going to be. There'd been no indication of anyone having been shot at the stage when Neville rang. Sheila had hold of a gun.So ? Had she done this before and made no attempt to actually use it ? That,we don't know.
How had she been in the past when Neville would call for the assistance of Jeremy ? We don't know.
-
. Strange how he did not think anyone had been shot? He gets a telephone call telling him Sheila is going berserk with a gun? He phones Julie to tell her something appeared wrong at the farmhouse? He alerts police? When he gets there the dog is whimpering in a distressed manner, then he again phones Julie at 5.45 to tell her not to go to work because it is EVIDENT at this stage something is wrong? He prob been stood outside near on 2 hours at this stage?
Now, apply your logical approach, to the police 'at' the scene - how come, that until 6.30am, they did not 'think' or 'believe' that 'anyone had been shot'. but 'low and behold', at 'that time', they requested 'two ambulances' for 'urgent attention at the scene', one of 'these' two ambulances to 'go directly to the farmhouse', the 'second ambulance' and 'its crew', to remain parked up, in 'Pages Lane', on 'standby'...
-
I've often wondered if just one person could have been saved. With Jeremy outside with the police,how could he also be inside shooting them all ? Nobody knew at any point who'd been shot nor who the shooter actually was-----------not even Jeremy, and nigh on 3 hours had been wasted in finding out !!
-
I've often wondered if just one person could have been saved. With Jeremy outside with the police,how could he also be inside shooting them all ? Nobody knew at any point who'd been shot nor who the shooter actually was-----------not even Jeremy, and nigh on 3 hours had been wasted in finding out !!
Clearly they took on board the subliminal messages Jeremy was feeding them regarding the history of Sheila's precarious mental health and her proficiency with all the numerous weapons in the house.
-
EP KNEW the shooting was going on when they were outside the farmhouse.
I wonder why they sent Jeremy " out of the way " to phone JM early morning as he wasn't fully aware at that stage that anyone was dead ?
-
EP KNEW the shooting was going on when they were outside the farmhouse.
I wonder why they sent Jeremy " out of the way " to phone JM early morning as he wasn't fully aware at that stage that anyone was dead ?
So at what time did they report hearing the numerous shots required to dispatch 4 victims? I rather imagine he wasn't "sent" anywhere, but asked if there was someone he wanted to be there with him which was convenient as he'd already alerted Julie to expect a call when he informed her that "Something is wrong at the farm."
-
Clearly they took on board the subliminal messages Jeremy was feeding them regarding the history of Sheila's precarious mental health and her proficiency with all the numerous weapons in the house.
I doubt it.
-
So at what time did they report hearing the numerous shots required to dispatch 4 victims? I rather imagine he wasn't "sent" anywhere, but asked if there was someone he wanted to be there with him which was convenient as he'd already alerted Julie to expect a call when he informed her that "Something is wrong at the farm."
I think it's only natural to have made a second call after not knowing initially what was going on. He was keeping JM up to date that's all and he obviously wanted her there as she was the only one at the time who he was closer to. If the family had been close to the relatives then he'd have rang them.
I don't see anything wrong or suspicious in him having said there was " something wrong at the farm ",except if I was on your side of the fence.
-
I think it's only natural to have made a second call after not knowing initially what was going on. He was keeping JM up to date that's all and he obviously wanted her there as she was the only one at the time who he was closer to. If the family had been close to the relatives then he'd have rang them.
I don't see anything wrong or suspicious in him having said there was " something wrong at the farm ",except if I was on your side of the fence.
And I suppose neither is "Not to worry, all is going well" suspicious, either? He clearly wasn't THAT bothered or he'd have called 999 rather than Julie.
-
Yeah, that was when he was ham acting grief. He also asked to speak to his dad knowing full well he was dead.
My ma-in-law collapsed and died in the bathroom of her home but my late husband wouldn't have it and he too wanted to speak to her after having been told that she'd died of heart failure.
He'd even practically accused the doctor of lying.
My own mother was the same when a neighbour who was a nurse,told mum that my dad had died. Mum had said he hadn't. It's called denial,mainly if you haven't physically seen them dying.
-
My ma-in-law collapsed and died in the bathroom of her home but my late husband wouldn't have it and he too wanted to speak to her after having been told that she'd died of heart failure.
He'd even practically accused the doctor of lying.
My own mother was the same when a neighbour who was a nurse,told mum that my dad had died. Mum had said he hadn't. It's called denial,mainly if you haven't physically seen them dying.
Perhaps that's the reason he didn't call 999? Oh no. I forgot. He rang Julie to tell her "Something is wrong at the farm.".
-
Perhaps that's the reason he didn't call 999? Oh no. I forgot. He rang Julie to tell her "Something is wrong at the farm.".
He wasn't supposed to know that anyone had died at that point - to suggest he was in shock, is ridiculous.
-
And I suppose neither is "Not to worry, all is going well" suspicious, either? He clearly wasn't THAT bothered or he'd have called 999 rather than Julie.
Do we know for sure that those words pertained to the night in question ? Or were said at all ?
-
Do we know for sure that those words pertained to the night in question ? Or were said at all ?
Well, in the world you inhabit, where EVERYONE connected to the case -OTHER than Jeremy- is involved in the greatest conspiracy of all time, they obviously weren't.
-
Well, in the world you inhabit, where EVERYONE connected to the case -OTHER than Jeremy- is involved in the greatest conspiracy of all time, they obviously weren't.
Whatever JM had said,I read with caution,don't you ?
-
None worse than an embittered person for spilling their guts.Dirty washing doesn't even come close.
-
I think I read on here that it was difficult for the defence to question jm because she kept breaking down, but recovered her composure when answering the prosecution.
-
Quite,buddy. And nobody saw through that show of drama. ::)
-
He wasn't supposed to know that anyone had died at that point - to suggest he was in shock, is ridiculous.
he wasnt under shock when he went and got a mouthful of poppys .and told the doc rightaway that the farm had a liecence to grow them in case the doc found it strange
-
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
Wonder what he was thinking before the police went in and they were challenging the house for response, GPO who were monitoring could hear a dog barking and could hear challenges to the house and the challenges went on for some while. When Adams went back to control vehicle where Bamber was stationed, Bamber said what if anything has happened in there they are all the family I have got? Wonder what he was thinking especially after he had told them about the rifle laying about that he had left loaded?
-
Wonder what he was thinking before the police went in and they were challenging the house for response, GPO who were monitoring could hear a dog barking and could hear challenges to the house and the challenges went on for some while. When Adams went back to control vehicle where Bamber was stationed, Bamber said what if anything has happened in there they are all the family I have got? Wonder what he was thinking especially after he had told them about the rifle laying about that he had left loaded?
That's an interesting point, Justice. I don't recall, at any time, Jeremy telling ANYONE, after his father's alleged call -panicked and sounding terrified- about Sheila having got hold of a gun, that the gun of which she allegedly had hold MIGHT have been the one he'd failed to put away safely, before he went home. I know I'd have been berating my own stupidity with words like "What if............." and "If only..................". I'd have probably screamed it at the police. Not once do we see Jeremy take any sort of responsibility.
-
I'm sure the leaving of the rifle on the settle would have been the least that Jeremy thought of as he drove home. He'd have had no idea what was to befall the family that night as nobody else would,not even its elder inhabitants.
Because Neville religiously put the guns etc away in the cupboard particularly as the children had been present,Jeremy just took it for granted. I don't even think that to blame him for leaving it there justifies any reason that he should take responsibility either.
-
I'm sure the leaving of the rifle on the settle would have been the least that Jeremy thought of as he drove home. He'd have had no idea what was to befall the family that night as nobody else would,not even its elder inhabitants.
Because Neville religiously put the guns etc away in the cupboard particularly as the children had been present,Jeremy just took it for granted. I don't even think that to blame him for leaving it there justifies any reason that he should take responsibility either.
So you think that, because -according to you- Jeremy had no idea of what was to befall his family, he wasn't remotely concerned about what MIGHT happen.? You don't think it could POSSIBLY have gone through his mind that Sheila COULD have got hold of the gun he was SO certain his father would put away? That being so, I suppose the family should count themselves lucky he even bothered to call the police despite Nevill's alleged call sounding "PANICKED and TERRIFIED"........................except the family were all dead.
-
So you think that, because -according to you- Jeremy had no idea of what was to befall his family, he wasn't remotely concerned about what MIGHT happen.? You don't think it could POSSIBLY have gone through his mind that Sheila COULD have got hold of the gun he was SO certain his father would put away? That being so, I suppose the family should count themselves lucky he even bothered to call the police despite Nevill's alleged call sounding "PANICKED and TERRIFIED"........................except the family were all dead.
How on earth would YOU,I,or anyone know what Jeremy's thoughts would have been ? Is thinking now a punishable crime in your world ?
It's so easy to say what you've said after the event.
-
How on earth would YOU,I,or anyone know what Jeremy's thoughts would have been ? Is thinking now a punishable crime in your world ?
It's so easy to say what you've said after the event.
I made the comment because you seemed so very certain that Jeremy wouldn't have given a thought to the rifle on the settle, yet now you're hitting me with how would "I" know what were his thoughts. NOR did he appear to think about the rifle on the settle after his father's alleged call -regarding a gun- sounding panicked and terrified.
I absolutely don't understand Jeremy's reaction to that alleged call. All I can say is that I'd have moved heaven and earth to get help there ASAP and argued about the consequences later....................which I have actually had to do.
-
I made the comment because you seemed so very certain that Jeremy wouldn't have given a thought to the rifle on the settle, yet now you're hitting me with how would "I" know what were his thoughts. NOR did he appear to think about the rifle on the settle after his father's alleged call -regarding a gun- sounding panicked and terrified.
I absolutely don't understand Jeremy's reaction to that alleged call. All I can say is that I'd have moved heaven and earth to get help there ASAP and argued about the consequences later....................which I have actually had to do.
It was seemingly just another day at the farm with nothing more untoward than normal.Why would Jeremy dwell on the fact that he'd left the rifle on the settle after he'd left. The only time he would have thought about it was when it was too late. He wasn't to know was he ?
-
That's an interesting point, Justice. I don't recall, at any time, Jeremy telling ANYONE, after his father's alleged call -panicked and sounding terrified- about Sheila having got hold of a gun, that the gun of which she allegedly had hold MIGHT have been the one he'd failed to put away safely, before he went home. I know I'd have been berating my own stupidity with words like "What if............." and "If only..................". I'd have probably screamed it at the police. Not once do we see Jeremy take any sort of responsibility.
Because that's what he was trying to avoid ;D ;D
-
It was seemingly just another day at the farm with nothing more untoward than normal.Why would Jeremy dwell on the fact that he'd left the rifle on the settle after he'd left. The only time he would have thought about it was when it was too late. He wasn't to know was he ?
Well, had I left a rifle on a settle, whilst I may NOT have given it another thought, it would, sure as HELL have exercised my brain if I'd received a terrified and panicked call from my father telling my my sister had gone mad and got hold of a gun. It would take someone totally devoid of conscience not to have wondered if it was the rifle they'd left out. Still, I expect Jeremy shrugged and said "Well, I wasn't to know, was I?"
-
Well, had I left a rifle on a settle, whilst I may NOT have given it another thought, it would, sure as HELL have exercised my brain if I'd received a terrified and panicked call from my father telling my my sister had gone mad and got hold of a gun. It would take someone totally devoid of conscience not to have wondered if it was the rifle they'd left out. Still, I expect Jeremy shrugged and said "Well, I wasn't to know, was I?"
But,say the rifle had been put away meanwhile.Of that we don't know. No,he wasn't to know. Without the shrug
-
But,say the rifle had been put away meanwhile.Of that we don't know. No,he wasn't to know. Without the shrug
If you're saying that the thought would never have crossed your mind that the gun she had hold of wasn't the gun you'd left laying around, I'd regard it either as negation of responsibility, ie it was dad's fault for not putting it away.
-
If you're saying that the thought would never have crossed your mind that the gun she had hold of wasn't the gun you'd left laying around, I'd regard it either as negation of responsibility, ie it was dad's fault for not putting it away.
Nobody's fault at all. It was an ordinary day and evening with nothing seemingly any different to any other time. You may repeat things until the cows come home but not one of us could say whether the rifle was ever put back. Initially when his father rang,it wouldn't have entered Jeremy's head as to whether the rifle was the one left on the settle. His father didn't make reference to that particular one,he'd just said " one of my guns ".
-
Nobody's fault at all. It was an ordinary day and evening with nothing seemingly any different to any other time. You may repeat things until the cows come home but not one of us could say whether the rifle was ever put back. Initially when his father rang,it wouldn't have entered Jeremy's head as to whether the rifle was the one left on the settle. His father didn't make reference to that particular one,he'd just said " one of my guns ".
Lookout, it's not a question of whether or not the rifle was put back. Jeremy's last memory of it was when he left it on the settle. It can't NOT have crossed his mind -or ANYONE'S mind if they had a conscience- after the alleged call, that it might be that rifle that Sheila had hold of.
-
Lookout, it's not a question of whether or not the rifle was put back. Jeremy's last memory of it was when he left it on the settle. It can't NOT have crossed his mind -or ANYONE'S mind if they had a conscience- after the alleged call, that it might be that rifle that Sheila had hold of.
It very likely did cross his mind at some point but too late to make a song and dance about it,or indeed stress that fact as it would have looked like an admission that it had been left there on purpose,as no doubt others saw it that way. He might have thought that himself too,so least said.Not that it made any difference anyway.
-
It very likely did cross his mind at some point but too late to make a song and dance about it,or indeed stress that fact as it would have looked like an admission that it had been left there on purpose,as no doubt others saw it that way. He might have thought that himself too,so least said.Not that it made any difference anyway.
Lookout, why, at that early stage, would he have thought it necessary to cover his back? There were MANY things he could have done differently at a later stage, but this was right at the beginning, Sheila was the only suspect. He COULD have said, without fear of retribution, that he'd left a gun laying around. HE was outside. Sheila, and allegedly the gun in her hand, were inside.
-
Lookout, why, at that early stage, would he have thought it necessary to cover his back? There were MANY things he could have done differently at a later stage, but this was right at the beginning, Sheila was the only suspect. He COULD have said, without fear of retribution, that he'd left a gun laying around. HE was outside. Sheila, and allegedly the gun in her hand, were inside.
Indeed,many things he could have done differently or rather not mentioned at all such as where he'd left the rifle.He needn't to have said where. He could just as easily have said that he himself had put it away.Nobody would have been any the wiser.
-
There is 'no evidence' at all, to prove that 'the gun' which Ralph Bamber was referring to in 'his' brief call (around 3.25am) to 'Jeremy', or in 'his' (Ralph's) call (3.26am) to 'the police', that the 'weapon' being spoken about, had been the ' .22 anshuzt rifle', it could just as easily have been 'reference' to ' the 12 bore shotgun', or 'the .22 BSA air rifle', upon which 'Sheila Caffells, fingerprints', were later discovered...
-
There is 'no evidence' at all, to prove that 'the gun' which Ralph Bamber was referring to in 'his' brief call (around 3.25am) to 'Jeremy', or in 'his' (Ralph's) call (3.26am) to 'the police', that the 'weapon' being spoken about, had been the ' .22 anshuzt rifle', it could just as easily have been 'reference' to ' the 12 bore shotgun', or 'the .22 BSA air rifle', upon which 'Sheila Caffells, fingerprints', were later discovered...
Technically that is correct. However the crime scene and the accounts of Jeremy leaving the rifle in the scullery prove the shotgun was not used.
-
The police 'fingerprinted', Anthony Pargeters, '.22 Bruno, bolt action rifle', but have for over 30 years, deliberately withheld, and concealed, 'the results'. It is understood, that several 'different' fingerprints belonging to 'several different people' were 'found' to be present upon 'Pargeters' rifle - including, Anthony Pargeters, Jeremy Bambers, Sheila Caffells, and two further sets 'not confirmed', but 'strongly suspected' as 'belonging to Ralph Bamber, and Ralph Neville'...
-
The police 'fingerprinted', Anthony Pargeters, '.22 Bruno, bolt action rifle', but have for over 30 years, deliberately withheld, and concealed, 'the results'. It is understood, that several 'different' fingerprints belonging to 'several different people' were 'found' to be present upon 'Pargeters' rifle - including, Anthony Pargeters, Jeremy Bambers, Sheila Caffells, and two further sets 'not confirmed', but 'strongly suspected' as 'belonging to Ralph Bamber, and Ralph Neville'...
Do you have any reference to this fingerprinting?
the .22 Bruno also had a silencer kept in the gun cupboard at times ???
-
Technically that is correct. However the crime scene and the accounts of Jeremy leaving the rifle in the scullery prove the shotgun was not used.
Nestled 'inside the barrel' of the '12 bore shotgun', was a 'discharged' Raker, Cartridge case. When this shotgun was 'recovered' from the gun cupboard, ' on that first morning', its barrel was 'snapped' shut, and after being removed from the cupboard, a police officer, 'broke open' its barrel, and stood it 'against the wall' in the den (downstairs office), without 'knowing at that time', that the 'Raker' cartridge which was 'sat' in the barrel of the shotgun (at that stage) had in fact 'already been fired'...
-
Nestled 'inside the barrel' of the '12 bore shotgun', was a 'discharged' Raker, Cartridge case. When this shotgun was 'recovered' from the gun cupboard, ' on that first morning', its barrel was 'snapped' shut, and after being removed from the cupboard, a police officer, 'broke open' its barrel, and stood it 'against the wall' in the den (downstairs office), without 'knowing at that time', that the 'Raker' cartridge which was 'sat' in the Harrell of the shotgun (at that stage) had in fact 'already been fired'...
It could have been fired days before hand. What about APs Bruno bolt action and Silencer? what discrepancies do we have to indicate it was at the farm on the night? It could be what Jeapes had seen in the window!
-
It could have been fired days before hand. What about APs Bruno bolt action and Silencer? what discrepancies do we have to indicate it was at the farm on the night? It could be what Jeapes had seen in the window!
A 'local resident', with the surname of 'Smith', contacted the police soon after the shootings of the family became 'public knowledge', to tell them that 'he had heard a shotgun blast', which came from the 'vicinity of whf', on the evening of the tragedy. Smith 'put the timing of the blast', he had witnessed, at having 'occurred', somewhere between 9.30 and 10.15pm, on Tuesday, 6th August 1985...
-
Affixed to the 'butt' of the 12 bore shotgun, was a single ' marigold type' glove. I understand, that a few days, or it may well have been 'a week, or two', later, an 'empty' marigold glove packet, was 'found in a hedge row', of a field close to the farmhouse. SOCO, ' fingerprinted', it, and in particular, they also fingerprinted the aforementioned 'spent Raker cartridge case', the rubber glove affixed to the butt of the shotgun, the empty marigold packet recovered from the hedgerow of the field, and of course, the 12 bore shotgun, itself. However, not in 'that' order, since the shotgun itself, was 'fingerprinted' as part of a police exercise to try and identify 'which gun', Ralph had been referring to, in telephone conversations, he had had with 'firstly', (3.25am) Jeremy, and 'secondly', (3.26am) the police, a minute afterwards. This was 'the purpose' of fingerprinting all the weapons that were 'known' to have been present in the farmhouse, at the time of the shootings. Included in 'this' exercise, was the 'examination' of Anthony Pargeters, .22 Bruno, bolt action rifle...
-
The 'examination' and 'fingerprinting' of Anthony Pargeters, .22 Bruno make, bolt action, rifle, and its findings, undertaken and obtained from an early stage in the police 'handling' of the 5 deaths, have for over 30 years, remained 'classified', knowledge, to but a 'select', few, on a 'need to know', basis...
-
The 'examination' and 'fingerprinting' of Anthony Pargeters, .22 Bruno make, bolt action, rifle, and its findings, undertaken and obtained from an early stage in the police 'handling' of the 5 deaths, have for over 30 years, remained 'classified', knowledge, to but a 'select', few, on a 'need to know', basis...
In addition, 'ammunitions', owned by 'Anthony Pargeter', and which were 'known' to be kept at the farmhouse, and also ammunition which 'had' been 'fired' during the killing spree, involving '4 of the 5 victims', together with empty cartridge cases totalling around 100 were recovered from a location 'behind' one of the barns (the scene of a shooting match involving Anthony Pargeter and Jeremy Bamber on the penultimate weekend before the shooting of the victims, occurred). Much of this ammunition, was 'used' in a 'swapping' process which took place once the 'nature of the investigation', changed around the first week or so into September, 1985...
This was done, as part of 'a police exercise', to turn the new investigation (under SC/786/85), from being 'if the truth' be known, from 'a multiple' gun crime, into a 'single gun' crime. This was achieved, simply by 'removing' all ammunition which had 'not' been loaded, and or, fired, via 'the anshuzt rifle', and 'replacing' it, with either, spent cartridge cases, and bullets, which had, 'at one time or another', been fired through the anshuzt rifle, on 'other occasions', either 'before' the time of the shootings, or which had been obtained 'afterwards, in both 'unreported' and 'reported' test firing of the same, with the same 'purpose' in mind...
Swap over any crime scene ammunition, not loaded into, or fired by way of, the family owned Anshuzt rifle. Remove any bullets, or spent cartridge cases, from the 'original batch', and in 'its place', introduce bullets and spent cartridge cases which 'can' be associated with and to the anshuzt rifle, so that the police 'ended up with', a 'revised' batch of crime scene ammunition, whereby, all the bullets, and all the spent cases, could all be positively associated with and to the family owned 'anshuzt' rifle...
As a result of police adopting this approach, the tragedy of whf was 'turned' from originally being a 'multi gun' crime, into a 'one gun' crime...
-
The following is 'a true representation' of the ballistic evidence in this investigation, be 'that' the 'original investigation' (SC/688/85), and, or the 'second part of the investigation' ( SC/786/85):-
(1) - the 'original batch' of Crime Scene Ammunition (OBCSA)
This was in existence whilstever the police were approaching the investigation (SC/688/85) as a matter of it being treated as 'a case of 4 murders, and a suicide, with Sheila having been responsible for shooting and killing the others, then presumably taking her own life.
(2) - the 'revised batch' of Crime Scene Ammunition (RBCSA)
This came into existence at the beginning of September, 1985, when suspicion fell upon Jeremy Bamber. Police simplified the intended prosecution, by turning the new murder investigation (SC/786/85) into 'a one gun' crime, by removing ammunition which had not been loaded, fired, and where it involved spent cartridge casings which 'had not' been ejected from the anshuzt rifle, at the time of the murders, these were 'replaced' by ammunitions which could be associated with and to the 'same' rifle...
-
Where did police 'get' the other ammunition from, which they 'used' in the 'swap' exercise which produced the ' RBCSA'?
(a) - behind the barn at whf. Jeremy fired between 50 / 60 rounds with use of the anshuzt rifle, on the penultimate weekend, before the shootings (rounds dispatched by Jeremy in a friendly shooting competition, involving, Anthony Pargeter. Where Anthony used 'his' Bruno rifle, and Jeremy 'used' the family owned anshuzt rifle)...
(b) - Unreported (unofficial) test firing of the anshuzt rifle with 2 rounds used from the 29 live rounds, originally spilled out onto the kitchen worktop (at least two 'control' rounds were 'fired' with use of the anshuzt rifle, long 'after' the tragedy, and used in 'Comparison tests', involving some of the OBCSA, on dates, 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, 1985, involving the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, and Detective Sergeant 'Stan' Jones, since, both of the 'aforementioned', signed the corresponding 'General Examination Records' (GER) which they also dated in their own unique handwriting styles. It 'therefore' must follow, that the ballistic expert, 'Fletcher', and DS 'Stan' Jones, were involved and had 'knowlege' of ' interference' with the 'OBCSA', prior to the 'official date' (20th September, 1985) when 'Fletcher' claims he first had 'involvement' with 'any' of the 'OBCSA'. Fletcher has 'lied' about 'that'. More 'concerning', is 'what' was DS 'Stan' Jones, doing on 'these' dates, (12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, 1985), at the 'Lab', signing the 'GER', for a selection of the 25 'OBCSA' (bullets)? According to the 'Lab records' the 'packaging' in which the 'OBCSA' arrived at the lab' had been 'cut open', and 'resealed' with celotape...
(C) - Reported (official) test firing of the anshuzt rifle with 27 of the 29 rounds, used in a 'comparison' test program, on the 20th and 25th September, 1985, and the 1st and 2nd of October, 1985 it is very worrying, that this collection of 29 (27) control rounds, were not given their own unique identifying number / reference, so that it would have been possible, for some other 'expert', to come along, and to 'reconstruct' the comparison tests which 'Fletcher' claimed he 'had' done, himself, on the 20th and the 25th September, 1985, and the 1st and the 2nd October, 1985. What 'was' required, was for each piece of the 'control ammunition' (DRH/42), to have been given a 'unique reference', and an 'accurate record' made of which piece of control ammunition was used, against the 'relevant' pieces of the 'OBCSA'...
-
Where did police 'get' the other ammunition from, which they 'used' in the 'swap' exercise which produced the ' RBCSA'?
(a) - behind the barn at whf. Jeremy fired between 50 / 60 rounds with use of the anshuzt rifle, on the penultimate weekend, before the shootings (rounds dispatched by Jeremy in a friendly shooting competition, involving, Anthony Pargeter. Where Anthony used 'his' Bruno rifle, and Jeremy 'used' the family owned anshuzt rifle)...
it is understood that 'as many' as 98 items were seized during the inspection site, in the 'region of the barn', at whf, where Anthony Pargeter, and Jeremy Bamber took part in a private shooting competition, on the penultimate weekend prior to the 'tragedy' occurring. Police were basically interested in gathering 'sufficient spent cartridge cases' which had been 'fired' with use of the anshuzt rifle, both with and without the family owned 'silencer' attached to the barrel of the gun. It is understood that a 'combination of 'spent cartridges' which had been loaded, fired and ejected from both the 'Bruno' and 'Anshuzt' rifles were gathered up and taken away for analysis. Many of these 'items', eventually found their way to the Lab', in particular, for the attention of 'Malcolm Fletcher'. Each of these were given unique exhibit references, between, 'MDF/2' and 'MDF/98' inclusively. In addition, a 'total' of 14 OBCSA spent cartridge cases, which 'had not' been loaded, fired, and ejected via the 'semi-automatic' mechanism of the 'anshuzt' rifle, were 'used' in a 'swapping exercise', involving 14 'alternative' spent cartridges which 'had' at 'some stage' been loaded, fired and ejected with use of the anshuzt rifle (possibly obtained from the region of the barn, where Anthony and Jeremy, had previously been shooting), were given an 'exhibit reference, of 'MDF/100'. As far as is known, these 14 'OBCSA', items, are still being retained at 'Huntingdon' Laboratory - they were loaded, fired and ejected during the tragedy by a shooter in possession of a 'different weapon' than the 'anshuzt' rifle...
-
Where did police 'get' the other ammunition from, which they 'used' in the 'swap' exercise which produced the ' RBCSA'?
(b) - Unreported (unofficial) test firing of the anshuzt rifle with 2 rounds used from the 29 live rounds, originally spilled out onto the kitchen worktop (at least two 'control' rounds were 'fired' with use of the anshuzt rifle, long 'after' the tragedy, and used in 'Comparison tests', involving some of the OBCSA, on dates, 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, 1985, involving the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, and Detective Sergeant 'Stan' Jones, since, both of the 'aforementioned', signed the corresponding 'General Examination Records' (GER) which they also dated in their own unique handwriting styles. It 'therefore' must follow, that the ballistic expert, 'Fletcher', and DS 'Stan' Jones, were involved and had 'knowlege' of ' interference' with the 'OBCSA', prior to the 'official date' (20th September, 1985) when 'Fletcher' claims he first had 'involvement' with 'any' of the 'OBCSA'. Fletcher has 'lied' about 'that'. More 'concerning', is 'what' was DS 'Stan' Jones, doing on 'these' dates, (12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, 1985), at the 'Lab', signing the 'GER', for a selection of the 25 'OBCSA' (bullets)? According to the 'Lab records' the 'packaging' in which the 'OBCSA' arrived at the lab' had been 'cut open', and 'resealed' with celotape...
two 'live' rounds, taken from 'exhibit DRH/42' were ' unofficially' test fired with 'use' of the 'anshuzt' rifle, and used for the 'purpose' of making comparison checks, against 'markings' made on 'bullets' in the 'OBCSA'. The reason 'Why' two rounds were 'used' and taken from the 29 control rounds, was 'because' police needed to have a ' bullet' fired with use of the anshuzt rifle, 'minus' the silencer, and 'another bullet', fired with 'use of the silencer' fitted to the same gun, so 'that' proper comparisons could be made, against the 'OBCSA' (bullets), and some of the 'RBCSA', (bullets)...
-
Where did police 'get' the other ammunition from, which they 'used' in the 'swap' exercise which produced the ' RBCSA'?
(C) - Reported (official) test firing of the anshuzt rifle with 27 of the 29 rounds, used in a 'comparison' test program, on the 20th and 25th September, 1985, and the 1st and 2nd of October, 1985 it is very worrying, that this collection of 29 (27) control rounds, were not given their own unique identifying number / reference, so that it would have been possible, for some other 'expert', to come along, and to 'reconstruct' the comparison tests which 'Fletcher' claimed he 'had' done, himself, on the 20th and the 25th September, 1985, and the 1st and the 2nd October, 1985. What 'was' required, was for each piece of the 'control ammunition' (DRH/42), to have been given a 'unique reference', and an 'accurate record' made of which piece of control ammunition was used, against the 'relevant' pieces of the 'OBCSA'...
'Fletcher', lied...
He had already 'done' comparison tests on dates 'before' the 20th September, 1985, as 'evidenced' by the fact that his dated, signature, appears on some 'GER', in respect of 'earlier' comparison tests that were 'carried out', on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September, 1985. Worse still, when questioned by 'COLP' as to the 'whereabouts' of 2 missing 'control ' rounds from the original 29 live rounds of DRH/42, 'Fletcher' simply responds by claiming they must 'have got lost'. But if 'that' were true, 'which' control rounds were 'used' in the comparison tests 'performed ' prior to the 20th September, 1985?
-
Mike I thought It was Pargetters rifle that was used to zero his sights, because he made a big deal about Jeremy being a crackshot.
-
Mike I thought It was Pargetters rifle that was used to zero his sights, because he made a big deal about Jeremy being a crackshot.
Pargeter had purchased a brand new 'telescopic site' which he fitted to 'his' Bruno, bolt action rifle, on 'that' particular visit, and he went to the rear of one of the barns at whf, to 'zero' it in. But he was joined there by Jeremy, and this led to them both engaging in a private shooting competition, with Anthony Pargeter firing his 'Bruno' make rifle, and Jeremy firing the 'family owned 'anshuzt' make rifle. In one of Anthony Pargeters witness statements, he outlines the 'shooting match' which he and Jeremy then 'engaged' in, stating that 'they' fired between 50 /60 rounds a piece on 'that', particular occasion...
-
We 'know' that the 'OBCSA' consisted of certain 'categories' of ammunition. Such as, (a) - 'Whole' bullets, (b) - 'nearly whole' bullets, (c) - 'half' a bullet, and (d) - 'fragments' of bullet...
-
We 'know' that the 'OBCSA' consisted of certain 'categories' of ammunition. Such as, (a) - 'Whole' bullets, (b) - 'nearly whole' bullets, (c) - 'half' a bullet, and (d) - 'fragments' of bullet...
One of the 'problems' involving the '12' whole bullets, is 'that' '7' of these, weigh too much, to have been part of 'Eley' ammunition. The 'other' 5 weigh too little...
-
Even more 'remarkable, is the 'fact' that the 'bullet' fired across Sheila Caffells, neck, is one of 'these' whole bullets (according to the ballistic expert), yet the 'pathologist' describes 'it' as a 'badly Fragmented' bullet, a fact supported by xray...
-
Yet to be 'fathomed out', is how the 'badly fragmented' bullet removed from Sheila's neck, by pathologist, Peter Venezis', could be blatantly 'mistaken' for a 'Whole' bullet, in the eyes of the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher?
-
Yes Jeremy used hollow point, not sure what AP used.
-
Yet to be 'fathomed out', is how the 'badly fragmented' bullet removed from Sheila's neck, by pathologist, Peter Venezis', could be blatantly 'mistaken' for a 'Whole' bullet, in the eyes of the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher?
Everything points to the 'switch over' of the original 'badly fragmented' PV/20, with a 'substituted, whole one', designed to 'help' turn the investigation into 'a one gun crime'. It 'cannot' simply be a 'coincidence' that 'this' transformation of a 'badly fragmented bullet' (PV/20) which had broken up into at least 15 pieces, could be described later, as 'a whole bullet'
-
How could the ' pathologist', and the 'ballistic expert' describe the 'same' bullet (PV/20), as ' a badly fragmented bullet', and 'a whole bullet', and it be the same bullet?
-
How could the ' pathologist', and the 'ballistic expert' describe the 'same' bullet (PV/20), as ' a badly fragmented bullet', and 'a whole bullet', and it be the same bullet?
To call 'this' ballistic evidence 'dodgy' would be an 'understatement...
-
So, listen up, police 'tampered with' at least 'one' of the two bullets, fired into Sheila Caffells, neck...
Why?
-
So, listen up, police 'tampered with' at least 'one' of the two bullets, fired into Sheila Caffells, neck...
Why?
If Sheila had shot herself as claimed by Jeremy and some of his campaigners, why would the police get 'involved' in messing around with the 'OBCSA'? the truth is, that 'they wouldn't have gone to these lengths...
-
Similarly, if Jeremy had been the killer, again, why would police 'entertain' any idea involving 'swapping over ammunition'?
-
There can be 'no doubt', none whatsoever, that police 'switched' the original badly fragmented PV/20 bullet, with a 'whole' bullet, to produce an impression that the same gun had fired 'both' shots, when if 'the truth be known', two 'different' weapons had been used to shoot her...
-
If, two different weapons were used to shoot Sheila (based on an inference drawn from the 'switch' involving the original PV/20), then how could the 'only' weapon supposedly found inside the main bedroom, have fired 'both' shots, PV/20 and PV/19?
Sheila had to have been 'shot' elsewhere in the farmhouse...
-
If, two different weapons were used to shoot Sheila (based on an inference drawn from the 'switch' involving the original PV/20), then how could the 'only' weapon supposedly found inside the main bedroom, have fired 'both' shots, PV/20 and PV/19?
Sheila had to have been 'shot' elsewhere in the farmhouse...
The only 'other' evidence in existence which supports the case for Sheila to have been shot elsewhere, can be found in (a) the contents of the police radio message logs, and (b) a reliance upon the reference to the 'existence' of ' an officers report, concerning the shooting incident in the kitchen' - both sources mentioned, strongly suggest and support the case for Sheila to have been the subject of the shooting incident in the kitchen, and that after she had been shot downstairs in the kitchen, she was presumed to have died...
-
The only 'other' evidence in existence which supports the case for Sheila to have been shot elsewhere, can be found in (a) the contents of the police radio message logs, and (b) a reliance upon the reference to the 'existence' of ' an officers report, concerning the shooting incident in the kitchen' - both sources mentioned, strongly suggest and support the case for Sheila to have been the subject of the shooting incident in the kitchen, and that after she had been shot downstairs in the kitchen, she was presumed to have died...
It also appears to be the case, that not only was Sheila the subject of 'that' officers report about 'the shooting incident in the kitchen', and that she was believed to have died there, but rather more intrigingly, that prior to 7.45am, staff in the control room who were 'eavesdropping the events live' via the telephone link, were talking about her death, as 'a suicide', rather than 'a murder'...
-
Jeremy Bamber had 'no influence' over what the police saw, what the police were confronted by, what the police reported, how what they reported was recorded, and so on, and so forth...
-
One factor everyone can be absolutely sure about, and that is that 'Sheila's body' was 'not' upstairs laid out on the bedroom floor with the anshuzt rifle upon it, by 8.10am...
We know 'this' because only three bodies were found upstairs at that 'specific time', as confirmed by a corresponding message, saying so, 'five dead, in total'...
-
I now fully understand the ' meaning' and ' purpose' of (a) the police radio message log version of events, as opposed to (b) the witness statement version of events as per the firearm officers, who went into the farmhouse - some of the dates of Some of these witness statements were 'back dated' to give an impression that they were written up, or typed out much earlier than in fact they had been...
-
I have 'discovered' the true meaning and purpose, for which each of these 'two different version' of the events came into being, and were introduced...
(a) - to be relied upon in the first part of the investigation which was being treated, as 'four murders, and a suicide', under a 'Crime Reference No. of SC/688/85. (two bodies found downstairs, three bodies found upstairs)...
(b) - to be relied upon once the direction of the investigation changed focus, and became a ' five murders' investigation, under a 'Crime Reference No. of SC/786/85. (one body downstairs, four bodies upstairs)...
-
Photographic evidence was never part of the inquest proceedings in the Coroners Court (these were only introduced in the Criminal Proceedings, once Jeremy Bamber became a suspect. A total of 581 photographs had to be edited, to support the latter approach. Initially, these 581 photographs were reduced to 223, with the remaining 358 photographs being deliberately withheld under pii)...
-
Photographic evidence was never part of the inquest proceedings in the Coroners Court (these were only introduced in the Criminal Proceedings, once Jeremy Bamber became a suspect. A total of 581 photographs had to be edited, to support the latter approach. Initially, these 581 photographs were reduced to 223, with the remaining 358 photographs being deliberately withheld under pii)...
Once the photographs were 'edited' and used to help prosecute Jeremy Bamber, Essex police had no alternative, but to try to conceal the contents of the police radio message logs. They 'achieved' this until after the failed 2002 appeal hearing...
-
The contents of these police radio message logs, matched the audio recordings obtained by way of the eavesdrop using the kitchen telephone handset which acted as a 'microphone', enabling staff in the control room to confirm that the details recorded in these police radio message logs, was recorded 'accurately', and more to the point, precisely, against 'exact' time markers...
-
The contents of these police radio message logs, matched the audio recordings obtained by way of the eavesdrop using the kitchen telephone handset which acted as a 'microphone', enabling staff in the control room to confirm that the details recorded in these police radio message logs, was recorded 'accurately', and more to the point, precisely, against 'exact' time markers...
Sheila was the female body in the kitchen at 7.37am. She was still there at 7.38am. She was the body being referred to as 'a suicide' before 7.45am - unless you are not aware, I should just remind you all that one of the two bodies already known about by 7.45am, was a female, and that one of these same two bodies was being talked about in terms of it being 'a suicide', some 25 minutes, before the other three bodies were found upstairs at 8.10am...
Based upon the positions of the five victims bodies as recorded in the set of crime scene photographs taken by PC David Bird, from 10 O'clock onward, Sheila's body could only have been found third in sequence, and therefore, hers could not have been the female body found downstairs in the kitchen along with Ralph Bambers body, as per the 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am and 7.45am police radio message log entries. Based on the position of Ralph's, Junes, and Sheila's body, there is 'no way' that anybody would ever describe the manner with which June Bamber had been shot and killed, that her death could have been reported as a suicide...
-
Why 'does' such a unique contradiction occur in the police versions of the alleged same event - how can June Bambers body ever have been downstairs in the kitchen along with her husband, at 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and more to the point, how could anybody describe her death as a suicide, considering that she had been shot a total of 7 times, with one of these 7 shots, fired directly between her eyes, with no weapon at all in her possession, or near to her body?
-
Why 'does' such a unique contradiction occur in the police versions of the alleged same event - how can June Bambers body ever have been downstairs in the kitchen along with her husband, at 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and more to the point, how could anybody describe her death as a suicide, considering that she had been shot a total of 7 times, with one of these 7 shots, fired directly between her eyes, with no weapon at all in her possession, or near to her body?
Set against these 'inconsistencies', is the fact that Sheila's body could not possibly have been found before June Bambers body, in the grand scheme of things, unless the position of June and Sheila's bodies had been moved, into 'those' locations prior to PC Bird being eventually allowed to photograph there bodies insitu. No matter which way you turn, the positions of June and Sheila's bodies cause problems when trying to make sense of their positions as shown in the staged photographs, the contents of the police radio message logs, and or the contents of police officers witness statements...
-
The police case in this prosecution is 'fabricated'. I have been 'singing' this tune for almost 27 years. At long last, people are starting to take notice, even Jeremy himself now 100% believes what I have been saying all along about how the police cannot be trusted to tell the truth, they cannot be trusted to act lawfully. They will and they have lied from pillar to post. The lot of them who are still alive have got a lot to lose once the actual truth is finally and completely exposed...
-
The police case in this prosecution is 'fabricated'. I have been 'singing' this tune for almost 27 years. At long last, people are starting to take notice, even Jeremy himself now 100% believes what I have been saying all along about how the police cannot be trusted to tell the truth, they cannot be trusted to act lawfully. They will and they have lied from pillar to post. The lot of them who are still alive have got a lot to lose once the actual truth is finally and completely exposed...
These very same bent and dodgy coppers not only sought to frame Sheila Caffell for her own suicide, but they have also framed Jeremy Bamber for shooting his sister dead, and then staging her death scene to promote the idea that she had taken her own life. When all along it had been the police themselves who 'had' shot Sheila, and it was the police themselves who had staged her death scene...
-
These very same bent and dodgy coppers not only sought to frame Sheila Caffell for her own suicide, but they have also framed Jeremy Bamber for shooting his sister dead, and then staging her death scene to promote the idea that she had taken her own life. When all along it had been the police themselves who 'had' shot Sheila, and it was the police themselves who had staged her death scene...
If the truth be known, Jeremy Bamber, has always 'had' during every moment, every second, every minute, every hour, every day, every week, every month, every year over the last 30 years, had the perfect alibi to prove and establish being doubt that 'he did not kill his sister', he did not shoot her dead, he had not and did not stage his sisters death scene, he has the benefit of the best alibi anyone who finds themselves in a similar position could wish to hope for, Jeremy was with one group of police officers outside the farmhouse at the time his sister was being shot inside the farmhouse at 7.37am, (kitchen), and 9.13am (main bedroom), by a different group of police officers inside the farmhouse. There are at least two dozen police officers who 'know' with 100% certainty, that Sheila had still been alive inside the farmhouse until 9.13am, and that Jeremy Bamber had not, did not shoot her once, let alone twice. There is a group of about a further half dozen police officers who were in attendance at the scene, who strongly suspect that Bamber had not killed his sister, and an additional dozen officers who have no knowledge or inclination at all, regarding Bambers culpability or innocence...
-
One of the most striking features of this 'gigantum' cover up, is that it was sanctioned and authorised with the consent of the most senior Detectives and uniform police officers, in the history of the Essex police force of its time. This motley crew of conspirators, included, DCI Wright, DCI Gibbons, DCI Harris, DCI Jones, DCI Clarke, DI Cook, PI Miller, PI Montgomery, PI Targrass, and ACC Simpson...
-
One of the most striking features of this 'gigantum' cover up, is that it was sanctioned and authorised with the consent of the most senior Detectives and uniform police officers, in the history of the Essex police force of its time. This motley crew of conspirators, included, DCI Wright, DCI Gibbons, DCI Harris, DCI Jones, DCI Clarke, DI Cook, PI Miller, PI Montgomery, PI Targrass, and ACC Simpson...
a further 14 members of the firearms team which originally took part in the first entry (8) and 6 others who took part in 'familiars' (a training exercise, where the bodies of the three adult victims were used as props, and their death scenes staged as per shown by reference to PC Birds photographs which he was not allowed to take until senior officers who were present at the scene were satisfied how the matter was going to be investigated, and in particular, what version of events might need to be written up should for whatever reason the shit started to hit the fan and the plans which were being put into place might go pearshape)...
-
Leaked information which has come from the current realms of the Essex police hierarchy, is understood to set into motion, the first tentative steps which will once and for all set the record straight regarding the circumstances of how Sheila Caffell met her sorry end in the main bedroom, after originally being shot downstairs in the kitchen. Yes, folks, they are finally considering admitting to the fact that Sheila was 'still alive' after police first 'entered' the farmhouse. My informant tells me that this is as far as the current hierarchy will be prepared to go, in a deal set to free Bamber in a fast track appeal scheduled to take place in May this year...
-
No questions, please. I cannot say anymore at this stage...
-
No questions, please. I cannot say anymore at this stage...
There are no questions to ask. All you've said is "They are...CONSIDERING............" which could just as well mean that they can withdraw that which they may be considering.
-
Leaked information which has come from the current realms of the Essex police hierarchy, is understood to set into motion, the first tentative steps which will once and for all set the record straight regarding the circumstances of how Sheila Caffell met her sorry end in the main bedroom, after originally being shot downstairs in the kitchen. Yes, folks, they are finally considering admitting to the fact that Sheila was 'still alive' after police first 'entered' the farmhouse. My informant tells me that this is as far as the current hierarchy will be prepared to go, in a deal set to free Bamber in a fast track appeal scheduled to take place in May this year...
Sure!
-
Wait and see...
-
Police have already been in contact with relatives to inform them that Jeremy's convictions are going to quashed, and that he will soon be at liberty to reclaim his parents wealth - quite naturally, relatives are unhappy that it has now come to this...
-
Is it a pantomime?
Ooooooh nooooooooo they haven't. :))
-
Police have already been in contact with relatives to inform them that Jeremy's convictions are going to quashed, and that he will soon be at liberty to reclaim his parents wealth - quite naturally, relatives are unhappy that it has now come to this...
And is this the truth, the WHOLE truth, so help you, God?
-
Police have already been in contact with relatives to inform them that Jeremy's convictions are going to quashed, and that he will soon be at liberty to reclaim his parents wealth - quite naturally, relatives are unhappy that it has now come to this...
Who were the ones that were getting ready to scarper to the Isle of Man many years ago should this happen ?
-
Who were the ones that were getting ready to scarper to the Isle of Man many years ago should this happen ?
That simply isn't true Lookout.
-
Is it a pantomime?
Ooooooh nooooooooo they haven't. :))
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Why on earth would you say that on this forum mike. If anything like tgat was happening it would be top secret so i cant see how that would bd helping jb at all.
-
Why on earth would you say that on this forum mike. If anything like tgat was happening it would be top secret so i cant see how that would bd helping jb at all.
And if it wasn't secret, it would be on the news. If the family had heard that, they would be rightly upset and be kicking off.
-
Wait and see, that's all I'm saying, other than the writings been on the wall for such a long time now over the staging of Sheila Caffells death scene, and the taking of police photographs, afterward...
-
Wait and see, that's all I'm saying, other than the writings been on the wall for such a long time now over the staging of Sheila Caffells death scene, and the taking of police photographs afterward...
Well, we've been waiting and 'not' seeing anything for years so ...... :)
-
Wait and see, that's all I'm saying, other than the writings been on the wall for such a long time now over the staging of Sheila Caffells death scene, and the taking of police photographs afterward...
Might it be possible, that in your excitement and anticipation, you may have got a little ahead of yourself re the relatives being notified of Jeremy's imminent release?
-
Well, we've been waiting and 'not' seeing anything for years so ...... :)
Wrong, we have witnessed the continuing corruption which manifested itself once police shot and killed Sheila Caffell, and staged her death scene, blaming Jeremy for doing things in relation to her death, which he could not have done, and which he did not do, gradually being exposed as 'a crime' Committed by the police themselves, irrespective of whether they would have been justified in doing so, if they had - whatever the true position, its too late now to rely upon that 'get away with murder' card, because they have covered up what did take place, and blamed Bamber himself for doing whatever the police themselves had done. Its too late for those police officers to retract the lies all of them are responsible for telling, they have been undone by the ballistics evidence, and the sequence with which the rifle was photographed at the main bedroom window (23), prior to the same rifle being photographed upon Sheila's body, as shown in photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
The truth is there for all to see, and to know...
-
And I am ' honoured' to have been part of the campaign which has been dedicated toward establishing the truth surrounding the circumstances of Sheila Caffells death, which rested in the hands of the police themselves, they shot her, twice they shot her, once downstairs in the kitchen (7.37am), and secondly, once upstairs in the main bedroom. Jeremy played no part in the police conspiracy to ' cover up' how she had in fact died. The police did all of this, all by themselves.Jeremy played a very little role in his sisters death, if it can be described as such, for example, he taught Sheila how to load and fire the anshuzt rifle, knowlege which she used in the killing of the ' other' 4 victims...
-
And I am ' honoured' to have been part of the campaign which has been dedicated toward establishing the truth surrounding the circumstances of Sheila Caffells death, which rested in the hands of the police themselves, they shot her, twice they shot her, once downstairs in the kitchen (7.37am), and secondly, once upstairs in the main bedroom. Jeremy played no part in the police conspiracy to ' cover up' how she had in fact died. The police did all of this, all by themselves.Jeremy played a very little role in his sisters death, if it can be described as such, for example, he taught Sheila how to load and fire the anshuzt rifle, knowlege which she used in the killing of the ' other' 4 victims...
Knowledge which 'inadvertently' left the anshuzt rifle still loaded with a solitary 'live' round, which ultimately killed her in the main bedroom. A bullet which did 'not' get fired into her brain, until around 9.13am, which of course 'takes Jeremy out of the equation, altogether...
-
And I am ' honoured' to have been part of the campaign which has been dedicated toward establishing the truth surrounding the circumstances of Sheila Caffells death, which rested in the hands of the police themselves, they shot her, twice they shot her, once downstairs in the kitchen (7.37am), and secondly, once upstairs in the main bedroom. Jeremy played no part in the police conspiracy to ' cover up' how she had in fact died. The police did all of this, all by themselves.Jeremy played a very little role in his sisters death, if it can be described as such, for example, he taught Sheila how to load and fire the anshuzt rifle, knowlege which she used in the killing of the ' other' 4 victims...
It can only be a matter of weeks since you told everybody on the forum that not only did the police kill Sheila but they also killed Neville too.
Have you changed your mind on this now, or is your 'informant' now accepting that The police killed Sheila but denying they killed Neville as well?
Could things further change in the coming weeks or have u reached ur final
Scenario that the police killed Sheila but it was in fact Sheila who killed Neville, not the police?
This is a genuine question and not a criticism but I'm just interested to know whether there is one other single poster / person who believes what you claim? Is there anyone u are aware of? I think this is stretching things for even your most ardent supporter Lookout.
-
It can only be a matter of weeks since you told everybody on the forum that not only did the police kill Sheila but they also killed Neville too.
Have you changed your mind on this now, or is your 'informant' now accepting that The police killed Sheila but denying they killed Neville as well?
Could things further change in the coming weeks or have u reached ur final
Scenario that the police killed Sheila but it was in fact Sheila who killed Neville, not the police?
This is a genuine question and not a criticism but I'm just interested to know whether there is one other single poster / person who believes what you claim? Is there anyone u are aware of? I think this is stretching things for even your most ardent supporter Lookout.
I share your 'scepticism' Petey ;)
-
It can only be a matter of weeks since you told everybody on the forum that not only did the police kill Sheila but they also killed Neville too.
Have you changed your mind on this now, or is your 'informant' now accepting that The police killed Sheila but denying they killed Neville as well?
Could things further change in the coming weeks or have u reached ur final
Scenario that the police killed Sheila but it was in fact Sheila who killed Neville, not the police?
This is a genuine question and not a criticism but I'm just interested to know whether there is one other single poster / person who believes what you claim? Is there anyone u are aware of? I think this is stretching things for even your most ardent supporter Lookout.
Petey, the truth is the truth and it shouldn't change. If it changes, it wasn't the truth, simple really.
-
Petey, the truth is the truth and it shouldn't change. If it changes, it wasn't the truth, simple really.
Trouble is, Mat, that when SO many different scenarios are offered, EACH claiming to be the "truth," how on earth is one supposed to decide WHICH truth is THE truth, or, is it as you say, because of the constant changes, NONE of it?
-
I share your 'scepticism' Petey ;)
I have to agree with you Caroline and Petey. Had the police been responsible for Sheila's death they would have let sleeping dogs lie i.e. 4 murders and 1 suicide.
-
Petey, the truth is the truth and it shouldn't change. If it changes, it wasn't the truth, simple really.
In Mikes current theory he uses the report of blood spatter expert Professor Herbert Leon McDonald as his reference point. Jeremy sent photos of Sheila and autopsy reports to Professor McDonald in 1992. Based on the blood spatter proff Herbert McDonald concluded that Shelia was murdered.
So if Jeremy is innocent and Shelia was murdered that then opens the possibility of police being Shelias killer.
The biggest problem with this theory is that in 1992 Jeremy did not have access to the police interviews and notes that contain evidence police say the photo varies from what they had seen and the location of the bible differs. Prof McDonald based his report on blood being under the bible assuming it was Shelias. So this new evidence that Jeremy obtained not long ago was not seen by McDonald making his reports now flawed.
It would be interesting if all the new material was sent back to macdonalds laboratory and what he would think now.
-
In Mikes current theory he uses the report of blood spatter expert Professor Herbert Leon McDonald as his reference point. Jeremy sent photos of Sheila and autopsy reports to Professor McDonald in 1992. Based on the blood spatter proffers or McDonald concluded that Shelia was murdered.
So if Jeremy is innocent and Shelia was murdered that then opens the possibility of police being Shelias killer.
The biggest problem with this theory is that in 1992 Jeremy did not have access to the police interviews and notes that contain evidence police say the photo varies from what they had seen and the location of the bible differs. Prof McDonald based his report on blood being under the bible assuming it was Shelias. So this new evidence that Jeremy obtained not long ago was not seen by McDonald making his reports now flawed.
It would be interesting if all the new material was sent back to macdonalds laboratory and what he would think now.
Would it make the burgers taste better? :-\
-
Would it make the burgers taste better? :-\
Haha I just realised I got his name wrong. It's herbert leon macdonell
I don't think his forensic consultancy make burgers ;D
-
Haha I just realised I got his name wrong. It's herbert leon macdonell
I don't think his forensic consultancy make burgers ;D
That's a relief. ;D
-
Haha I just realised I got his name wrong. It's herbert leon macdonell
I don't think his forensic consultancy make burgers ;D
Could be quite a lucrative sideline for them, David. ;D
-
It can only be a matter of weeks since you told everybody on the forum that not only did the police kill Sheila but they also killed Neville too. that is another matter, which although potentially true, cannot be proven to the same extent by a reliance upon the same quality of evidence available surrounding the killing of Sheila Caffell, by the police. In her case, the fact of the matter is that the anshuzt rifle, 'has' been' photographed leaning against the bedroom window' as shown in crime scene photograph No.23, 'before' that same rifle was photographed in Sheila's possession, as per crime scene photographs, No.'s, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. The documentary and photographic evidence which is currently available, proves and serves to establish beyond doubt that the police, and no-one else could have murdered her, and staged her death scene, and falsely claiming in the original instance, that she had shot herself, and later counter claiming that Jeremy had killed her. In the case of Ralph Bamber, no such clear cut evidence yet exists, despite the fact that his body was moved from its original position behind the internal door, sat on a chair, onto the kitchen floor in the region of the corner of the aga. However, Ralph had a bullet wound entry measuring the diameter of at least one of his 8 wounds as being 1\2 inch in diameter, when .22 ammunition only produces diameter bullet wound holes, measuring either 3/16ths, or 1\4 inch diameter wound holes depending upon which parts of the body where victims had been shot...
Have you changed your mind on this now, or is your 'informant' now accepting that The police killed Sheila but denying they killed Neville as well? The information I have is that police who took part in the informative (familiars, if you like, but to ordinary folk, best described as a training exercise under taken with the bodies of the victims still insitu), also shot bullets into the bodies of Ralph and June Bamber, shots which made larger diameter bullet wounds than other shots fired via the family and or relative owned .22 rifles. When shots were fired at such close quarters there would hardly be sufficient time, or distance travelled, to enable a .22 bullet to start yawing so that it would make bullet entry wounds twice as big as they normally would appear...
Could things further change in the coming weeks or have u reached ur final
Scenario that the police killed Sheila but it was in fact Sheila who killed Neville, not the police? the police 'did' shoot and kill Sheila. The police staged her death scene on the bedroom floor. Then PC Bird took the 'damning' photographs which show the rifle at the bedroom window earlier as per photo' No.23, upon her body afterwards, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33. Sheila Caffell had not killed herself, and her brother Jeremy did not shoot her - but the police did. Sheila fired bullets at all the other victims, but there is a strong case for believing that Ralph and June Bamber were shot with use of 'other' larger calibre bullets, which made larger bullet entry holes, with diameters of those wounds almost twice as big as those made by .22 type ammunition. That's what I am saying.There is no requirement for anyone such as me to have to prove that the police shot Ralph, or June Bamber with a different weapon than the one designated as 'the murder weapon', since it has already been confirmed that Sheila was shot and killed with two different guns. The evidence that the originall and badly fragmented PV/20, was 'switched' and a whole round put into its place speaks volumes about what police got up to. Add to that the fact that the rifle at the main bedroom window was photographed there at the window, before police photographed 'it' on Sheila's body, will serve as an example for eternity on how easily Essex police were trying to get away with shooting the three adult victims, and almost getting away with it..
This is a genuine question and not a criticism but I'm just interested to know whether there is one other single poster / person who believes what you claim? Is there anyone u are aware of? I think this is stretching things for even your most ardent supporter Lookout.
-
So do you think / claim that the police killed Neville Bamber?
I appreciate that you are saying that the evidence 'isn't as strong' but u must know whether you believe / know / claim that the police did kill Neville?
-
As far as the state and the condition of the original bullet (PV/20) is concerned, there is 'clearly' a huge discrepancy, between what the pathologist Peter Venezis describes it in terms of it being, ' badly fragmented', and the ballistic experts own description where he describes it as, 'whole' in appearance...
Such a discrepancy should never have arisen, and everyone of 'us' knows, that a 'badly fragmented bullet, cannot grow back into its former, 'whole' condition...
Police swapped 'it' so that the ballistic expert, Fletcher could associate its replacement with and to he anshuzt rifle, so that police could investigate the murders as a one gun crime, when it wasn't...
-
I have to agree with you Caroline and Petey. Had the police been responsible for Sheila's death they would have let sleeping dogs lie i.e. 4 murders and 1 suicide.
The problem is, that if one is going to remain steadfast in the assertion that Jeremy is innocent, but at the same time it looks less and less likely that Sheila is guilty, the finger that points must be provided with another place to rest to ensure it doesn't turn back to Jeremy.
-
As far as the state and the condition of the original bullet (PV/20) is concerned, there is 'clearly' a huge discrepancy, between what the pathologist Peter Venezis describes it in terms of it being, ' badly fragmented', and the ballistic experts own description where he describes it as, 'whole' in appearance...
Such a discrepancy should never have arisen, and everyone of 'us' knows, that a 'badly fragmented bullet, cannot grow back into its former, 'whole' condition...
Police swapped 'it' so that the ballistic expert, Fletcher could associate its replacement with and to he anshuzt rifle, so that police could investigate the murders as a one gun crime, when it wasn't...
1) Professor Mcdonells report is now flawed as we now know police messed up the scene and the location of the bible before they took the photos. That is what Mcdonell made his decision on.
2) Sheila's wounds to the neck were contact or partial contact wounds.
Theory of Police Killing Shelia is Flawed
-
Everything points to the fact that the police shot Sheila, and killed her, then they (the police) staged her death scene on the bedroom floor, and then got PC Bird (SOCO) to photograph her body there after the rifle which eventually fired the fatal shot (PV/19) that killed her was brought from the main bedroom window, and positioned on her body. This sequence of events is adequately covered by the content and the detail in the police radio message logs, timed entries, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and photographs, numbered, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33
-
Everything points to the fact that the police shot Sheila, and killed her, then they (the police) staged her death scene on the bedroom floor, and then got PC Bird (SOCO) to photograph her body there after the rifle which eventually fired the fatal shot (PV/19) that killed her was brought from the main bedroom window, and positioned on her body. This sequence of events is adequately covered by the content and the detail in the police radio message logs, timed entries, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, and photographs, numbered, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33
If they staged it, I wonder why they put one shell case to the right of the body and one shell case to the left?
-
Professor Herbert Leon McDonnell's first report, was in fact, accurate. He concluded that Sheila had been killed by another person, and that her killer had staged her death scene to make it look like she had shot herself. With the benefit of hindsite, we now know that Essex police failed to notify him of the sequence with which key photographs had been taken. Facts which did not come to light until much later, but nevertheless, and as it turns out, Essex police really had staged Sheila Caffells death scene, and what's more, it was the police who had 'misused the images captured in the photographs' claiming they represented the crime scene in its untouched condition, when it wasn't...
McDonnell, was right in any event, its just that we now know police 'fixed' Sheila's death scene, and they did this because they needed to show that she 'had' taken her 'own life'...
-
Professor Herbert Leon McDonnell's first report, was in fact, accurate. He concluded that Sheila had been killed by another person, and that her killer had staged her death scene to make it look like she had shot herself. With the benefit of hindsite, we now know that Essex police failed to notify him of the sequence with which key photographs had been taken. Facts which did not come to light until much later, but nevertheless, and as it turns out, Essex police really had staged Sheila Caffells death scene, and what's more, it was the police who had 'misused the images captured in the photographs' claiming they represented the crime scene in its untouched condition, when it wasn't...
McDonnell, was right in any event, its just that we now know police 'fixed' Sheila's death scene, and they did this because they needed to show that she 'had' taken her own life'...
The photographs of Shelia that Jeremy sent to McDonnell in 1992 it was assumed those pictures to be of Sheila as she was found (unaltered), Hence McDonnel came to the conclusion that Shelia was murdered based on the blood patterns on the carpet and the circumstances around the bible. However we now have police interview/notes saying that the crime scene photos of Shelia are different to how they first found her. This evidence came to light not long ago and McDonnell did not know this at the time in 1992 and if he did his conclusions would have been different.
-
Furthermore, although Mcdonnell concluded that Sheila Caffell had not killed herself, and that her killer(s) had set her death scene to give a general impression that she had taken her own life, he went on to say, that there was no evidence to suggest that Jeremy Bamber was 'that' killer. This was his conclusion, after Essex police had sent to him, all the photographs they claimed they had taken at the scene. What is startling is that Mcdonnell, never claimed involvement of a sound moderator in the shooting of Sheila Caffell, or if he knew about it, that the discovery of such a silencer, found elsewhere in the farmhouse, was evidence to prove 'Jeremy Bambers' involvement in her death, with use of 'it'...
Mcdonnell was right, and is right, there has never been any real evidence which implicates Jeremy Bamber in the shootings of his sister...
-
Beyond reasonable doubt ? I don't think so. Not when you see things like this.
-
I was acting on Jeremy Bambers behalf when he first had dealings with Professor Herbert Leon, Mcdonnell, so I do know what I am talking about. Jeremy did not send photographs to Mcdonnell, he paid for the postage and costs, which was required, and an initial fee for McDonnell's first report. The BBC I think actually paid for the experts report, or something like that. But in any event, the photographs Mcdonnell examined and commented upon, came directly from Essex police...
-
Furthermore, although Mcdonnell concluded that Sheila Caffell had not killed herself, and that her killer(s) had set her death scene to give a general impression that she had taken her own life, he went on to say, that there was no evidence to suggest that Jeremy Bamber was 'that' killer. This was his conclusion, after Essex police had sent to him, all the photographs they claimed they had taken at the scene. What is startling is that Mcdonnell, never claimed involvement of a sound moderator in the shooting of Sheila Caffell, or if he knew about it, that the discovery of such a silencer, found elsewhere in the farmhouse, was evidence to prove 'Jeremy Bambers' involvement in her death with use of 'it'...
Mcdonnell was right, and is right, there has never been any real evidence which implicates Jeremy Bamber in the shootings of his sister...
If Mcdonnell had the police interview/notes I had just posted he would give the opinion its inconclusive.
If you think otherwise contact Mcdonnell himself and we shall see what he sais
-
Mcdonnell would have concluded that the photographs relied upon to prosecute Jeremy Bamber were 'misleading' and had given the wrong impression to the jury at trial, and that in particular, when the jury had retired to consider its verdict, that there was a grave concern that these staged photographs gave an impression that Sheila's body had been staged, which fitted in with the main plank of the prosecutions case, that 'Jeremy Bamber ', and no-one else had staged Sheila's death scene, but it was one of many deceptions produced by the police. Mcdonnell would have advised that in view of the crime scene having been 'doctored' and the fact that the photographs themselves which had been taken much later had been used to bolster up the case against Bamber, that the case should be referred to the appeal court with a view of setting the convictions aside...
-
Mcdonnell would have concluded that the photographs relied upon to prosecute Jeremy Bamber were 'misleading' and had given the wrong impression to the jury at trial, and that in particular, when the jury had retired to consider its verdict, that there was a grave concern that these staged photographs gave an impression that Sheila's body had been staged, which fitted in with the main plank of the prosecutions case, that 'Jeremy Bamber ', and no-one else had staged Sheila's death scene, but it was one of many deceptions produced by the police. Mcdonnell would have advised that in view of the crime scene having been 'doctored' and the fact that the photographs themselves which had been taken much later had been used to bolster up the case against Bamber, that the case should be referred to the appeal court with a view of setting the convictions aside...
this is what I keep saying - The photos are vital as it is those that indicate a staged scene. If the gun had fallen to the side for example and her hand was in a different position it would not have looked like a "staged suicide" it might have looked like a suicide . If you see what I mean . So if the police did pick up the gun and check it before the photos and did not put it back in the same position then we are not really looking at the true scene - or perhaps they moved the body to protect her dignity? And to be honest when you take the statement quoted above into account it does not look like we can be 100% sure?
-
this is what I keep saying - The photos are vital as it is those that indicate a staged scene. If the gun had fallen to the side for example and her hand was in a different position it would not have looked like a "staged suicide" it might have looked like a suicide . If you see what I mean . So if the police did pick up the gun and check it before the photos and did not put it back in the same position then we are not really looking at the true scene - or perhaps they moved the body to protect her dignity? And to be honest when you take the statement quoted above into account it does not look like we can be 100% sure?
Yes, the photographic evidence relied upon at trial, to 'bolster up the case against Jeremy Bamber' was very misleading, and unfair. The jury obviously would have accepted the position of Sheila's body as seen in one or more of those '8 consecutively taken photographs showing Sheila' body on the bedroom floor in the possession of the rifle' as being 'exactly' as it had been found upon first entry by police, with the exception of the fact that PC Bird (SOCO) took a photograph of the rifle leaning against the main bedroom window, a photograph numbered 23, showing the said rifle leaning against the aforementioned window was subject of cross examination in chief, and by defence counsell. PC Bird testified that he he took photograph 23. When asked if he had seen or knew who had put that rifle there at the window, he said he had not seen who had put that rifle there. The matter was further enquired into when Detective Inspector Cook testified. He was questioned about the different positions of Sheila's right hand, and her arm, against her body and upon the gun, as subject to photographs bearing the sequential numbers, 29 / 30? Cook told the court that he had shifted the position of Sheila's hand as shown in the aforementioned photographs so that PC Bird could photograph bloodied fingermarks that were present upon the front lower part of her nightdress. When Cook was asked about the photograph of the rifle (23) at the bedroom window, his answer was (with the benefit of hindsight) very telling. It was very telling because when Cook was asked did he know who had placed that rifle, there? He responded by saying, 'that he had'. He testified that 'he had' placed the rifle there, after PC Bird had finished taking all the photographs showing Sheila' s body in possession of the rifle. Cook testified to the effect that once he had removed the gun from Sheila's body, he had handed the gun to Police Inspector Montgomery to check it to make sure it was safe. Once this had been done, Cook stated that he had then placed the rifle against the bedroom window, as depicted in photograph No.23. The gist of the testimony given by both PC Bird, and DI Cook, was that photographs which showed Sheila's possession of the rifle (photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33) were taken before, photograph No.23, which shows the same rifle resting against the window. This testimony was false, and by anybody's standard, amounts to 'perverting the course of justice', because both Bird and Cook knew that photograph No.23, was taken before photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33). We now know, with the benefit of hindsight, that the rifle was photographed at the bedroom window (23), then somebody brought the rifle from the window and positioned 'it' upon Sheila's body, and only then had PC Bird photographed it there, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. Now that we know this, Cook also lied about the different positions of Sheila's hands when compared in photo's, 29 / 30, by claiming that he had moved them so that PC Bird could photograph bloodied fingermarks upon the front lower part of her nightdress. The stark truth is that PC Bird could have photographed those bloodied fingermarks on the said nightdress whilst the rifle was resting against the bedroom window as depicted at the time Bird himself had taken photograph No.23. The different positions of Sheila's right arm, and her hand, as shown in photographs, No. 29 / 30, was evidence of the fact that 'Ron' Cook, himself was totally responsible for staging Sheila's death scene, which was then photographed by his sidekick PC Bird. The jury had no way of knowing that the photographic evidence had been taken only after the positions of the three adult victims had been moved or displaced during a training exercise which had lasted 'one hour' between 9 and 10 O'clock, and that Senior Officers at the scene had given Cook strict instructions for him to make sure that the gun was photographed on Sheila Caffells body accurately...
-
Cook brought the rifle from the main bedroom window (23), and put it on Sheila's body, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
This tells its own story...
-
The 'staging' of Sheila Caffells body, was a pivotal point in the prosecutions case, and the photographs showing the rifle in Sheila's possession. We now know that Sheila's body had been staged in all those photographs ( 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 ), staged by Cook and Bird, who acted in the knowlege and with the consent of senior officers...
-
So u are now claiming that not only did the police shoot and kill Sheila, but 'information you have been provided with' shows that the police also shot June and Neville.
1 Did the police shoot and kill June?
2 Did the police shoot and kill Neville?
3 Did the police shoot an already dead June?
4 Did the police shoot an already dead Neville?
5 Do u think Sheila, June and Neville were all still alive when the police arrived?
You've come up with a wide range of theories and conjecture in the past. So in light of ur gut feelings, what u know and what 'informers' have told u, what are your current thoughts with regards my above 5 questions.
A simple yes / no answer will suffice. Waffle and detailed answers / explanation are not required.
Thanks
-
Cook brought the rifle from the main bedroom window (23), and put it on Sheila's body, as per photo's, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33...
This tells its own story...
23 was taken after the other photographs. Numerical exhibit order is not time/date order.
You are certainly telling stories. ::)
-
23 was taken after the other photographs. Numerical exhibit order is not time/date order.
You are certainly telling stories. ::)
Hartley, I don't know enough about photography to comment, but between the late 70's and the late 80's it became my then husband's hobby. He used a variety of cameras but I don't recall that any of the pictures were numbered. Could I be wrong?
-
Hartley, I don't know enough about photography to comment, but between the late 70's and the late 80's it became my then husband's hobby. He used a variety of cameras but I don't recall that any of the pictures were numbered. Could I be wrong?
The numbers are just assigned by the police to allow them to reference particular images, like an index.
The order that photographs were actually taken in could be determined from their position on negative strips.
Mike is attempting to mislead peaple by suggesting the numerical reference is indicative of the order that photographs were actually taken in.
I have no idea what he hopes to achieve by attempting this particular deception. It might suck a few people in on an internet forum, but that's about it.
-
Refer to Mr Sutherst's expertise - all the strips of negatives were uniquely marked by marks similar to bar codes that you find on items for sale in a shop or a store. Not actual bar codes but a series of light marks upon each individual negative, which makes it distinctive to any other negative in any other strip, and capable of being placed in the sequence with which photographs had been taken. Sutherst's technique made it possible to distinguish the order with which all 581 photographs were taken. He was able to identify individual negatives which had been cut from strips of 10 negatives, by a reference to these 'straition type' marks...
Additionally, Operation Stokenchurch, provided the exact order that PC Bird had taken all his photographs at the scene, that information was published on this forum, and I reproduce the key part which clearly confirms that photograph No.23, was taken before photograph, No.26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. This proves emphatically, that PC Bird and DI 'Ron' Cook, both deliberately lied whilst testifying, because they both alleged that photograph No.23 was taken after the 8 consecutive photographs which show Sheila in possession of the gun ( 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 ). But study the 'Operation Stokenchurch document' depicting the actual order which PC Bird took all these photographs:-
-
Note, that the 'Stokenchurch' schedule states that 7 consecutively taken photographs showing Sheila's body, are numbered at positions, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32...
-
Note, that the 'Stokenchurch' schedule states that 7 consecutively taken photographs showing Sheila's body, are numbered at positions, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32...
At the beginning of the 'Stokenchurch Schedule' it refers to, ' including'...
-
According to the contents of the 'Stokenchurch Schedule', the order that the three adult victims bodies were found in, were (1) Ralph Bamber , (2) June Bamber , and then (3) Sheila Caffell. But this does not accord with the content of the police radio message logs, where it clearly states that two bodies had been found at 7.37am, ' the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female'. One of these two bodies was reported to have been a murder, and the other death, reported as a suicide, by 7.45am…
The second body found could not therefore have been June Bamber, because her death was clearly not a suicide...
So, this brings me to the only photograph taken in between the photographs taken of Ralph Bamber and Sheila Caffell, that PC Bird took of June Bamber, that being the 25th photograph in the sequence of events, photograph No.25, taken of June Bambers body, at a time when the rifle was still resting at the bedroom window (23)...
-
It would be very interesting to see photograph No.25, and the 'actual' photograph, which PC Bird took of June Bambers body:-
-
PC Bird was given the task of creating 'a false photographic record', by compiling an album which only consisted of 223 photographs, which was named, 'THE MASTER COPY ALBUM'. He numbered these in sequential order, 1, 2, 3, etc, to 221, 222, 223. This was done to mask the true order that all the photographs had actually been taken in, and so that 'other' photographs could be compared against 'a fabricated sequence' introduced so that police could try to suggest that Photograph No.23, had been taken after photograph No.'26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. But PC Bird dropped a clanger, because in in haste to fabricate the sequential order that key photographs were taken in, he recorded the fact that photograph 23, was taken before photographs, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, totally different to what DI Cook testified about, since Cook had PC Bird having taken photographs 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, before PC Bird had taken photograph 23...
-
What becomes clear from looking at PC Birds 'pathetic attempt' to 'fabricate' the above 'photographic schedule' is the fact that the sequence with which all 223 photographs of 'The Master Copy Album' were taken were not even taken in sequential 'date' order, let alone taken in a sequential 'individual' order. This is borne out by the fact that photographs which were taken at the scene on the 7th August 1985, are listed either side of photographs taken, on the 10th of September 1985; 8th August 1985; 11th September 1985; 8th August 1985; 8th September 1985; 11th September 1985; 12th September 1985; 17th September 1985; 10th September 198; 23rd September 1985; 14th September 1985; 20th September 1985, 1st October 1985, 20th September 1985, 1st October 1985, and the 26th November 1985...
-
What becomes clear from looking at PC Birds 'pathetic attempt' to 'fabricate' the above 'photographic schedule' is the fact that the sequence with which all 223 photographs of 'The Master Copy Album' were taken were not even taken in sequential 'date' order, let alone taken in a sequential 'individual' order. This is borne out by the fact that photographs which were taken at the scene on the 7th August 1985, are listed either side of photographs taken, on the 10th of September 1985; 8th August 1985; 11th September 1985; 8th August 1985; 8th September 1985; 11th September 1985; 12th September 1985; 17th September 1985; 10th September 198; 23rd September 1985; 14th September 1985; 20th September 1985, 1st October 1985, 20th September 1985, 1st October 1985, and the 26th November 1985...
None of the additional 358 'missing photographs' which form part and parcel of an album which became known as 'THE SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ALBUM', that consists of a total of 581 photographs receive any mention whatsoever, in PC Birds ' photographic schedule' above. The 'gaps' in the dated order in this schedule which separate photographs taken on other dates, other than on the 7th August 1985, are testimony to the fact that PC Bird was one of the conspirators who set out to fabricate the photograph records to hide and conceal a grand total of 358 photographs, from the knowledge of the defense, and the jury which tried the case in October 1986...
-
By reference to the aforementioned 'photographic schedule' produced by PC Bird, at least '10 key photographs' which were taken at the scene on the 7th August 1985, (master copy album) appear to have been 'switched' with photographs 'taken on other dates'. For example, in positions, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 86, 87, 88, 101, and 104...
-
What do these 10 'switched' photographs relate to? Why would Essex police want to produce a 'photographic Schedule' purporting to register all the police photographs that were taken in connection with the investigation under the misleading title of 'MASTER COPY ALBUM', and slip at least 10 photographs into 'that' album, which were not taken at the scene on that first date (7th August 1985), to enable them to 'remove 10 key photographs' which must have been taken at the scene on the 7th August 1975?
-
Now, let's look at the 'date sequence' with which each of the 50 'COURT ALBUM' photographs were taken, based upon the information recorded in 'PC Birds, schedule':-
(1) - 7th August 1985
(2) - 7th August 1985
(3) - 26th November 1985
(4) - 7th August 1985
(5) - 7th August 1985
(6) - 7th August 1985
(7) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Ralph Bamber
(8) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Ralph Bamber
(9) - 12th September 1985
(10) - 7th August 1985
(11) - 7th August 1985
(12) - 12th September 1985
(13) - 7th August 1985
(14) - 7th August 1985
(15) - 7th August 1985
(16) - 7th August 1985
(17) - 7th August 1985
(18) - 7th August 1985
(19) - 7th August 1985
(20) - 7th August 1985
(21) - 1st October 1985
(22) - 7th August 1985
---------------------------------------
(23) - 7th August 1985 - rifle leaning against bedroom window
---------------------------------------
(24) - 7th August 1985
---------------------------------------
(25) - 7th August 1985 - Body of June Bamber
(26) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(27) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(28) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(29) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(30) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(31) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(32) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
(33) - 7th August 1985 - Body of Sheila Caffell with rifle on body
---------------------------------------
(34) - 7th August 1985
(35) - 7th August 1985
(36) - 7th August 1985
(37) - 7th August 1985
(38) - 7th August 1985
(39) - 7th August 1985
(40) - 7th August 1985
(41) - 7th August 1985
(42) - 7th August 1985
(43) - 7th August 1985
(44) - 7th August 1985
(45) - 7th August 1985
(46) - 8th August 1985
(47) - 8th August 1985
(48) - 7th August 1985
(49) - 7th August 1985
(50) - 7th August 1985
-
As can be seen from the layout of the actual photographs taken at the scene, on the '7th August 1985, that police 'saturated ' THE COURT ALBUM' with photographs (26 to 33, inclusive) showing the position of Sheila Caffells body, with the anshuzt rifle upon it, put 'there' by Detective Inspector, 'Ronald', Walter Cook...
-
As can be seen from the layout of the actual photographs taken at the scene, on the '7th August 1985, that police 'saturated ' THE COURT ALBUM' with photographs (26 to 33, inclusive) showing the position of Sheila Caffells body, with the anshuzt rifle upon it, put 'there' by Detective Inspector, 'Ronald', Walter Cook...
Not put there by Jeremy Bamber...
-
Yet, the jury were being invited (ney, they were being brain washed) into thinking and believing that these 'staged' photographs, ( 26 to 33, inclusive) represented ' exactly' how Jeremy Bamber, himself had left the scene, after he had shot and killed his sister, and allegedly 'staged his sisters death scene' on the bedroom floor, something which we now know could not possibly have been the case, since DI Cook was the person who brought the rifle from the bedroom window (23),and positioned it on the body (as seen in photograph No.23), and PC Bird then took the said photographs (26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33)......
-
What we are dealing with here, is a typical example, of various 'agencies of the state', working together, 'hand in glove, a nod of the head here, and a funny hand shake there'...
-
What we are dealing with here, is a typical example, of various 'agencies of the state', working together, 'hand in glove, a nod of the head here, and a funny hand shake there'...
An integral part of this investigation, and the way it has panned out, and it has been referred to, where false records have been created to ' support' a case, which could not possibly be true, involves widespread corruption by various agencies of the State, simply with a common purpose in mind, that purpose being to cover up the true circumstances surrounding Sheila's death...
-
An integral part of this investigation, and the way it has panned out, and it has been referred to, where false records have been created to ' support' a case, which could not possibly be true, involves widespread corruption by various agencies of the State, simply with a common purpose in mind, that purpose being to cover up the true circumstances surrounding Sheila's death...
Police 'shot her', police 'killed her', police 'staged her death scene'
These are, in fact the 'stone cold facts'...
-
In the 'cold light of day' it becomes clear that as a result of police fabricating the photographic records, that this not only wrongly contributed in Jeremy Bamber being wrongly convicted, but it also helped to pave the way for the greedy relatives (as Jeremy refers to them) to 'dishonestly get thier hands' upon his parents, and his mothers share of his grandmother's, estate(s)...
-
Police 'shot her', police 'killed her', police 'staged her death scene'
These are, in fact the 'stone cold facts'...
Quote from: mike tesko on January 07, 2016, 10:50:AM
You seemed to have missed or ignored my post, so I will respectfully ask you the following again.
So u are now claiming that not only did the police shoot and kill Sheila, but 'information you have been provided with' shows that the police also shot June and Neville.
1 Did the police shoot and kill June?
2 Did the police shoot and kill Neville?
3 Did the police shoot an already dead June?
4 Did the police shoot an already dead Neville?
5 Do u think Sheila, June and Neville were all still alive when the police arrived?
You've come up with a wide range of theories and conjecture in the past. So in light of ur gut feelings, what u know and what 'informers' have told u, what are your current thoughts with regards my above 5 questions.
A simple yes / no answer will suffice. Waffle and detailed answers / explanation are not required.
Thanks
-
No doubt, everyone will be aware, that there are no actual times of death in relation to the 'other' four victims. Some people are simply out to try and cause mischief. So, before I make any response to any questions, I would like to know the 'actual' times of death with regards to Ralph and June Bamber? We know that both had 1/2 inch bullet entry wounds in their bodies, which are above twice the diameter of ordinary .22 ammunition. So, such jokers should refer to these factors, rather than trying to mock me...
-
It has already been demonstrated, how the police staged Sheila's death scene. Well, the police also 'staged Ralph Bambers death scene' in the kitchen, too. We know this because prior to police entering the farmhouse, in particular, them entering the main kitchen, you wouldn't have been able to see his body sat on a wooden chair pushed up against the inner door in the corner of the kitchen, because the angle of vision was too acute for anyone standing outside the kitchen window to be able to see that far left right into the corner of the room...
-
Mike - have you reached a final decision on exactly what you THINK did happen on the night?
It has been rumoured the truth could come out soon - so it would be good to have your definitive theory.
You more than anyone have had access to a huge amount of documents and information that should give you an idea whether any informants information is true or a wind up?
-
Mike - have you reached a final decision on exactly what you THINK did happen on the night?
It has been rumoured the truth could come out soon - so it would be good to have your definitive theory.
You more than anyone have had access to a huge amount of documents and information that should give you an idea whether any informants information is true or a wind up?
what are these rumors about?
-
Mike - have you reached a final decision on exactly what you THINK did happen on the night?
It has been rumoured the truth could come out soon - so it would be good to have your definitive theory.
You more than anyone have had access to a huge amount of documents and information that should give you an idea whether any informants information is true or a wind up?
Yep, it has - ever since I joined the forum, I've heard the same thing repeated and yet nothing ever came of it.
-
Yep, it has - ever since I joined the forum, I've heard the same thing repeated and yet nothing ever came of it.
When I first joined, such was the excitement, I truly expected Jeremy to be out in a few weeks.
-
Yep, it has - ever since I joined the forum, I've heard the same thing repeated and yet nothing ever came of it.
Yes you could possibly be right. We will have to wait and see.
-
No doubt, everyone will be aware, that there are no actual times of death in relation to the 'other' four victims. Some people are simply out to try and cause mischief. So, before I make any response to any questions, I would like to know the 'actual' times of death with regards to Ralph and June Bamber? We know that both had 1/2 inch bullet entry wounds in their bodies, which are above twice the diameter of ordinary .22 ammunition. So, such jokers should refer to these factors, rather than trying to mock me...
I'm asking you what is ur position re: my questions.
Obviously I haven't got a clue about the time of deaths. That is not what I am asking.
I again respectfully ask u the same questions. Or is there some reason u are choosing not to post ur opinion / what u have been told?
-
So u are now claiming that not only did the police shoot and kill Sheila, but 'information you have been provided with' shows that the police also shot June and Neville. Both had 1/2 inch diameter bullet entry wounds, which could not have been made by .22 rounds fired from the only alleged murder weapon used in their shooting, and murders (the family owned, anshuzt rifle which cannot fire 1/2 inch calibre type ammunition)
1 Did the police shoot (yes) and kill June?
2 Did the police shoot (yes) and kill Neville?
3 Did the police shoot an already dead June (maybe)?
4 Did the police shoot an already dead Neville (maybe)?
5 Do u think Sheila, (yes)June (yes)and Neville (yes)were all still alive when the police arrived?
You've come up with a wide range of theories and conjecture in the past. So in light of ur gut feelings, what u know and what 'informers' have told u, what are your current thoughts with regards my above 5 questions.
A simple yes / no answer will suffice. Waffle and detailed answers / explanation are not required.
Thanks
-
Mike - have you reached a final decision on exactly what you THINK did happen on the night?
Yes, it is now known, that the positions of the three adult victims of the tragedy, as referred to in firearm officers witness statements, which appear to correspond to the location and position of Ralph's, Junes and Sheila' s bodies in the disclosed crime scene photographs was not the true and exact positions these bodies were found, or which they had been confronted by at first point of contact. We know this with 100% certainty. I have shown by reference to the actual sequence that crime scene photographs were taken in, that the anshuzt rifle was photographed leaning against the main bedroom window in photograph No.23, and it was photographed there before Ron Cook brought that rifle from that bedroom window, and put it on Sheila's body, and only then did he get PC Bird to photograph the rifle there in her possession as per photographs No.'s, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33. - the crime scene photographic evidence relied upon in this case, therefore, is fabricated. It is unreliable. What becomes apparent, with the benefit of hindsight, is that Ron Cook misused photographs, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, to help to convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders. He lied about what was shown in photograph 23 itself. He claimed that he had placed the rifle there at that bedroom window, and that he had put that rifle there after PC Bird had already taken photographs (26, to 33) of 'it' upon Sheila Caffells body. But that was untrue. He could not have put 'that' rifle there in 'that' photograph, because no photographs were taken showing the rifle on Sheila's body at all until after photograph 23 was taken. He may have placed the rifle back at the bedroom window after PC Bird had photographed 'it' on the body as per photographs, 26 to 33, inclusive, but no photograph was taken of this event. What Cook did was unethical. He testified to the effect that he had placed the anshuzt rifle there at the bedroom window before photograph 23 was taken, when he knew full well that he could not have, and in fact that he did not. PC Bird, who presumably was in the same bedroom at the time he started to photograph the scene, testified during the trial that, 'he did not know who had put the rifle there, at the bedroom window' which is very telling, since if Cook had put it there, he could only have put 'it' there, once PC Bird had taken the other photographs of that same rifle on Sheila's body. If there had only been Cook and himself in the bedroom at the time Bird took photograph 23, and photographs, 26, to 33, then surely PC Bird would have known that Ron Cook had put the rifle as shown in photograph No.23 there at the window before he had taken photograph, 23. He says, he 'did not know' who had put it there. The only reliable conclusion to be drawn, is that PC Bird 'did not know' who had put that rifle there, because it was there all along, before SOCO took control of the crime scene from 10 O'clock that morning. The rifle had not been photographed on Sheila's body at all by that stage. Indeed, according to PS Adams statement which he made to the COLP investigators in 1992, there 'was no rifle on Sheila's body at around 9 O'clock that morning. So, no rifle on the body at around 9 am, then the rifle photographed at the bedroom window at around 10 am, as per photograph No.23, then at some stage afterwards, the same rifle was brought from its position at the window and placed onto Sheila's body, at which point PC Bird took photographs, 26 to 33 inclusive. Only for then Ron Cook to remove the rifle and place it back at the same window from whence it had come, before the staging of Sheila's death scene got underway. It is very telling, in my opinion, that when PS Adams refers to him having no recollection of the rifle being with the body at around 9 O'clock that morning, that he does not even mention a presence of the rifle in question being anywhere in the same room, which suggests that perhaps 'it' was still resting at the box room window , at that time of the proceedings...
-
It is also very telling, that in PS Adams COLP account, not only does he have no recollection of the gun being on the body at around 9am that particular morning. But he goes on to say that both he and PC Collins got the impression that June and Sheila had both been 'bible reading' beforehand...
Bible reading?
Hang on a minute, we have Sheila laid out alongside one edge of the bed in the main bedroom with the rifle on her body and seemingly under her control, with a bible precariously positioned resting partially against her upper right arm, and we have June Bamber slumped up against the bedroom door - 'bible reading', how do PS Adams and PC Collins, work that out then, based upon the position and location of Junes and Sheilas bodies, as per PC Birds crime scene photographs?
-
The absolute truth of the matter is that Sheila's body was originally the subject of a confrontation downstairs in the main kitchen. It was next relocated on top of her parents bed, then was moved to the bedroom floor and placed in the recovery position upon its right side. Then rolled over on to its back, and the rifle brought to her body, plonked upon it, and then PC Bird took photographs 26, to 33 inclusive. Police chose to make out a false account regarding where and how first contact with Sheila had taken place. They claimed falsely that her body had been found, where her body had ended up, as described above. But they lied, the whole damn lot of them lied through the skin of their teath...
-
Professor, Herbert Leon McDonnell, concluded, after examining the 8 crime scene photographs (26 to 33, inclusive), that Sheila had not killed herself, but rather that she was murdered. I agree with his findings.He stated that 'Sheila's death scene had been staged', by her killer(s), I agree with this, also. He further states something which appears so obvious that not even a rooky cop would fail to notice, and that is that prior to Sheila's killer(s) staging her death scene by placing the rifle upon her body, that Sheila's body had been laying in the recovery position on her right side. He concludes that whilst she was laid in this recovery position upon its right side, that blood from the fresh wound had pooled into the fold of her right armpit / shoulder, and that once her killer (s) had rolled her back into the supine position, this pool of blood which had gathered there, was released and caused the triangular blood stain in the corresponding part of her nightdress to become formed. He stated that this occurred when the killer(s) moved Sheila's right arm to position it upon the rifle...
Well, we all know who moved Sheila's right arm now, don't we?
Ron Cook admitted to doing that...
-
For those interested in what the report states, it can be viewed here:
jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,264.0.html (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,264.0.html)
-
Mike - have you reached a final decision on exactly what you THINK did happen on the night?
It has been rumoured the truth could come out soon - so it would be good to have your definitive theory.
You more than anyone have had access to a huge amount of documents and information that should give you an idea whether any informants information is true or a wind up?
You know the truth. Jeremy Bamber massacred his family.
-
Jeremy Bamber did not kill anyone, he was simply convicted of the killings because the jury were satisfied that Sheila Caffell could not have shot herself, and that her death scene had been staged, to give an impression that she had committed suicide. No evidence was relied upon directly to prove that Jeremy had killed any of the other four victims. He was only convicted of the five murders, because the judge told the jury that it could only have been Sheila or Jeremy. He told them that there was no suggestion that there was a third party involvement. The killer had to be either Sheila, or Jeremy. With misuse of crime scene photographs, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, and the dishonest testimony of Ron Cook and PC Bird, the jury were satisfied that Sheila's death had not been a suicide, they concluded that someone else had shot her, and that someone else had dishonestly staged her death scene. So the jury had no option but to convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders, because the jury had nobody else to blame for staging Sheila's death scene. We of course, with the benefit of hindsight, now know that Ron Cook and PC Bird, between themselves (aided by the advice of others) staged Sheila Caffells death scene. It had not been Jeremy Bambers doing, afterall...
-
For those interested in what the report states, it can be viewed here:
jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,264.0.html (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,264.0.html)
Thanks for that, Hartley. Mcdonnell appears quite emphatic that A) Sheila didn't kill herself and B) that her body was staged.
-
Thanks for that, Hartley. Mcdonnell appears quite emphatic that A) Sheila didn't kill herself and B) that her body was staged.
There is already a thread on his findings. I will find it.
Bamber hired him and didn't dispute his findings. I believe that after this report, Bamber focused on the silencer.
-
Jeremy Bamber did not kill anyone, he was simply convicted of the killings because the jury were satisfied that Sheila Caffell could not have shot herself, and that her death scene had been staged, to give an impression that she had committed suicide. No evidence was relied upon directly to prove that Jeremy had killed any of the other four victims. He was only convicted of the five murders, because the judge told the jury that it could only have been Sheila or Jeremy. He told them that there was no suggestion that there was a third party involvement. The killer had to be either Sheila, or Jeremy. With misuse of crime scene photographs, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, and the dishonest testimony of Ron Cook and PC Bird, the jury were satisfied that Sheila's death had not been a suicide, they concluded that someone else had shot her, and that someone else had dishonestly staged her death scene. So the jury had no option but to convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders, because the jury had nobody else to blame for staging Sheila's death scene. We of course, with the benefit of hindsight, now know that Ron Cook and PC Bird, between themselves (aided by the advice of others) staged Sheila Caffells death scene. It had not been Jeremy Bambers doing, afterall...
We now know that the anshuzt rifle was 'found' in another room at the farmhouse, other than the main bedroom where it was first of all photographed leaning against the main bedroom window, (photograph 23) and afterwards, then and only then, the same rifle was photographed on top of Sheila Caffells body (photographs, 26 to 33, inclusive). The rifle that was used in the staging of Sheila Caffells death scene, had been the same rifle seen by WPC Jeapes at the box room window, from around 7.15am, onwards. Professor McDonnell confirms that the rifle had been found in a different room, in his provisional report. The position of this rifle at the box room window, adequately explains why at around 9 am when PS Adams visited the main bedroom and viewed Sheila's body that he had no recollection of seeing a gun with Sheila's body. What he says is true, because the rifle at that stage was still in the other room (box room) resting against the box room window. Not brought into the main bedroom until after the 'familiars' (training exercise) got under way. In fact we now know that by 9.13am that the rifle from the box room window was brought into the main bedroom and used in a gauging exercise on Sheila's body. This was done to see if it might be possible to suggest that she had sustained the single shot present in her neck at that stage, could have been caused with use of this weapon, and as it was being rested onto her body, with the muzzle end of the rifle under her chin, with the fingers of her right hand being manipulated upon and around the trigger mechanism, the trigger was activated and this explains how Sheila sustained the second shot to her neck. Immediately after the shot was discharged from that rifle, the rifle itself was removed and stood up near the main bedroom window, which resulted in PC Bird photographing it there after 10 O'clock as per crime scene photograph No.23. Police involved in the training exercise, rolled her body over into the recovery poisition upon its right hand side. Once the scene was handed over to SOCO at around 10 O'clock, Sheila's body was rolled back into the supine position, and Ron Cook and PC Bird, did the rest...
-
You know the truth. Jeremy Bamber massacred his family.
I'm afraid not,as it was Sheila who had lost all sense of reality that night. Of that,there's no doubt whatsoever.
-
There is already a thread on his findings. I will find it.
Bamber hired him and didn't dispute his findings. I believe that after this report, Bamber focused on the silencer.
Pssst, you could always just click on the link in my post above. :P
-
Pssst, you could always just click on the link in my post above. :P
Which is what I did :))
-
Which is what I did :))
;D
Chasing statistics then. ;)
-
;D
Chasing statistics then. ;)
Drowning in Adam's multitudinous threads. After a time one looks much like another ::)
-
Much the same as everyone's answers-----------the old boring war-cry of " He's Guilty ". ::)
-
McDonnell speaks about the rifle being found in a different room, the closet (no less):-
-
AP's rifle ?
-
AP's rifle ?
Possibly, yes - since his rifle was the only gun kept in a closet...
-
D's Davidson fingerprinted a silencer on the 9th August 1985, the same time a rifle in police possession on that same date, was being described as a bolt action type rifle, not a semi automatic one...
-
could it be possible that jb hid the rifle in the coal shed he had the key for it that morning.cause i dont think he would have risked going to far in whf without the rifle.
-
could it be possible that jb hid the rifle in the coal shed he had the key for it that morning.cause i dont think he would have risked going to far in whf without the rifle.
No.
-
thank you anyone else with opinions
-
thank you anyone else with opinions
What was the question? Do you mean about the coal shed?
-
What was the question? Do you mean about the coal shed?
yes .on the morning of the murders he gave the key to a police officer iam not sure which one .
-
yes .on the morning of the murders he gave the key to a police officer iam not sure which one .
I obviously have no more of an idea about how Jeremy actually carried out the murders than anybody else. My personal opinion is that he was already in the house, maybe he was staying the night.
-
I obviously have no more of an idea about how Jeremy actually carried out the murders than anybody else. My personal opinion is that he was already in the house, maybe he was staying the night.
good point hartley.i have also thought he could have hidden some where in whf.after all why make two trips .hide in there do the job and make one trip home.its only that the farm manegers wife heard him leaving whf about 10pm.if she actually saw him driving away .iam not sure.
-
I obviously have no more of an idea about how Jeremy actually carried out the murders than anybody else. My personal opinion is that he was already in the house, maybe he was staying the night.
Where were you when I was arguing this with Scip? >:( ;D ;D ;D
-
Where were you when I was arguing this with Scip? >:( ;D ;D ;D
what did he have to say about it caroline.if jb did stay he would have taken a risk because he could not be sure that june or sheila did not tell junes sister he was staying when she called.
-
good point hartley.i have also thought he could have hidden some where in whf.after all why make two trips .hide in there do the job and make one trip home.its only that the farm manegers wife heard him leaving whf about 10pm.if she actually saw him driving away .iam not sure.
His car was at Goldhanger, it's possible that he went to bring the last trailer home, he mentions travelling around on foot, but he could have dropped his car off and then walked to the last trailer, brought it in, then used the excuse that he didn't have his car so was going to stay the night.
In that scenario, he simply retrieved the rifle from the gun cupboard and carried out the murders.
25 shots were fired, 30 bullets were on the kitchen side, yet a box can't hold any more than 50 bullets, so there are 5 bullets too many. Jeremy claims he took a full box and tipped then out on the kitchen side. For Sheila to have been an opportunist and used the bullets available, then she also went and got 5 more out of the cupboard, it doesn't make sense.
The bullets can only have been staged half way through or after the murders, Jeremy's claim that he put them there implicates him directly.
Anyway, in answer to your question, I don't think he did or needed to stash the rifle, he just retrieved it from its usual place.
-
Where were you when I was arguing this with Scip? >:( ;D ;D ;D
Watching and smiling. ;D
-
interesting was jb.s old bedroom door at whf locked when police raided it that morning.and if so who had the key and where was it.
-
interesting was jb.s old bedroom door at whf locked when police raided it that morning.and if so who had the key and where was it.
I don't know where the key was, the police entered the room somehow (which had a sign saying "Jeremy's Room") and found a made bed.
He went to WHF several times throughout the day, I suspect it was not unusual for him to stay over.
-
He car was at Goldhanger, it's possible that he went to bring the last trailer home, he mentions travelling around on foot, but he could have dropped his car off and then walked to the last trailer, brought it in, then used the excuse that he didn't have his car so was going to stay the night.
In that scenario, he simply retrieved the rifle from the gun cupboard and carried out the murders.
25 shots were fired, 30 bullets were on the kitchen side, yet a box can't hold any more than 50 bullets, so there are 5 bullets too many. Jeremy claims he took a full box and tipped then out on the kitchen side. For Sheila to have been an opportunist and used the bullets available, then she also went and got 5 more out of the cupboard, it doesn't make sense.
The bullets can only have been staged half way through or after the murders, Jeremy's claim that he put them there implicates him directly.
Anyway, in answer to your question, I don't think he did or needed to stash the rifle, he just retrieved it from its usual place.
yes good points hartley.i was thinking if he didnt stay the night and came in the morning on the bike .took the rifle from coalshed and entererd the farm through the kitchen window.than had anyone confronted him he could shoot them dead
-
yes good points hartley.i was thinking if he didnt stay the night and came in the morning on the bike .took the rifle from coalshed and entererd the farm through the kitchen window.than had anyone confronted him he could shoot them dead
I don't think he needed to make that additional effort, what was the point. He could legitimately place himself in the farmhouse already, without sneaking about.
-
I don't know where the key was, the police entered the room somehow (which had a sign saying "Jeremy's Room") and found a made bed.
He went to WHF several times throughout the day, I suspect it was not unusual for him to stay over.
i only thought of the key because had he sneaked back in after saying he was going home .he could then lock himself in that bedroom and no one would break the door down if it was locked the family i mean.what do you think hartley
-
To be fair, Caroline came up with the last trailer scenario, so the 'good point's should go to her, I've just hijacked her theory a bit. ;)
-
i only thought of the key because had he sneaked back in after saying he was going home .he could then lock himself in that bedroom and no one would break the door down if it was locked the family i mean.what do you think hartley
I get your meaning, but again to me it doesn't seem necessary. He could just say he's staying over, maybe he watched TV in the living room, so he could use it as a sort of alibi to the police to make them believe he was at home.
-
I get your meaning, but again to me it doesn't seem necessary. He could just say he's staying over, maybe he watched TV in the living room, so he could use it as a sort of alibi to the police to make them believe he was at home.
He said he watched a programme called RECOVERY, something about punk rockers and something about miscarriages.
I don't doubt that he did, because the police could test him on it, but maybe he watched them at WHF.
-
To be fair, Caroline came up with the last trailer scenario, so the 'good point's should go to her, I've just hijacked her theory a bit. ;)
caroline is a little diamond.ive learnt lots through her posts.shes always willing to help other members with their questions doubters or believers.much respect to her
-
caroline is a little diamond.ive learnt lots through her posts.shes always willing to help other members with their questions doubters or believers.much respect to her
There are many good posters, from either side of the divide, yes Caroline is one of them.
-
He said he watched a programme called RECOVERY, something about punk rockers and something about miscarriages.
I don't doubt that he did, because the police could test him on it, but maybe he watched them at WHF.
very true.but didnt ds jones in his interview catch him out cause the program started after jb said he had gone to bed.
-
very true.but didnt ds jones in his interview catch him out cause the program started after jb said he had gone to bed.
Yeah I know, but it's one of things where he could just say, "oh, maybe I went up later than I thought". It's not really definitive.
-
Yeah I know, but it's one of things where he could just say, "oh, maybe I went up later than I thought". It's not really definitive.
thats correct i think he did say that.because of the phone call from junes sister .i prefer the scenerio of him hiding in his roomwith out anyone knowing .but like you said it could fit your scenerio also
-
thats correct i think he did say that.because of the phone call from junes sister .i prefer the scenerio of him hiding in his roomwith out anyone knowing .but like you said it could fit your scenerio also
I'm not dismissing your view, I certainly don't pretend to know any better.
-
I'm not dismissing your view, I certainly don't pretend to know any better.
yes what jb did we wont know unless he confeses.but the thoery is as good as any. cause no one can say for sure where he was after 10pm
-
His car was at Goldhanger, it's possible that he went to bring the last trailer home, he mentions travelling around on foot, but he could have dropped his car off and then walked to the last trailer, brought it in, then used the excuse that he didn't have his car so was going to stay the night.
In that scenario, he simply retrieved the rifle from the gun cupboard and carried out the murders.
25 shots were fired, 30 bullets were on the kitchen side, yet a box can't hold any more than 50 bullets, so there are 5 bullets too many. Jeremy claims he took a full box and tipped then out on the kitchen side. For Sheila to have been an opportunist and used the bullets available, then she also went and got 5 more out of the cupboard, it doesn't make sense.
The bullets can only have been staged half way through or after the murders, Jeremy's claim that he put them there implicates him directly.
Anyway, in answer to your question, I don't think he did or needed to stash the rifle, he just retrieved it from its usual place.
People having psychotic episodes do things that make sense to them but not to rational people. That is the definition of delusion.
-
Everything that seemed or appeared skewed was normal for Sheila who'd lost all sense of reality.
-
Nobody can say where any of the (eventual) benefactors were at 10pm, that evening (6th August 1985)...
-
Jeremy loaded the rifle with fresh bullets in the kitchen. I don't recall him saying that he tipped all the bullets out onto the kitchen worktop, as shown in PC Birds photographs...
-
A packet of plastic curtain hooks appears to have been placed upon or against, or both, on the live rounds tipped out on the kitchen worktop...
-
When I have previously spoken to, and written to Jeremy, about the 'box of bullets' he brought into the kitchen, to load rounds into the ammunition magazine of the anshuzt rifle, he has always maintained that it was a brand new box full of bullets containing 50 rounds, and that the box was sealed in a cellathane
wrapper which he tore off and left on the worktop along with the remaining unloaded rounds still in the box. What I find remarkable is that there is no sign of the cellathane wrapper at all on the worktop when PC Bird started to take his main kitchen crime scene photographs. More interestingly, the contents of the remaining 29 live rounds were tipped out onto the worktop, and a further solitary live round is shown to be still in the base of the ammunition box. Rather intriguingly, some of the 29 loose rounds appear to have been covered or pushed up against a packet of unopened curtain hooks...
-
I don't know about anybody else, but I can only make out 27 live rounds tipped out onto the kitchen worktop:-
-
3 rounds seem to be unaccounted for?
Or am I mistaken?
-
If I am not mistaken, why would police tell Jeremy that only 20 rounds were missing or used from the box of ammunition, if the 'true total' was 26 or 27?
I think 23 rounds are missing, not 20...
-
At least 3 bullet entry wounds had 1/2 diameters, wound sizes that could not have been made by .22 ammunition fired at such close quarters into the bodies of the victims...
Is it possible, that police took 3 rounds from the bullets left on the kitchen worktop, in order to disguise use of larger ammunition 'used' in the shooting of at least two of the victims?
-
At least 3 bullet entry wounds had 1/2 diameters, wound sizes that could not have been made by .22 ammunition fired at such close quarters into the bodies of the victims...
Is it possible, that police took 3 rounds from the bullets left on the kitchen worktop, in order to disguise use of larger ammunition 'used' in the shooting of at least two of the victims?
Which victims had these larger 1/2 inch diameter bullet wounds, in any event?
-
Ralph and June Bamber, I think...
-
3 rounds seem to be unaccounted for?
Or am I mistaken?
Without labelling the bullet in the box I can make out 23 casings outside the box :-\
Edit
Actually I can now see a 24th on the table making the total 25
-
In notes I kept of all my discussions with Jeremy about all the features of his case, He was never specific about how many bullets had already been preloaded into the rifles ammunition magazine, before he loaded it with more bullets in the main kitchen? The police paved the way for the possibility that there must have already been 5 bullets loaded into the gun, that is half of the magazines capacity, which can hold 10. It has always puzzled me 'why would Jeremy load more bullets into the rifles half filled ammunition magazine', if it already had sufficient rounds in it to shoot at a couple of rabbits he had seen near one of the barns?
-
In notes I kept of all my discussions with Jeremy about all the features of his case, He was never specific about how many bullets had already been preloaded into the rifles ammunition magazine, before he loaded it with more bullets in the main kitchen? The police paved the way for the possibility that there must have already been 5 bullets loaded into the gun, that is half of the magazines capacity, which can hold 10. It has always puzzled me 'why would Jeremy load more bullets into the rifles half filled ammunition magazine', if it already had sufficient rounds in it to shoot at a couple of rabbits he had seen near one of the barns?
Even more intriguing, Jeremy has said on several occasions that he only put as many as 5 or 6 live rounds into the ammunition magazine at 'that' time, and has never made reference to him knowing that there were already any other live rounds already loaded into it at that time...
-
Even more intriguing, Jeremy has said on several occasions that he only put as many as 5 or 6 live rounds into the ammunition magazine at 'that' time, and has never made reference to him knowing that there were already any other live rounds already loaded into it at that time...
I have come to the conclusion, armed with other information which has come into my possession, that when Jeremy brought the rifle into the main kitchen along with that new box of ammunition, that 'it' was not already loaded with any other bullets. I have a good reason for saying this...
-
I have come to the conclusion, armed with other information which has come into my possession, that when Jeremy brought the rifle into the main kitchen along with that new box of ammunition, that 'it' was not already loaded with any other bullets. I have a good reason for saying this...
I don't for one moment believe that Jeremy would have put more bullets into a gun which was already loaded with sufficient rounds for him to shoot at a couple of rabbits he had seen. if it was already loaded, he would have been wasting time putting bullets into the gun, so because of this and other factors, there simply can't have been any bullets in the gun when Jeremy returned to the farmhouse after seeing the rabbits, hence why he had to load bullets into it. More telling, according to the notes I made of our conversations, the fact that he only loaded 5 or 6 live rounds into the empty gun, as opposed to filling it right up with 10 bullets, demonstrates his intention to get out to the barn (rather sharpishly) hoping to do a bit of rabbit shooting...
-
In order to be complete, I must draw attention to the fact that '5 bullet cases' had 'double magazine marks upon their circumferences', as opposed to the 'other 20 bullet cases' which only had 'single magazine markings' upon them...
-
At this juncture, we have these 5 spent cartridge cases, with double ammunition magazine markings upon them...
-
At this juncture, we have these 5 spent cartridge cases, with double ammunition magazine markings upon them...
Take your pick:-
Were these '5 double marked spent cartridge cases' introduced as part of the 'ploy by Essex police to make this into a one gun crime', or as the case may be, was 'this' evidence that the 5 live rounds that 'Jeremy had loaded into the gun', been removed by someone such as Ralph Bamber, after Jeremy had 'inadvertently left whf to go home' at around 9.30am?
-
Take your pick:-
Were these '5 double marked spent cartridge cases' introduced as part of the 'ploy by Essex police to make this into a one gun crime', or as the case may be, was 'this' evidence that the 5 live rounds that 'Jeremy had loaded into the gun', been removed by someone such as Ralph Bamber, after Jeremy had 'inadvertently left whf to go home' at around 9.30am?
Its a bit confusing for us laymen(: There is the magazine that you can load some bullets into - up to 10 and Jeremy said he took the magazine out but he left some bullets in the breech - what does that mean? I have inly ever used shotguns.
-
Its a bit confusing for us laymen(: There is the magazine that you can load some bullets into - up to 10 and Jeremy said he took the magazine out but he left some bullets in the breech - what does that mean? I have inly ever used shotguns.
The anshuzt rifle could technically be loaded with a total of 11 rounds - 10 bullets loaded into its ammunition magazine, and a further bullet already loaded into the breech of the gun.
-
Jeremy told me that he loaded 5 or 6 new bullets into the ammunition magazine of the rifle before he went out looking to shoot rabbits. He cycled one of these rounds into the breech of the gun so that it was ready to use immediately if he had sight of the rabbits he had seen earlier. When he returned to the farmhouse, he removed the magazine from the rifle, and manually removed the round he had previously cycled into the breech of the weapon. Once he removed that round from the breech, he reloaded it into the top end of the ammunition magazine, so that presumably it was 6th in position of order the rounds had been loaded by that stage. This 6th loaded round, had been the original 6th loaded round, that Bamber had loaded into the magazine less than 20 minutes beforehand. The only difference being that on the second reload of that round into the ammunition magazine, instead of the cartridge case being marked with one set of magazine marks, it now had two sets, and other marks and striations imposed upon the case as a result of Jeremy cycling that round into the breech, and manually extracting it, before reloading it back into the aforementioned ammunition magazine...
-
Jeremy told me that he loaded 5 or 6 new bullets into the ammunition magazine of the rifle before he went out looking to shoot rabbits. He cycled one of these rounds into the breech of the gun so that it was ready to use immediately if he had sight of the rabbits he had seen earlier. When he returned to the farmhouse, he removed the magazine from the rifle, and manually removed the round he had previously cycled into the breech of the weapon. Once he removed that round from the breech, he reloaded it into the top end of the ammunition magazine, so that presumably it was 6th in position of order the rounds had been loaded by that stage. This 6th loaded round, had been the original 6th loaded round, that Bamber had loaded into the magazine less than 20 minutes beforehand. The only difference being that on the second reload of that round into the ammunition magazine, instead of the cartridge case being marked with one set of magazine marks, it now had two sets, and other marks and striations imposed upon the case as a result of Jeremy cycling that round into the breech, and manually extracting it, before reloading it back into the aforementioned ammunition magazine...
Jeremy placed the unloaded anshuzt rifle on a wooden settle in the rear entrance hall, next to the kitchen and the downstairs office (known as the Den)...
-
But, I never got to know the truth about what Jeremy claimed he did with the ammunition magazine once he had unclipped it, and recycled the round from the breech back into the magazine. There were several loose end enquiries I always kept back, to pursue at a later time, ' "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...
-
But, I never got to know the truth about what Jeremy claimed he did with the ammunition magazine once he had unclipped it, and recycled the round from the breech back into the magazine. There were several loose end enquiries I always kept back, to pursue at a later time, ' "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...
This was one of them...
-
Did Jeremy re-attach the partially loaded ammunition magazine to the anshuzt rifle, or if not, what did he do with the bullet laden magazine once he placed the anshuzt rifle on that settle in the back hallway?
-
If he re-attached the loaded ammunition magazine to the anshuzt rifle that he placed on the settle, this action must have contributed to the tragedy which was to follow during the early hours of the following morning. If he hadn't re-attached the ammunition magazine to the rifle, where did he deposit that magazine with half a dozen live rounds inside it, one of those six cartridge cases having two sets of magazine markings, cycling marks from it being transferred from the magazine into the breech of the rifle, and marks from it being manually extracted from the breech, whereas, the other five cartridges only had one set of magazine marks on them, with one of these five rounds, also bearing the distinctive mark from the spring intensified metal plate inside the magazine (known as the follower plate mark) which comes into direct contact with the cartridge first loaded into the ammunition magazine...
-
If he re-attached the loaded ammunition magazine to the anshuzt rifle that he placed on the settle, this action must have contributed to the tragedy which was to follow during the early hours of the following morning. If he hadn't re-attached the ammunition magazine to the rifle, where did he deposit that magazine with half a dozen live rounds inside it, one of those six cartridge cases having two sets of magazine markings, cycling marks from it being transferred from the magazine into the breech of the rifle, and marks from it being manually extracted from the breech, whereas, the other five cartridges only had one set of magazine marks on them, with one of these five rounds, also bearing the distinctive mark from the spring intensified metal plate inside the magazine (known as the follower plate mark) which comes into direct contact with the cartridge first loaded into the ammunition magazine...
Order 6 bullets loaded into magazine:-
Round One, magazine marks, follower plate mark
Round Two, magazine marks
Round Three, magazine marks
Round Four, magazine marks
Round Five, magazine marks
Round Six, magazine marks, cycling marks loaded into breech, extraction marks removed manually from breech, reloaded, magazine marks
If these bullets were fired during the tragedy, without the need to reload the gun with further ammunition, these markings, particularly, on rounds one and six, might give an insight as to whereabouts inside the farmhouse the shootings had started?
-
Order 6 bullets loaded into magazine:-
Round One, magazine marks, follower plate mark
Round Two, magazine marks
Round Three, magazine marks
Round Four, magazine marks
Round Five, magazine marks
Round Six, magazine marks, cycling marks loaded into breech, extraction marks removed manually from breech, reloaded, magazine marks
If these bullets were fired during the tragedy, without the need to reload the gun with further ammunition, these markings, particularly, on rounds one and six, might give an insight as to whereabouts inside the farmhouse the shootings had started?
Since, the 6th round loaded, removed, and then reloaded back into the same ammunition magazine, would be the first round fired during the entire incident. It is therefore necessary to determine what happened to that first round once it had been reloaded into the magazine, for the second time, and cycled back into the breech of the rifle, fired sending the bullet itself speeding toward its target, its corresponding cartridge case, being extracted, and ejected at the place inside the farmhouse where that first shot was discharged. There were obvious reasons why the police should have focussed upon the whereabouts at the scene of the spent cartridge case bearing all the aforementioned unique clues, not applicable to any of the other bullet cases found or recovered from the scene...
Round Six, magazine marks, cycling marks loaded into breech, extraction marks removed manually from breech, reloaded, magazine marks, cycling marks loaded into breech, firing pin mark, extraction marks, ejection marks...
-
No such spent cartridge case was ever recovered at the scene...
-
No such spent cartridge case was ever recovered at the scene...
This causes me a lot of anxiety...
-
We are told that five of the 25 cartridge cases which ultimately formed part of the batch of crime scene ammunition, had 'double magazine marks', and one set of 'cycling marks', one 'firing pin' mark, one set of 'extraction', and 'ejection marks', so no joy there then?
-
Closest we have the the '6th' round loaded into the ammunition magazine by Jeremy Bamber himself, can be found nestling in the ammunition box, with a spot of blood upon it, unfired...
-
We are told that five of the 25 cartridge cases which ultimately formed part of the batch of crime scene ammunition, had 'double magazine marks', and one set of 'cycling marks', one 'firing pin' mark, one set of 'extraction', and 'ejection marks', so no joy there then?
Mike, When it comes to the double magazine marks could it be possible that they were just loaded into the magazine sometime in the past then removed from the magazine back into the ammo box once?
This could have happened anytime from purchase of the ammo to the days before the murders :-\
-
Mike, When it comes to the double magazine marks could it be possible that they were just loaded into the magazine sometime in the past then removed from the magazine back into the ammo box once?
This could have happened anytime from purchase of the ammo to the days before the murders :-\
Unfortunately not, since Jeremy brought a brand new box of ammunition into the main kitchen, to load the ammunition magazine of the anshuzt rifle with a maximum of 6 rounds. At this time the box of ammunition had been sealed, which caused him to have to 'remove the cellophane wrapper' from the box, which Jeremy left on the kitchen worktop. So, all the bullets loaded into the ammunition magazine at that time from that box would presumably all be unmarked and unscathed. The key feature being that Jeremy only describes loading 'new rounds into the ammunition magazine', no mention of any bullets from any other source...
-
There is some confusion regarding what might appear to be the barrel of a rifle resting at the bathroom window, on the red brick part of the house, which was captured by PC Bird (SOCO). Was this what WPC Jeapes spoke about in her witness statement?
-
Referring back to the casings etc because I think the missing cases are relevant
1) As you say Jeremy was either trying to deceive - or if he is innocent the action of going to try to shoot rabbits at the time was not important so why should he remember every detail . But I always think the first statements of everyone involved tend to be the most accurate so in his first statement he does mention where he left the magazine .
2) If the assailant got 5 more bullets from somewhere else would there have been an unopened box of ammunition in the cupboard if so why did he open a new one or could that ammunition have beloneged to anyone else?
-
In his second statement the next day he says the seal was broken - but I guess that could still mean he could take the cellophane off? And says he did not know how many bullets were in the box? I am guessing the police asked for these extra details because Jeremy would not have volunteered them so they asked him if the silencer / sights were on the gun? That would tie up with the relatives talking about it on the second day ?
So if Jeremy never specifically said there were 50 bullets in the box why did allegedly the police ask him about the missing 5?
I am confused .
To me in a house like that guns are not mutually exclusive - so his father could also have picked up the rifle and used it previously ?
And I still cant get my head round how the guns were left not locked away . I remember in the 70s always having to do that and NB was a magistrate.
-
In his second statement the next day he says the seal was broken - but I guess that could still mean he could take the cellophane off? And says he did not know how many bullets were in the box? I am guessing the police asked for these extra details because Jeremy would not have volunteered them so they asked him if the silencer / sights were on the gun? That would tie up with the relatives talking about it on the second day ?
So if Jeremy never specifically said there were 50 bullets in the box why did allegedly the police ask him about the missing 5?
I am confused .
To me in a house like that guns are not mutually exclusive - so his father could also have picked up the rifle and used it previously ?
And I still cant get my head round how the guns were left not locked away . I remember in the 70s always having to do that and NB was a magistrate.
It has always been a bug bear of mine, that witness statement contents made by non police officers, are not written up by the witnesses themselves, but are worded and paraphrased by the police. Sometimes, as in the 'Hills'brough Disaster', and in my own 'Ringstone Grove Case' (bungalow job), policeman do not even make up their own witness statements, but the contents of such witness statements are written up, edited or retyped by another police officer, on their behalf. In Jeremy's case, the same applied. He did not word or paraphrase the content of his statements, dated, the 7th and 8th August 1985, a police officer did after asking Jeremy questions, and Jeremy giving responses. Based on a combination of what the police officer asked Jeremy, and what Jeremy said in response, the police officer in question paraphrased what was asked, and the reply given. I know from having spoken to Jeremy on countless occasions previously about these witness statements, that he was keen to point out that the original versions of both witness statements were hand written, and contained far more detail in the hand written versions, than has subsequently been typed up. A typical example of this involves the detail of the sighting of the figure at the bedroom window, as observed by Jeremy himself and two police officers - these details are 'omitted altogether' in the typed version of his statements...
-
On the 9th August 1985, when DCI Jones, and DS Jones, paid Jeremy a visit they spoke to him about the 5 mystery bullets. They wanted to know what explanation he might offer to them? Jeremy, told them on that occasion, that 'the only thing he could think of was that there must have been 5 rounds already loaded into the gun', at the time he had put bullets into it. Police quickly accepted his answer, and questioned him as to the whereabouts of the silencer which Anthony Pargeter had already spoken to them about, it being fitted to the barrel of the rifle inside the gun cupboard in the den, on the penultimate week-end prior to the shootings of the family. DCI Jones, wanted to know if that silencer had been fitted to the barrel of the rifle on the eve' of the tragedy when Jeremy had loaded the gun up with bullets from the new box of ammunition? Jeremy replied, "No"...
I would speak to Jeremy on many occasions, regarding these exchanges...
-
I do understand where you are coming from because the bit about the silencer and sights would not have been volunteered by Jeremy if he was innocent or guilty because allegedly the silencer had not been found at that stage . So it sounds more like the relatives had mentioned it - then the police asked him and he answered . I agree the whole second statement sounds like Answers to questions by the police about several subjects .
-
I do understand where you are coming from because the bit about the silencer and sights would not have been volunteered by Jeremy if he was innocent or guilty because allegedly the silencer had not been found at that stage . So it sounds more like the relatives had mentioned it - then the police asked him and he answered . I agree the whole second statement sounds like Answers to questions by the police about several subjects .
The relative did mention them, AP mentioned them on 9th Aug when the family expressed their suspicions about Jeremy to Taff Jones and yes, Jones and Jones asked Jeremy later that day.
-
On the 9th August 1985, when DCI Jones, and DS Jones, paid Jeremy a visit they spoke to him about the 5 mystery bullets. They wanted to know what explanation he might offer to them? Jeremy, told them on that occasion, that 'the only thing he could think of was that there must have been 5 rounds already loaded into the gun', at the time he had put bullets into it. Police quickly accepted his answer, and questioned him as to the whereabouts of the silencer which Anthony Pargeter had already spoken to them about, it being fitted to the barrel of the rifle inside the gun cupboard in the den, on the penultimate week-end prior to the shootings of the family. DCI Jones, wanted to know if that silencer had been fitted to the barrel of the rifle on the eve' of the tragedy when Jeremy had loaded the gun up with bullets from the new box of ammunition? Jeremy replied, "No"...
I would speak to Jeremy on many occasions, regarding these exchanges...
He's not likely to forget if there was 5 rounds already loaded.
-
If there were already 5 rounds in the magazine, then this is even more suspicious! He said he was in a hurry to shoot the rabbits, so if the magazine was half full, surely this would have been enough for the purpose?
-
If there were already 5 rounds in the magazine, then this is even more suspicious! He said he was in a hurry to shoot the rabbits, so if the magazine was half full, surely this would have been enough for the purpose?
but does that mean bullets in the breech or magazine ? How many can go in the breech ? Mike is saying it was a full box of 50 but Jeremy does not say that in his statements.
-
but does that mean bullets in the breech or magazine ? How many can go in the breech ? Mike is saying it was a full box of 50 but Jeremy does not say that in his statements.
There can only be one bullet in the breach at any one time, so in effect, you can have 11 bullets loaded - 10 in the mag and one in the breach. Jeremy said that he removed the bullet from the breach. I think I have read somewhere that he did say it was a full box, not sure where though. :-\
-
There can only be one bullet in the breach at any one time, so in effect, you can have 11 bullets loaded - 10 in the mag and one in the breach. Jeremy said that he removed the bullet from the breach. I think I have read somewhere that he did say it was a full box, not sure where though. :-\
In the statements I just posted which were from the first two days he said he did not know for sure because the seal on the box had been broken but he thought it was fairly full .
This is not trying to defend him but I think say if he was innocent and he was just going out to shoot rabbits than you might not necessarily count the bullets into the gun or notice much about the box And he probably just took out the bullet and magazine in a way he normally would without thinking about it much , just making the gun safe? I have never heard him say much about whether he assumed his father would have tided up and put the gun away - I think that came from the relatives , who actually never visited WHF very much so I am not sure how they knew . I would think Jean B would have had more information in that respect. Like we have said before the "staging " of the gun and bullets was a bit irrelevant in a house with no locked cupboard and ammunition laying around in boxes.
-
In the statements I just posted which were from the first two days he said he did not know for sure because the seal on the box had been broken but he thought it was fairly full .
This is not trying to defend him but I think say if he was innocent and he was just going out to shoot rabbits than you might not necessarily count the bullets into the gun or notice much about the box And he probably just took out the bullet and magazine in a way he normally would without thinking about it much , just making the gun safe? I have never heard him say much about whether he assumed his father would have tided up and put the gun away - I think that came from the relatives , who actually never visited WHF very much so I am not sure how they knew . I would think Jean B would have had more information in that respect. Like we have said before the "staging " of the gun and bullets was a bit irrelevant in a house with no locked cupboard and ammunition laying around in boxes.
Yes, that's fair enough but why bring the bullets out to the kitchen and not just load the rifle from where it was stored? It would have been much quicker for someone in a hurry.
-
Shooting rabbits ;D
-
Shooting rabbits ;D
Yeah, I don't believe it either.
-
Shooting rabbits ;D
When you consider the fact that rabbits are a pest to farmers and the ammunition loaded in the gun is purpose build to kill rabbits and similar rodents, it's not really that unusual at all. 8)
-
When you consider the fact that rabbits are a pest to farmers and the ammunition loaded in the gun is purpose build to kill rabbits and similar rodents, it's not really that unusual at all. 8)
It is when the whole family ends up being shot dead the following day and the murder weapon is the very same rifle and no witnesses to corroborate the bunny story. ;) 8)
-
He's not likely to forget if there was 5 rounds already loaded.
I agree. Which is why I looked into the matter further. Of course Jeremy would have known whether or not there had already been bullets in the gun before he felt it was necessary to get a new box of ammunition wrapped in cellophane, take that along with the rifle into the kitchen to reload the gun with bullets it did not need, if it was already loaded with these additional five rounds. This led me to believe that when Jeremy took the gun and the bullets into the main kitchen, that the rifle in question 'was not' loaded with any bullets at all, because if it had been loaded, he would have gone straight back out of the farmhouse to try to catch the two rabbits before they hop footed it away, or legged it...
-
If there were already 5 rounds in the magazine, then this is even more suspicious! He said he was in a hurry to shoot the rabbits, so if the magazine was half full, surely this would have been enough for the purpose?
When the question was raised by Jones and Jones, about where the additional 5 rounds had come from, he didn't definitely say there was already 5 bullets in the ammunition magazine of the gun, he actually said they must have already been in the gun. I had it out with Jeremy about this, and it transpired that he only loaded 5 or 6 rounds from the new box they came out of. I put it to him that he would have known there were already bullets loaded into the gun prior to him seeking to reload it with new bullets, and he replied that when he took possession of the rifle he had believed it to be empty. He insisted to me, that he had either put 5 or 6 rounds into the magazine of the gun on that evening, which technically meant that the 5 mystery bullets could be accounted for. I did not like this explanation, but I have to say, that I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that Jeremy had indeed, only loaded a handful of new bullets into that ammunition magazine on that occasion. I do not believe the gun was already loaded up with as many as 5 rounds, or 4, or, 3, or 2, or even 1 bullet. Those 5 additional mystery bullets came from a different source altogether, in my opinion...
-
It is when the whole family ends up being shot dead the following day and the murder weapon is the very same rifle and no witnesses to corroborate the bunny story. ;) 8)
Its not when you consider his psychotic sister then has access to that murder weapon and no witnesses to refute the bunny story :P 8)
-
When the question was raised by Jones and Jones, about where the additional 5 rounds had come from, he didn't definitely say there was already 5 bullets in the ammunition magazine of the gun, he actually said they must have already been in the gun. I had it out with Jeremy about this, and it transpired that he only loaded 5 or 6 rounds from the new box they came out of. I put it to him that he would have known there were already bullets loaded into the gun prior to him seeking to reload it with new bullets, and he replied that when he took possession of the rifle he had believed it to be empty. He insisted to me, that he had either put 5 or 6 rounds into the magazine of the gun on that evening, which technically meant that the 5 mystery bullets could be accounted for. I did not like this explanation, but I have to say, that I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that Jeremy had indeed, only loaded a handful of new bullets into that ammunition magazine on that occasion. I do not believe the gun was already loaded up with as many as 5 rounds, or 4, or, 3, or 2, or even 1 bullet. Those 5 additional mystery bullets came from a different source altogether, in my opinion...
This became self-evident when it was confirmed that 5 of the 25 spent cartridges had got 'double magazine markings' on them, the other 20 only had 'single magazine marks' on them...
-
This became self-evident when it was confirmed that 5 of the 25 spent cartridges had got 'double magazine markings' on them, the other 20 only had 'single magazine marks' on them...
These 'double marked' casings were distributed, in (a) the main bedroom, (b) the children's bedroom, and (c) the main kitchen...
-
Let's assume therefore, just for arguments sake, that before Jeremy loaded the gun in the kitchen with new bullets, that these 5 'double magazine marked rounds' were already loaded up in the gun. Jeremy adds another lets say 5 new rounds, before leaving the farmhouse to go out hunting the rabbits he had seen, returning to the farmhouse, without so much as firing a shot. He removed the ammunition magazine, removed a round from the breech and clipped it into the magazine which he put on a blanket or a towel on the settle in the rear entrance hall, along with the anshuzt rifle unloaded by that stage. Let's then assume that after Jeremy had left whf to go home, his sister had got hold of the gun, and the fully loaded ammunition magazine, put them together and had then gone on a shooting spree, shooting her children, and then each of her parents. Was it possible to reconstruct the sequence with which Sheila must have discharged that first load of 10 bullets by reference to the position of these 5 'double marked' spent cartridge cases' found at different locations inside the farmhouse? Well, yes...
-
Let's assume therefore, just for arguments sake, that before Jeremy loaded the gun in the kitchen with new bullets, that these 5 'double magazine marked rounds' were already loaded up in the gun. Jeremy adds another lets say 5 new rounds, before leaving the farmhouse to go out hunting the rabbits he had seen, returning to the farmhouse, without so much as firing a shot. He removed the ammunition magazine, removed a round from the breech and clipped it into the magazine which he put on a blanket or a towel on the settle in the rear entrance hall, along with the anshuzt rifle unloaded by that stage. Let's then assume that after Jeremy had left whf to go home, his sister had got hold of the gun, and the fully loaded ammunition magazine, put them together and had then gone on a shooting spree, shooting her children, and then each of her parents. Was it possible to reconstruct the sequence with which Sheila must have discharged that first load of 10 bullets by reference to the position of these 5 'double marked' spent cartridge cases' found at different locations inside the farmhouse? Well, yes...
Cartridge case 29 - double magazine marks (DRH/8) Main Bedroom
Cartridge case 38 - double magazine marks (DRH/19) Kitchen Table
Cartridge case 41 - double magazine marks (DRH/38) KIDS BEDROOM
Cartridge case 42 - double magazine marks (DRH/39) KIDS BEDROOM
Cartridge case 44 - double magazine marks (DRH/43) Main bedroom
-
If there were already 'these'"5 double magazine marked rounds loaded into the ammunition magazine, to which Jeremy loaded a further 5 new rounds, then the order with which all these differently marked rounds had been loaded into the gun, is inextricably linked to the sequence they were discharged from the gun. Therefore, the 5 double marked rounds had been loaded at positions, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, into the gun, followed by the 5 new rounds, loaded at positions 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. The shooter fired all 10 rounds, in a reverse order, so that the last round loaded, was the first round fired (this would have been a single magazine marked round), the 9th bullet loaded would be the 2nd round fired (another single magazine marked round), the 8th bullet loaded would be the 3rd round fired (another single marked round), the 7th bullet loaded would be the 4th round fired (another single marked round), the 6th bullet loaded would be the 5th round fired (the last of the single magazine marked rounds). Then the shooter, must have discharged two bullets in the children's bedroom, returned to the main bedroom to discharge a further two bullets, before venturing downstairs to the main kitchen, and discharging the last of the 10 rounds in the main kitchen (each of the last 5 bullets fired having double magazine marks on them) - this suggests very strongly that the shooter either killed each of the two child victims, after June Bamber had already been shot 5 times. That the shooter returned to June Bamber and shot her twice more and killed her off. The shooter then went downstairs and discharged 1 shot at Ralph Bamber in the Main kitchen...
-
If there were already 'these'"5 double magazine marked rounds loaded into the ammunition magazine, to which Jeremy loaded a further 5 new rounds, then the order with which all these differently marked rounds had been loaded into the gun, is inextricably linked to the sequence they were discharged from the gun. Therefore, the 5 double marked rounds had been loaded at positions, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, into the gun, followed by the 5 new rounds, loaded at positions 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. The shooter fired all 10 rounds, in a reverse order, so that the last round loaded, was the first round fired (this would have been a single magazine marked round), the 9th bullet loaded would be the 2nd round fired (another single magazine marked round), the 8th bullet loaded would be the 3rd round fired (another single marked round), the 7th bullet loaded would be the 4th round fired (another single marked round), the 6th bullet loaded would be the 5th round fired (the last of the single magazine marked rounds). Then the shooter, must have discharged two bullets in the children's bedroom, returned to the main bedroom to discharge a further two bullets, before venturing downstairs to the main kitchen, and discharging the last of the 10 rounds in the main kitchen (each of the last 5 bullets fired having double magazine marks on them) - this suggests very strongly that the shooter either killed each of the two child victims, after June Bamber had already been shot 5 times. That the shooter returned to June Bamber and shot her twice more and killed her off. The shooter then went downstairs and discharged 1 shot at Ralph Bamber in the Main kitchen...
Ralph Bambers unique blood was first spotted in the form of multiple drops on the kitchen floor, directly beneath where the telephone handset was photographed resting on the kitchen worktop. A body width away, a set of bloodied fingerprints were visible on the front facing edge of that very same kitchen worktop - all this tends to show support for Ralph Bamber making 'that' call to Jeremy, and the shooter intervening...
-
But, on the other hand, if the gun was empty when Jeremy put new bullets into the ammunition magazine, it would free up a further 5 single marked rounds, which altered the sequence with which the other four victims had been shot, for example, 1 shot which killed Daniel Caffell in the kids room. 1 shot which killed Nicholas Caffell in the kids room. 5 shots which wounded June Bamber in the main bedroom, and 3 shots which wounded or killed Ralph Bamber downstairs in the kitchen, (or shot once coming up or going down the main stairs, and then shot twice whilst present in the kitchen)...
-
But, on the other hand, if the gun was empty when Jeremy put new bullets into the ammunition magazine, it would free up a further 5 single marked rounds, which altered the sequence with which the other four victims had been shot, for example, 1 shot which killed Daniel Caffell in the kids room. 1 shot which killed Nicholas Caffell in the kids room. 5 shots which wounded June Bamber in the main bedroom, and 3 shots which wounded or killed Ralph Bamber downstairs in the kitchen, (or shot once coming up or going down the main stairs, and then shot twice whilst present in the kitchen)...
The shooter then would have found time, for another reload of the ammunition magazine, by using 9 more new rounds (single magazine marks), and finished off Ralph Bamber with all but 1 of the 8 shots he is known to have sustained (4 shots), Daniel Caffell (3 shots) and Nicholas Caffell (1 shot) and June Bamber (last shot of reload)...
Then, this paved the way for the introduction of the 5 'double magazine marked' rounds, and 1 police issue fired round...
-
Net result was that there were only 20 live rounds missing from the new box of 50 found on the kitchen worktop...
-
The 5 'double marked' rounds came into play , therefore, as a result of (a) the shooter having retained them from an earlier 'unknown' load of the ammunition magazine of the same gun for specific use in the shootings. Retaining 'these' 5 rounds intending to use them to kill the victims, including Sheila herself who intended to take her own life, (b) they had been originally loaded into the magazine of another gun, and reloaded into the magazine of the anshuzt rifle during the shootings, (c) these 5 were shots fired by police during 'familiars', in addition to (or inclusive of) the shooting of Sheila in the main bedroom, (d) these 5 'double marked' cartridge cases, were introduced later in a 'substitution' program, to try and account for at least 5 shots that were fired by an additional weapon - a necessary 'tinkering' with the batch of crime scene ammunition, as part of the attempt to turn the investigation, from being 'a multiple' gun crime, into 'a single' one...
-
As I say, I do not believe that the anshuzt rifle was loaded with any bullets, when Jeremy Bamber took possession of it, on the evening 'prior' to the morning of the shootings, but if I am wrong, then the 'sequence' with which those 'first 10 shots' were fired, supports Jeremy's account that he received a desperate call from his father, saying, 'Come Quickly', and ' yours sisters got the gun' and 'she has gone crazy'...
-
As I say, I do not believe that the anshuzt rifle was loaded with any bullets, when Jeremy Bamber took possession of it, on the evening 'prior' to the morning of the shootings, but if I am wrong, then the 'sequence' with which those 'first 10 shots' were fired, supports Jeremy's account that he received a desperate call from his father, saying, 'Come Quickly', and ' yours sisters got the gun' and 'she has gone crazy'...
The evidence which supports Jeremy Bambers unwavering contention that his father 'did' make that all important call to him, being the location and the position of those last 5 rounds fired from the first load of the gun, for example, 2 double magazine marked cartridge cases recovered from the vicinity of the kids bedroom, two double magazine marked cartridge cases recovered from the main bedroom, with the discovery of the all important last of the 5 double magazine marked cartridge cases discovered downstairs on the kitchen table...
This analysis supports the case for Ralph being shot at, at the time he was making his call to Jeremy (at around 3.25am), or the police at 3.26am (when he was telling the police, that 'my daughter has got possession of one of my guns' and 'is going berserk'...
-
Sheila could have had possession of one of Ralph Bambers guns, at 'that' stage, and with the benefit of hindsight, with only 9 or 10 rounds fired by that stage, and still yet another 16, or 15 rounds, to be fired in the ongoing event, it fits 'perfectly' with the the notion, that 'his daughter, was going berserk'...
-
Shooting rabbits ;D
why ?
Why is that funny ? Explain .
-
It is when the whole family ends up being shot dead the following day and the murder weapon is the very same rifle and no witnesses to corroborate the bunny story. ;) 8)
No it is not - it is the most common thing on a farm to shoot rabbits and the family said that Neville would have put the gun away any way - in an unlocked cupboard so what is the point?
I just don't get why anyone should think it is unusual .
And if you are going to say that Jeremy did not even like shooting animals at all - then you are stretching it a bit to say he could murder his whole family without showing any emotion or shock.
-
Yes, that's fair enough but why bring the bullets out to the kitchen and not just load the rifle from where it was stored? It would have been much quicker for someone in a hurry.
I don't think he did bring them to the kitchen I thought they were already there?
And he did not leave the gun in the kitchen so it is not as if the gun and ammunition were close?
-
Jeremy told me the box of ammunition was a new box, wrapped in cellophane, police said, each new box contained, 50 rounds of live an munition. There were a total of 30 rounds 'not used' according to the police - only 20 live rounds potentially used. So, where did the other 5 rounds originate from?
-
Jeremy told me the box of ammunition was a new box, wrapped in cellophane, police said, each new box contained, 50 rounds of live an munition. There were a total of 30 rounds 'not used' according to the police - only 20 live rounds potentially used. So, where did the other 5 rounds originate from?
Let's proceed on the basis that - Sheila had 'obtained' the additional 5 rounds, at some stage after her 'arrival' at the farmhouse, without anyone's knowledge...
-
This, helps to explain the anomaly between the number of rounds missing from the new box of ammunition (20 rounds), and the actual number of rounds fired (25)...
-
This, helps to explain the anomaly between the number of rounds missing from the new box of ammunition (20 rounds), and the actual number of rounds fired (25)...
We have to assume, that the 5 additional rounds which had been way laid, that ended up with 2 sets of magazine marks, were in the ammunition magazine at some stage, in the loading positions, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, and that these in fact could have been the same 5 new rounds which Jeremy has spoken about. What if, Ralph had emptied the ammunition magazine which Jeremy had left on a blanket or something similar on the settle in the rear entrance hall, and that Ralph had removed those 5 unused new rounds for safety reasons, only for the shooter to reload them, followed by 5 new rounds?
-
We have to assume, that the 5 additional rounds which had been way laid, that ended up with 2 sets of magazine marks, were in the ammunition magazine at some stage, in the loading positions, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, and that these in fact could have been the same 5 new rounds which Jeremy has spoken about. What if, Ralph had emptied the ammunition magazine which Jeremy had left on a blanket or something similar on the settle in the rear entrance hall, and that Ralph had removed those 5 unused new rounds for safety reasons, only for the shooter to reload them, followed by 5 new rounds?
This would result in there being 5 double magazine marked rounds loaded at positions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in the ammunition magazine, followed by 5 new bullets being also loaded by the shooter into the same ammunition magazine, at positions, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. The firing order would be in reverse, bullet 10 fired 1st, 9th fired 2nd, 8th fired 3rd, 7th fired 4th, 6th fired 5th, 5th fired 6th, 4th fired 7th, 3rd fired 8th, 2nd fired 9th, and lastly, 1st fired in 10th position...
-
By a reliance on this scenario, the shooter had discharged the 5 double magazine marked rounds, two in the kids room, two in the main bedroom, and a single one in the main kitchen downstairs, as per the discharge of the gun with position of bullets which were double marked being fired in positions, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, from the gun...
-
Wait and see what the next four months will bring, the 'information' I have been given is positive, and some police officers will be under investigation at the end of the case, wait and see, wait and see...
-
I am as certain as I can be, that by the end of May this year, that Jeremy Bambers convictions are going to be 'Quashed'...
-
I am as certain as I can be, that by the end of May this year, that Jeremy Bambers convictions are going to be 'Quashed'...
And they all lived happily ever after.
-
One of the failings in Jeremy Bambers convictions, was the failure to establish where these '5 double magazine marked rounds' originated from? It is such a significant feature in the ballistics evidence which the police, and the CPS, (and others) have blatantly failed to address. It is my firm view that these 'organisations' and ' individuals' did not address this feature adequately enough, because it led to the inevitable conclusion that Sheila Caffell 'had' shot the other 4 victims...
-
One of the failings in Jeremy Bambers convictions, was the failure to establish where these '5 double magazine marked rounds' originated from? It is such a significant feature in the ballistics evidence which the police, and the CPS, (and others) have blatantly failed to address. It is my firm view that these 'organisations' and ' individuals' did not address this feature adequately enough, because it led to the inevitable conclusion that Sheila Caffell 'had' shot the other 4 victims...
If Jeremy Bamber had been the killer, he would almost certainly have 'finished off' Ralph Bamber as his main priority, that means he would have needed to fire 5 rounds into Ralphs body, to at least make sure that he was in fact dead, before he went upstairs to the bedrooms to shoot the other victims with the 5 'double magazine marked rounds'. Well, I've got news for you all. The statistics do not support such a scenario. Since, if Jeremy is the killer, and he needed to kill Ralph Bamber by a minimum of say 5 shots, this left the remaining 5 shots (were these the 5 'double magazine marked rounds') to dispose of the other victims. Well, we know that June was shot 5 times, before the 6th and, or, the 7th bullet 'that killed her' was also discharged from the rifle. So, this raises a significant doubt about the claim that 'she' was shot 5 times whilst laying in bed. if this was true, there would almost certainly been '5 double magazine marked' cartridge cases recovered from, or found in the vicinity of the main bedroom, but there were, in fact only 2...
-
If Jeremy Bamber had been the killer, he would almost certainly have 'finished off' Ralph Bamber as his main priority, that means he would have needed to fire 5 rounds into Ralphs body, to at least make sure that he was in fact dead, before he went upstairs to the bedrooms to shoot the other victims with the 5 'double magazine marked rounds'. Well, I've got news for you all. The statistics do not support such a scenario. Since, if Jeremy is the killer, and he needed to kill Ralph Bamber by a minimum of say 5 shots, this left the remaining 5 shots (were these the 5 'double magazine marked rounds') to dispose of the other victims. Well, we know that June was shot 5 times, before the 6th and, or, the 7th bullet 'that killed her' was also discharged from the rifle. So, this raises a significant doubt about the claim that 'she' was shot 5 times whilst laying in bed. if this was true, there would almost certainly been '5 double magazine marked' cartridge cases recovered from, or found in the vicinity of the main bedroom, but there were, in fact only 2...
If any of this were true (which it cannot be) then how can it be explained, the presence of only 2 'double magazine marked' cases in the main bedroom, and a further 2 'double magazine marked' cases in the children's bedroom, and a solitary 'double magazine marked' cartridge case, on the table downstairs in the main kitchen, if the first load of the ammunition magazine contained, '5 new rounds' and '5 reloaded rounds' - which had the feature of 5 rounds with ' single magazine marks, and the other 5 rounds with 'double magazine marks'?
-
Speaking of Neville,was that the only position the poor man was found in,or are there other photo's ?
-
There is some confusion regarding what might appear to be the barrel of a rifle resting at the bathroom window, on the red brick part of the house, which was captured by PC Bird (SOCO). Was this what WPC Jeapes spoke about in her witness statement?
What do you mean by "which was captured by Pc Bird"? WPc Jeapes referred to a window (that she stated had what appeared to be a rifle leaning against it) "where the building is clad in grey brick", which doesn't apply to the bathroom window, but does to the window of the boxroom between the twins' bedroom and the main bedroom.
-
Speaking of Neville,was that the only position the poor man was found in,or are there other photo's ?
He was sat on one of the two wooden chairs directly behind the door, with his body slumped forward against a second chair positioned directly in front of him. It would have been impossible for anyone standing outside the main kitchen window, who was looking into the kitchen to be able to see Ralph Bamber sat there on that chair pushed right up against the door in the corner, because the angle of vision from outside the kitchen window to him sat there on the chair with the other chair in front of him, was too acute. Because of this, it delayed police entry into the main kitchen through the door behind which was sat his body as described, for several minutes. This was one of the reasons why
-
If Jeremy Bamber had been the killer, he would almost certainly have 'finished off' Ralph Bamber as his main priority, that means he would have needed to fire 5 rounds into Ralphs body, to at least make sure that he was in fact dead, before he went upstairs to the bedrooms to shoot the other victims with the 5 'double magazine marked rounds'. Well, I've got news for you all. The statistics do not support such a scenario. Since, if Jeremy is the killer, and he needed to kill Ralph Bamber by a minimum of say 5 shots, this left the remaining 5 shots (were these the 5 'double magazine marked rounds') to dispose of the other victims. Well, we know that June was shot 5 times, before the 6th and, or, the 7th bullet 'that killed her' was also discharged from the rifle. So, this raises a significant doubt about the claim that 'she' was shot 5 times whilst laying in bed. if this was true, there would almost certainly been '5 double magazine marked' cartridge cases recovered from, or found in the vicinity of the main bedroom, but there were, in fact only 2...
I am sure there must be some information in these double marked casings somewhere - but it is giving me a headache trying to understand it all .
-
What do you mean by "which was captured by Pc Bird"? WPc Jeapes referred to a window (that she stated had what appeared to be a rifle leaning against it) "where the building is clad in grey brick", which doesn't apply to the bathroom window, but does to the window of the boxroom between the twins' bedroom and the main bedroom.
The bathroom window is situated on the same side of the farmhouse 'white side', where it has got 'red brick' and 'grey brick'. On 'green side' the farmhouse is built in only 'grey brick'. It depends on how you interpret what WPC Jeapes said...
-
I am sure there must be some information in these double marked casings somewhere - but it is giving me a headache trying to understand it all .
The location at which these 5 'double magazine marked' casings were found and recovered from inside the farmhouse, tell a story which all of us should be paying attention to. The distribution of these 'double magazine marked casings' at the scene gives us an insight into the 'script' adopted by the shooter, whilst she /he was in possession or the control of the first load of the guns ammunition magazine once the actual shootings began:-
Pop - single magazine marked
Pop - single magazine marked
Pop - single magazine marked
Pop - single magazine marked
Pop - single magazine marked
--------------------------------------------------
Pop - double magazine marked (children's bedroom)
Pop - double magazine marked (children's bedroom)
Pop - double magazine marked ( main bedroom)
Pop - double magazine marked (main bedroom)
Pop - double magazine marked (kitchen table)
-
Sequence with which first 10 rounds were loaded and fired via the Anshuzt rifle:-
Jeremy phone police at Chelmsford (3.36am)
Jeremy attempting to contact police at Witham police station, no-one answering
1st round loaded (double magazine marked) last bullet fired - Ralph Bamber in main kitchen
Jeremy attempting to call his father back getting engaged tone
Jeremy attempting to call his father back getting engaged tone
Ralph calls police at 3.26am
Ralph makes a call to Jeremy at 3.25am
2nd round loaded (double magazine marks) 9th bullet fired - June Bamber in main bedroom
3rd round loaded (double magazine marks) 8th bullet fired - June Bamber in main bedroom
4th round loaded (double magazine marks) 7th bullet fired - Daniel Caffell in kids bedroom
5th round loaded (double magazine marks) 6th bullet fired - Nicholas Caffell in kids bedroom
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6th round loaded (single magazine mark) 5th bullet fired - June Bamber in main bedroom
7th round loaded (single magazine mark) 4th bullet fired - June Bamber in main bedroom
8th round loaded (single magazine mark) 3rd bullet fired - June Bamber in main bed room
9th round loaded (single magazine mark) 2nd bullet fired - June Bamber in main bedroom
10th round loaded (single magazine mark) 1st bullet fired - June Bamber in main bedroom
Sheila Caffell was almost certainly the shooter in this scenario, targeting her mother first, then her two children, and lastly her father. At the conclusion of which she would not have to have handled any of these 10 rounds into the ammunition magazine of the anshuzt rifle - a feature consistent with the lead deposit results obtained from the examination of the hand swabs...
-
Did Sheila shoot the other four victims of the tragedy - "yes", she did...
-
Quite obviously, based on the aforementioned scenario, the shooter had run out of bullets after shooting at Ralph Bamber in the main kitchen, at a time when Ralph was using the telephone. With the shooter out of bullets, it was the ideal situation for a struggle to ensue, involving the shooter and a wounded Ralph Bamber - which everyone seems to be in agreement did in fact happen...
-
Quite obviously, based on the aforementioned scenario, the shooter had run out of bullets after shooting at Ralph Bamber in the main kitchen, at a time when Ralph was using the telephone. With the shooter out of bullets, it was the ideal situation for a struggle to ensue, involving the shooter and a wounded Ralph Bamber - which everyone seems to be in agreement did in fact happen...
Accommodating these 5 ' double magazine marked' cartridge cases, in the grand scheme of things, seems to me to be a key feature in trying to reconstruct the discharge of the first full load of bullets fired with use of the anshuzt rifle. By establishing the sequence with which these 'first 10' shots were fired, it provides somewhat of an insight into the mind of the shooter, and is capable of also providing a blow for blow account of the movement by the shooter from room to room, back to the first room, and then downstairs to the main kitchen, leaving three dead in her / his wake, and wounding Ralph Bamber whist he was using the telephone in the vicinity of bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop, and corresponding multiple spots of blood directly beneath upon the kitchen floor. What all this tells us, is that Ralph Bamber got shot either just before he started using the telephone, or whilst he was engaged using the telephone...
-
Accommodating these 5 ' double magazine marked' cartridge cases, in the grand scheme of things, seems to me to be a key feature in trying to reconstruct the discharge of the first full load of bullets fired with use of the anshuzt rifle. By establishing the sequence with which these 'first 10' shots were fired, it provides somewhat of an insight into the mind of the shooter, and is capable of also providing a blow for blow account of the movement by the shooter from room to room, back to the first room, and then downstairs to the main kitchen, leaving three dead in her / his wake, and wounding Ralph Bamber whist he was using the telephone in the vicinity of bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop, and corresponding multiple spots of blood directly beneath upon the kitchen floor. What all this tells us, is that Ralph Bamber got shot either just before he started using the telephone, or whilst he was engaged using the telephone...
It all fits in snugly with the contents of the two different telephone log contents, one timed at 3.26am (Ralph's call to police), and the second call timed at 3.36am (Jeremy's call to the police)...
-
Bullets ran out, after June dead, Daniel dead, Nicholas dead, Ralph wounded - Ralph raises alarm by contacting Jeremy, then police. Reload of ammunition needed to take place close to where phone handset off its cradle. Imminent struggle on cards at this stage. Injured Ralph beaten into submission. Shooter able to reload gun with further ammunition, shooter finishes Ralph off in kitchen...
-
Ralph Bambers injuries:-
-
Me thinks that Ralph Bamber was stood facing the kitchen worktop in this general position when he was using the phone, and when he contaminated the edge of the kitchen worktop with the bloodied fingers of his left hand, whilst he held the phones handset in his uninjured right hand...
-
Blood from his wounded left arm, ran down onto the fingers of his left hand and contaminated the edge of the kitchen worktop...
-
The blood on the fingers of his left hand caused these bloodied fingermark impressions upon the edge of the kitchen worktop, placing him in the correct position inside the kitchen to enable him to have made the call to Jeremy at around 3.25am, and the call to police at 3.26am...
-
He held the phones handset, in his clean uninjured right hand...
-
The bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop could only have been made by (a) Ralph Bamber , (b) Sheila Caffell, or (c) the shooter,(unknown, Jeremy Bamber)?
-
The bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop could only have been made by (a) Ralph Bamber , (b) Sheila Caffell, or (c) the shooter,(unknown, Jeremy Bamber)?
Police kept the existence of these bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop a secret, because their existence there tended to show support for Jeremy's contention that Ralph had called him from the scene...
-
Police knew the identity of the person who made these bloodied fingermarks which left clear fingerprints in blood there on the edge of the worktop. But, they withheld the fingerprint evidence in this instance. Some have suggested that these bloodied identifiable fingerprints belonged to Sheila Caffell and place her there in the kitchen with blood on her hands (so to speak) but I am satisfied that Ralph Bamber is the person who made these marks. It was his own blood...
-
It depends on how you interpret what WPC Jeapes said...
There's no reason to interpret her reference to "grey" as anything other than an indication that the window she referred to had some connection to that colour. The bathroom window wasn't near to grey bricks or cladding, whereas the boxroom window was.
What did you mean by "which was captured by Pc Bird"?
-
There's no reason to interpret her reference to "grey" as anything other than an indication that the window she referred to had some connection to that colour. The bathroom window wasn't near to grey bricks or cladding, whereas the boxroom window was.
What did you mean by "which was captured by Pc Bird"?
No rifle was photographed leaning against the box room window on 'white side ', but PC Bird took the photograph of what appears to be the barrel of a rifle resting against the corner of the bathroom window...
-
The other odd thing, is that none of the 'double magazine marked cartridge cases' have been linked or associated with any bullets by a reference to manufacturers automatic crimping marks which can be found when the primed cartridge and the lead or copper coated bullet are inextricably joined together in an automated process. Different manufacturers, use similar but different equipment in their manufacturing of ammunition, which leave distinctive crimping marks on the bottom edge of a bullet, making it possible to identify which manufacturer produced each bullet without the need to have to hand a cartridge case. in addition, each manufacturer uses a different type of primer, traces of which can be found on the base of each bullet once the round has been fired. This primer can also be found lining the tube of a spent cartridge, so that it becomes technically feasible to link bullet and cartridge case together, by reference to matching the type of primer, as well as crimping marks produced at the manufacturing stage. No such tests were ever contemplated by the 'rookie' ballistics expert, Malcolm Fletcher. Somebody has gone to a lot of trouble to turn this investigation into a one gun crime, by introducing 'Eley' type spent cartridge cases into the batch of 25 crime scene casings, and simply left it at that as though this was sufficient to establish and prove that all the rounds fired during the incident came from one batch of Eley manufactured ammunition, when in fact the weight of bullets described by the ballistic expert, as 'WHOLE BULLETS, are either 'too high' (7), or 'too low' (5), to have originated from the same manufactured batch...
-
The other odd thing, is that none of the 'double magazine marked cartridge cases' have been linked or associated with any bullets by a reference to manufacturers automatic crimping marks which can be found when the primed cartridge and the lead or copper coated bullet are inextricably joined together in an automated process. Different manufacturers, use similar but different equipment in their manufacturing of ammunition, which leave distinctive crimping marks on the bottom edge of a bullet, making it possible to identify which manufacturer produced each bullet without the need to have to hand a cartridge case. in addition, each manufacturer uses a different type of primer, traces of which can be found on the base of each bullet once the round has been fired. This primer can also be found lining the tube of a spent cartridge, so that it becomes technically feasible to link bullet and cartridge case together, by reference to matching the type of primer, as well as crimping marks produced at the manufacturing stage. No such tests were ever contemplated by the 'rookie' ballistics expert, Malcolm Fletcher. Somebody has gone to a lot of trouble to turn this investigation into a one gun crime, by introducing 'Eley' type spent cartridge cases into the batch of 25 crime scene casings, and simply left it at that as though this was sufficient to establish and prove that all the rounds fired during the incident came from one batch of Eley manufactured ammunition, when in fact the weight of bullets described by the ballistic expert, as 'WHOLE BULLETS, are either 'too high' (7), or 'too low' (5), to have originated from the same manufactured batch...
I have no doubt, that DI 'Ron' Cook, DS 'Stan' Jones and Ballistic expert, 'Malcolm' Fletcher, were all involved in the substitution process of some original spent cartridge cases, with substituted ones - so that they could present the investigation as a one gun crime, to suggest that one rifle was used, and one batch of crime scene ammunition was used in the slaughter, when at least two, possibly three different weapons had been used, and at least three different types of ammunition had been fired.It is very 'suspicious that when the batches of crime scene ammunition arrived at the lab' that the packaging it had arrived in had been cut open and resealed with cello-tape. Furthermore, DS 'Stan' Jones signature appears on several if not more of the 'GENERAL EXAMINATION RECORDS' for these items, which are retained at the Lab'. It beggars belief, that DS Jones signature should appear and be present on several key lab' records relating to the examination of bullets and cartridge cases?
-
No wonder DS Jones had to rewrite the contents of his pocket book, his involvement in tampering with the batch of crime scene ammunition almost slipped through the net. But for the fact that his signature appears upon several key lab' records (which he had no right to do), his involvement in this conspiracy would never have been known about. The most 'telling' feature amongst all of this, being that DS Jones, and the ballistic experts signature, being synchronised by date upon the same lab' documents, on dates prior to the occasion when 'Fletcher' took official custody of the same. Fletcher went out of his way to promote the idea that he did not have any involvement with the batch of crime scene ammunition until on and after the 20th September 1985, yet both his, and DS Jones signatures, appear alongside key pieces of crime scene ammunition on dates before that, for example, on the 12th, the 13th, the 18th, and the 19th September 1985. Why the deception?
-
Why did DS Jones get involved in 'fiddling' the batch of crime scene ammunition?
-
Why did DS Jones get involved in 'fiddling' the batch of crime scene ammunition?
Perhaps it had something to do with the very first silencer (SBJ/1) recovered at the scene on the 7th August 1985? Did that silencer belong to Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle?
-
We also know that the police went to see Anthony Pargeter and examined his rifle for damage. Yet, no police officer has made any report or a witness statement regarding this event. It's as though the police do not want anyone to know that they had taken an interest in Anthony Pargeters rifle...
-
Mike,what was the idea of police going to Ibiza where AP lived ? Was it business or pleasure,or both ?
-
Mike,what was the idea of police going to Ibiza where AP lived ? Was it business or pleasure,or both ?
I think it was when COLP looked at the possible use of his rifle in the shootings...
-
Anthony Pargeter told COLP that Essex police had examined his rifle as part of the original investigation, checking it for damage. Yet there is no official mention by Essex police of them having done so...
-
PC Bird took the photograph of what appears to be the barrel of a rifle resting against the corner of the bathroom window...
How do you know this? Has this photograph been disclosed on this site?
-
How do you know this? Has this photograph been disclosed on this site?
Yes, here :-
-
There are certain questions which need answering honestly by Essex police. Here are some of them:-
(1) - were the raid team confronted by a second person downstairs when they entered the farmhouse?
(2) - did any firearm officer discharge his weapon after entering the main kitchen?
(3) - if the entry into the farmhouse was intended to be stealthily carried out, why does it state in one of the police logs, that 'movemernt' and 'voices' could be heard via the telephone handset (eavesdrop) when the raid team had entered the kitchen?
-
There are certain questions which need answering honestly by Essex police. Here are some of them:-
(1) - were the raid team confronted by a second person downstairs when they entered the farmhouse?
(2) - did any firearm officer discharge his weapon after entering the main kitchen?
(3) - if the entry into the farmhouse was intended to be stealthily carried out, why does it state in one of the police logs, that 'movemernt' and 'voices' could be heard via the telephone handset (eavesdrop) when the raid team had entered the kitchen?
Evidence exists which was never brought to the juries attention, that would have 'caused the jury problems' in coming to the conclusion that Jeremy Bamber had killed his sister. For example, the 'fact' that 'two bodies' were 'reportedly' found, or which 'police were confronted by', upon their 'entry to the premises'. One of these bodies was 'a male', and the second body was in fact 'a female'. One of these two bodies was being talked about in terms of 'a murder', and the second body was described as having been 'a suicide'. Only 'three bodies' were found upstairs. There was 'a shooting incident in the kitchen' after the firearm officers 'entered' the premises, as confirmed by the mention of an 'Officers Report' covering the same matter. More strikingly, upon the arrival of SOCO's at the scene (9.20am) senior officers told DI 'Ron' Cook, (he later denied identifying where he got this information from) the following:-
'There was a seige, and persons shot dead'
Now, this is very interesting...
'A person, or persons shot dead'
Ron Cook had not by 9.20am, yet been into the farmhouse, yet here he is describing the fact that somebody had 'provided him with information', that 'a person had been shot dead', and that one of these people had 'committed suicide'...
' A person has committed suicide'
-
We know that prior to 7.37am, there had indeed been 'a shooting incident' which 'did' take place 'in the kitchen', upon entry, and that prior to 7.45am, staff in the control room were speaking of two deaths, two bodies already having been reported, in fact to 'hit the nail on the head' these two deaths were being spoken about and referred to, as 'a murder' and 'a suicide'. Now, lets get something clear before we go any further. There is no way on gods green planet that Ralph Bambers body could possibly have been described as 'a murder', and 'a suicide'. In the log's, 'a male body' is described on two separate occasions, before mention is also made of 'a female body'. So, any notion that Ralphs body had been mistaken for a female body which has later been introduced to try a get Essex police out of the mire, simply doesn't hold water (7.37am) 'The body of one dead male', and 'the body of one dead female' found upon entry to the premises. (7.38am) One dead 'male'. one dead 'female'...
-
We know that prior to 7.37am, there had indeed been 'a shooting incident' which 'did' take place 'in the kitchen', upon entry, and that prior to 7.45am, staff in the control room were speaking of two deaths, two bodies already having been reported, in fact to 'hit the nail on the head' these two deaths were being spoken about and referred to, as 'a murder' and 'a suicide'. Now, lets get something clear before we go any further. There is no way on gods green planet that Ralph Bambers body could possibly have been described as 'a murder', and 'a suicide'. In the log's, 'a male body' is described on two separate occasions, before mention is also made of 'a female body'. So, any notion that Ralphs body had been mistaken for a female body which has later been introduced to try a get Essex police out of the mire, simply doesn't hold water (7.37am) 'The body of one dead male', and 'the body of one dead female' found upon entry to the premises. (7.38am) One dead 'male'. one dead 'female'...
What 'Ron' Cook makes mention of at the beginning of the Scenes of Crime Register (typed version), makes complete sense of these matters, 'seige and persons shot dead'...
-
'Siege and persons shot dead'...
(7.37am) 'The body of one dead male', and 'the body of one dead female'
(7.38am) 'One dead male, one dead female'
(7.42am) ' Can someone contact the police surgeon, and the Coroners officer, regarding two bodies'
-
'A person or persons shot dead'
Don't overlook the significance of the as yet 'undisclosed' Officers Report, which deals with the 'shooting incident in the kitchen, upon entry'...
-
(8.10am) 'after a thorough search of the premises 'a further three bodies found upstairs', five dead in total'...
-
Then, fast forward in time to around 9am, with 'a training exercise' (familiars) getting under way, involving armed officers trying to 'reconstruct an explanation' for how Sheila had been 'shot' downstairs 'presumed to have died', only for her to 'regain consciousness' and end up on the bed in the main bedroom. By this stage she had only been shot once, and there was no gun with her body - it still resting against a window in another upstairs room of the farmhouse. Enter, 'DCI Taff Jones', and 'other high ranking detectives' into the main bedroom scenario, followed by the 'bringing of the anshuzt rifle' from the other room, and 'it' being placed and positioned upon Sheila Caffells body, as part of a 'gauging exercise' to establish whether or not police could get away with suggesting that 'she had shot herself' with use of 'it'?
-
(9.13am) whilst police are positioning the fingers of her right hand around and upon the trigger mechanism, with the muzzle of the rifle barrel close to her chin, the 'trigger mechanism' was activated, sending a bullet which was still loaded in the gun up through her chin, into and out of the void of her mouth, and to deposit itself into her brain, killing her outright...
-
(9.13am) 'A person or persons shot dead' and 'A person had committed suicide'...
(9.20am) SOCO's arrive at the scene, and senior officers inform 'Ron' Cook that his team cannot take control of the scene at that stage, because 'familiars' were ongoing inside the farmhouse under the supervision of other senior officers...
-
(9.13am) 'A person or persons shot dead' and 'A person had committed suicide'...
(9.20am) SOCO's arrive at the scene, and senior officers inform 'Ron' Cook that his team cannot take control of the scene at that stage, because 'familiars' were ongoing inside the farmhouse under the supervision of other senior officers...
SOCO are kept waiting 40 minutes before the 'crime scene is handed over' to them (9.20 - 10am)...
-
Here is a list of most of the senior police officers who were at the scene whilst these 'informatives' were being carried out, and the various crime scenes in the main bedroom and the kitchen were being 'staged' in order to fit the way that the investigation would be carried out and reported on later...
DCI 'George' Harris
DCI 'Terry' Gibbons
DCI Wright
DCI 'Taff' Jones
-
How do you know this? Has this photograph been disclosed on this site?
Yes, here :-
The photograph shows something in the bathroom window, but it doesn't look like a gun barrel, as it appears to be slightly curved and is too low (given the overall length of the gun). It's probably just something that had been placed on the window sill in the bathroom.
-
Yes, here :-
The photograph shows something in the bathroom window, but it doesn't look like a gun barrel, as it appears to be slightly curved and is too low (given the overall length of the gun). It's probably just something that had been placed on the window sill in the bathroom.
It is the shadow of the barrel thrown up against the recessed wall in the bathroom window, which gives an impression that the object is curved...
-
What 'Ron' Cook makes mention of at the beginning of the Scenes of Crime Register (typed version), makes complete sense of these matters, 'seige and persons shot dead'...
Somebody told ’Ron' Cook after his arrival 'at the scene' at '9.20am' that there had been a Siege 'and' persons (had been) shot dead. The source where this information had come from was supposedly 'unknown', but this cannot possibly be true. Cook knew exactly where that information came from, because in the handwritten 'SOCO Register' the full sordid facts are almost certainly recorded giving the full details of how the police shot Sheila, and the fact that for around 40 minutes after 'SOCO's arrival at the scene between 9.20 and 10am, they were prevented from taking control of the crime scene until 'formalities' were being carried out inside the main bedroom and the kitchen downstairs, involving a group of firearm and senior officers....
-
Somebody told ’Ron' Cook after his arrival 'at the scene' at '9.20am' that there had been a Siege 'and' persons (had been) shot dead. The source where this information had come from was supposedly 'unknown', but this cannot possibly be true. Cook knew exactly where that information came from, because in the handwritten 'SOCO Register' the full sordid facts are almost certainly recorded giving the full details of how the police shot Sheila, and the fact that for around 40 minutes after 'SOCO's arrival at the scene between 9.20 and 10am, they were prevented from taking control of the crime scene until 'formalities' were being carried out inside the main bedroom and the kitchen downstairs, involving a group of firearm and senior officers....
Linked to this, is 'the officers report' (Essex Police action reference No. 1612) which deals with that' shooting incident which had occurred in the kitchen. The truth of the matter is that Essex police have all the information relating to the plight of Sheila Caffell, involving the struggle she had with PS Woodcock as he was attempting to come around the edge of the opening inner door, and how his weapon fired the shot across her neck. How she was presumed to have died as a result of this shooting downstairs in the main kitchen, only for her body to end up 'on top of the bed in the main bedroom' minus any rifle next to or near her body. How her body was transferred from the bed, to the bedroom floor, and the rifle from a window in another upstairs room was brought to the main bedroom and presented upon her body for ' gauging' purposes, only for the rifle which had unwittingly not been checked to see if it was still loaded, discharged the fatal shot beneath Sheila's chin...
-
The jury should have been informed that firearm and senior officers were engaged inside the farmhouse in 'familiars' which physically delayed SOCO from taking control of all of the crime scenes within the farmhouse, and that this delay lasted for 40 minutes after SOCO had arrived at the scene at 9.20am. These 'informatives' had already been on going inside the farmhouse for 20 minutes prior to the arrival of SOCO (from 9am). Why did this exercise have to be completed 'before' SOCO took control of the crime scene at 10 am? That one hour period allowed all those present to touch and restage the bodies of the three adult victims. It allowed them to transport the rifle which would later be presented as the only murder weapon used in the shootings of all five of the victims, from another room into the main bedroom, and staged with it on Sheila Caffells body under her solitary control. By the time SOCO took control of the scene at 10 O'clock, the bodies of victims had already been interfered with, and the rifle brought from one upstairs room to another...
-
It is the shadow of the barrel thrown up against the recessed wall in the bathroom window, which gives an impression that the object is curved...
There isn't enough detail shown for it to be clear that it's a shadow of a straight object. You own a camera... if you try to take a photograph that apparently shows a curved shadow of a straight object, you will find it very hard to accomplish. What stable position could a rifle have that would allow it to cast such a shadow?
-
There isn't enough detail shown for it to be clear that it's a shadow of a straight object. You own a camera... if you try to take a photograph that apparently shows a curved shadow of a straight object, you will find it very hard to accomplish. What stable position could a rifle have that would allow it to cast such a shadow?
What appears to be a curved shadow of the rifles barrel, upon closer inspection may well simply be a small gap in the curtain on that side of the window. You can see this effect higher up on the same side of the window, although higher up there is more of it in view.
-
At 9am, according to one of the firearm Commanders, PS Adams, there was no rifle with the body at the time he visited the main bedroom. Yet by 10 am, PC Bird (SOCO) photographs the rifle on top of Sheila's body seemingly under her control. Now, we know that during that one hour period between 9 and 10am, that senior officers and firearm officers were engaged in carrying out 'familiars' involving the bodies of the three adult victims, but in particular, involving the body of Sheila Caffell. DI 'Ron' Cook (SOCO) did not arrive at the scene until 9.20am, by which time Sheila had already been shot for the second time, and killed. He spoke with senior officers there at the scene, senior officers such as Jones, Gibbons, Wright and Harris, and it was whilst speaking with these senior officers that he learned of a complication which had arisen during the firearm operation, involving a contradiction in the ratio of discovered bodies, downstairs and upstairs in the farmhouse by around 8.10am, and how this became compromised during a 20 minute period between 8.10 and 8.30am, with the body count downstairs, and upstairs, becoming changed from an original ratio of 2/3, into a final one of 1/4...
-
At 9am, according to one of the firearm Commanders, PS Adams, there was no rifle with the body at the time he visited the main bedroom. Yet by 10 am, PC Bird (SOCO) photographs the rifle on top of Sheila's body seemingly under her control. Now, we know that during that one hour period between 9 and 10am, that senior officers and firearm officers were engaged in carrying out 'familiars' involving the bodies of the three adult victims, but in particular, involving the body of Sheila Caffell. DI 'Ron' Cook (SOCO) did not arrive at the scene until 9.20am, by which time Sheila had already been shot for the second time, and killed. He spoke with senior officers there at the scene, senior officers such as Jones, Gibbons, Wright and Harris, and it was whilst speaking with these senior officers that he learned of a complication which had arisen during the firearm operation, involving a contradiction in the ratio of discovered bodies, downstairs and upstairs in the farmhouse by around 8.10am, and how this became compromised during a 20 minute period between 8.10 and 8.30am, with the body count downstairs, and upstairs, becoming changed from an original ratio of 2/3, into a final one of 1/4...
The most startling fact of all being, that at around 10am when PC Bird (SOCO) was being taken into the farmhouse for the very first time, how 'Ron' Cook had told him, ' to make sure that he photographed the rifle in the correct position on Sheila's body'...
This was how the rifle which is shown in PC Birds photographs got onto Sheila's body. Sheila didn't put it there herself, and Jeremy Bamber did not put it there either. Neither did Mathew McDonald, or any would be as yet unknown hitman, or spy. The police put the rifle on her body, and then PC Bird took the pictures...
-
The most startling fact of all being, that at around 10am when PC Bird (SOCO) was being taken into the farmhouse for the very first time, how 'Ron' Cook had told him, ' to make sure that he photographed the rifle in the correct position on Sheila's body'...
This was how the rifle which is shown in PC Birds photographs got onto Sheila's body. Sheila didn't put it there herself, and Jeremy Bamber did not put it there either. Neither did Mathew McDonald, or any would be as yet unknown hitman, or spy. The police put the rifle on her body, and then PC Bird took the pictures...
For all anyone knows the rifle was found lying on the floor beside Sheila's body. Only the shooter and the firearms team know where the rifle was originally found.
-
The rifle certainly was not on the body of Sheila when DS Jones saw her body on the bed with a single shot to the throat. This was what he relayed to Ann Eaton at Jeremy's cottage later that morning. Neither was there a gun on Sheila's body at 9 O'clock when PS Adams viewed the body before leaving the scene. It is believed to be of some significance that these observations were carried out within 5 to 10 minutes of one another - DS Jones arriving at the scene at between 9.05 and 9.10am, along with DCI Jones. It is also worth noting that PI 'Ron' Cook did not arrive at the scene until 9.20am, and that by that stage, Cook states that he thought DCI Jones had already been inside the farmhouse to view the scene. According to Cook when he first saw Sheila's body she had been shot twice (this was after 9.20am), whereas DS Jones only saw 'one' wound (after 9.05, and before - 9.10am) upon Sheila's throat, at least that is what DS Jones told Ann Eaton that same morning. There was therefore a minimum of 10 minutes in which time the second shot was discharged under Sheila's chin between 9.05 and 9.15pm...
-
According to 'David Shaws' account, there came a time in the main bedroom when senior detectives and firearm officers were 'huddled' around Sheila's body on the floor, and DCI Jones was using 'a broom handle' to demonstrate the two angles, at which Sheila could have shot herself twice with the rifle...
-
According to 'David Shaws' account, there came a time in the main bedroom when senior detectives and firearm officers were 'huddled' around Sheila's body on the floor, and DCI Jones was using 'a broom handle' to demonstrate the two angles, at which Sheila could have shot herself twice with the rifle...
-
How could senior officers and firearm officers have known at what angle each of the two shots 'had' been inflicted when she was shot, unless a police officer had been involved in the shootings?
-
DCI Jones only went inside the farmhouse once during his visit to the scene, and he was outside in the court yard with DCI's Harris and Gibbons, when Cook arrived there at 9.20am. Therefore, Sheila must have been shot on the second occasion, after DCI Jones and DS Jones viewed Sheila's body when it was still laid on top of the bed, at a time when Sheila had only been shot once, after which DS Jones had left the farmhouse, leaving DCI Jones and the other senior officers in the bedroom, before Ron Cook arrived at the scene by 9.20am. What also becomes clear, is that DS Jones was not 'privy' to the second shooting of Sheila which took place in the bedroom, or that her body was moved from the bed to the bedroom floor with the intention of the police intending to say her body had originally been found there, otherwise he would not have relayed what he told Ann Eaton about Sheila's body being on the bed, shot once. What is also relevant is that 'if' DCI Jones had partaken in 'familiars' involving the body of Sheila Caffell, as described by David Shaw in his book manuscript, then such an exercise would surely only have been carried out 'after' the second shot had inadvertently been fired beneath her chin in a bizarre accident involving the loaded anshuzt rifle brought from another upstairs room at some point after 9 am...
-
DCI Jones only went inside the farmhouse once during his visit to the scene, and he was outside in the court yard with DCI's Harris and Gibbons, when Cook arrived there at 9.20am. Therefore, Sheila must have been shot on the second occasion, after DCI Jones and DS Jones viewed Sheila's body when it was still laid on top of the bed, at a time when Sheila had only been shot once, after which DS Jones had left the farmhouse, leaving DCI Jones and the other senior officers in the bedroom, before Ron Cook arrived at the scene by 9.20am. What also becomes clear, is that DS Jones was not 'privy' to the second shooting of Sheila which took place in the bedroom, or that her body was moved from the bed to the bedroom floor with the intention of the police intending to say her body had originally been found there, otherwise he would not have relayed what he told Ann Eaton about Sheila's body being on the bed, shot once. What is also relevant is that 'if' DCI Jones had partaken in 'familiars' involving the body of Sheila Caffell, as described by David Shaw in his book manuscript, then such an exercise would surely only have been carried out 'after' the second shot had inadvertently been fired beneath her chin in a bizarre accident involving the loaded anshuzt rifle brought from another upstairs room at some point after 9 am...
The Coroners officer, PC Wright gives conflicting evidence contained between the contents of his witness statements, and his COLP interview records - he states the rifle was with the body in some form or other in one version, yet in the other source he states that 'he has no recollection (at 9.30am) of the gun being present at the time he viewed Sheila's body' on the bedroom floor...
-
Another important factor worth not overlooking, is the fact that at around 10am when PC Bird and the other SOCO's went to enter the farmhouse, how Ron Cook had told PC Bird ' to remember to get the position of the gun upon the body correct'...
-
Another important factor worth not overlooking, is the fact that at around 10am when PC Bird and the other SOCO's went to enter the farmhouse, how Ron Cook had told PC Bird ' to remember to get the position of the gun upon the body correct'...
If the gun was already on the body, why would Ron Cook need to be instructing PC Bird at around 10am on how "to remember to get the position of the gun on the body correct"?
-
On top of all these 'inconsistencies', there is also the fact that when both DI Cook and PC Bird testified during Bambers trial, they both wrongly claimed that photograph 23 which showed the rifle leaning against the main bedroom window was taken 'after' the other photographs (26 to 33, inclusive) which showed the same rifle on Sheila's body. Yet, photograph No.23 was clearly taken by PC Bird before the other aforementioned photographs. Another thing worthy of note, is that PC Bird stated during his testimony that ' he did not know who had put the rifle at the bedroom window before he took photograph 23', whereas DI Cook stated he had removed it from Sheila's body, had handed it to PI Montgomery to check and make safe, then Cook had placed it at the bedroom window, before PC Bird had come along to photograph it there...
I am afraid not, sunshine, you lied...
-
I am afraid not, sunshine, you lied...
Unless of course, Ron Cook was referring to putting the rifle there at 'that' window, on an earlier occasion, prior to PC Bird photographing it there at the main bedroom window, before it was brought to Sheila's body and PC Bird started to take photographs, 26, through to 33, collectively. Thereafter, both of them lying about when photograph No.23 was actually taken. They falsely claiming it was taken much later than it actually had been. If they had told the truth about the order with which photographs 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, were taken. They deliberately lied about when photograph No.23 had been taken because had they admitted the truth, all the crime scene photographs which showed Sheila's body with the anshuzt rifle in her possession would have been deemed 'inadmissable', meaning that the prosecution would not have been entitled to introduce any of these 8 consecutively taken photographs which show Sheila with 'that' rifle, so that they could allege that Jeremy 'had' staged his sisters body to suggest that 'she' had taken her own life. The truth of the matter, is that the photographs made available to the jury, indeed 'did' show her body in 'a staged pose', but it han't been Jeremy who was responsible for doing that / this, the real villains of the peace were the police themselves. In particular, the SOCO's themselves who acted under the instruction of Harris, Gibbons, Jones, Clarke and Wright...
Bambers convictions 'must' therefore be quashed immediately, or as soon as is practically possible, since the jury were deceived into thinking and believing that the photographs they were given to look at whilst deliberating their Verdict showed 'how' Jeremy had set the stage to fool police into accepting Sheila had killed herself, when she had not. If the truth be known, the police fooled themselves by bringing 'that' rifle from the bedroom window, as shown in photograph No.23, and placing 'it' on Sheila's body and then getting PC Bird to take 8 consecutive photographs, numbered, 26 to 33, inclusive...
That deception, serves to 'nullify' the legality of the convictions..
-
What Harris, Gibbons, Jones, Clarke and Wright did by authorising the stage management of Sheila's body by SOCO, set off an irreversible sequence of events which incorporated corruption at the highest level possible in the echelon's of the Essex Police Force, and the Criminal Justice System. It was a conspiracy that became borne out a desperate measure only originally designed to conceal mistakes that had been made in the first part of the firearms operation between 5am and 8.10am, under the Commandership of PS Adams. Irrespective of how Sheila Caffell had been shot on the first occasion, she had 'not' died inside the farmhouse before 8.10am, despite it having been confirmed she had been dead by that stage, she was still alive, a good half an hour later when at 8.44am, the police surgeon, Dr Craig, who was accompanied by PI Miller, mistakenly announced her death, with her body being 'on the far side of the bed', with what appeared to be 'a solitary shot' beneath the chin. We know that there has already been much debate and speculation about what was meant by the term which Craig and Miller both used in their respective witness statements, regarding Sheila's body being, ' on the far side of the bed'. But, when you take into account the position of Sheila's body as reported by DS Jones, to Ann Eaton, later that same morning, 'on the bed', with 'a solitary wound to her neck', it seems to undermine the alternative suggestion that her body had always been on the bedroom floor. It had not always been on the bedroom floor, her body has been photographed on the bed, with a single wound to her neck'. It is hardly likely that police would have moved Sheila's body from the floor to the bed, and then back to the bedroom floor in time for PC Bird to start taking his 8 consecutively taken photographs which show the rifle on Sheila Caffells body (26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33)...
-
What Harris, Gibbons, Jones, Clarke and Wright did by authorising the stage management of Sheila's body by SOCO, set off an irreversible sequence of events which incorporated corruption at the highest level possible in the echelon's of the Essex Police Force, and the Criminal Justice System. It was a conspiracy that became borne out a desperate measure only originally designed to conceal mistakes that had been made in the first part of the firearms operation between 5am and 8.10am, under the Commandership of PS Adams. Irrespective of how Sheila Caffell had been shot on the first occasion, she had 'not' died inside the farmhouse before 8.10am, despite it having been confirmed she had been dead by that stage, she was still alive, a good half an hour later when at 8.44am, the police surgeon, Dr Craig, who was accompanied by PI Miller, mistakenly announced her death, with her body being 'on the far side of the bed', with what appeared to be 'a solitary shot' beneath the chin. We know that there has already been much debate and speculation about what was meant by the term which Craig and Miller both used in their respective witness statements, regarding Sheila's body being, ' on the far side of the bed'. But, when you take into account the position of Sheila's body as reported by DS Jones, to Ann Eaton, later that same morning, 'on the bed', with 'a solitary wound to her neck', it seems to undermine the alternative suggestion that her body had always been on the bedroom floor. It had not always been on the bedroom floor, her body has been photographed on the bed, with a single wound to her neck'. It is hardly likely that police would have moved Sheila's body from the floor to the bed, and then back to the bedroom floor in time for PC Bird to start taking his 8 consecutively taken photographs which show the rifle on Sheila Caffells body (26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33)...
The situation was further complicated because Sheila's death had been reported prior to 8.10am, as one of the two bodies downstairs in the kitchen. Don' t forget that at 8.10am, the following message was passed from the scene, 'after a thorough search of the premises, a further three bodies found upstairs. Five dead in total'...
-
Sheila had not been killed by 8.10am...
-
By the time she had been killed, her body was upstairs, it had been moved to the bedroom floor from the bed. She was shot and killed when her body was laid in the supine position on the bedroom floor. Police rolled her body into its right side into the recovery position which caused the horizontal type bloodstains across her face, neck, and the top part of her nightdress in the region of her right armpit /shoulder...
-
By the time she had been killed, her body was upstairs, it had been moved to the bedroom floor from the bed. She was shot and killed when her body was laid in the supine position on the bedroom floor. Police rolled her body into its right side into the recovery position which caused the horizontal type bloodstains across her face, neck, and the top part of her nightdress in the region of her right armpit /shoulder...
This took place during the 'formalities' (informals) being carried out after 9am, with Harris, Gibbons, Jones, Clarke and Wright in attendance, to gether with PI Montgomery, PS Woodcock, and PI Bob Miller. Other officers viewed Sheila's body in the bedroom on the bed and the floor. DS Jones saw Sheila's body on the bed. PS Adams did not have any recollection of a gun being with Sheila's body when he viewed 'it' at 9am. It is hardly likely that Sheila Caffells body was seen on the bedroom floor by PS Adams at 9am, considering that DS Jones did not arrive at the scene with DCI Jones until around 9.05am, at which stage Sheila's body was 'on the bed'. It must have been on the bed because DS Jones was the only police officer to have viewed Sheila's body in the main bedroom who visited Ann Eaton at Jeremy's cottage that morning and told her Sheila's body with the rifle alongside her body on the bed, and that she had only been shot once...
-
DS Jones was later reprimanded by senior officers for opening his mouth to Ann Eaton at Jeremys cottage about the fact that Sheila's body and the rifle had been on the bed when he saw it, and that she had only been shot once, by the time he left the scene with DC Clarke and Jeremy Bamber...
-
DS Jones was later reprimanded by senior officers for opening his mouth to Ann Eaton at Jeremys cottage about the fact that Sheila's body and the rifle had been on the bed when he saw it, and that she had only been shot once, by the time he left the scene with DC Clarke and Jeremy Bamber...
DS Jones was summoned back to the scene from Jeremy's cottage at around 11.15am, because senior officers at the scene had found out that relatives had leaked details of where Sheila's body had been found on the bed, but that because things had taken a turn for the worst after DS Jones had left the scene earlier, Sheila's body had already been photographed on the bedroom floor with the rifle a top it, and she now having been shot a second time...
-
Essex police have tried very hard to conceal the fact that DS Jones returned to the scene that morning for a second time. But he did, and the reason why he did was because he was summoned there by senior officers for a bollocking, which threatened to seriously undermine the handling of the investigation after the operation had gone pearshaped for the second time in the same investigation that morning...
-
When questioned by COLP about this second visit to the scene DS Jones told them that 'he could not now remember the reason why he returned to the scene that morning, from Jeremy's cottage'...
-
When questioned by COLP about this second visit to the scene DS Jones told them that 'he could not now remember the reason why he returned to the scene that morning, from Jeremy's cottage'...
But, he 'did' return, and after being reprimanded he went on to seize four separate exhibits from the scene that particular morning - SBJ/1, SBJ/2, SBJ/3, and SBJ/4,,,
-
It is now my firm belief, that DS Jones took possession of Anthony Pargeters .22 Bruno bolt action rifle with its parker hale silencer attached, which was taken from the downstairs toilet, which he labelled. SBJ/1. He took a photograph showing the aforementioned weapon in the downstairs toilet with it insitu....
-
It is now my firm belief, that DSJones took possession of Anthony Pargeters .22 Bruno bolt action rifle with its parker hale silencer attached, which was taken from the downstairs toilet, which he labelled. SBJ/1. He took a photograph showing the aforementioned weapon in the downstairs toilet with it insitu....
This adequately helps to explain how DS Davidson fingerprinted 'a silencer' on the 9th August 1985, and may provide a huge clue to the identity of the barrel of a gun which had got 'red paint' upon it, a gun which Davidson told COLP had been found downstairs at the scene. Linked to this is the fact that out of the blue Anthony Pargeter also told COLP that Essex police had 'examined' his rifle as part of the shootings...
-
The silencer received from Peter Eaton on the evening of 12th August 1985, by DS Jones, was originally labeled SJ/1 by Ron Cook...
-
We have been at this juncture before, but we have never delved into the likelihood that one of the silencers (SBJ/1) was examined at the lab' by Glynis Howard, on 13th August 1985, whilst the other silencer, marked SJ/1 was in fact retained by DCI Jones, who kept it for keepings sake and used it as a 'paperweight' on his desk at Witham police station. Now, if this is right, then Glynis Howard originally identified 'human blood' in the Anthony pargeter silencer, not the Bamber family owned one. Evidence seems to point to the Anthony Pargeter weapon having the lab' reference No.'s 22 (silencer) and No.23 (Bruno rifle)...
-
There is no 'legitimate' reason, why the same silencer should have got 'two' different, Lab' reference numbers (22, and 23), if it had been the same silencer on all occasions...
-
There is no 'legitimate' reason, why the same silencer should have got 'two' different, Lab' reference numbers (22, and 23), if it had been the same silencer on all occasions...
Unlike the hand swabs (DRH/33 - Lab' item No.17) which were rejected at the lab' on the 9th August1985, because these arrived at the lab' in the same packaging as a weapon supposedly 'not connected' with the shootings, but which were later re- introduced (DRH/44 - DRH/ 33) as Lab' item No.75. It is not yet explained how 'hand swabs' taken from Sheila Caffell could end up in the same packaging as a rifle at the lab' on the 9th August 1985, unless of course, you accept that the rifle in question 'was' the 'Anthony Pargeter', Bruno rifle...
-
How utterly coincidental that by 7th August 1985, DS Jones had seized SBJ/1 at the scene, and that DS Davidson had fingerprinted a rifle and a silencer on the 9th August 1985, and that hand swabs (DRH/33 - Lab' item No.17), had been received at the lab' in the same packaging as a weapon, not supposedly linked to this (SC/688/85) investigation?
-
How utterly coincidental that by 7th August 1985, DS Jones had seized SBJ/1 at the scene, and that DS Davidson had fingerprinted a rifle and a silencer on the 9th August 1985, and that hand swabs (DRH/33 - Lab' item No.17), had been received at the lab' in the same packaging as a weapon, not supposedly linked to this (SC/688/85) investigation?
Me thinks, the hand swabs (DRH/33 - Lab' item No.17), arrived at the Lab' on that date, in the same packaging as SBJ/1, which at that stage consisted of Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle, and parkerhale silencer. Me thinks that there was some red paint found on the end of Anthony Pargeters rifle barrel, and me thinks that there was blood on the original hand swabs taken from Sheila's hands at the scene (particularly her right hand) and that these blood contaminated hand swabs contaminated the silencer (SBJ/1) with blood that was unique to Sheilka Caffell, by this process...
-
Anthony Pargeter told the COLP investigators that Essex police had seized his rifle and examined it, checked it for damage, yet there is no disclosed information by any Essex police officer covering this, nor any mention of the possible existence of such a silencer belonging to Anthony Pargeter at all, which is startling considering that the Bamber owned silencer, and the Pargeter one, were identical in outward appearance...
-
Of some significance, it would seem, is the complete apparent avoidance of any mention whatsoever in the case file of the silencer which belonged to Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle, being compared by any of the relatives including Anthony Pargeter himself, of his silencer, and the Bamber family owned one? I find this hard to believe particularly because outwardly both silencers were identical looking to one another. Internally, however, the Bamber family owned Parker Hale silencer had got 'less' internal baffle plates than the one belonging to Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle. We know, for example, that the silencer owned by Anthony Pargeter, was purchased in 1980, and that Parker Haale silencers manufactured at that time had 17 internal baffle plates...
-
Of some significance, it would seem, is the complete apparent avoidance of any mention whatsoever in the case file of the silencer which belonged to Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle, being compared by any of the relatives including Anthony Pargeter himself, of his silencer, and the Bamber family owned one? I find this hard to believe particularly because outwardly both silencers were identical looking to one another. Internally, however, the Bamber family owned Parker Hale silencer had got 'less' internal baffle plates than the one belonging to Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle. We know, for example, that the silencer owned by Anthony Pargeter, was purchased in 1980, and that Parker Haale silencers manufactured at that time had 17 internal baffle plates...
The Bamber owned silencer had only got 14 internal baffle plates...
-
As I have already said, there was no reason why the unique Lab' item number 22 for the silencer should have been altered to No.23, because the silencer was not rejected at the lab' in the same way that the 'hand swabs', were...
-
Something had to be Lab' item No.22, and something had to be Lab' item No.23, it just doesn't make sense altering the silencer from Lab' item No.22 to Lab' item No.23, if it was the same silencer on both occasions. Since by vacating Lab' item No.22, it draws everyone's attention to it...
-
It's so easy to be blinded by science to the uninitiated,and this is exactly what happened so that other more important issues were completely overlooked. EP had been intent on using the silencer for all it was worth to convince one and all,simply because there was nothing else in which to follow as regards pointing a finger at Jeremy.
-
It's so easy to be blinded by science to the uninitiated,and this is exactly what happened so that other more important issues were completely overlooked. EP had been intent on using the silencer for all it was worth to convince one and all,simply because there was nothing else in which to follow as regards pointing a finger at Jeremy.
WHY? They could simply have stuck hard and fast to it being Sheila. If they were capable of setting up Jeremy to prove their point, they could JUST as easily have set Sheila up to prove the same point.
-
It is also worth noting, that Jeremy has always maintained that Anthony Pargeters Bruno rifle and Parker hale Silencer were present inside the farmhouse at the time of the shooting. This can be borne out by 'their' inclusion in the list of weapons and ammunition he provided to the firearm officers shortly after their arrival upon the scene at around 5am. If Jeremy was the killer and he had staged his sisters body to give an impression that she had killed the others and then shot herself, why would Jeremy include Anthony Pargeters rifle as being present inside the farmhouse if it hadn't been? It wouldn't add up or make any sense for him to include the Pargeter rifle as being there if it wasn't on that occasion. Furthermore, during the many occasions which I had to speak to Jeremy about Pargeters rifle and silencer, he always was insistent that these were at the scene at the time of the shootings. Jeremy invariably drew my attention to the fact that his father was a local justice of the peace, and that as such in this capacity his father would never have allowed Anthony Pargeter to remove his rifle unless there had been a valid amendment to the terms and conditions on the relevant firearm certificate. Not to be overlooked, is that Pargeter himself describes his own rifle and silencer to have been present at the farmhouse on the penultimate week end prior to the shootings, so on that footing alone his rifle and component parts, along with a variety of ammunition against his name, was quite clearly still being kept at the farm, and one has to assume that by that stage, there had not been any alteration or amendment to the terms and conditions on Pargeters Firearm Certificate. With this in mind, any amendment to his firearm certificate would have needed to have been applied for, granted and ammendend on 'that' very same date that Anthony Pargeter went to whf to fit a new telescopic sight to his Bruno rifle, if there is any truth to his later suggestion, that he took his rifle home with him to Bournend at the end of his weekend stay. He gives no explanation for why he suddenly decides to take his bruno rifle home, after 'it' having always been stored there for the previous five years? Not only that, but the firearms licensing dept' is not open for business at week - ends. Additionally, where is the proof that there was ever such an amendment in his conditions about where he could keep or fire his rifle? We know that that weekend he certainly fired between 50 to 60 rounds of .22 ammunition at the back of the barn, because he says he had done so. If Pargeter had already got an amendment to his firearm certificate regarding where his Bruno rifle could be fired, and kept, why was he still firing that bruno rifle at whf on that weekend?
-
I have always thought that the Pargenter BRNO was at WHF. I think it was removed by the family who cleared all the weapons from the farm.
I also think that there was more than one shooter.How could a lone shooter cause such mayhem alone?
The children were apparently sleeping when they were murdered, as one of the twins was still sucking his thumb.
How could they have slept with all the racket going on?
I loathe to say it, but Jeremy seemed to be aware that the BRNO was at the farm and knew exactly where it was.
I am not suggesting that AP was involved the slaughter, but somebody was.
IMO two people were involved,as I believe that one person could not have done this.
-
I have always thought that the Pargenter BRNO was at WHF. I think it was removed by the family who cleared all the weapons from the farm.
I also think that there was more than one shooter.How could a lone shooter cause such mayhem alone?
The children were apparently sleeping when they were murdered, as one of the twins was still sucking his thumb.
How could they have slept with all the racket going on?
I loathe to say it, but Jeremy seemed to be aware that the BRNO was at the farm and knew exactly where it was.
I am not suggesting that AP was involved the slaughter, but somebody was.
IMO two people were involved,as I believe that one person could not have done this.
Must say Buddy I have the same opinion, 2 people involved, answers a lot for me.
-
I have always thought that the Pargenter BRNO was at WHF. I think it was removed by the family who cleared all the weapons from the farm.
I also think that there was more than one shooter.How could a lone shooter cause such mayhem alone?
The children were apparently sleeping when they were murdered, as one of the twins was still sucking his thumb.
How could they have slept with all the racket going on?
I loathe to say it, but Jeremy seemed to be aware that the BRNO was at the farm and knew exactly where it was.
I am not suggesting that AP was involved the slaughter, but somebody was.
IMO two people were involved,as I believe that one person could not have done this.
In view of the 'fact' that Essex police 'tampered' with the batch of crime scene ammunition, I 'agree'' that more than one rifle was used in the shootings. I believe 99.9% that Anthony Pargetets rifle 'was' used in the shootings, whether or not he took it home with him the penultimate weekend before the shootings. I am 100% certain that 'that' rifle was there at the farmhouse, on the evening prior to the shootings...
-
Must say Buddy I have the same opinion, 2 people involved, answers a lot for me.
Jeremy Bambers convictions were secured around the premis that his sister had not killed herself, that There had been no 'third party' involvement in her death, and that since the jury were given a stark choice of choosing the killer from between Sheila and Jeremy, by them agreeing by a 10/2 majority that Sheila 'had not' shot herself, the only option available to them was to convict Jeremy as the killer. In effect, I do not honestly beleive that Jeremy Bamber had a fair trial, because the jury 'had to choose' the killer, it was either 'Sheila' or 'Jeremy', they were not given the 'choice' to find Jeremy 'not guilty', once they had come to the conclusion that Sheila herself was killed...
In my view, the jury 'did not have a totally free choice to acquit our to convict Jeremy Bamber, it was 'a forced verdict'...
-
Basically put, in street cred' wise terms, the court which convicted Jeremy Bamber for these murders amounted to what is sometimes referred to in criminal circles, as nothing but 'a kangaroo court'...
'He was done up like a kipper'
-
There was Mr Justice Drake, assisting in the cover up, telling the jury in his summing up speech, that 'there is no suggestion that there was any third party involvement in these killings', he said. 'the killer was either Sheila, or Jeremy' he said, 'If it wasn't Sheila, it had to be Jeremy'...
-
There was Mr Justice Drake, assisting in the cover up, telling the jury in his summing up speech, that 'there is no suggestion that there was any third party involvement in these killings', he said. 'the killer was either Sheila, or Jeremy' he said, 'If it wasn't Sheila, it had to be Jeremy'...
The Cops hid the truth about the conflicting body count downstairs and upstairs. They hid the evidence and made sure the jury never got a whiff of such evidence. Because if the cat had come out of the bag at the trial stage, the jury would have known that Sheila had still been alive long after the armed officers set off to enter the farmhouse at around 7.30am. How would it have been possible to deny that Sheila was still alive after 8.10am, when her body was correctly identified downstairs as the second body, the female, who they claimed had killed herself upon entry by the police. She had in fact, according to the contents of PS Woodcocks report about the shooting incident which occurred in the kitchen, pulled the muzzle end of his rifle into her own throat as he activated the trigger mechanism by dynamic tension created in a sort of tug of war between both of them. How, had she ended up on the bed upstairs in the main bedroom, if she had been reported dead downstairs in the kitchen from as early as 7.37am, confirmed again a minute later at 7.38am, this confirmation reinforced 4 minutes later when at 7.42am, a request was sent out from the farmhouse Can you contact your police surgeon, and the coroners officer regarding two bodies'. The truth in the matter is that within a further 3 minutes by 7.45am, a civilian employee with the Christian name, 'Linda', was contacting DS Davidson at his home (7.45am) 'Can you come into the office, police are dealing with an incident at white house farm, involving a murder, and a suicide'. So, by 7.45 am, police had got possession of two bodies not one. one of these two bodies was a male, who could only have been Ralph Bamber. He was murdered, and no-one can hope to suggest that his death was the death which police were referring to as 'the suicide'. No, it was the second body, the female body, that was reported to the control room in terms of her death being a suicide. Nobody can realistically suggest that June Bambers death was anything other than a murder. Therefore, Sheila Caffell was the second body to be reported. She being the female who 'had' committed suicide, by 7.45am. This being the case, there is no room for error by claiming that Sheila's body had not been the second body of a victim which in one form or another, the police who entered the farmhouse had 'Come across' after setting foot inside the farmhouse within 'the space of the very first 7 or 8 crucial minutes', or to be specific between 7.37am, and prior to 7.45am...
-
The Cops hid the truth about the conflicting body count downstairs and upstairs. They hid the evidence and made sure the jury never got a whiff of such evidence. Because if the cat had come out of the bag at the trial stage, the jury would have known that Sheila had still been alive long after the armed officers set off to enter the farmhouse at around 7.30am. How would it have been possible to deny that Sheila was still alive after 8.10am, when her body was correctly identified downstairs as the second body, the female, who they claimed had killed herself upon entry by the police. She had in fact, according to the contents of PS Woodcocks report about the shooting incident which occurred in the kitchen, pulled the muzzle end of his rifle into her own throat as he activated the trigger mechanism by dynamic tension created in a sort of tug of war between both of them. How, had she ended up on the bed upstairs in the main bedroom, if she had been reported dead downstairs in the kitchen from as early as 7.37am, confirmed again a minute later at 7.38am, this confirmation reinforced 4 minutes later when at 7.42am, a request was sent out from the farmhouse Can you contact your police surgeon, and the coroners officer regarding two bodies'. The truth in the matter is that within a further 3 minutes by 7.45am, a civilian employee with the Christian name, 'Linda', was contacting DS Davidson at his home (7.45am) 'Can you come into the office, police are dealing with an incident at white house farm, involving a murder, and a suicide'. So, by 7.45 am, police had got possession of two bodies not one. one of these two bodies was a male, who could only have been Ralph Bamber. He was murdered, and no-one can hope to suggest that his death was the death which police were referring to as 'the suicide'. No, it was the second body, the female body, that was reported to the control room in terms of her death being a suicide. Nobody can realistically suggest that June Bambers death was anything other than a murder. Therefore, Sheila Caffell was the second body to be reported. She being the female who 'had' committed suicide, by 7.45am. This being the case, there is no room for error by claiming that Sheila's body had not been the second body of a victim which in one form or another, the police who entered the farmhouse had 'Come across' after setting foot inside the farmhouse within 'the space of the very first 7 or 8 crucial minutes', or to be specific between 7.37am, and prior to 7.45am...
There is no margin for error, the second body reported to have been a female, who had committed suicide, could only have been and was, the body of Sheila Caffell. Her death was the death reported as a suicide, in accordance with the details of PS Woodcocks 'officers Report' (1612) which deals with 'the shooting incident in the kitchen upon entry'. These are the stark facts that no-one can ignore. This throws a huge shadow over the words used by the trial judge, Mr Justice Drake, when he directed the jury to convict Jeremy Bamber, if they came to the conclusion that Sheila Caffell had not, in fact, killed herself. He told them that there was no suggestion that any third party had been involved in Sheila Caffells death, and that if the jury came to the inevitable conclusion that Sheila had not killed herself, then the only other person it could have been was Jeremy Bamber, and in those circumstances they should convict him as the murderer. But we now know, that Sheila was initially shot by PS Woodcock as he made an awkward entry into the main kitchen, the circumstances of which are covered in his 'officers Report' (1612). Nobody else's death, from amongst the five victims who died in the tragedy, could realistically have been described as a 'suicide', so Sheila's body had to be the second body which police one way or another came into possession of after entering the farmhouse...
-
There is no margin for error, the second body reported to have been a female, who had committed suicide, could only have been and was, the body of Sheila Caffell. Her death was the death reported as a suicide, in accordance with the details of PS Woodcocks 'officers Report' (1612) which deals with 'the shooting incident in the kitchen upon entry'. These are the stark facts that no-one can ignore. This throws a huge shadow over the words used by the trial judge, Mr Justice Drake, when he directed the jury to convict Jeremy Bamber, if they came to the conclusion that Sheila Caffell had not, in fact, killed herself. He told them that there was no suggestion that any third party had been involved in Sheila Caffells death, and that if the jury came to the inevitable conclusion that Sheila had not killed herself, then the only other person it could have been was Jeremy Bamber, and in those circumstances they should convict him as the murderer. But we now know, that Sheila was initially shot by PS Woodcock as he made an awkward entry into the main kitchen, the circumstances of which are covered in his 'officers Report' (1612). Nobody else's death, from amongst the five victims who died in the tragedy, could realistically have been described as a 'suicide', so Sheila's body had to be the second body which police one way or another came into possession of after entering the farmhouse...
To cap it all off, it was during this same original period of activity during which all the bodies of the five victims became accounted for, with the last significant message in the sequence timed at 8.10am, ' After a thorough search of the premises, a further three bodies found upstairs. Five dead in total'...
By this stage, no room for error, two bodies downstairs and three bodies upstairs. A murder, and a suicide, downstairs, and no suicide reported upstairs by 8.10am...
-
We now move on to the amended body count, which first came into being at just before 8.44am, with Sheila's body now being reported by the police surgeon, Dr Craig, and PI 'Bob' Miller, on 'the far side of the bed', sporting only one bullet wound to her neck. Not to be forgotten, is that at about 9.05am DS Jones had arrived at the scene and viewed Sheila's body upon the bed minus any firearm either upon her body, or anywhere near her body. Facts which he relayed to Ann Eaton, once he went to Jeremys cottage, and met her there...
What everyone needs to do is satisfy themselves at what stage beyond the cut off time of 8.10am, did the second body count scenario come into effect? We know, for example, that the very first occasion when Sheila's body is mentioned as being upstairs, is when Craig and Miller view Sheila's body at 8.44am, and Craig pronounces her as being dead (If for the time being we ignore all the firearm teams witness statements, which I shall deal with later), at that time. Which of course was flawed because he did not carry out any physical examination whatsoever of her body. He did not, for example, take her pulse to see whether or not her heart was still beating. He did not check to see if she was still breathing, and he did not take her temperature. More significantly, he did not report any signs of death in the colour of her flesh...
-
It is my contention, for others to either consider and reject, or to consider and accept, that the only true time any of us can be really sure that there were in fact four bodies upstairs, and only one body downstairs, is by 10 O'clock, when PC Bird started to take crime scene photographs. We can see Ralphs body downstairs in the kitchen. His must have been the first body which firearm officers took into their possession, and I don't think there will be anyone amongst us who will disagree with this. His body, being the male referred to as a murder, in the original scenario with its cut off point at 8.10am...
-
It is my contention, for others to either consider and reject, or to consider and accept, that the only true time any of us can be really sure that there were in fact four bodies upstairs, and only one body downstairs, is by 10 O'clock, when PC Bird started to take crime scene photographs. We can see Ralphs body downstairs in the kitchen. His must have been the first body which firearm officers took into their possession, and I don't think there will be anyone amongst us who will disagree with this. His body, being the male referred to as a murder, in the original scenario with its cut off point at 8.10am...
The problems start when we try matching up the 'second body' which police reported had come into their possession prior to 7.45am, the female, who had committed suicide...
Based upon the position of the four bodies which were photographed upstairs, it becomes absolutely clear that Sheila Caffells body could never in a month of Sundays have been the second body police took into their possession, at best it could only have been third in the original sequence, by 8.10am. Furthermore, June Bambers death could not be described by anyone's standards as having been a suicide, because she had been shot a total of 7 times, and more crucially there was no weapon in her possession, or close to her body in any of the crime scene photographs which PC Bird took, from 10am, onward. So, we have got a very significant anomaly, involving the sequence with which the bodies of Sheila Caffell and June Bamber came into the possession of the police, but in our favor we know that the second body police 'did' come upon, was a female who had committed suicide, by 7.45am...
That person, (the second body taken into police possession) could only have been the female Sheila Caffell, based upon the first episode since she was the only victim with injuries which could have been mistaken for her having committed suicide. However, her body could not possibly have been the second body police took into their possession in the next episode, from 10 O'clock, onward - hers could only have been the third body taken into police possession in this scenario...
-
In the original episode, which concluded by 8.10am, only three bodies came into police possession upstairs, which again is problematic, because two of these bodies were the child victims. With this in mind and only one female body upstairs by 8.10am, who's body was it, Sheila's, or Junes?
-
Once we can satisfy ourselves where the beginning and the end of each of the two episodes relate to, we can then focus what went on in between, which caused one of these episodes which concluded by 8.10am which had a body count of two downstairs and three upstairs, which then became transformed into the second episode commencing from 10 O'clock onwards, where there was only one body downstairs, and no less than four upstairs...
So what took place, between 8.10am, and 10 O'clock, that morning, which explains how the body count of two downstairs, three upstairs, was turned head over heels, so that there was only one body downstairs, and now four bodies upstairs?
-
Well, we've got several key things which we know happened after the cut off point in the first episode at 8.10am, and prior to the commencement of the second episode from 10 O'clock, onward. These events shaped the way in which the investigation panned out:-
(1) - PS Adams position of being 'The Commander' of the firearms operation was terminated
(2) - PI Montgomery assumes Commandership of the ongoing firearms operation
(3) - DCI Harris, DCI Gibbons and PI Montgomery, enter whf via the kitchen
(4) - DCI Harris uses phone in kitchen to speak directly to ACC Simpson about operation having gone pearshaped
(5) - Sheila Caffell AWOL somewhere inside farmhouse
(6) - Body of Sheila collapsed on top of bed, one bullet wound to her neck
(7) - Police surgeon, Dr Craig, and PI Miller view body on far side of bed - Sheila Caffell is pronounced dead without the need for a physical examination. One shot to neck only
(8) - DCI Harris, DCI Gibbons, DCI Clarke, DCI WRIGHT, PI Montgomery, PS Adams, and PS Woodcock, conducting 'informals' inside farmhouse with bodies in situ. PS Adams does not see rifle with body of Sheila when he views her body in the bedroom, and states body was much further away from bedside cabinet than where it is shown in photographs taken by PC Bird that he saw at a debriefing held later that day. PS Adams also stated that the bible which in PC Birds photographs was resting against Sheila Caffells upper right arm, was in fact much further away from her body in the region of her waist when he viewed her body at around 9 am
(9) - Arrival at scene of DCI Jones, and DS Jones, both into farmhouse to view bodies, after which DCI Jones gets involved with ongoing 'informals' in company of other senior officers already named and still present. DS Jones leaves farmhouse, and together with DC Clark, they travel with Jeremy to his cottage at Goldhanger, to take a witness statement from Jeremy. Whilst present there, meets Ann Eaton and informs her that Sheila's body was found on top of the bed, sporting one bullet wound to her neck. He also tells her that the body of June Bamber was also laid on the bed, and that there was a rifle on the bed between both of them, and that Sheila had got a bible on her chest
(10) - PC Wright (Coroners officer), arrives at the scene
(11) - DI Cook and PC Bird (SOCO) arrive at the scene. DI Cook goes to speak with DCI Jones, and is taken on a tour of the farmhouse, and shown the bodies. DI Cook comes back out of the farmhouse, and tells PC Bird that when he eventually goes into the house, in particular, the main bedroom where the two bodies of Sheila and June are present, to make sure that he (PC Bird) photographs the rifle in the correct position upon Sheila's body
(12) - SOCO (Cook, Bird, Davidson, and Hammersley) enter farmhouse as a team intent upon carrying out a full examination with the bodies of the victims insitu at that stage
-
I have always thought that the Pargenter BRNO was at WHF. I think it was removed by the family who cleared all the weapons from the farm.
I also think that there was more than one shooter.How could a lone shooter cause such mayhem alone?
The children were apparently sleeping when they were murdered, as one of the twins was still sucking his thumb.
How could they have slept with all the racket going on?
I loathe to say it, but Jeremy seemed to be aware that the BRNO was at the farm and knew exactly where it was.
I am not suggesting that AP was involved the slaughter, but somebody was.
IMO two people were involved,as I believe that one person could not have done this.
Hi Buddy, if you read Bambers statement, he said Tony kept his 22 at the farmhouse sometimes and he cannot remember seeing it after the weekend he was there, which was the 26/28 th July? So even Bamber admits it was only sometimes that he kept it there?
-
Another problem I have is, Tony Pargeter states that the silencer was on Nevilles rifle the weekend before the murders, Bamber is then asked when was the last time he used the rifle to which he replies one to two weeks before the murders, because the rifle was found minus the silencer after the murders did he at any time remove the silencer from the rifle after the weekend that Tony Pargeter was there, his reply was yes two to three times, now why would he remove a silencer if he had not used it for one to two weeks, also it seems Tony was telling the truth that the silencer was on when he saw it that weekend?
-
Another problem I have is, Tony Pargeter states that the silencer was on Nevilles rifle the weekend before the murders, Bamber is then asked when was the last time he used the rifle to which he replies one to two weeks before the murders, because the rifle was found minus the silencer after the murders did he at any time remove the silencer from the rifle after the weekend that Tony Pargeter was there, his reply was yes two to three times, now why would he remove a silencer if he had not used it for one to two weeks, also it seems Tony was telling the truth that the silencer was on when he saw it that weekend?
I asked him about this and he said his dad liked to clean the guns and most likely removed noth the silencer and the sights while cleaning it. :-\
-
I asked him about this and he said his dad liked to clean the guns and most likely removed noth the silencer and the sights while cleaning it. :-\
[/quote) Wonder why if his dad removed it, he removed it a couple of times that week it was found at the back of the cupboard ?
-
Anthony Pargeters silencer was not fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle at all on the penultimate week-end prior to the shootings. It was fitted to the barrel of his own Bruno bolt action rifle...
-
Anthony Pargeters silencer was not fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle at all on the penultimate week-end prior to the shootings. It was fitted to the barrel of his own Bruno bolt action rifle...
On this occasion, Pargeter went to the normal location where he kept his rifle (the downstairs toilet) and found it to be missing. After speaking to Jeremy's mother about it, she advised him that he would probably find it in the cupboard in the downstairs office (the den), which was where he did actually find it there. June Bamber obviously knew more about who had moved Anthony Pargeters rifle than she let on. It seems almost certain that she knew about its whereabouts on that occasion than she let on, because Ralph Bamber himself had moved it there for safety reasons. It would be hardly likely that Jeremy had moved Pargeters rifle there, and then told his mum about having done so. Anyway, why shouldn't Ralph move that rifle from the downstairs toilet, to the cupboard in 'the den'?
-
When interviewed by police Jeremy suggested that 'he' hadn't removed the telescopic site, and the silencer from the barrel of the anshuzt rifle, at any stage prior to the shootings - nothing in what he says suggests in the slightest that he could have lied about that, or it...
-
So Neville would have removed the sights at least, being the most awkward to remove ?
-
So Neville would have removed the sights at least, being the most awkward to remove ?
Are you suggesting it was too difficult for anyone else to do?
-
Are you suggesting it was too difficult for anyone else to do?
Very likely would have been for the likes of Sheila as I'm not sure whether a particular screwdriver of sorts was needed,or where it would have been for easy access.
There must have been a problem with the moderator's removal or assembly too because of the damage to it.
-
A novice was handling that rifle,of that there's no doubt because of the damage to stock and silencer as well as the over-shooting.
-
A novice was handling that rifle,of that there's no doubt because of the damage to stock and silencer as well as the over-shooting.
Well, you have convinced yourself of that anyway ;D. It was damaged because Jeremy beat his father with it. The silencer wasn't damaged other than a few scratches and the over shooting (as you can it) was Jeremy's way of making it look like "Sheila had gone crazy" with a gun. She must have been a crack shot though because she never missed! ;)
-
Well, you have convinced yourself of that anyway ;D. It was damaged because Jeremy beat his father with it. The silencer wasn't damaged other than a few scratches and the over shooting (as you can it) was Jeremy's way of making it look like "Sheila had gone crazy" with a gun. She must have been a crack shot though because she never missed! ;)
I agree that it seems that all shots found there target, however they were all random meaning they were all over the place.
There did not appear to be any grouping, which you would expect from an expert shooter.
-
A novice was handling that rifle,of that there's no doubt because of the damage to stock and silencer as well as the over-shooting.
Jeremy can hardly be described as a gun novice, although I'll allow that he'd probably never previously used one in that situation.
-
I agree that it seems that all shots found there target, however they were all random meaning they were all over the place.
There did not appear to be any grouping, which you would expect from an expert shooter.
But Jeremy didn't want it to look like the work of an expert shot. He wanted it to look like the work of someone deranged. Similar to the way in which the late comedian, Les Dawson, managed to produce appalling bad sounds from an instrument he he could play to concert standard.
-
I agree that it seems that all shots found there target, however they were all random meaning they were all over the place.
There did not appear to be any grouping, which you would expect from an expert shooter.
Buddy,you couldn't miss at a foot away.
-
But Jeremy didn't want it to look like the work of an expert shot. He wanted it to look like the work of someone deranged. Similar to the way in which the late comedian, Les Dawson, managed to produce appalling bad sounds from an instrument he he could play to concert standard.
That's of course if you think it was Jeremy Jane.
-
Well, you have convinced yourself of that anyway ;D. It was damaged because Jeremy beat his father with it. The silencer wasn't damaged other than a few scratches and the over shooting (as you can it) was Jeremy's way of making it look like "Sheila had gone crazy" with a gun. She must have been a crack shot though because she never missed! ;)
Was Neville's skull shattered by the impact of the " beating " ? No. The damage to the rifle came as it hit the iron surround of the Aga.
-
Only Neville, and June had these random, probably because they were running around.
Sheila was not nor the twins.
-
Only Neville, and June had these random, probably because they were running around.
Sheila was not nor the twins.
If jerey was trying to make it look like a deranged Sheila, why were the twins only shot twice.
-
Was Neville's skull shattered by the impact of the " beating " ? No. The damage to the rifle came as it hit the iron surround of the Aga.
What else was responsible for shattering Nevill's skull?
-
What else was responsible for shattering Nevill's skull?
Could have been a poker from the aga.
-
What else was responsible for shattering Nevill's skull?
I don't remember seeing documents pertaining to the state of his skull,apart from the fact of bullet entries causing such injuries. To be bashed until the stock broke off the rifle would have removed part of his skull.
-
The walls too would have been splattered with the force.
-
Could have been a poker from the aga.
Surely they'd have found hair and tissue attached to it?
-
Surely they'd have found hair and tissue attached to it?
Don't think they looked Jane. They thought it was murder/suicide.
-
The walls too would have been splattered with the force.
Not if the beating had occurred post mortem.
-
Not if the beating had occurred post mortem.
Unless one was insane,what would have been the point of doing that ?
-
Don't think they looked Jane. They thought it was murder/suicide.
I agree that areas of the investigation were sloppy, but it must have been obvious that the head wounds weren't bullet inflicted.
-
Unless one was insane,what would have been the point of doing that ?
To make it look as if the crime was committed by someone who was insane?
-
I agree that areas of the investigation were sloppy, but it must have been obvious that the head wounds weren't bullet inflicted.
Yes they must have known that Jane, but they still thought murder/suicide.
-
To make it look as if the crime was committed by someone who was insane?
It was-------------Sheila.
-
It was-------------Sheila.
Jeremy achieved what he'd set out to accomplish.
-
Was Neville's skull shattered by the impact of the " beating " ? No. The damage to the rifle came as it hit the iron surround of the Aga.
Don' bother with the real details of the case, you carry on on making it up as you go along. ::)
-
I agree that it seems that all shots found there target, however they were all random meaning they were all over the place.
There did not appear to be any grouping, which you would expect from an expert shooter.
Not if you wanted it to appear you weren't an expert shooter but didn't want to waste a shot.
-
If jerey was trying to make it look like a deranged Sheila, why were the twins only shot twice.
They weren't, Nicholas was shot 3 times and Daniel was shot 5 times.
-
Jeremy achieved what he'd set out to accomplish.
Wrong.
-
Don' bother with the real details of the case, you carry on on making it up as you go along. ::)
You do a fine job of making things up too ::)
-
Surely they'd have found hair and tissue attached to it?
The reason there wasn't was because the rifle hit the Aga.
-
Wrong.
But he did. For a whole month of travel and partying. Oh, that's right!!! Wasn't there something about him being desperate to raise money to pay death duties and funeral expenses? Perhaps he'd have done better to have knuckled down to work on the farm instead of paying an unnecessary manager's salary.
-
Yes they must have known that Jane, but they still thought murder/suicide.
That's because it was a murder/suicide.
-
The reason there wasn't was because the rifle hit the Aga.
Keep up, Lookout. I was referring to Buddy's suggestion that a POKER was used to smash Nevill's skull.
-
But he did. For a whole month of travel and partying. Oh, that's right!!! Wasn't there something about him being desperate to raise money to pay death duties and funeral expenses? Perhaps he'd have done better to have knuckled down to work on the farm instead of paying an unnecessary manager's salary.
No,he wasn't " desperate " to pay death duties. He just didn't want the monies coming out of the estate any more than it was being.
What he allegedly did doesn't make him a murderer nor is it a hanging offence to sell goods and chattells in order to pay expenses and holidays,as some seem to think so. It's just another excuse to blacken his name.
Unless you've been on the receiving end of a large estate,then you don't know what it's like.
-
It's known as being asset rich and cash poor. A situation that nobody wants to be in-------if they're honest.
-
Whatever Jeremy sold to fund whatever,was his for a short while to have disposed of as he'd wished.
-
No,he wasn't " desperate " to pay death duties. He just didn't want the monies coming out of the estate any more than it was being.
What he allegedly did doesn't make him a murderer nor is it a hanging offence to sell goods and chattells in order to pay expenses and holidays,as some seem to think so. It's just another excuse to blacken his name.
Unless you've been on the receiving end of a large estate,then you don't know what it's like.
And you can't judge all similar cases as being the same as your own experience. I agree that "it isn't a hanging offence to sell goods and chattels in order to pay expenses and holidays" but it was entirely inappropriate in the wake of his family being slaughtered to walk away and leave others to deal with the situation. However much you seek to defend his every action, he blackened his own name by his own callous actions.
-
It's known as being asset rich and cash poor. A situation that nobody wants to be in-------if they're honest.
That, in Jeremy's case, was simply not so. Whilst he, personally was probably living beyond his means, there was a family accountant who would have released all necessary funds. The Bambers were certainly nowhere near being on their uppers.
-
And you can't judge all similar cases as being the same as your own experience. I agree that "it isn't a hanging offence to sell goods and chattels in order to pay expenses and holidays" but it was entirely inappropriate in the wake of his family being slaughtered to walk away and leave others to deal with the situation. However much you seek to defend his every action, he blackened his own name by his own callous actions.
Nobody wanted/needed him after the deaths,or he wouldn't have gone anywhere. More's the pity he did go because he was certainly unaware of the " plans " which were ahead. He had no idea whatsoever that his relatives were plotting against him.
He went away to rid himself of reporters/journo's whereas his ex went to a solicitor to get rid of them,except when she was offered money into the bargain.
-
Nobody wanted/needed him after the deaths,or he wouldn't have gone anywhere. More's the pity he did go because he was certainly unaware of the " plans " which were ahead. He had no idea whatsoever that his relatives were plotting against him.
He went away to rid himself of reporters/journo's whereas his ex went to a solicitor to get rid of them,except when she was offered money into the bargain.
Yeah, 'course he did. Can you imagine Nevill or ANY other member of the family doing what he did. Nevill would have stayed if only to lend support and stability to the farm employees whose worlds were also turned upside down by what happened. Personally, I think Nevill would have been ashamed of his behaviour.
-
Yeah, 'course he did. Can you imagine Nevill or ANY other member of the family doing what he did. Nevill would have stayed if only to lend support and stability to the farm employees whose worlds were also turned upside down by what happened. Personally, I think Nevill would have been ashamed of his behaviour.
Oh yes,I could just see Neville remaining tight-lipped with the media breathing down his neck 24/7 and in his face every time he opened his front door. I rather feel that another side to him would have been evident in those circumstances.
If anyone had wanted Jeremy to stay,they'd have asked him. Until I read something to that effect,I remain to believe that nobody particularly cared. Everyone had the run of WHF so why should they have cared ?? Surely he was better out of the way ? I'd have thought so. Neville would have chased them all being as there was no love lost.
-
Oh yes,I could just see Neville remaining tight-lipped with the media breathing down his neck 24/7 and in his face every time he opened his front door. I rather feel that another side to him would have been evident in those circumstances.
If anyone had wanted Jeremy to stay,they'd have asked him. Until I read something to that effect,I remain to believe that nobody particularly cared. Everyone had the run of WHF so why should they have cared ?? Surely he was better out of the way ? I'd have thought so. Neville would have chased them all being as there was no love lost.
It shouldn't have been necessary for anyone to ask Jeremy to stay. Decency, responsibility, and a sense of what was appropriate would have dictated. Those things which would have been drummed into him by his parents and his education. Nevill wouldn't have "let the side down" by acting in a way which was bound to attract attention.
-
It shouldn't have been necessary for anyone to ask Jeremy to stay. Decency, responsibility, and a sense of what was appropriate would have dictated. Those things which would have been drummed into him by his parents and his education. Nevill wouldn't have "let the side down" by acting in a way which was bound to attract attention.
Responsibility ? At 24 ?
-
Responsibility ? At 24 ?
Awww. Poor ickle man!!! It was what he'd been bought for. He was "The Heir". He was getting -ALL- the goodies. It was his responsibility to put in the graft. He wasn't a Prince of the realm, for God's sake. He was a country farmer's son. Nobody was expecting him to do anything singled handed.
-
Awww. Poor ickle man!!! It was what he'd been bought for. He was "The Heir". He was getting -ALL- the goodies. It was his responsibility to put in the graft. He wasn't a Prince of the realm, for God's sake. He was a country farmer's son. Nobody was expecting him to do anything singled handed.
I'm afraid I'm not the " poor ickle man " type of person,no matter who it is. More a kick up the behind person towards a hapless 24 year old,which Neville probably felt like doing at times,though I could never imagine him raising his hand.
-
I'm afraid I'm not the " poor ickle man " type of person,no matter who it is. More a kick up the behind person towards a hapless 24 year old,which Neville probably felt like doing at times,though I could never imagine him raising his hand.
All of which seems to suggest that the times were very limited when Nevill could say he was thoroughly proud of Jeremy and his achievements.
-
All of which seems to suggest that the times were very limited when Nevill could say he was thoroughly proud of Jeremy and his achievements.
Latterly,Neville had been pleased when he was teaching Jeremy the business side of the farm in which both appeared interested and Neville could then retire in the knowledge that his son could one day take over.
We don't know how Sheila felt about this,do we ? Her disjointed life,illness,constant quarrels with her mother over their religious differences and little hope for the future for herself and her boys.
-
Latterly,Neville had been pleased when he was teaching Jeremy the business side of the farm in which both appeared interested and Neville could then retire in the knowledge that his son could one day take over.
We don't know how Sheila felt about this,do we ? Her disjointed life,illness,constant quarrels with her mother over their religious differences and little hope for the future for herself and her boys.
Nevill was only 61 when he was killed. He would have needed to work for a VERY long time before Jeremy was anywhere near reaching Nevill's competency. Nevill had trained at Royal Cirencester and had done his "apprenticeship on the Speakman farm. He clearly had aptitude. Jeremy had done a couple of years? at Colchester College, had spent more time working in a Little Chef, a Colchester wine bar, Sloppy Joe's and had done a couple of year long? visits to Australasia. he didn't exactly put his heart and soul into the family business, did he? I'm quite certain that Nevill was cheered by the few months work Jeremy eventually put in but there was no guarantee it was going to last. It DIDN'T last, He couldn't be bothered to put the slightest effort into the farm -other than planning to sell it- after his family's deaths.
I can't imagine what interest Sheila would have had in the farm any more than Jeremy had. Certainly nothing she did ever gave that impression.
-
Oh yes,I could just see Neville remaining tight-lipped with the media breathing down his neck 24/7 and in his face every time he opened his front door. I rather feel that another side to him would have been evident in those circumstances.
If anyone had wanted Jeremy to stay,they'd have asked him. Until I read something to that effect,I remain to believe that nobody particularly cared. Everyone had the run of WHF so why should they have cared ?? Surely he was better out of the way ? I'd have thought so. Neville would have chased them all being as there was no love lost.
I think we need to remember that JB was only 24 as opposed to Nevill who was 62. Guilty or innocent I am pretty sure their reaction would have been very different due to their different levels of experience and maturity.
I don't believe JB should be judged on his behaviour after the murders. I know various young people who behaved in unexpected or irresponsible ways after a sudden death.
-
When interviewed by police Jeremy suggested that 'he' hadn't removed the telescopic site, and the silencer from the barrel of the anshuzt rifle, at any stage prior to the shootings - nothing in what he says suggests in the slightest that he could have lied about that, or it...
Another astounding fact is that Anthony Pargeter never speaks about, refers to, or mentions anything about the 'whereabouts' of 'his own' silencer at the time of the tragedy. There is no mention in his Essex police witness statements, or much later, in his COLP witness statements..
-
That is because 'he' knows it was there at the scene, it was fitted to one of the guns used in the shootings. He knows it, the relatives know it, and the police know it was used in the shootings, no matter who the killer was...
-
DS Jones took possession of the Pargeter silencer, from the scene on the 7th August 1985 (the real 'SBJ/1' silencer). He recovered it from the downstairs toilet, after he had photographed it there, attached to Anthony Pargeter Bruno rifle...
-
DS Jones took possession of the Pargeter silencer, from the scene on the 7th August 1985 (the real 'SBJ/1' silencer). He recovered it from the downstairs toilet, after he had photographed it there, attached to Anthony Pargeter Bruno rifle...
This was 'the silencer' which DS Davidson 'fingerprinted' on the 9th August 1985...
-
No 'signed' exhibit label, marked, 'SBJ', has ever been disclosed, yet by all accounts, this was the very 'first' exhibit reference associated with the silencer, which 'Glynis Howard' examined and found human blood upon, on the 13th August 1985...
-
No 'signed' exhibit label, marked, 'SBJ', has ever been disclosed, yet by all accounts, this was the very 'first' exhibit reference associated with the silencer, which 'Glynis Howard' examined and found human blood upon, on the 13th August 1985...
How utterly remarkable that so much 'confusion' exists, around the 'correct' exhibit reference, of 'that' silencer, taken to the lab' by 'Ron' Cook on the 13th August 1985. Since, according to Cooks notebook entry, he 'describes the silencer he took to Glynis Howard on that first occasion, as being 'exhibit S/J/1', yet 'she refers' to 'it' in her witness statement by the conflicting exhibit reference 'SBJ/1'. But the really most astounding feature of all, is that 'her signature' does not appear on any exhibit label bearing the identifying mark of either, 'SBJ/1', or 'SJ/1', but rather remarkably, her signature appears on a separate exhibit label marked, 'DRB/1'...
-
There it is, in black and white, Glynis Howard, only examines the silencer on one key occasion (13th August 1985), but her name is mentioned in terms of three separate exhibit references. Once, (SBJ/1) at a time when 'Ron' Cook labeled it 'SJ/1' at the lab'. Secondly, How could Howard have signed an exhibit label bearing the identifying mark 'SBJ/1' if 'Ron' Cook labeled the one he gave to her on that occasion, ' SJ/1'. Thirdly, how did 'Glynis Howards' signature end up on a totally different exhibit label bearing an exhibit reference, 'DRB/1', if as she told COLP investigators, she only ever 'signed' one exhibit label, bearing the exhibit label, 'SBJ/1'?
Where is the 'exhibit label' bearing that exhibit reference (SBJ/1) that Glynis Howard signed on 'that' occasion...
-
Somebody in authority 'tampered' with the exhibit reference of 'the' silencer, examined by Glynis Howard, on that 'key' occasion. They did it so that the 'Bamber family owned silencer', could be introduced into the equation...
-
Somebody in authority 'tampered' with the exhibit reference of 'the' silencer, examined by Glynis Howard, on that 'key' occasion. They did it so that the 'Bamber family owned silencer', could be introduced into the equation...
The 'Bamber family owned silencer' was not used in the shootings...
-
The 'Bamber family owned silencer' was 'introduced' into the investigation when 'it' was submitted to the Lab' on the '20th September 1985', under the 'guise of it to be checked for blood and fibers...
-
It was done too late...
By the 20th September 1985, all the 'blood group evidence' (A, EAPBA, hp2-1, AK1) had already been obtained from analysis of the flake taken from the other silencer (DB/1). Thus 'proving' that the key blood group evidence was 'never' found inside the 'Bamber family owned silencer', at all...
-
It was done too late...
By the 20th September 1985, all the 'blood group evidence' (A, EAPBA, hp2-1, AK1) had already been obtained from analysis of the flake taken from the other silencer (DB/1). Thus 'proving' that the key blood group evidence was 'never' found inside the 'Bamber family owned silencer', at all...
Bamber 'has' been 'framed' for the murders of his family, by Essex police turning the investigation into a 'one gun crime', using bullets from 'one batch' of ammunition, and ' one silencer' that belonged to the family...
-
The conspiracy has been 'undone' by the research I have been responsible for undertaking.
-
Essex police, their experts, and with the help of relatives 'framed' Jeremy Bamber for the murders of his family, by concealing the involvement of multiple weapons, various types of ammunition, and Anthony Pargeter silencer, in the actual shootings...
-
Sheila Caffells blood was 'not' found inside the 'Bamber family owned silencer'. It is not possible because 'that' silencer was not brought into the equation until 'after' the blood group evidence had 'already' been obtained at the lab', between 12th to 19th September, 1985. The evidence is all there in the documentation. Essex police had the 'Bamber owned silencer' in their possession all the while once Ann Eaton handed 'it' to police on the 11th September 1985. The police retained it in their possession from the 11th September, until the 20th September 1985, making it 'impossible' for 'it' to be the same silencer from which the crucial flake was obtained, and examined at the lab' previously...
-
By the 9th August 1985, Essex police certainly knew about the existence of 'two silencers', because Anthony Pargeter told them about his visit to the farmhouse on the penultimate week end prior to the shootings occurring, him discovering the anshuzt rifle and silencer, in the same cupboard in the den, as his own Bruno rifle and silencer...
-
By the 9th August 1985, Essex police certainly knew about the existence of 'two silencers', because Anthony Pargeter told them about his visit to the farmhouse on the penultimate week end prior to the shootings occurring, him discovering the anshuzt rifle and silencer, in the same cupboard in the den, as his own Bruno rifle and silencer...
The 'so called' discovery of the 'Bamber Family Owned Silencer' by David Boutflour, at the scene, on the 10th August 1985, therefore, was not such an astonishing discovery after all. Because Anthony Pargeter had known about the 'Bamber family owned silencer' since the penultimate week end prior to the 7th August 1985. The police and the relatives have shrouded the existence of 'that' silencer as being the be all and end all of the proof which casts Jeremy Bamber as the killer, as though Bamber had made some sort of a mistake by returning 'that' silencer back into the gun cupboard where it was known to have been kept, after he had used 'it' on the gun to shoot dead the other five members of his family. But I have got news for you all, there simply was 'none' of Sheila Caffells blood, or any other victims blood found upon or inside the 'Bamber family owned silencer'. Any blood which was found, was present upon 'the other' identical looking silencer belonging to Anthony Pargeter. His silencer, under the guise of DB/1, having been present at Huntingdon Laboratory, since the 30th August 1985. 'It' being the silencer 'inside which' the key flake of blood was recovered, and which upon analysis provided the key 'blood group' evidence that was used to help to convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders. But, if the truth be known, those blood group results, were attributed to the 'Wrong silencer'. This can now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, since Essex police did not send the 'Bamber family owned silencer' to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibers until the 20th September 1985, which was too late for 'it' to be the silencer inside which the blood was found...
-
It is to my knowledge that the blood group evidence relates to 'the other' silencer, and that the 'Bamber family owned silencer' was used to make additional scratch marks on the aga surround in the kitchen. Evidence exists to confirm that it was not until September that the key scratch marks were present upon the aga surround, so for a month nobody bothered to take any photographs showing these key scratch marks, at the same time the relatives had possession of the 'Bamber family owned silencer', right up until the 11th September 1985, when Ann Eaton gave 'it' to the police. Lo and behold, suddenly the police are photographing the scratched aga. The 'Bamber family owned silencer' (DRB/1) had the red coloured paint ingrained upon it, the Pargeter silencer (SBJ/1) had got human blood, and contained the flake which produced the key blood group evidence (A, EAP BA, HP2/1, and AK/1). My in depth research into the silencer issue has established that the key blood group evidence, and the key paint sample evidence, were not found upon or inside the same silencer, but rather inside 'different' ones...
-
This simple exercise, with which the 'Pargeter silencer', and the 'Bamber family owned silencer' were swapped over, was masked by the introduction of different exhibit references at different stages of the investigation, until eventually the evidence found on and inside one or other of the two silencers, was presented as though the blood and paint evidence had been obtained from the examination of the same silencer, but the truth of the matter is that it did not. They got around this problem by detaching the 'flake' of dried blood found inside the 'Pargeter owned silencer', and by attributing the results obtained from the examination of it, to the 'Bamber family owned silencer' which had red paint from the aga ingrained into its knurled end...
-
This simple exercise, with which the 'Pargeter silencer', and the 'Bamber family owned silencer' were swapped over, was masked by the introduction of different exhibit references at different stages of the investigation, until eventually the evidence found on and inside one or other of the two silencers, was presented as though the blood and paint evidence had been obtained from the examination of the same silencer, but the truth of the matter is that it did not. They got around this problem by detaching the 'flake' of dried blood found inside the 'Pargeter owned silencer', and by attributing the results obtained from the examination of it, to the 'Bamber family owned silencer' which had red paint from the aga ingrained into its knurled end...
.
But, their corruption has been undone, by virtue of the fact that the 'Bamber family owned silencer' was sent to the lab' too late (on 20th September] to have been the same silencer already at the lab' from as long ago as the 30th August 1985, under the guise of exhibit reference DB/1, inside which had been recovered the 'key' flake of blood, by the 12th September (some 8 days before the 'Bamber family owned silencer' was even sent to the lab' on 'its' first occasion, on 20th September, 1985. By that date, blood had already been detected in the 'other' silencer, 'DB/1', so why on the 20th September, submit the 'Bamber family owned silencer' to the same Lab', requesting that this 'latest' silencer should be checked for blood?
-
For some inexplicable reason, there has not 'yet' been released any Lab 'General Examination Record' pertaining to the 'requested examination' of the 'Bamber family owned silencer', as per its submission, on 20th September...
-
None of the relatives queried whether or not the silencer in police possession belonged to Anthony Pargeter, or the Bambers. None of the Boutflour, or the Eaton's, considered the possibility that the silencer in police possession from 9th August 1985, inclusive of 13th August 1985, and the 30th August 1985, that it belonged to Anthony Pargeter, but by September they must have strongly suspected this to be the case, because on the 11th September 1985, Ann Eaton handed over the 'Bamber owned silencer' to police. From that point onward, one of the silencers (DB/1) was at the lab', whilst the other (Bamber owned) was being retained by Essex police. By the time DS Davidson and DS Eastwood were fingerprinting the 'Bamber owned silencer' on 13th September, John Hayward and Malcolm Fletcher had already 'extracted' the key flake of blood from the other silencer at the lab' (DB/1)...
-
Blood group evidence had already been obtained from an analysis of the flake taken from silencer (DB/1) on 12th September 1985, some 8 days prior to the occasion that Essex police decided to submit the 'Bamber family owned silencer', with a specific request for 'it' to be checked for blood...
-
I am the truth, the evidence used to help to convict Jeremy Bamber of these murders, is fraudulent...
-
Use of the 'Pargeter silencer' in these murders, points the finger of guilt clearly in 'his' direction, no-one else's...
-
Use of the 'Pargeter silencer' in these murders, points the finger of guilt clearly in 'his' direction, no-one else's...
There was clearly a case for making out a 'third party' involvement in these shootings, which Essex police sought to deliberately suppress ..
-
There was clearly a case for making out a 'third party' involvement in these shootings, which Essex police sought to deliberately suppress ..
Lo and behold, that 'third party' involvement, included, 'themselves'...
-
The trial judge, 'Justice Drake' favoured the prosecutions case, he was extremely bias...
-
The Criminal Justice System can well do without bias judges, and bias Magistrates, because in the long term, all these morons do, is damage the image of the Criminal Justice System, itself...