Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on March 22, 2017, 02:24:PM
-
The front door was locked from inside. Bamber & the police didn't have a front door key anyway. So not much point in Nevill ringing both if neither can enter.
Nevill had time to ring Bamber & according to many, the police. So why not leave the front door ajar ?
Nevill obviously also had time to leave the front door ajar & is likely to do this before making any phone calls.
The worst that could happen is Sheila would run out of the front door bare footed in her nightie. Either holding or not holding a rifle, before or after anyone arrived.
Nevill was expecting Bamber to 'come quickly' and help him restrain Sheila. Not much chance of that if Nevill's upstairs injured & Bamber is standing on the doorstep ringing the door bell.
Nevill was also expecting the police to arrive. An open door would at least give Bews & Jones the option of entering & assisting Nevill. Everyone staying outside for hours was not why Nevill made 3am phone calls.
-
How do you know that NB wasn't trying to make his way into the hall towards the front door,because according to MOST of the newspapers that day,NB had been found in the hall ??
In which case when police made their calculations regarding the body of a female seen through the window,NB ( a male ) wouldn't have been seen if he'd been in the hall.
It'll never be clear nor truthful how or where the three adult bodies had been found because of the amount of anomalies there are in the case as a whole. There's only speculation.
-
How do you know that NB wasn't trying to make his way into the hall towards the front door,because according to MOST of the newspapers that day,NB had been found in the hall ??
In which case when police made their calculations regarding the body of a female seen through the window,NB ( a male ) wouldn't have been seen if he'd been in the hall.
It'll never be clear nor truthful how or where the three adult bodies had been found because of the amount of anomalies there are in the case as a whole. There's only speculation.
But he wasn't found in the hall!
-
How do you know that NB wasn't trying to make his way into the hall towards the front door,because according to MOST of the newspapers that day,NB had been found in the hall ??
In which case when police made their calculations regarding the body of a female seen through the window,NB ( a male ) wouldn't have been seen if he'd been in the hall.
It'll never be clear nor truthful how or where the three adult bodies had been found because of the amount of anomalies there are in the case as a whole. There's only speculation.
So Nevill was about to open the door. So you agree it's very unusual the front door was bolted.
Nevill was found in the kitchen.
He had 16 minutes between 2 phone calls to leave the front door ajar. As well as time prior to deciding to ring Bamber & the police. However the front door was bolted from inside.
So why bother phoning people who can't get inside ?
-
Why not start from the very beginning and see for yourself how this crime had been reported and how changes came to be made as the case took its course ?
-
Why not start from the very beginning and see for yourself how this crime had been reported and how changes came to be made as the case took its course ?
When it first happened, newspapers w(much like here) would have gone into feeding frenzy, taking any information from anyone they thought might be in the know. That's why A LOT of incorrect information was printed. Nevil wasn't found in the hall.
-
When it first happened, newspapers w(much like here) would have gone into feeding frenzy, taking any information from anyone they thought might be in the know. That's why A LOT of incorrect information was printed. Nevil wasn't found in the hall.
6 out of 10 editions told how NB was found in the hall.
-
When it first happened, newspapers w(much like here) would have gone into feeding frenzy, taking any information from anyone they thought might be in the know. That's why A LOT of incorrect information was printed. Nevil wasn't found in the hall.
Caroline, you have NO idea! Not only did it cover every national, it covered ALL the locals -about 9 in total at that time- and they all said slightly different things. OBVIOUSLY it wasn't all true.
-
6 out of 10 editions told how NB was found in the hall.
SO? It doesn't mean he was.
-
SO? It doesn't mean he was.
Doesn't mean he wasn't either being as so many reports had been made.
-
Doesn't mean he wasn't either being as so many reports had been made.
Well, in this case there is corroborative evidence -or should I say, LACK of- in the hall. You've seen the picture of Nevill, head in bucket, puddles of blood IN THE KITCHEN. How, injured like that would he have got to the hall without leaving any trace of his presence?
-
WHY would the report have been made in the first place ? There's a big difference in how we're supposed to perceive how he was allegedly found,head near scuttle and not IN it,to him being found in the hall.
There's a heck of a difference between how the case first began and how it's seen today.
-
WHY would the report have been made in the first place ? There's a big difference in how we're supposed to perceive how he was allegedly found,head near scuttle and not IN it,to him being found in the hall.
There's a heck of a difference between how the case first began and how it's seen today.
I really can't tell you, Lookout, other than to tell you what I've already said MANY times. Human beings are fallible. You only need to look at the television and see whats happening in Westminster RIGHT NOW to hear that there are always conflicting reports wherever there's a major incident.
-
I really can't tell you, Lookout, other than to tell you what I've already said MANY times. Human beings are fallible. You only need to look at the television and see whats happening in Westminster RIGHT NOW to hear that there are always conflicting reports wherever there's a major incident.
I'm watching that horrendous news now. Sadly,we've come to expect that attacks such as this are a sickening fact of our lives now and my thoughts go out to those involved.
One attack being as cowardly as another towards the innocent public,though I doubt that there's room for conflicting reports as everyone has come to know who the assailants are.
-
I'm watching that horrendous news now. Sadly,we've come to expect that attacks such as this are a sickening fact of our lives now and my thoughts go out to those involved.
One attack being as cowardly as another towards the innocent public,though I doubt that there's room for conflicting reports as everyone has come to know who the assailants are.
There are conflicting reports. Each person being interviewed is telling their own story and speaking of their own experience. Others are telling what they've been told by others. ALL are telling different stories about the same incident. WHF was a microcosm of what's happening right now.
-
6 out of 10 editions told how NB was found in the hall.
He wasn't
-
There are conflicting reports. Each person being interviewed is telling their own story and speaking of their own experience. Others are telling what they've been told by others. ALL are telling different stories about the same incident. WHF was a microcosm of what's happening right now.
Which is all the more reason that EP SHOULD have known what was happening at WHF.
Why do the numbskulls have to go around with their phones taking pics of what's happening ? Sick !
-
Which is all the more reason that EP SHOULD have known what was happening at WHF.
Why do the numbskulls have to go around with their phones taking pics of what's happening ? Sick !
You're talking about something that happened -at night- 30+ years ago, that NONE of those present had previously experienced in practice. This could be the only case you're interested in but it seems to me that ALL of you who seek to rectify what you believe are MoJ's say exactly the same thing about the initial handling of the case.
It's interesting that the policeman who is reporting said he will say what he knows but won't speculate. I imagine there was a lot of speculation going on a WHF.
-
You're talking about something that happened -at night- 30+ years ago, that NONE of those present had previously experienced in practice. This could be the only case you're interested in but it seems to me that ALL of you who seek to rectify what you believe are MoJ's say exactly the same thing about the initial handling of the case.
It's interesting that the policeman who is reporting said he will say what he knows but won't speculate. I imagine there was a lot of speculation going on a WHF.
And there's been nothing but speculation since the tragedy at WHF.
-
Which is all the more reason that EP SHOULD have known what was happening at WHF.
Why do the numbskulls have to go around with their phones taking pics of what's happening ? Sick !
What numbskulls?
-
Posters are not answering the question.
Apart from Lookout saying Nevill may have been on his way to the front door. Weirdly because some newspapers apparently & incorrectly said Nevill was found in the hall.
If Nevill & June together could not handle Sheila, what is the point in phoning Bamber & the police if the police & Bamber can't get inside ?
-
What numbskulls?
Those who were seen on the news an hour ago.
-
Nevill may have believed he would be able to get to the front door when Bamber or the police rang the bell. This is an optimistic & risky attitude.
Sheila had 'gone crazy and had got the gun'. Nevill alone or with June could not control her resulting in Nevill making phone calls. WHF was a big house & a door bell ringing may just provoke Sheila even more.
If Nevill or June were alive but involved in a struggle or too injured to get to the door, vital minutes or hours would be lost with people outside WHF rather than inside.
I'm sorry but the suggestion that some newspapers apparently wrongly reported Nevill was found in the hall does not suggest he was about to open the front door.
-
So how do we know that he didnt unlock the door then Sheila could have locked it again after Nevill was out of the way.
-
So how do we know that he didnt unlock the door then Sheila could have locked it again after Nevill was out of the way.
And then gone upstairs to shoot herself?
-
And then gone upstairs to shoot herself?
We don't know,but it wouldn't surprise me. ( if she'd felt the same as Princess Diana did in her stuffy household )
-
We don't know,but it wouldn't surprise me. ( if she'd felt the same as Princess Diana did in her stuffy household )
But Lookout, it wasn't Sheila's stuffy home and she'd only got another 48 hours there.
-
But Lookout, it wasn't Sheila's stuffy home and she'd only got another 48 hours there.
I meant that she grew up in. A cold,loveless climate.
-
The front door was locked from inside. Bamber & the police didn't have a front door key anyway. So not much point in Nevill ringing both if neither can enter.
Nevill had time to ring Bamber & according to many, the police. So why not leave the front door ajar ?
Nevill obviously also had time to leave the front door ajar & is likely to do this before making any phone calls.
The worst that could happen is Sheila would run out of the front door bare footed in her nightie. Either holding or not holding a rifle, before or after anyone arrived.
Nevill was expecting Bamber to 'come quickly' and help him restrain Sheila. Not much chance of that if Nevill's upstairs injured & Bamber is standing on the doorstep ringing the door bell.
Nevill was also expecting the police to arrive. An open door would at least give Bews & Jones the option of entering & assisting Nevill. Everyone staying outside for hours was not why Nevill made 3am phone calls.
I suppose the Defence would have to argue the time between him telephoning his son and making his way to the door he was intercepted by his daughter.
-
The front door was locked from inside. Bamber & the police didn't have a front door key anyway. So not much point in Nevill ringing both if neither can enter.
Nevill had time to ring Bamber & according to many, the police. So why not leave the front door ajar ?
Nevill obviously also had time to leave the front door ajar & is likely to do this before making any phone calls.
The worst that could happen is Sheila would run out of the front door bare footed in her nightie. Either holding or not holding a rifle, before or after anyone arrived.
Nevill was expecting Bamber to 'come quickly' and help him restrain Sheila. Not much chance of that if Nevill's upstairs injured & Bamber is standing on the doorstep ringing the door bell.
Nevill was also expecting the police to arrive. An open door would at least give Bews & Jones the option of entering & assisting Nevill. Everyone staying outside for hours was not why Nevill made 3am phone calls.
How does he "obviously" have time for all of this?
-
How does he "obviously" have time for all of this?
It's still a good point Adam makes, especially as some doubters have said Nevill was downstairs at the start of the shooting.
-
How does he "obviously" have time for all of this?
Well there was a 16 minute gap between Nevill ringing Bamber & the police. It doesn't take 16 minutes for Nevill to unbolt & leave the front door ajar for Bamber & the police. It would take 10 seconds. .
If you don't believe Nevill rang the police, he still had minutes or hours to decide to leave the front door ajar prior to ringing Bamber. It would have taken several minutes to ring Bamber as he was sleeping 'like a log'. Unbolting the front door would only take 10 seconds.
Nevill only saying 11 words to Bamber over the phone before the line went dead suggests Nevill had less time after this phone call. Providing you believe he didn't phone the police 16 minutes later. But being downstairs when ringing Bamber, there is still a possibility he had 10 seconds available.
-
It's interesting that the policeman who is reporting said he will say what he knows but won't speculate.
As distinct from what?
-
The front door was locked from inside. Bamber & the police didn't have a front door key anyway. So not much point in Nevill ringing both if neither can enter. incorrect, according to relatives there was always a key kept in an out building! However, although this was true, somebody applied two bolts on the rear farmhouse door! A key was inserted in the lock on the inside of the rear farmhouse door but it is not known whether the door itself was locked by these means! All we know is that the key was in the lock, and that two bolts were keeping the door from being opened! We know that there were several blows with a sledge hammer to this door because it is reported as such in the police radio message logs! Several loud bangs and voices that were heard via the telephone eavesdropping set up by the operator! Voices which reported the following, 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found in kitchen upon entry' (7.37am). There were voices, as recorded! Why would armed officers be talking if they were supposed to be entering a dangerous environment where they suspected someone who had access to several firearms and all manner of ammunitions was lurking at any turn these brave police officers might take once the back door of the farmhouse was caved in? There were voices because there was a confrontation right there in the kitchen, a confrontation involving PS Woodcock and Sheila Caffell! Sheila grabbed a hold of Woodcocks gun barrel as he came into the kitchen! At the time this occurred the muzzle end of Woodcocks police issue rifle was pointing toward the outside wall of the kitchen! This was because the internal kitchen door through which Woodcock was trying to enter the kitchen was from his vantage point hinged on the left, but which from Sheila's perspective inside the kitchen itself was hinged on the right!! Cops won't release the 'official report' concerning this shooting incident in the kitchen but I have been told about its contents! In the aforementioned. Report the officer concerned, seeks to explain how he had 'no control' over the direction in which the muzzle end of his rifle was pointing when he tried to 'come around' the opening edge of the internal kitchen door! It was always pointing away from any potential target! 'I agree with Woodcock', there a no way on the devils earth that he could have trained his weapon on somebody on the other side of that internal door! I am with him, from his perspective the internal kitchen door through which he was trying to negotiate, opened inward, into the kitchen itself, it was a door which was hinged on its left hand side! The edge of that door prevented Woodcock from training the muzzle end of his operational rifle, on any target beyond, or on the other side of 'that' door! From where Woodcock was standing, the opening edge of that door would have swung open left to right! He could not have got a shot off at Sheila even though he might have wanted to!!
There is no doubt, whatsoever, in this matter, Woodcock did not voluntarily shoot Sheila Caffell across the throat! She grappled with the barrel end of Woodcocks rifle, she pulled it into her own neck/throat as Woodcock attempted to enter the kitchen! That sudden movement where Sheila 'tugged at' the barrel of 'that' rifle, involuntarily caused the trigger finger of Woodcock to activate the trigger of his weapon! I am satisfied that this was what did occur! By these means, Sheila got shot in the kitchen - the contents of the officers report about the shooting Incident in the kitchen (refers)! Woodcock claims in this officers report that Sheila attempted to commit suicide! I am with Woodcock' n that respect!
They won't release this information because to do so, will and does mean, that 'unfortunately' mean that Jeremy Bamber had 'not' shot his sister!!
-
Front door to farmhouse may have been unlocked!
-
Front door to farmhouse may have been unlocked!
Let's get the facts right!
One of the firearm officers who entered the farmhouse, opened the front door to the farmhouse as a possible means of escape before firearm officers began their approach up the main stairs!
For all anybody knows Neville Bamber could have (did) unlock this door for the police and Jeremy to enter once they arrived!!!
-
Let's get the facts right!
One of the firearm officers who entered the farmhouse, opened the front door to the farmhouse as a possible means of escape before firearm officers began their approach up the main stairs!
For all anybody knows Neville Bamber could have (did) unlock this door for the police and Jeremy to enter once they arrived!!!
Please provide any evidence to contradict this fact!!!
-
As distinct from what?
As distinct from the amount of speculation which occurred at WHF. Perhaps lessons were learned. Perhaps WHF became the held up example of "How Not To.................."
-
The truth always prevails - it doesn't matter what lies are introduced regarding anything, that is false, the truth will always shine through! Front door to farmhouse could have been unlocked by Neville Bamber, as intimated by the creation of this thread!!
Prove otherwise, please...
-
As distinct from the amount of speculation which occurred at WHF. Perhaps lessons were learned. Perhaps WHF became the held up example of "How Not To.................."
Ok, let's say cop shot Sheila because the barrel of his rifle, or pea shooter, was never in his control (always pointing away from a potential target)! Let's agree with the content of the 'undisclosed' officers report! Sheila tried to commit suicide'! Lessons learned?
Think!!!
-
So, what we have, ladies and gentlemen, is ' a suicide', right there at the beginning, right after the firearm officers caved the door to the farmhouse in...
Sheila pulling the barrel of Woodcocks rifle toward her own neck, as he was trying to enter the kitchen!!
I am with Woodcock', I do not imply that he deliberately shot Sheila! If he had done, he would have been justified in doing so, because by that stage she had fired 23 bullets killing four members of her own family!!
The first shot across Sheila's throat was accidental involving circumstances beyond the control of PS Woodcock! The struggle between the two (Woodcock and Sheila) spilled into the kitchen. The voices 'overheard' (refer police log), were the voices of Woodcock and Sheila engaged in that struggle!!
-
The truth always prevails - it doesn't matter what lies are introduced regarding anything, that is false, the truth will always shine through! Front door to farmhouse could have been unlocked by Neville Bamber, as intimated by the creation of this thread!!
Prove otherwise, please...
Can it be proved that Jeremy didn't, at some point, subdue Sheila further, by placing something over her mouth impregnated with an anaesthetic agent?
-
Can it be proved that Jeremy didn't, at some point, subdue Sheila further, by placing something over her mouth impregnated with an anaesthetic agent?
Yes, it can be proved!
I have spoken personally with hundreds of convicted people during my incarceration, many of whom admitted their guilt (to me) and were sentenced accordingly! Others, like Bamber have denied responsibility for crimes they were convicted of!!!
Let's just deal with the cases where prisoners have always denied culpability of the crimes they were convicted of!
80% of these cases, I discovered that evidence used to prosecute these people, had been fabricated!!!
-
My approach in all such cases, has been - ' I can't help you unless you tell me the truth' (as known by you)!!
-
My approach in all such cases, has been - ' I can't help you unless you tell me the truth' (as known by you)!!
Let's deal with this 80% of cases where the vast majority involved prisoners who to some extent or another admitted involvement (to me) in the crimes they were ultimately convicted of...
I found examples of police corruption in many of these cases!!
-
Yes, it can be proved!
I have spoken personally with hundreds of convicted people during my incarceration, many of whom admitted their guilt (to me) and were sentenced accordingly! Others, like Bamber have denied responsibility for crimes they were convicted of!!!
Let's just deal with the cases where prisoners have always denied culpability of the crimes they were convicted of!
80% of these cases, I discovered that evidence used to prosecute these people, had been fabricated!!!
OK. Prove it. Jeremy saying he didn't do it, DOESN'T.
-
Let's deal with this 80% of cases where the vast majority involved prisoners who to some extent or another admitted involvement (to me) in the crimes they were ultimately convicted of...
I found examples of police corruption in many of these cases!!
I have years, and years, of personal experience, in dealing with the aftermath of such cases!
'Cons', or inmates, or prisoners, confiding in me, how although they were guilty (as charged and convicted/sentenced) the so called honest Criminal justice system had stitched them up!!
-
I have years, and years, of personal experience, in dealing with the aftermath of such cases!
'Cons', or inmates, or prisoners, confiding in me, how although they were guilty (as charged and convicted/sentenced) the so called honest Criminal justice system had stitched them up!!
None of which goes any way to prove that Jeremy didn't use something to further subdue her/render her compliant. Actually, I have no problem with the guilty being stitched up. I call it poetic justice. The police may have picked up on the adage "set a thief to catch a thief".
-
Or-------" no honesty among thieves " if blaming Jeremy and the relatives as far as motives are concerned ?
-
OK. Prove it. Jeremy saying he didn't do it, DOESN'T.
He passed a lie detector test!
I remember the build up to this being arranged!
I have sent Jeremy the photograph of Sheila on the bed! It caused all sorts of problems for him, and myself in my affairs with Jeremy! Just take it as being true that Sheila was on the bed, before cops moved her body to the floor, and whilst ever she was upon the bed (gospel) she only had one bullet wound to her throat!
The Home Office currently rely upon polygraph test results to monitor sex offenders released on Parole license - so please don't even try to fob me off by declaring that such tests are unreliable!
Before Jeremy took the polygraph test - let me tell you about things that were spelled out to him by GDS, and myself!
We told him, in no uncertain terms that if he failed the polygraph test, it would be the 'end of the Road', as far as any appeal was concerned!!!
Now, Jeremy, to his credit kept saying that he did not have any involvement in the deaths of his family!
I personally believed him, and I still do believe he wasn't inside the farmhouse when anyone got shot! I once got a glimmer of hope in my mindset, when I once suggested that he might have been Sheila's accomplice! He had responded to this suggestion of mine, by declaring, 'You Clever Bastard' !!
If Bamber had failed the polygraph test he knew that the likes of GDS and myself could not support him any further!!!
He passed the polygraph test, you should remind yourself of the questions which were put to him during that test, and the answers he gave sharply! He had no deal what the questions were going to be! He answered all questions sharply!
The expert who conducted the polygraph test believes that Jeremy told the truth and that he was not present at the farmhouse when anybody was shot and killed, and that Jeremy had received a call from Neville Bamber! I did not need a polygraph test to convince myself that what Jeremy had told me, was the truth! He is not clever enough to be able to manipulate the truth! He thinks he's clever, but the truth is none of us are that clever that we can manipulate the gods honest truth! You see when somebody tells a lie, somewhere along the line, things start to stack up against it being the truth! I am 61 years old, and I have a life time of experience which I would like to think entitles me to be in a good position to determine when somebody is telling lies, or not!
In all the years I have had dealings with Jeremy Bamber, there has only been one occasion when I sensed something was wrong with what he had been telling me, and that was when I once suggested to him, that 'he' might have been an accomplice of Sheila's!
'You Clever Bastard' he responded! You read into this, what you may! I have my own views on the matter! I never pursued the matter any further, my question and his answer told me everything I needed to know...
-
None of which goes any way to prove that Jeremy didn't use something to further subdue her/render her compliant. Actually, I have no problem with the guilty being stitched up. I call it poetic justice. The police may have picked up on the adage "set a thief to catch a thief".
You should hold your head in shame - there is no room in the Criminal Justice System for Corruption and dishonesty!
-
Or-------" no honesty among thieves " if blaming Jeremy and the relatives as far as motives are concerned ?
See, I rather see the relatives as fighting to retain something they'd ALL worked their guts out for to prevent it all falling into the hands of a usurper whose only interest in it was what he could make on it.
-
You should hold your head in shame - there is no room in the Criminal Justice System for Corruption and dishonesty!
So you'd sooner see the guilty walk free?
-
So, it is clearly spelled out, from one of the guilty camp, that they agree with a bit of corruption here, and a bit of dishonesty there!
How can people who hold such views and beliefs, expect to discover the truth in any matter, and case, any event?
-
So you'd sooner see the guilty walk free?
Your approach is a dishonest one!
I thought you were posting here to get to the truth!!
-
There's an old saying, which I took a shine to - ' there are three versions of the truth, your version, my version, and somewhere in between what you, and I believe to be the truth!!
-
There's an old saying, which I took a shine to - ' there are three versions of the truth, your version, my version, and somewhere in between what you, and I believe to be the truth!!
The actual truth is somewhere between what you and I might be saying!
-
It has always fascinated me, the methods adopted by police officers, in the way they set out to deliberately falsify evidence to support the prosecution of a person!
Why go to such lengths, when a person is admitting the offence anyway?
-
Your approach is a dishonest one!
I thought you were posting here to get to the truth!!
SOMETIMES crime has to be fought with crime. You may think my APPROACH dishonest, but I haven't made a career out of being dishonest or trying to defraud. For those who have, I'm prepared for the police to use whatever means they have at their disposal to stop this happening, because it's MY hard earned money some of these criminals are stealing. OH, and I've heard you getting pretty irate about it, too.
-
It has always fascinated me, the methods adopted by police officers, in the way they set out to deliberately falsify evidence to support the prosecution of a person!
Why go to such lengths, when a person is admitting the offence anyway?
it has now become clear that those amongst the Bamber is guilty camp, advocate corruption and dishonesty! It is a sad, sad day for our forum!
How can anybody advocate dishonesty?
-
SOMETIMES crime has to be fought with crime. You may think my APPROACH dishonest, but I haven't made a career out of being dishonest or trying to defraud. For those who have, I'm prepared for the police to use whatever means they have at their disposal to stop this happening, because it's MY hard earned money some of these criminals are stealing. OH, and I've heard you getting pretty irate about it, too.
Your approach tippifies why miscarriage of justice occur!
-
Your approach is a dishonest one!
I thought you were posting here to get to the truth!!
But not your truth, Mike.
-
See, I rather see the relatives as fighting to retain something they'd ALL worked their guts out for to prevent it all falling into the hands of a usurper whose only interest in it was what he could make on it.
Pity you don't see things as I see them. 12 months before the tragedy,the EATONS lost their farmland.After returning from holiday they'd been contacted by PE's brother telling them that their rented land had been sold. NB had kindly solved a problem for them by purchasing a piece of land for them to farm and it was this piece of land that remained in the hands of the Bambers who,when they all perished would automatically have been turned over to JB.
I can see that the thought of working on land belonging to a " kid who had no ties to the family " would have sent reverberations through all the relatives so any which way they could blame him for the murders--------they did,and succeeded.
I CAN'T see it any other way than this. The relatives put him where he is and are determined to keep him there.
-
But not your truth, Mike.
Ok, but at least I start off from the position of having an open mind, your approach by your own admission is a dishonest one! And, that's why miscarriages of justice occur!
I have done responding to anything you post from here on in - good luck and don't keep up the bad work!!!
-
It's official then, people think it's alright to fabricate and falsify evidence! What a malarky, behaving like criminals to justify somebodies demise, in one form or another!
That's what victims like Jeremy Bamber are up against!
How can anyone who takes a dishonest approach, be entertained when it comes to somebody having been wronged, when the person your trying to debate with, takes a dishonest approach?
-
Ok, but at least I start off from the position of having an open mind, your approach by your own admission is a dishonest one! And, that's why miscarriages of justice occur!
I have done responding to anything you post from here on in - good luck and don't keep up the bad work!!!
Everyone has their own truth. I find your blanket hatred of the police anything BUT open minded, but I don't see how you can say that my mind is closed when I can freely admit that, as I've never had the sort of dealings with them that you, and your family, have -and I suspect that goes for many others here, too- I can't be expected to see/share it from your perspective.
-
Everyone has their own truth. I find your blanket hatred of the police anything BUT open minded, but I don't see how you can say that my mind is closed when I can freely admit that, as I've never had the sort of dealings with them that you, and your family, have -and I suspect that goes for many others here, too- I can't be expected to see/share it from your perspective.
Nearly all my dealings with police in my role at work have been positive. As a consequence, I am inclined to think positively of the police in general. However, I am aware that as an institution, they have committed some heinous acts over the years. It is probably also true, that if the policing fraternity has existed in a 'closed shop' scenario, it is likely to have been awash with abuses of power.
-
Pity you don't see things as I see them. 12 months before the tragedy,the EATONS lost their farmland.After returning from holiday they'd been contacted by PE's brother telling them that their rented land had been sold. NB had kindly solved a problem for them by purchasing a piece of land for them to farm and it was this piece of land that remained in the hands of the Bambers who,when they all perished would automatically have been turned over to JB.
I can see that the thought of working on land belonging to a " kid who had no ties to the family " would have sent reverberations through all the relatives so any which way they could blame him for the murders--------they did,and succeeded.
I CAN'T see it any other way than this. The relatives put him where he is and are determined to keep him there.
But I believe he committed the murders. I have no proof that the relatives didn't do more than tell it how they'd always seen it, and encouraged the police to see it their way. It doesn't make Jeremy innocent.
-
Nearly all my dealings with police in my role at work have been positive. As a consequence, I am inclined to think positively of the police in general. However, I am aware that as an institution, they have committed some heinous acts over the years. It is probably also true, that if the policing fraternity has existed in a 'closed shop' scenario, it is likely to have been awash with abuses of power.
Roch, I, 100% concur with what you say. Of COURSE I'm not blind to corruption within any institution. The bigger the institution, generally, the greater the corruption but I can't help but feel that it's being used, in this case, to suggest that they framed an innocent man. There are rotten apples in EVERY barrel, but unlike some here, perhaps because of their own agenda's, I don't believe the whole barrel is rotten to the core.
-
Hello lookout
we all as individuals see things differently and can be passionate about our views. I for one tend to lean towards Jeremy guilty but I always have a wee space in my mind he could be innocent and thus I am prepared to listen to points raised by his supporters others are so convinced he is guilty they are passionate about their beliefs and that is their right. It has been well documented that some police forces have not always been honest but I think we have more honest cops than dishonest.
-
Hello lookout
we all as individuals see things differently and can be passionate about our views. I for one tend to lean towards Jeremy guilty but I always have a wee space in my mind he could be innocent and thus I am prepared to listen to points raised by his supporters others are so convinced he is guilty they are passionate about their beliefs and that is their right. It has been well documented that some police forces have not always been honest but I think we have more honest cops than dishonest.
Hi Susan-------the powers of persuasion which generated from the relatives towards EP was such that it couldn't have been ignored,but it doesn't help solve a crime and this crime to my mind was never solved in the way it should have been. There is far more to crime than hating and loathing someone who you've named as the perpetrator and EP's abysmal investigating didn't go far enough.
For them it couldn't have been any easier than if JB had stood there holding a rifle.
You can't turn a murder around to suit those concerned,which is what happened. JB hadn't given anyone the runaround,nor evaded/avoided,he remained up-front right the way through.
I can't see that those who support JB wouldn't have " seen through " anyone who would be pulling the wool either,as there are some well-read people among his supporters as well as those who've parted with well-earned cash in which to help Jeremy find justice. Their determination as well as JB's is to be applauded to see this through.
Policing has changed over the years as the margin for error has become less and less and the public are made more aware through the media that dishonesty within forces is no longer acceptable. However,there are still areas of the law which need to be looked into such as the CCRC and IPCC.
-
Hi Susan-------the powers of persuasion which generated from the relatives towards EP was such that it couldn't have been ignored,but it doesn't help solve a crime and this crime to my mind was never solved in the way it should have been. There is far more to crime than hating and loathing someone who you've named as the perpetrator and EP's abysmal investigating didn't go far enough.
For them it couldn't have been any easier than if JB had stood there holding a rifle.
You can't turn a murder around to suit those concerned,which is what happened. JB hadn't given anyone the runaround,nor evaded/avoided,he remained up-front right the way through.
I can't see that those who support JB wouldn't have " seen through " anyone who would be pulling the wool either,as there are some well-read people among his supporters as well as those who've parted with well-earned cash in which to help Jeremy find justice. Their determination as well as JB's is to be applauded to see this through.
Policing has changed over the years as the margin for error has become less and less and the public are made more aware through the media that dishonesty within forces is no longer acceptable. However,there are still areas of the law which need to be looked into such as the CCRC and IPCC.
Lookout excellent post X
-
Nearly all my dealings with police in my role at work have been positive. As a consequence, I am inclined to think positively of the police in general. However, I am aware that as an institution, they have committed some heinous acts over the years. It is probably also true, that if the policing fraternity has existed in a 'closed shop' scenario, it is likely to have been awash with abuses of power.
The Hillsboro' Cover up by South Yorkshire police springs to mind - they fabricated other coppers witness statements, and the local Coroner's court and that vile monster called Thatcher were all in on it! You can't trust the filth, especially knowing that they can't even tell the right time of day, or count beyond three bodies being upstairs at 8.10am, if there really were four!
Keystone cops were more efficient than Essex police, and South Yorkshire police!
Happy days for the scum of the earth and it's supporters, promotions all round, and fantastic pension rights! Vile evil scumbags!!
-
Non disclosure of evidence by the time of Bambers October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial tells it's own story in Bambers case! Dodgy photographic evidence used to falsely promote how armed cops supposedly found the five bodies, a bullet that grew from a piece of badly fragmented bullet into a whole one withing six weeks of it being removed from Sheila's neck during autopsy! I wonder what the pathologist (Peter Venezis) would have to say about the ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, about exhibit PV/20 growing whole?
-
Front door to farmhouse was unlocked, cops opened it as an escape route before going upstairs!!
-
The front door was locked from inside. Bamber & the police didn't have a front door key anyway. So not much point in Nevill ringing both if neither can enter.
Nevill was also expecting the police to arrive. An open door would at least give Bews & Jones the option of entering & assisting Nevill. Everyone staying outside for hours was not why Nevill made 3am phone calls.
It is an interesting question as to why Nevill did not escape himself or open the doors. One possibility is that Nevill made his calls for help before he realised how serious the situation was and then after seeing or hearing Sheila firing the rifle he realised that Jeremy would be in danger if he entered the farmhouse. So maybe Nevill locked the doors to protect Jeremy.
-
See, I rather see the relatives as fighting to retain something they'd ALL worked their guts out for to prevent it all falling into the hands of a usurper whose only interest in it was what he could make on it.
Sorry only just catching up on this thread. Jane that is a very sad statement to make, that in my mind proves the family were going to do everything they could to stitch jb up and were unlawful in doing so. In fact it was them that were worried they would lose everything that Neville had worked his guts out for.
your take on getting justice in your eyes goes against everything we fight for in this country. An open and honest justice system.
-
Sorry only just catching up on this thread. Jane that is a very sad statement to make, that in my mind proves the family were going to do everything they could to stitch jb up and were unlawful in doing so. In fact it was them that were worried they would lose everything that Neville had worked his guts out for.
your take on getting justice in your eyes goes against everything we fight for in this country. An open and honest justice system.
The fact that they thought he killed everyone might have had something to do it it also.
-
It is an interesting question as to why Nevill did not escape himself or open the doors. One possibility is that Nevill made his calls for help before he realised how serious the situation was and then after seeing or hearing Sheila firing the rifle he realised that Jeremy would be in danger if he entered the farmhouse. So maybe Nevill locked the doors to protect Jeremy.
The phone call is a problem for people supporting Jeremy. At 3am a phone call to someone is a serious situation, had he not thought it was serious, why make the call, if he did think it was serious, why not just call the police?
-
Hi Susan-------the powers of persuasion which generated from the relatives towards EP was such that it couldn't have been ignored,but it doesn't help solve a crime and this crime to my mind was never solved in the way it should have been. There is far more to crime than hating and loathing someone who you've named as the perpetrator and EP's abysmal investigating didn't go far enough.
For them it couldn't have been any easier than if JB had stood there holding a rifle.
You can't turn a murder around to suit those concerned,which is what happened. JB hadn't given anyone the runaround,nor evaded/avoided,he remained up-front right the way through.
I can't see that those who support JB wouldn't have " seen through " anyone who would be pulling the wool either,as there are some well-read people among his supporters as well as those who've parted with well-earned cash in which to help Jeremy find justice. Their determination as well as JB's is to be applauded to see this through.
Policing has changed over the years as the margin for error has become less and less and the public are made more aware through the media that dishonesty within forces is no longer acceptable. However,there are still areas of the law which need to be looked into such as the CCRC and IPCC.
People keep saying that the relatives had power over the police - explain this power?
-
The fact that they thought he killed everyone might have had something to do it it also.
That doesn't excuse their actions or behaviour. The police and pathologist knew Sheila had killed everyone. The police were so convinced regarding the original evidence, that they expressed disgust towards the relatives' insinuations. Funny that - since we are constantly told on here that there is no evidence. So the police at the time were convinced to the extent that they were disgusted at the relatives insinuations - purely based on no evidence??
The relatives were told some of the reasons as to why the police held Sheila responsible, at a time when there was no need for police to conceal certain evidence: as they themselves were not actively pursuing JB as a suspect at that point, there was far less motivation to conceal any known evidence that linked Sheila. Whatever the relatives were told, it was enough to convince two gun experts among them, that Sheila could have been responsible.
The problem with that scenario - is that it did not resolve the self-serving concerns and fears that the relatives harboured.
-
Sorry only just catching up on this thread. Jane that is a very sad statement to make, that in my mind proves the family were going to do everything they could to stitch jb up and were unlawful in doing so. In fact it was them that were worried they would lose everything that Neville had worked his guts out for.
your take on getting justice in your eyes goes against everything we fight for in this country. An open and honest justice system.
That is also how I read it.
-
That doesn't excuse their actions or behaviour. The police and pathologist knew Sheila had killed everyone. The police were so convinced regarding the original evidence, that they expressed disgust towards the relatives' insinuations. Funny that - since we are constantly told on here that there is no evidence. So the police at the time were convinced to the extent that they were disgusted at the relatives insinuations - purely based on no evidence??
The relatives were told some of the reasons as to why the police held Sheila responsible, at a time when there was no need for police to conceal certain evidence: as they themselves were not actively pursuing JB as a suspect at that point, there was far less motivation to conceal any known evidence that linked Sheila. Whatever the relatives were told, it was enough to convince two gun experts among them, that Sheila could have been responsible.
The problem with that scenario - is that it did not resolve the self-serving concerns and fears that the relatives harboured.
That's a good point. For guilters.
If Taff was able to give the relatives evidence of Sheila's guilt, why did the relatives continue their pursuit by going to Peter Simpson ?
-
That doesn't excuse their actions or behaviour. The police and pathologist knew Sheila had killed everyone. The police were so convinced regarding the original evidence, that they expressed disgust towards the relatives' insinuations. Funny that - since we are constantly told on here that there is no evidence. So the police at the time were convinced to the extent that they were disgusted at the relatives insinuations - purely based on no evidence??
The relatives were told some of the reasons as to why the police held Sheila responsible, at a time when there was no need for police to conceal certain evidence: as they themselves were not actively pursuing JB as a suspect at that point, there was far less motivation to conceal any known evidence that linked Sheila. Whatever the relatives were told, it was enough to convince two gun experts among them, that Sheila could have been responsible.
The problem with that scenario - is that it did not resolve the self-serving concerns and fears that the relatives harboured.
Convinced? This is quite a serious accusation Roch because it would mean the relatives KNEW Jeremy was innocent and so did the police, but they ALL framed him anyway? Certainly from your way of thinking, the relatives may have had a motive - but the police didn't, they would simply have acted unlawfully but for what reason?
-
People keep saying that the relatives had power over the police - explain this power?
Manipulation and control ! RWB had threatened EP with a letter to the " powers that be " that unless they dance to his tune,he'll report their incompetence.
-
Manipulation and control ! RWB had threatened EP with a letter to the " powers that be " that unless they dance to his tune,he'll report their incompetence.
A letter ? Ohhhh
Have you got a source for this ?
What incompetence would the relatives be aware of ? They were not part of the investigation.
-
Were not the relatives responsible for JB's category to be heightened back to Cat A ??
-
Manipulation and control ! RWB had threatened EP with a letter to the " powers that be " that unless they dance to his tune,he'll report their incompetence.
Bouflour wasn't party to what went on inside or outside WHF. He had a few theories and was convinced the police had it wrong, his letter was obviously compelling enough for the police to look at the case again. However, if you're saying he had something over the police, you need to say what because if not, it' an empty theory!
-
Were not the relatives responsible for JB's category to be heightened back to Cat A ??
As victims they have a right to object.
-
As victims they have a right to object.
In an ordinary situation perhaps. However...
Jeremy is a victim of the relatives. The relatives are not a victim of Jeremy Bamber.
-
That's a good point. For guilters.
If Taff was able to give the relatives evidence of Sheila's guilt, why did the relatives continue their pursuit by going to Peter Simpson ?
Because " Taff " was having none of it and chased them out of his office. They DIDN'T want to hear that Sheila had been guilty.
What evidence did the relatives " find " in which to have Jeremy convicted ??
Come to think,what did EP have to convict him ??
-
Because " Taff " was having none of it and chased them out of his office. They DIDN'T want to hear that Sheila had been guilty.
What evidence did the relatives " find " in which to have Jeremy convicted ??
Come to think,what did EP have to convict him ??
There is a thread on this. As it's an important issue.
But thanks for you're view that the relatives 'didn't want to hear' evidence Taff had that Sheila was guilty.
-
Sorry only just catching up on this thread. Jane that is a very sad statement to make, that in my mind proves the family were going to do everything they could to stitch jb up and were unlawful in doing so. In fact it was them that were worried they would lose everything that Neville had worked his guts out for.
your take on getting justice in your eyes goes against everything we fight for in this country. An open and honest justice system.
OK, Notsure, so you're saying it's of no moment that Jeremy was guilty. It's of no moment that the guilty -whoever they are- walk free. All that matters is that those whose job it is to get them to court are seen to stay withing lawful parameters? I'm perfectly capable of believing that as I've had no crime committed against me -or anyone I hold dear- but if I had, I'm not certain that I'd be too concerned about the methods used to bring the criminal to justice. However, I would need to be in that position to tell you, more clearly, how I'd feel.
-
In an ordinary situation perhaps. However...
Jeremy is a victim of the relatives. The relatives are not a victim of Jeremy Bamber.
Only if you believe he is innocent.
-
Only if you believe he is innocent.
Whether he is a victim of the relatives doesn't hinge on my belief.
-
OK, Notsure, so you're saying it's of no moment that Jeremy was guilty. It's of no moment that the guilty -whoever they are- walk free. All that matters is that those whose job it is to get them to court are seen to stay withing lawful parameters? I'm perfectly capable of believing that as I've had no crime committed against me -or anyone I hold dear- but if I had, I'm not certain that I'd be too concerned about the methods used to bring the criminal to justice. However, I would need to be in that position to tell you, more clearly, how I'd feel.
no Jane I'm not saying that at all. Of course it's of consequence if he's guilty and be sure I would have told the police what my thoughts were on the situation but I would never have used unlawful methods to get him convicted.
-
Whether he is a victim of the relatives doesn't hinge on my belief.
No, it hinges on whether he is innocent or not. However, your belief that he is a victim, does hinge on your belief that he is innocent.
-
no Jane I'm not saying that at all. Of course it's of consequence if he's guilty and be sure I would have told the police what my thoughts were on the situation but I would never have used unlawful methods to get him convicted.
So what would you have done, Notsure? Remember exactly what you believe he's done. Remember that he's killed your beloved aunt and uncle, your cousin -OK you never had much time for her, but those little boys!!!!!!!? Would you have been prepared to shrug your shoulders and said c'est la vie, if he'd walked free? I wonder what would be worse. Trying to rebuild another life for yourself and your family well away from what you'd always known -a relationship with him in future would be IMPOSSIBLE- based on resentment that he'd stolen not just your livelihood but that of your children, OR suffer the odd twinge of guilt at the odd time that a small voice inside you head said "Suppose he was innocent".
-
So what would you have done, Notsure? Remember exactly what you believe he's done. Remember that he's killed your beloved aunt and uncle, your cousin -OK you never had much time for her, but those little boys!!!!!!!? Would you have been prepared to shrug your shoulders and said c'est la vie, if he'd walked free? I wonder what would be worse. Trying to rebuild another life for yourself and your family well away from what you'd always known -a relationship with him in future would be IMPOSSIBLE- based on resentment that he'd stolen not just your livelihood but that of your children, OR suffer the odd twinge of guilt at the odd time that a small voice inside you head said "Suppose he was innocent".
So because you believe something... and you're too arrogant to question the validity of your own beliefs... and you're worried about your financial livelihood... that makes it OK to fit somebody up?
-
It is an interesting question as to why Nevill did not escape himself or open the doors. One possibility is that Nevill made his calls for help before he realised how serious the situation was and then after seeing or hearing Sheila firing the rifle he realised that Jeremy would be in danger if he entered the farmhouse. So maybe Nevill locked the doors to protect Jeremy.
I don't believe Nevill would try to escape from Sheila. It would leave a sleeping June and the twins at the mercy of Sheila. He had rang Bamber & the police 16 minutes later so was going to wait for them.
Nevill went downstairs to arm himself or to escape. He was also being shot at by Bamber upstairs. So it was a natural reaction to go downstairs. He never reached the front door if that is what he was aiming for.
-
It is an interesting question as to why Nevill did not escape himself or open the doors. One possibility is that Nevill made his calls for help before he realised how serious the situation was and then after seeing or hearing Sheila firing the rifle he realised that Jeremy would be in danger if he entered the farmhouse. So maybe Nevill locked the doors to protect Jeremy.
I also don't believe Nevill left the front door ajar, then shut it again after realising how dangerous the situation was.
He had told Bamber on the phone Sheila had 'gone crazy and got the gun'. Things couldn't get any more serious.
Nevill had also phoned Chelmsford police. Who he would assume would be able to restrain Sheila. So no point in leaving the front door bolted.
-
So because you believe something... and you're too arrogant to question the validity of your own beliefs... and you're worried about your financial livelihood... that makes it OK to fit somebody up?
No. I'm saying we need to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before we know what it feels like to be them and be in their situation.
-
No. I'm saying we need to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before we know what it feels like to be them and be in their situation.
" Look to yourself " is what June had told AE after telling tales about Sheila's " odd behaviour " !!
-
No. I'm saying we need to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before we know what it feels like to be them and be in their situation.
Still doesn't excuse their actions and behaviour. They don't want to know the truth. They've had their lives now and had their wealth and prosperity and success etc. That's the card they played. It wouldn't matter if Bamber dies in prison, these people will go to their graves with tainted reputations. That's the price they are willing to pay for the 31 years of prosperity they gained by burning Jeremy's life. There is always a trade-off.
-
" Look to yourself " is what June had told AE after telling tales about Sheila's " odd behaviour " !!
With a father as judgemental and as demanding of obedience as was RWB, AE's attitude to Sheila -her style and 'idiosyncrasies' is hardly surprising.
-
Still doesn't excuse their actions and behaviour. They don't want to know the truth. They've had their lives now and had their wealth and prosperity and success etc. That's the card they played. It wouldn't matter if Bamber dies in prison, these people will go to their graves with tainted reputations. That's the price they are willing to pay for the 31 years of prosperity they gained by burning Jeremy's life. There is always a trade-off.
Have I ever suggested that such isn't the case. I'd be the first to say there's no such thing as a free lunch.
-
So so true !!
-
To get back to the original topic, Neville didn't have time to go and open the door as the shooting probably started while he was standing with the phone in his hand. Hence, the dropped receiver.
-
To get back to the original topic, Neville didn't have time to go and open the door as the shooting probably started while he was standing with the phone in his hand. Hence, the dropped receiver.
The trouble here is Nevill had time to ring the police 16 minutes later. If he had time to ring the police he would have found 20 seconds to open the front door. Unless you believe Nevill didn't call the police.
If Nevill only rang Bamber, he had time to open the front door before ringing Bamber. And may have had time afterwards.
-
Mike says there was a key kept in an out building at WHF. So all Nevill had to do was unbolt the door for Bamber to use the key to let himself in.
There is no record of Bamber telling the police about this key after arriving at WHF. The raid team smashing the door down hours later.
-
Ok, but at least I start off from the position of having an open mind, your approach by your own admission is a dishonest one! And, that's why miscarriages of justice occur!
I have done responding to anything you post from here on in - good luck and don't keep up the bad work!!!
An open mind? Since when you have been open to anything other than the relatives and the police all lied? Both Jane and I have looked at bother sides and that's having an open mind. We have believed much of what was said here until such a time that no evidence was forth coming. MOJ's do occur, police fake evidence or manipulate the truth but even in instances where that happens, the subject isn't always innocent. Would you rather murderers were allowed to roam the streets because of a technicality? If someone states their innocent when they are guilty - don't you hate those people too because they are also liars - liars that could go on to hurt other people.
-
Still doesn't excuse their actions and behaviour. They don't want to know the truth. They've had their lives now and had their wealth and prosperity and success etc. That's the card they played. It wouldn't matter if Bamber dies in prison, these people will go to their graves with tainted reputations. That's the price they are willing to pay for the 31 years of prosperity they gained by burning Jeremy's life. There is always a trade-off.
That's well written Roch but spare a thought for Colin for those of us who think Bamber is guilty as hell..
-
An open mind? Since when you have been open to anything other than the relatives and the police all lied? Both Jane and I have looked at bother sides and that's having an open mind. We have believed much of what was said here until such a time that no evidence was forth coming. MOJ's do occur, police fake evidence or manipulate the truth but even in instances where that happens, the subject isn't always innocent. Would you rather murderers were allowed to roam the streets because of a technicality? If someone states their innocent when they are guilty - don't you hate those people too because they are also liars - liars that could go on to hurt other people.
There are dozens of potential murderers roaming the streets of this country,but they're so cowardly that nobody knows anything until it's too late !!
-
There are dozens of potential murderers roaming the streets of this country,but they're so cowardly that nobody knows anything until it's too late !!
None of which alters the fact that the guilty as hell continue to proclaim their innocence, but that seems to be overlooked as being irrelevant.
-
There are dozens of potential murderers roaming the streets of this country,but they're so cowardly that nobody knows anything until it's too late !!
They aren't actually murderers until they have killed someone but are you happy with them being there? Would you be affronted if police helped the evidence along so secure a conviction?
-
There are dozens of potential murderers roaming the streets of this country,but they're so cowardly that nobody knows anything until it's too late !!
I've lost count of murderers who "wouldn't hurt a fly".. http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-06-16/he-wouldnt-hurt-a-fly-says-brother-of-alleged-mp-killer/
-
I've lost count of murderers who "wouldn't hurt a fly".. http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-06-16/he-wouldnt-hurt-a-fly-says-brother-of-alleged-mp-killer/
I didn't say that !!
-
Why am I being vilified just because I support JB ?
-
Why am I being vilified just because I support JB ?
Eh? Think you have a persecution complex Lookout!
-
Why am I being vilified just because I support JB ?
You're not, but all posters must be open to scrutiny.
-
You're not, but all posters must be open to scrutiny.
I've scrutinised/questioned everything Steve------but not on here. Rather with those who ARE in the know !
-
I've scrutinised/questioned everything Steve------but not on here. Rather with those who ARE in the know !
I rather imagine that Steve may have meant "open to scrutiny" by others? Funny how you appear to make it about you.
-
I rather imagine that Steve may have meant "open to scrutiny" by others? Funny how you appear to make it about you.
Who else are these acidic questions/replies usually meant for ??
-
I've scrutinised/questioned everything Steve------but not on here. Rather with those who ARE in the know !
Who might they be? ;D ;D ;D
-
Who might they be? ;D ;D ;D
You might well laugh--------but I fear it'll be on the other side of your face if you knew !!
I don't say all I know on here,you know.
-
You might well laugh--------but I fear it'll be on the other side of your face if you knew !!
I don't say all I know on here,you know.
Oh here we go - Lookout in the know! ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)
-
Oh here we go - Lookout in the know! ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)
There is intelligence beyond/outside of this forum you know !!
-
There is intelligence beyond/outside of this forum you know !!
Well, there is every little this side of it! ;D ;D ;D
-
Was there a direct entrance into the kitchen from the garage,at WHF ?
-
Was there a direct entrance into the kitchen from the garage,at WHF ?
I would think it highly unlikely. I've never yet known where permission has been granted to knock holes in the walls of listed buildings. But why, with all those outbuildings at their disposal, would they have needed to build a garage?
-
I would think it highly unlikely. I've never yet known where permission has been granted to knock holes in the walls of listed buildings. But why, with all those outbuildings at their disposal, would they have needed to build a garage?
Some places have garages with a door which leads into the kitchen. No need to " knock holes " anywhere. There could have been a lean-to,we don't know.
You'd better ask the relatives because it was RWB who'd mentioned a back door in the garage with a bolt/bolts bashed off it along with a smashed lock.
I just wondered if it led into the kitchen via a door and not a " hole ".
-
Some places have garages with a door which leads into the kitchen. No need to " knock holes " anywhere. There could have been a lean-to,we don't know.
You'd better ask the relatives because it was RWB who'd mentioned a back door in the garage with a bolt/bolts bashed off it along with a smashed lock.
I just wondered if it led into the kitchen via a door and not a " hole ".
I suppose it never occurred to you that the 'hole' I referred to would have had a door in it? I STILL don't think permission would be given for a new building would be abutted to a listed building which necessitated having a hole punched into it to facilitate a door.
-
I suppose it never occurred to you that the 'hole' I referred to would have had a door in it? I STILL don't think permission would be given for a new building would be abutted to a listed building which necessitated having a hole punched into it to facilitate a door.
If a building/alteration,etc is carried out on a listed building it has to be in keeping with the building,i.e. of Georgian architecture in this case and permission has to be granted through the appropriate channels for listed buildings.
-
If a building/alteration,etc is carried out on a listed building it has to be in keeping with the building,i.e. of Georgian architecture in this case and permission has to be granted through the appropriate channels for listed buildings.
That would seem to be a huge expense to go to on a house which wasn't even theirs, don't you think, especially when they had a surfeit of out buildings at their disposal?
-
That would seem to be a huge expense to go to on a house which wasn't even theirs, don't you think, especially when they had a surfeit of out buildings at their disposal?
If it was to their advantage and money was no problem,they'd have done it whether they'd owned the place or not. The outbuildings were already in use.
There's never been a garage mentioned as far as I'm aware.
-
If it was to their advantage and money was no problem,they'd have done it whether they'd owned the place or not. The outbuildings were already in use.
There's never been a garage mentioned as far as I'm aware.
Probably because there wasn't one. I've NEVER seen a garage attached to the side of old farm houses, or even purpose built in the yards -I've known Bentley's to be kept outside along with Land rovers- and unless you've got it from the horse's mouth, how do you know that all the outbuildings were in use.
-
Probably because there wasn't one. I've NEVER seen a garage attached to the side of old farm houses, or even purpose built in the yards -I've known Bentley's to be kept outside along with Land rovers- and unless you've got it from the horse's mouth, how do you know that all the outbuildings were in use.
I was assuming that the outbuildings were used for the crops that were supplied----cattle-feed,borage,potatoes,rape etc,but not in all in the one place.
Daughter nearly bought a Bentley,but went for a Chrysler saloon instead--------cheaper.
-
I was assuming that the outbuildings were used for the crops that were supplied----cattle-feed,borage,potatoes,rape etc,but not in all in the one place.
Daughter nearly bought a Bentley,but went for a Chrysler saloon instead--------cheaper.
The guy I knew used to take cabbages to market in the boot of his.................Bentley, that is. Not Chrysler.
-
The guy I knew used to take cabbages to market in the boot of his.................Bentley, that is. Not Chrysler.
Massive boots in both models.