Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on April 15, 2017, 11:40:AM
-
This thread is an overview at the current moment in time of the circumstances surounding the death of Sheila Caffell inside the farmhouse after armed police stormed the premises, how her blood did end up inside the silencer, and why the prosecution presented the case during the trial in October 1986, and at the subsequent appeal in 2002, that with the silencer fitted onto the end of the rifles barrel that the overall length of the weapon had been too long to enable Sheila to have shot herself with use of it as so configured, and that in any event once shot dead she could not thereafter have removed the silencer and transported it all the way downstairs to conceal it inside the gun cupboard, where David Boutflour later recovered it on 10th August 1985 - since, a dead person cannot perform such activities (we all know this to be true), but these factors do not prove or establish that Jeremy Bamber was or is the killer, for the following reasons (please bear with me)...
-
I proceed on the basis that:-
(1) - a WPC Julia Jeapes, and a PC Brown, both independently of eachother, reported the sighting of what appeared to be a rifle leaning against a first floor window, situated on the red bricked part of the house (this window has been identified as a first floor 'box room window'). The box room in question is located between the main bedroom and the children's bedroom situated on the red brick part of the house)
(2) - Jeremy Bamber did not Shoot his sister, Sheila Jean Caffell, dead inside the farmhouse
(3) - that in countless requests from police using a loud hailler for Sheila to show a sign or give a signal that she was prepared to give herself up and bring the seige to a conclusion that at around 7.15am, someone alive inside the farmhouse placed the rifle (anshuzt rifle) against the first floor box room window, an act designed to signal to police who were surrounding the large farmhouse that Sheila had wanted to give herself up, there and then, thereafter
(4) - that Sheila must have made her way from the box room window where she had put the said weapon to signal her intention at that stage, and that she made her way downstairs into the kitchen under such a flag of truce, only to be confronted by armed police and a struggle took place in the kitchen between Sheila and the first officer trying to get around the opening edge of an internal kitchen door
(5) - That Sheila was still very much alive at the time (and afterwards) the firearm officers entered the farmhouse around 7.30am
(6) - that Sheila had presented the rifle 'she had used' to kill the other victims with at a first floor box room window, as 'a gesture of goodwill', and 'intent' (a 'flag of truce', by any other name) prior to armed officers commencing their approach to enter the farmhouse and bring the seige to an end, in keeping with loud hailer appeals beforehand for her to 'give herself up' and for her to ' show her intent to surrender by ' presenting the said rifle in her possession at any window of the farmhouse of her choosing'
(7) - A log of every 'spoken challenge' made to the occupants of the farmhouse, between 5am and around 7.30am (currently undisclosed) confirms that police were aware that Sheila Caffell was 'still very much alive' inside the farmhouse throughout the aforementioned seige
(8) - that Sheila was the second body (the female) reported to have been found in the kitchen, in addition to the discovery or find, as it were of the body of Neville Bamber in the kitchen upon entry
(9) - that the existence of 'an officers report' regarding 'the shooting incident in the kitchen' is reference to the initial shooting of Sheila Caffell during the entry of armed police into the kitchen, and the fact that cops mistakenly thought she had been killed downstairs in the kitchen, as a result of that 'first shot'...
(10) - that, senior officers, compromising of DCI 'George' Harris, DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, and PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, set off to enter the farmhouse from their original location inside a forward control point situated inside a nearby farm building (a barn), 'unarmed', to enter the premises after 8.10am when it had already been confirmed that 'a further three bodies had been found upstairs making it five dead bodies, in total'
(11) - that PS Adams (Commander of firearm operation at scene between 5am and 8.10am), DCI Clarke, remained at the forward control point, after receiving the 8.10am message, that 'a further three bodies had been found upstairs in the bedrooms' in addition to the two dead bodies found in the kitchen upon entry (from around 7.35am, onward)
(12) - that once DCI 'George' Harris, DCS 'Terry' Gibbons, and PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, entered the kitchen at around 8.15am, they only found one body there this being the body of Nevill Bamber, Sheila's body had disappeared! This caused panic because when these officers left the forward control point to enter the farmhouse, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery had left his weapon with PS Adams, and DCI Clarke at the forward control point. Therefore, upon entering the kitchen and discovering Sheila's body was 'missing', Harris, Gibbons and Montgomery found themselves trapped in the kitchen unarmed with Sheila Caffell on the loose again and potentially armed with a loaded weapon that she was prepared to use
(13) - that Harris, Gibbons, and Montgomery, barrackaded themselves into the kitchen by placing a large wooden chair directly behind the internal kitchen back passageway door as well as pushing the kitchen table across the kitchen floor toward the doorway of a small spiral stairway situated in the corner of the kitchen, with the purpose being to prevent these doors being unexpectedly opened by Sheila Caffell in possession of a gun with intent of shooting them. They also placed a towel, a pair of cotton trousers, and a seat cushion around blood which had pooled on the kitchen floor around the base of a metal coal hod inside which had been placed the head of Neville Bamber to try to restrict his blood spreading further a field on the floor
(14 ) - Montgomery used his police radio to contact PS Adams and DCI Clarke at the forward control point to update them that the firearm operation had suddenly gone pearshaped! A message was subsequently relayed via Montgomery's radio set for DCI 'George' Harris to use the landline in the kitchen to call ACC 'Peter' Simpson at his home address and update him directly of the unexpected turn of events! This request followed a decision requesting the operated to terminate the eavesdrop of the kitchen phone at 8.15 am
(15) - Harris updated Simpson between around 8.15am and 8.30am via use of the kitchen land line phone, regarding the fresh search to relocate and eliminate the threat she poised, culminating in the rediscovery of Sheila Caffells body upon the bed in her parents bedroom in a collapsed state still sporting only one bullet wound in her throat by that stage
(16) - that by the time the police surgeon first saw and pronounced Sheila Caffell as being dead at 8.44am, that her body was 'still resting on the far side of the bed' (not the floor) and that 'she only had what appeared to be a single bullet wound to her throat' by this stage
(17) - that by around 9am PS Adams visited the main bedroom scene and saw Sheila's body upon the bed, with no weapon in her possession, and the bible elswhere on the bedroom floor. Adams and the vast majority of the other firearm officers (with the exception of PI Montgomery, and PS Woodcock who remained present at the farm) then left the scene! This coincided with a number of senior officers looking very closely at the bodies of the victims, including Sheila Caffell, and thus commencing 'informatives', whereby cops tried to fathom out the sequence of events leading up to the five deaths. These 'informatives' lasted in duration for about an hour (between 9 am and 10am), until SOCO (DI 'Ron' Cook, DS 'Neil' Davidson, DC 'David' Hammersley, DC Henderson, PC 'David' Bird, and one other) took control of the various crime scenes inside the kitchen, main bedroom and the children's bedroom! At various stages whilst 'informatives' were being carried out, other key police officers, including DCI 'Taff' Jones, DS 'Stan' Jones, DC 'Mick' Clark, and the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright, arrived at the scene!
(18) - during 'informatives' being conducted around and in the vicinity of the body of Sheila Caffell in the main bedroom, certain officers noted key factors including the fact that (a) her body was laid on top of the bed, (b) that Sheila only had one bullet wound to her throat, (c) that there was no rifle or other weapon present inside the bedroom where her body was located on the bed, (d) that she had sustained the only shot to her throat downstairs in the kitchen and had mistakenly been pronounced as being dead there after being shot by use of a police issue round fired from a police weapon (the shooting would be covered in an officers report into that shooting incident which happened downstairs earlier in the kitchen) (e) upon making her way from the kitchen downstairs from after 8.10am which coincided with real confirmation by armed officers completing a full search of the farmhouse, that two bodies had already been found and located downstairs by 7.37am, onward, and 'a further three bodies (only) had been found and located upstairs', Sheila's body had been relocated upstairs on top of the bed in a collapsed state (8.30am), and verified as being dead by the police surgeon, Dr Craig at 8.44am, with what appeared to be a bullet wound to her throat, thus altering the bodily distribution which originally had been confirmed as two bodies downstairs (7.37am), three bodies upstairs (8.10am), to one body downstairs and four bodies upstairs by 8.30am, (f) that PS Adams had been the Commander of the firearm operation at the scene between 5am and 8.15am, which coincided with the operation inside the farmhouse going pearshaped, as described, (g) at which point PI 'Ivor' Montgomery had assumed Commanders, he being trapped inside the kitchen at the time Sheila's body had gone AWOL
(19) - DCI 'Taff' Jones, DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC 'Mick' Clark, visited the main bedroom of the farmhouse whilst Sheila Caffells body was still laid on top of the bed, bearing only a single bullet entry wound to her throat! At this stage the body of June Bamber was also on top of the bed! Somebody had brought the rifle from its resting place against a first floor 'box room' window and placed in-between both bodies on top of the bed, as confirmed by DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC ' Mick's Clark who told Ann Eaton this when all were present inside Jeremy's cottage that same norning!
(20) - DC 'Mick' Clark, and DS 'Stan' Jones left the scene to go with Jeremy to his cottage from 9 Head Street, Goldhanger, to take his first witness statement (dated, 7 August 1985)
(21) - the bodies of Sheila Caffell and June Bamber! were then moved from on the bed, to the bedroom floor either side of the bed! At this stage Sheila Caffell had only been shot once, a shot which travelled horizontal in fashion across her throat, from left to right (to which the original badly fragmented bullet PV/20 referred). Once June Bambers body was lifted from the bed, cops took three photographs of Sheila's lone body still on the bed. The photographs only show one bullet hole in her throat at that stage, with no rifle on her body! No blood can be seen to be leaking from the corners of her mouth! There was no triangular bloodstain on the front upper right hand of her light blue nightie! There was no bloodied hand print present upon the front lower right of the same!
(22) - the anshuzt rifle brought from the first floor box room window was fitted with a Parker Hale silencer
(23) - the only rifle upstairs was brought from its location leaning against a first floor 'box room window', and placed in position on to Sheila's body at 9.13am for 'gauging purposes' during 'informatives'. This rifle (anshuzt) had not fired the first shot (the piece of the badly fragmented PV/20 bullet recovered from Sheila Caffells neck, during autopsy by Peter Venezis, pathologist) received in the kitchen, but 'this rifle' would in due course, inflict the fatal shot (PV/19, a whole bullet recovered from Sheila Caffells brain by Peter Venezis during the same autopsy) which ultimately killed her off instanteneously!
(24) - senior officers huddled around Sheila Caffells body now on the bedroom floor!
(25) - they were pondering whether it might be possible or not to present the single shot (at that time) as having been inflicted with use of the silencer fitted to the anshuzt rifle, rather than to admit that she had been shot and had been killed by use of a police weapon and one police round (the shooting incident in the kitchen event which later became subject of an 'Officers Report' into the shooting of Sheila Caffell after police entered the kitchen of the farmhouse)
(26) - the anshuzt rifle with silencer attached onto the end of its barrell was duly offered to Sheila Caffells body, police making sure that the fingers of her right hand could reach the trigger mechanism of the rifle! At this stage it became apparent that the barrel of the rifle with its silencer attached virtually eradicated any prospective of it being capable of use at the time the single shot (at that time) had been inflicted! One officer took it upon himself to try to squeeze the additional two inches required to make the rifle so configured into the gun which had fired the shot! He stretched Sheila's arm as far as it would extend whilst at the same time trying to manipulate the muzzle end of the silencer fitted to the guns barrel into position against the solitary bullet wound hole in Sheila Caffells neck! During this time an abrasion mark was created around the bullet entry hole on her throat!
(27) - whilst in the process of trying to make the anshuzt rifle with silencer fit into the gap (distance) between the trigger of the aforementioned weapon and the location of the single bullet wound hole in Sheila's throat, the trigger mechanism of the said rifle got activated and a shot was discharged higher up on Sheila's throat which sent the bullet (PV/19) up through her mouth and which lodged in her brain! As soon as this second wound was inflicted fresh blood started to pour from the corners of her mouth, from the newly inflicted wound, and her left nostril
(28) - no-one had bothered to check the rifle to make sure it was not loaded with a live round
(29) - officers who had been gathered around Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, where shocked and stunned that a safety check had not been carried out and the weapon made safe before it's removal from the first floor box room window on the red brick side of the house, and brought to Sheila's body for the purpose of 'informatives'
(30) - the amount of fresh blood which had instantly poured from Sheila Caffells mouth, nostril and second bullet wound in her throat, caused everyone present to believe that Sheila had not been dead after all despite her death being called twice, once from around 7.37am in the kitchen downstairs, and secondly at 8.44am by the police surgeon, Dr Craig
(31) - the rifle was quickly removed from Sheila's body, and those present tried frantically to keep her alive by laying her in the recovery position upon the right side of her body
(32) - Sheila Caffell died in the main bedroom at precisely 9.13am, when the second shot (bullet PV/19) was received
(33) - once the second 'higher up on the throat shot got inflicted, police found themselves facing an additional dilemma. Now Sheila had two shots on her throat, one fired by a police weapon when cops stormed the kitchen, to which an 'Officers Report' refers (the shooting incident in the kitchen), a second shot which had inadvertently been fired via the anshuzt rifle with a silencer fitted to its barrel! The anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted could not possibly have been responsible for inflicting the first shot across the throat because the distance between the rifles trigger and the muzzle end of the silencer that was fitted to the guns barrel was too long! On the other hand, the anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted had inflicted the second 'higher up on the throat' shot! Senior cops carrying out the informative considered recoil as being a possible solution to the problem cops now faced, but this was rejected because the same gun could not have fired both shots into Sheila's throat
(34) - Sheila's blood got into the silencer as a result of the silencer still being fitted to the barrel end of the anshuzt rifle at the time 'the second higher up on the throat shot got inflicted'
(35) - senior officers found themselves at a cross roads, they had a victim who had been shot twice by two different guns, which excluded the possibility of cops arguing that 'recoil' might account for the two shots! They decided to remove the silencer, and proceed as though there had never been a silencer involved with the family owned anshuzt rifle, so they removed the silencer, and proceeded to stage Sheilas death using the anshuzt rifle minus it's silencer! DS 'Stan' Jones, would leave Jeremy's cottage later that same morning and retrieve the aforementioned silencer and give it to DCI 'Taff' Jones who kept it on his office desk at Witham Police Station and used it as a temporary paper weight!
(36) - once senior officers concluded 'informatives' it was decided by them that the matter would proceed through the Coroner's Court System, and be treated as, 'four murders, and a suicide'
(37) - after returning to the scene at just before dinner time, on that first morning, 'Stan' Jones recovered four exhibits in total, bearing exhibit marks, SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and SBJ/1 (the silencer) these four exhibits, including the silencer were logged in an Essex Police Major Incident Property Register bearing a Crime Reference No. SC/688/85...
(38) - DI 'Ron' Cook, and his team of SOCO (DC Hammersley, DS Davidson, and PC 'David' Bird), had all arrived at the scene by 9.20am, but they were denied access to the various crime scenes inside the farmhouse until after 10 am, by which stage Senior Officers had completed their 'informatives'
(39) - the Coroner's Officer (PC 'Norman' Wright) arrived at the scene at 9.30am. He did not recollect there being any weapon with Sheila's body when he visited the main bedroom. He would later make a statement declaring that the rifle had been removed from the body already by that stage...
(40) - at around 10am, DI 'Ron' Cook, and his team of SOCO commenced their approach to enter the farmhouse, and carry out duties which included photographing the scenes in different parts of the farmhouse, and gathering exhibits! Of particular interest, was that PC 'David' Bird would later recount to the COLP investigators precisely what 'Ron' Cook told him as they strode off into the direction of the premises, ' make sure you get the position of the rifle on the body accurately!
(41) - at the autopsy of Sheila Caffell, performed by Peter Venezis on 7 August 1985, he removed a whole bullet (PV/19) from her brain. He also removed a piece of badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) from the right hand side of her throat. By 20th September 1985 (44 days later) the piece of badly fragment bullet (PV/20) recovered from Sheila Caffells throat by the pathologist Peter Venezis, had grown into a whole bullet, to enable the prosecutions ballistic expert, to conclude that both bullets (PV/19 and PV/20) had been fired from the same anshuzt rifle
(42) - on afternoon of 9 August 1985, DCI 'Taff' Jones, and DS 'Stan' Jones visited Jeremy Bamber at his cottage in Head Street, Goldhanger! They questioned him about whether the silencer was fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle when he last saw it and handled the weapon? He replied, 'no'. Later that same evening, Jones and Jones met Ann Eaton at whf to give her the keys of the farmhouse to her and gave her a tour of the premises! At this time 'Stan' Jones returned the Parker Hale silencer (SBJ/1) to the gun cupboard in the den
(43) - on the following day, David Boutflour recovered the same silencer from the aforementioned gun cupboard, and took it to his sister's (Ann Eaton) house, where it was retained until evening of 12 August 1985, when 'Stan' Jones attended to recollect it on the pretense that he didn't know anything at all about its existence previously! Of course, 'Stan' Jones did know of the silencers existence because on the morning of 7 August 1985 he returned to the scene from Jeremy's cottage to collect it (SBJ/1), then on afternoon of 9 August 1975 both he and DCI 'Taff' Jones had questioned Jeremy about it being fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle when he last saw it before the tragedy, and later that same evening, 'Stan' Jones had returned it to the gun cupboard, where David Boutflour would recover it on 10 August 1985
(44) - upon arrival at his sister's (Ann Eaton) house with the silencer, David Boutflour unsuccessfully tried to unscrew the end cap off the muzzle of the silencer to look inside, but he told COLP investigators that it was too tightly fastened!
(45) - during the three days or so (10th, 11th and 12th August 1985) David Boutflour had used a broken razor blade to scrape off a piece of dried blood from the flat surface on the end of the silencer which he retained because as he would later tell COLP investigators, ' it fascinated' him!
(46) - Glynis Howard examined silencer at Huntingdon Laboratory on 13 August 1985, saying there was insufficient blood for analysis purposes. She handed the silencer back to 'Ron' Cook for fingerprinting
(47) - 'Ron' Cook fingerprinted the silencer by oblique light technique on 15 August 1985, but found no fingerprints
(48) - 'Ron' Cook fingerprinted the silencer by Superglue technique on 23 January 1985, at a police faculty Sandridge
(49) - 'Ron' Cook dismantled silencer and separated it's metal end cap, top washer and the first seven of 17 internal baffle plates, on 29 August 1985, but he reported finding no blood or any dried blood flakes inside. He rebuilt it! Cook photographed this dismantling and rebuilding exercise
(50) - a silencer was added to the list of items submitted to lab' at Huntingdon on 30 August 1985 for examination
(51) - Ann Eaton handed this flake of dried blood / silencer over to DC Oakey on the 11 September 1985
(52) - Flake received at lab' made into a solution so that it could be checked for a presence of individual blood group activity
(53) - a portion of the aforementioned solution was tested on 12 September 1985, producing a positive result for
(54) - a comparison test using a control round test fired via anshuzt rifle was carried out at the lab by ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, which confirmed the crime scene ammunition had been fired in the anshuzt rifle
(55) - David Boutflour contacts police by telephone on 12 September 1985, to tell them that he has found the guns silencer
(56) - a portion of the aforementioned solution was tested on 13 September 1985, producing a positive result for
(57) a comparison test using a control round test fired via anshuzt rifle was carried out at the lab by ballistic ex6ert, Malcom Fletcher, which confirmed the crime scene ammunition had been fired in the anshuzt rifle
(58) - DS Davidson and DS Eastwood fingerprinted the silencer on 14 September 1985
(59) - David Boutflour contacts police (DC Oakey, SOCO) asking them to meet him at whf. Notes taken by DC Oakey, mentions the two locations inside the gun cupboard at the farmhouse where David Boutflour found the silencer
(60 - police photograph scratch marks on the underside and front fascia of the red painted kitchen aga suround at scene on 14 September 1985
(61) - a portion of the aforementioned solution was tested on 18 September 1985, producing a positive result for
(62) - a comparison test using a control round test fired via anshuzt rifle was carried out at the lab by ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, which confirmed the crime scene ammunition had been fired in the anshuzt rifle
(63) - a portion of the aforementioned solution was tested on 19 September 1985, producing a positive result for
(64) - a comparison test using a control round test fired via anshuzt rifle was carried out at the lab by ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, which confirmed the crime scene ammunition had been fired in the anshuzt rifle
(65) - police submitted silencer to lab along with an ammunition box inside which it was found for examination at lab' on 20th September 1985
(66) - prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher takes possession of the batch of 25 crime scene spent cartridge cases, the 25 crime scene bullets recovered from bodies of victims during autopsy, performed over 7 / 8 August 1985, and 29 control rounds exhibit DRH/42. He carries out official test firing of exhibit DRH/42 in the anshuzt rifle on this date (20th September 1985)
(67) - blood from a silencer was tested to see if it was of 'human' Origin', on 20th September 1985, and confirmed as being so, same date!
(68) - silencer examined at lab' on 25th September 1985, and red paint particles noticed in knurl of circumference of its end cap (for first time)
(69) - prosecutions ballistic expert (Fletcher) conducts further official test firing of control ammunition (DRH/42) with anshuzt rifle (DRH/15) on 25 September 1985
(70) - prosecutions ballistic expert (Fletcher) conducts further official test firing of control ammunition (DRH/42) with anshuzt rifle (DRH/15) on 2 October 1985
(71) - ingrained paint noticed for first time after re-examination of silencer on 25 September 1985, confirmed as originating from red painted Aga suround in kitchen at whf (confirmed at lab' on 2nd October 1975)
-
The evidence that cops Shot Sheila Caffell downstairs in the kitchen and mistakenly thought she had been killed, before her body becoming displaced upstairs on top of the bed, then moved to the bedroom floor after being officially pronounced dead by police surgeon, Dr Craig at 8.44am she only sporting what appeared to be a gunshot wound to her throat by that stage, that the second shot she sustained was inflicted after 8.44am once her body was removed to the bedroom floor and the only rifle present upstairs which was resting at a first floor box room window where it had remained since around 7.15am, was brought to Sheila's body for gauging purposes and 'informatives' without it being checked or made safe!
-
The blood which purported to come from inside the silencer belonged exclusively to Sheila Caffell!
-
The blood which purported to come from inside the silencer belonged exclusively to Sheila Caffell!
It is the manner with which it was said to have got there, that is very misleading!
-
Red paint found ingrained into the knurl end of the silencers end cap got there because at one time or another, the silencer was brought into contact with the aga suround
-
Sheila Caffell was still alive after the anshuzt rifle appeared for the first time at the first floor box room window at around 7.15am
-
Cops shot Sheila in the kitchen upon entry despite knowing that she was acting under a truce of white flag (she had placed rifle at box room window to signal to firearm officers that she was ready to give herself up)!
-
Cops shot Sheila in the kitchen upon entry despite knowing that she was acting under a truce of white flag (she had placed rifle at box room window to signal to firearm officers that she was ready to give herself up)!
At the time they shot Sheila in the kitchen cops did not know that any of the other victims had even been shot let alone killed!
-
Cops made a blunder by claiming that when shot by them in the kitchen (7.37am) that she had been killed!
-
Cops made a blunder by claiming that when shot by them in the kitchen (7.37am) that she had been killed!
No weapon was present in the kitchen which could have inflicted the first shot across her throat (7.37am) other than a police weapon!
-
No weapon was present in the kitchen which could have inflicted the first shot across her throat (7.37am) other than a police weapon!
Whilst cops were making the blunder by pronouncing Sheila as the second dead body in the kitchen (7.37am onward), the anshuzt rifle was still resting at the first floor box room window where Sheila had placed it under a flag of truce (7.15am, onward)
-
Cops shot a delusional unarmed Sheila Caffell (7.37am) who had set the signal by placing the anshuzt rifle at the first floor box room window (7.15am), without knowing that any of the other victims had already been shot let alone killed!
-
The occupants of CA07 were responsible for relaying the key information by police radio from the scene to the control room at 7.37am, 7.38am and 8.10am, information which contradicts the official line taken by Essex police that there was only one body found downstairs in the kitchen, and four bodies found upstairs in the bedrooms! According to the evidence, CA07 had two bodies found in kitchen as per their 7.37am, and 7.38am messages, and a further three bodies found upstairs by 8.10am! The situation is not helped by a failure of the person or persons responsible for providing the information to CA07 coming forward to give an explanation regarding what they told, or was said, to CA07, causing them to relay such information whilst they themselves communicated with the control room back in Chelmsford! Similarly, the person, or persons who received these key timed messages (7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am) from CA07 are also absent with their views on the same matters!
Why has everyone involved in these processes (reporting of body count downstairs in kitchen, and upstairs in bedrooms between 7.37am and 8.10am) remained silent regarding this considering the implication and inferences to be drawn pointing toward the displacement of a female body from the vicinity of the downstairs kitchen after 8.10am, into the main bedroom upstairs, thereafter? How did the body count of victims alter from being two bodies downstairs and a further three bodies upstairs between 7.37am and 8.10am, into the contradictory scenario by 8.44am (police surgeon, Dr Craig, pronounced Sheila dead, her body laid on the far side of the bed, with what appeared to be an entry wound to her throat) that by that stage there was only one body downstairs in the kitchen, the other four bodies were upstairs in the bedrooms? Everybody involved in the reporting of the facts known between 7.37am and 8.10am have remained tight lipped and they all refuse to offer an explanation for how the former scenario involving body counts downstairs and upstairs became 'altered'!
It's as though all these different people involved in the reporting of there being two bodies downstairs and three bodies found upstairs by 8.10am, have been prevented from speaking out by some action or other! But what sort of action would be deemed powerful enough to prevent any of these characters from speaking out on how the body count altered downstairs and upstairs, after 8.10am, from two bodies found downstairs, three bodies found upstairs, into one body downstairs, four bodies upstairs, thereafter?
I have identified what that action was, and is...
-
The occupants of CA07 were responsible for relaying the key information by police radio from the scene to the control room at 7.37am, 7.38am and 8.10am, information which contradicts the official line taken by Essex police that there was only one body found downstairs in the kitchen, and four bodies found upstairs in the bedrooms! According to the evidence, CA07 had two bodies found in kitchen as per their 7.37am, and 7.38am messages, and a further three bodies found upstairs by 8.10am! The situation is not helped by a failure of the person or persons responsible for providing the information to CA07 coming forward to give an explanation regarding what they told, or was said, to CA07, causing them to relay such information whilst they themselves communicated with the control room back in Chelmsford! Similarly, the person, or persons who received these key timed messages (7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am) from CA07 are also absent with their views on the same matters!
Why has everyone involved in these processes (reporting of body count downstairs in kitchen, and upstairs in bedrooms between 7.37am and 8.10am) remained silent regarding this considering the implication and inferences to be drawn pointing toward the displacement of a female body from the vicinity of the downstairs kitchen after 8.10am, into the main bedroom upstairs, thereafter? How did the body count of victims alter from being two bodies downstairs and a further three bodies upstairs between 7.37am and 8.10am, into the contradictory scenario by 8.44am (police surgeon, Dr Craig, pronounced Sheila dead, her body laid on the far side of the bed, with what appeared to be an entry wound to her throat) that by that stage there was only one body downstairs in the kitchen, the other four bodies were upstairs in the bedrooms? Everybody involved in the reporting of the facts known between 7.37am and 8.10am have remained tight lipped and they all refuse to offer an explanation for how the former scenario involving body counts downstairs and upstairs became 'altered'!
It's as though all these different people involved in the reporting of there being two bodies downstairs and three bodies found upstairs by 8.10am, have been prevented from speaking out by some action or other! But what sort of action would be deemed powerful enough to prevent any of these characters from speaking out on how the body count altered downstairs and upstairs, after 8.10am, from two bodies found downstairs, three bodies found upstairs, into one body downstairs, four bodies upstairs, thereafter?
I have identified what that action was, and is...
Members of the raid team signed witness statements which had been prepared for them by another officer, claiming that upon entry to the farmhouse they found Neville Bambers body downstairs in the kitchen, and that after making their way upstairs, they found June Bambers body on the main bedroom floor at the doorway, and Sheila's body on the bedroom floor on the far side of the bed in possession of the anshuzt rifle, she having been already shot twice! That the two child victims were found in another bedroom close by!
-
By adopting this approach it avoided cops having to explain the circumstances regarding the displacement of a female body from downstairs to upstairs after 8.10am! It also avoided them explaining how the rifle which had been seen resting against a first floor box room window at around 7.15am, and managed to end up in possession of Sheila Caffell, if she had already been dead from as long ago as say 3am, or thereabouts!
-
The raid team did not only find the body of Neville Bamber downstairs in the kitchen, they were confronted by Sheila Caffell and she got shot in a struggle in the kitchen. Her body remained downstairs until 8.10am! The raid team did not find four bodies, including Sheila's upstairs in the bedrooms, with Sheila in possession of the anshuzt rifle, already dead she having already been shot twice! But by claiming these things in witness statements prepared for them by another, it cut out the need give a satisfactory explanation surrounding the displacement of Sheila's body bearing one bullet wound to the neck, from the kitchen to the main bedroom upstairs, where she ended up receiving a second shot to the neck! Adopting this approach meant that cops didn't have to give a public explanation concerning how Sheila was shot downstairs in the kitchen whilst the rifle supposedly used to shoot her was still resting against the first floor bedroom window, and why the piece of badly fragmented bullet subject of that first shot (the original PV/20 exhibit) could have been fired through a different weapon altogether, a weapon belonging to the police!
-
By introducing the witness statement version of events, where it is claimed cops only found one body downstairs in the kitchen, and the other four bodies upstairs in the bedrooms, it avoided the cops having to explain how at some stage after 8.10am the anshuzt rifle had got from its resting place at a first floor box room window, onto Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor, and she receive the second shot (bullet PV/19) after 8.10am?
-
I agree with you totally on this Mike, how many people in are involved in this cover up? Obviously people at the farm and others at EP headquarters. I cannot believe that this has been covered up for over 30 years without somebody spilling the beans.
-
I agree with you totally on this Mike, how many people in are involved in this cover up? Obviously people at the farm and others at EP headquarters. I cannot believe that this has been covered up for over 30 years without somebody spilling the beans.
Which makes it all the more likely that there isn't a cover up. In this "cast of thousands" ALL allegedly 'in the know' how could it possibly have been guaranteed that each and every one would keep their mouths shut? People enjoy a drink. It helps to relax them. When something weighs heavily they might take an extra drink -or three- and when they drink, they tend to let their tongues run away with them, Others have ears.
Secrets are easier to contain when we're surrounded by others who hold the same secret -we become each other's support group- but when we become separated from the group, ie they die, they move away, secrets become harder to hold onto. IF what you're suggesting is true, it MAY mean that, even if the confession was overheard, all those who have heard it, believe it doesn't matter, as Jeremy is guilty, anyway. A 'cover up' doesn't make a guilty man innocent.
-
I agree with you totally on this Mike, how many people in are involved in this cover up? Obviously people at the farm and others at EP headquarters. I cannot believe that this has been covered up for over 30 years without somebody spilling the beans.
How do you quantify saying or asking, 'How many were involved in the cover up'?
I choose to approach the matter differently by believing that not everybody was knowingly involved in all the cover up from start to finish, with everybody knowing everything about the overall cover up! To my mind and my way of thinking, I believe different persons were only privy to some features or aspects of the overall cover up! A bit like them all being a jigsaw piece in a massive puzzle, some people only holding one piece of the jigsaw, whilst others had two or more pieces, some pieces which fitted other parts of the jigsaw pieces others with much less involvement in the cover up! I have seen this sort of thing in so many cases, where some witnesses believe what they have said in a witness statement to be the absolute truth, because they got caught up in something someone else wanted them to know, or see! In this particular matter, I'm not saying that the three occupants in CA07 were physically involved in the shootings of Sheila Caffell, they didn't witness the struggle in the kitchen, or the fact that Sheila got shot in the kitchen by a police weapon and one round of police ammunition! No, I'm not saying that at all! But the occupants of CA07 knew that Sheila was believed to have been killed downstairs in the kitchen! This must be true otherwise why would CA07 be passing such key messages at 7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am to the control room?
-
I don't think it's a case of there being tens and tens, or hundreds, or a thousand or more different people all knowingly being involved in a massive cover up! A dozen, or more is likely to be the real figure of those totally involved in the cover up, from start to finish, many of them members of an elite firearms group, along with key senior officers, and to a lesser but still a significant extent, the role SOCO played in misrepresenting the crime scene in photographic evidence!
-
Matters were not helped along by the decision to originally treat these deaths as a Coroner Court case, rather than a Criminal Court case! It's a well known fact that cops can hide the truth in cases which get dealt with in a Coroner's court, like in the original Hillsboro' cover up! A month down the road, when it changed into five murders, then cops had dug a hole too deep for them to climb back out of with any degree of credibility! Their position hampered by pressure being placed on them by the relatives!!
-
Once the nature of the investigation changed (SC/786/85) cops were restricted in the way they got the truth out, and it would be fair to say, they had to build their case around where PC 'David' Bird had photographed the bodies Insitu from after 10 am on the first morning of the investigation!
-
Once the nature of the investigation changed (SC/786/85) cops were restricted in the way they got the truth out, and it would be fair to say, they had to build their case around where PC 'David' Bird had photographed the bodies Insitu from after 10 am on the first morning of the investigation!
The position of the victims bodies as shown in PC Birds crime scene photographs, was at odds with the location and body count (two bodies downstairs, three bodies upstairs) as per the police radio log messages between 7.37am and 8.10am! The position of the anshuzt rifle with its silencer removed on Sheila's body after 10am, contradicts the sighting of the said rifle at a first floor box room window from 7.15am, onwards...
-
I agree with you totally on this Mike, how many people in are involved in this cover up? Obviously people at the farm and others at EP headquarters. I cannot believe that this has been covered up for over 30 years without somebody spilling the beans.
I think you have just contradicted and answered your own thoughts with this statement.
-
The handwritten police logs containing this key evidence of two bodies found in kitchen upon entry (7.37am, 7.38am) and a further three bodies found upstairs (8.10am) making five dead in total was not disclosed to the defence during, or beforehand, the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial! Neither were the witness statement contents of WPC Jeapes and PC Brown which deals with the rifle they saw at the box room window prior to the raid team commencing its approach to enter the farmhouse with a view to bringing the seige to a conclusion...
-
I think you have just contradicted and answered your own thoughtswith this statement.
100% right with minimum of words, Justice ;D
-
With respect to the guilter reasoning on this, there have been other massive cover ups involving police corruption that have gone on for 25 years.
I don't think you could have the info provided in Shaw's account - without people having spilled the beans. I do not believe Shaw is Mike Tesko.
The CT have also claimed that somebody came forward about the silencer and expressed remorse.
It is also true that physical evidence existed on the morning of the crime, strongly indicating Sheila was the murderer. It was recorded and continues to exist as such. Therefore in order for there not to have been a cover up - this evidence would have to not exist or be recorded in the first place.
-
With respect to the guilter reasoning on this, there have been other massive cover ups involving police corruption that have gone on for 25 years.
I don't think you could have the info provided in Shaw's account - without people having spilled the beans. I do not believe Shaw is Mike Tesko.
The CT have also claimed that somebody came forward about the silencer and expressed remorse.
It is also true that physical evidence existed on the morning of the crime, strongly indicating Sheila was the murderer. It was recorded and continues to exist as such. Therefore in order for their not to have been a cover up - this evidence would have to not exist or be recorded in the first place.
Let's just have a rethink on your last paragraph, Roch. It's HIGHLY likely that the 'evidence' from the first morning was coloured by everything Jeremy -and ONLY Jeremy- had told them ie they made it fit what they believed they knew. Which isn't to say that what they believed they knew was correct.
-
Let's just have a rethink on your last paragraph, Roch. It's HIGHLY likely that the 'evidence' from the first morning was coloured by everything Jeremy -and ONLY Jeremy- had told them ie they made it fit what they believed they knew. Which isn't to say that what they believed they knew was correct.
Hi Jane. Firstly, I believe this is a myth: that was born out of which existing testimony, the police decided they could make use of once Mike Ainsley took over.
The evidence I refer to could not be coloured as you put it. It is not that type of evidence.
-
With respect to the guilter reasoning on this, there have been other massive cover ups involving police corruption that have gone on for 25 years.
I don't think you could have the info provided in Shaw's account - without people having spilled the beans. I do not believe Shaw is Mike Tesko.
The CT have also claimed that somebody came forward about the silencer and expressed remorse.
It is also true that physical evidence existed on the morning of the crime, strongly indicating Sheila was the murderer. It was recorded and continues to exist as such. Therefore in order for there not to have been a cover up - this evidence would have to not exist or be recorded in the first place.
I do agree on police cover ups and I do believe that back then once the senior police officer is focused on one line of investigation it's hard to move his stance, take Oldfield in the Ripper investigation he was gone on the geordie accent, even though other officers was telling him to dismiss this theory and if he had listened it could have saved others.
But what are we led to believe about the cover up, was it one person and the family (impossible) was it a few senior police and the family, was it every police officer who said anything negative about Bamber, was it Julie Mugford, was it forensics or M15 coupled with Free Masons or was it drug related. Did Sheila lay on the floor and pretend to be dead in the kitchen then jump up and run upstairs and shoot herself, or did the police shoot her in the kitchen then upstairs again by accident then cover up their own mistake and blame Bamber. Or was it simply a mistake by the police who were led to believe it was murder suicide and were led by someone like Oldfield who didn't like being proved wrong and made assumptions before forensics and lines of enquiry had finished? I do believe the killer, like the Ripper and Bamber, were staring the police in the face.
-
The police didn't change stance. Thread created.
Stan Jones, Miller, Bews etc believed Bamber was guilty from the beginning. Taff Jones refused to budge & was taken off heading the case.
The media just reported it as murder/suicide on the day of the massacre.
Once the forensic & circumstantial evidence had been processed & Julie came forward, Bamber was arrested a month after the massacre. This does not seem like a long time considering it was a 5x murder.
-
Someone posted that Taff Jones died in March 1986. So had over 6 months to let the media or higher senior police know that Sheila was guilty. And why.
However he kept quiet for 6 months & accepted being taken off heading the case & the change of direction.
-
I don't agree with the OS that Bamber was framed because the police shot Sheila.
A month after the massacre no one was accusing the police of shooting Sheila. Espescially Bamber.
As said, the police had simply processed the forensic & circumstantial evidence. And Julie had come forward.
-
The police didn't change stance. Thread created.
Stan Jones, Miller, Bews etc believed Bamber was guilty from the beginning. Taff Jones refused to budge & was taken off heading the case.
Why do you continue to post BS?
-
I do agree on police cover ups and I do believe that back then once the senior police officer is focused on one line of investigation it's hard to move his stance, take Oldfield in the Ripper investigation he was gone on the geordie accent, even though other officers was telling him to dismiss this theory and if he had listened it could have saved others.
But what are we led to believe about the cover up, was it one person and the family (impossible) was it a few senior police and the family, was it every police officer who said anything negative about Bamber, was it Julie Mugford, was it forensics or M15 coupled with Free Masons or was it drug related. Did Sheila lay on the floor and pretend to be dead in the kitchen then jump up and run upstairs and shoot herself, or did the police shoot her in the kitchen then upstairs again by accident then cover up their own mistake and blame Bamber. Or was it simply a mistake by the police who were led to believe it was murder suicide and were led by someone like Oldfield who didn't like being proved wrong and made assumptions before forensics and lines of enquiry had finished? I do believe the killer, like the Ripper and Bamber, were staring the police in the face.
I think you make some good points here.
I think a small group of officers were 'sympathetic' to the relatives and undermined DCI Jones. This did not initially contain Miller - as he expressed "disgust" at the relatives insinuations. Didn't Stan Jones also initially challenge Ann Eaton, regarding the prospect of 'sending an innocent man to prison'?
Once the pressures to investigate Bamber were created by ACC Simpson - officers simply jumped ship to what was required. Some stayed silent - others actively took part (perhaps this speaks volumes about individual characters and their levels of integrity - or lack of it).
Why Simpson decided to change? Perhaps if EP retain control of the case - it gives them the opportunity to continue to cover what happened in the farmhouse and allows them control over the available original evidence. They have a window of opportunity to manipulate and hide evidence. Once relatives go to press or a higher body than EP top brass, external queries could be directed towards EP. There would have have been the spectre of an outside agency or police force discovering the original evidence - bringing in to question all of the orginal decisions made by Simpson, Harris, Jones etc.?
I think this is where the suggestion comes from - that EP probably wanted the prosecution to fail - while simultaneously appeasing the relatives - that everything possible was done to achieve a conviction.
I also find it intereting about what you suggest may have happened with Sheila. I once suggested that and a former member (current member of red forum) described my scenario mockingly as 'Sheila playing possum'. I've wondered about it because it aids in the defence suggestion she made her way upstairs. It does not explain though, how or why police regarded her as "dead" and a "suicide" on entry to the kitchen - as she would in this scenaio have no obvious wounds.
-
Why do you continue to post BS?
Good point.
-
Mike,do you know the true identity of " David Shaw " as this I believe is a pseudonym ? If so and you don't want to disclose it,I'll understand.
-
I think you make some good points here.
I think a small group of officers were 'sympathetic' to the relatives and undermined DCI Jones. This did not initially contain Miller - as he expressed "disgust" at the relatives insinuations. Didn't Stan Jones also initially challenge Ann Eaton, regarding the prospect of 'sending an innocent man to prison'?
Once the pressures to investigate Bamber were created by ACC Simpson - officers simply jumped ship to what was required. Some stayed silent - others actively took part (perhaps this speaks volumes about individual characters and their levels of integrity - or lack of it).
Why Simpson decided to change? Perhaps if EP retain control of the case - it gives them the opportunity to continue to cover what happened in the farmhouse and allows them control over the available original evidence. They have a window of opportunity to manipulate and hide evidence. Once relatives go to press or a higher body then EP top brass, external queries could be directed towards EP. There would have have been the spectre of an outside agency or police force discovering the original evidence - bringing in to question all of the orginal decisions made by Simpson, Harris, Jones etc.?
I think this is where the suggestion comes from - that EP probably wanted the prosecution to fail - while simultaneously appeasing the relatives - that everything possible was done to achieve a conviction.
I also find it intereting about what you suggest may have happened with Sheila. I once suggested that and a former member and member (current member of red forum) described my scenario mockingly as 'Sheila playing possum'. I've wondered about it because it aids in the defence suggestion she made her way upstairs. It does not explain though, how or why police regarded her as "dead" and a "suicide" on entry to the kitchen - as she would in this scenaio have no obvious wounds.
A small group of officers were sympathetic to the relatives and not bothered about what went on at the farmhouse at that point? They didn't close ranks to stop top brass finding out about this 'thing'? Some even jumped ship but it still managed to hit top brass? So is this conspiracy with just a few officers or at the heart of EP as a whole - it's rather confusing. Also, if they wanted the evidence to fail, why include a blood filled silencer which if discovered would mean far more than something that happened at the farmhouse. None of this rings true for me.
-
Why do you continue to post BS?
Shouldn't you be concentrating on you're BS 5th scenario attempt ? Complete with pretty diagrams. Mind you you've only been on it for 5 months.
At least you tried in you're 4 previous failures. Roch's scenario is just 'Sheila shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'.
Anyway. The police didn't change stance. They just arrested Bamber after one month. But feel free to be a conspiracy theorist.
-
Shouldn't you be concentrating on you're BS 5th scenario attempt ? Complete with pretty diagrams. Mind you you've only been on it for 5 months.
At least you tried in you're 4 previous failures. Roch's scenario is 'Sheila shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'.
Anyway. The police didn't change stance. They just arrested Bamber after one month.
Hahaha Adam David must be smarter than me I have been on mine for 4 years hehehe
-
Hahaha Adam David must be smarter than me I have been on my for 4 years hehehe
Everyone is awaiting you're scenario which was due on Saturday. But better late than never.
It does not have to include diagrams. It just has to be plausible.
The last two scenarios from Buddy & Lucy had to be dismissed. No one believes Nevill rang Bamber after being shot 4 times & no one believes a fully fit Nevill fought Sheila & lost.
Hopefully you're scenario will assist everyone.
-
Mike,do you know the true identity of " David Shaw " as this I believe is a pseudonym ? If so and you don't want to disclose it,I'll understand.
Hi lookout
David Shaw is elusive I have searched for him and can only find a Sports writer in Australia. I am not saying for one moment he does not exist he may have written one book then drifted into the night :)
-
Everyone is awaiting you're scenario which was due on Saturday. But better late than never.
It does not have to include diagrams. It just has to be plausible.
The last two scenarios from Buddy & Lucy had to be dismissed. No one believes Nevill rang Bamber after being shot 4 times & no one believes a fully fit Nevill fought Sheila & lost.
Hopefully you're scenario will assist everyone.
Adam my scenario is the best and it could change your stance on this case and you will be posting as JB innocent. Be patient a wee bit longer it is nearly finished. I am busy just now researching happenings from 1745 this will be ongoing so will set it aside and get back to my Sheila scenario.
-
I don't agree with the OS that Bamber was framed because the police shot Sheila.
A month after the massacre no one was accusing the police of shooting Sheila. Espescially Bamber.
As said, the police had simply processed the forensic & circumstantial evidence. And Julie had come forward.
Adam please remind me what is the forensic evidence you refer to I have forgot :'(
-
Adam my scenario is the best and it could change your stance on this case and you will be posting as JB innocent. Be patient a wee bit longer it is nearly finished. I am busy just now researching happenings from 1745 this will be ongoing so will set it aside and get back to my Sheila scenario.
I am pleased you're scenario will be the best. There is already several plausible Bamber scenarios which match the crime scene. But no luck with Sheila.
Some supporters or former supporters refuse to submit one. Others post very brief ones such as 'by shooting them' or 'she shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'.
More detailed ones have had to be dismissed & David is now on his 5th attempt which has so far taken 5 months.
-
Adam please remind me what is the forensic evidence you refer to I have forgot :'(
It is in the 'Forensic Evidence Library'.
-
A small group of officers were sympathetic to the relatives and not bothered about what went on at the farmhouse at that point? They didn't close ranks to stop top brass finding out about this 'thing'? Some even jumped ship but it still managed to hit top brass? So is this conspiracy with just a few officers or at the heart of EP as a whole - it's rather confusing. Also, if they wanted the evidence to fail, why include a blood filled silencer which if discovered would mean far more than something that happened at the farmhouse. None of this rings true for me.
You might have misunderstood my post. The top brass as far up as Simpson already know what happened in the farmhouse - i.e. Harris / Simpson. So there would be no need for more junior officers to close ranks to prevent top brass from finding out.
I dont know what you mean about officers jumping ship and hitting top brass?
I think people concentrate too much on who is at the 'heart' of any conspiracy.
There are probably officers who knew exactly what happened in the farmhouse - who expressed concerns upon being shown videos of crime scene photos - but who were not prepared to take it any further than that. It was not these officers' decison to prosecute JB.
There are some investigative officers who knew what happened and it's been alleged other officers were not privy to the same level of knowledge at the outset. Some officers arrived later than others. Some officers were only required in a certain aspect of the case and will have concentrated on their duties. Some officers will have viewed the crime scene close up while others enerting the farmhouse may have glanced without entering in to any detailed study.
Traditionally - EP have managed the case in a defensive manner i.e. Jeremy Bamber was convicted in a court of law - Jeremy Bamber has had access to the appeals process - Enquiries have not uncovered anything to suggest the conviction is wrong etc etc etc. In that sense the conspiracy is wider.
-
You might have misunderstood my post. The top brass as far up as Simpson already know what happened in the farmhouse - i.e. Harris / Simpson. So there would be no need for more junior officers to close ranks to prevent top brass from finding out.
I dont know what you mean about officers jumping ship and hitting top brass?
I think people concentrate too much on who is at the 'heart' of any conspiracy.
There are probably officers who knew exactly what happened in the farmhouse - who expressed concerns upon being shown videos of crime scene photos - but who were not prepared to take it any further than that. It was not these officers' decison to prosecute JB.
There are some investigative officers who knew what happened and it's been alleged other officers were not privy to the same level of knowledge at the outset. Some officers arrived later than others. Some officers were only required in a certain aspect of the case and will have concentrated on their duties. Some officers will have viewed the crime scene close up while others enerting the farmhouse may have glanced without entering in to any detailed study.
Traditionally - EP have managed the case in a defensive manner i.e. Jeremy Bamber was convicted in a court of law - Jeremy Bamber has had access to the appeals process - Enquiries have not uncovered anything to suggest the conviction is wrong etc etc etc. In that sense the conspiracy is wider.
News travels very fast, we are led to believe that someone from the police shot Sheila while other police officers were in attendance, so from day one when it would not have mattered if the police shot the killer, easy to get out of or cover up, SHE CAME AT US WITH a gun, police shoot dead women who murdered her family, hero police shoot dead women who massacred her family EASY PEASY.
Without any input from the family or anyone else they decided to change it to a suicide, it's easy, let's stage it so it looks like Sheila shot herself twice shall we. So they went from police covering up shooting Sheila to Sheila shooting herself twice and When they couldn't get away with this they had another idea, lets frame Bamber and everyone associated with the police went along with it or couldn't be bothered?
-
News travels very fast, we are led to believe that someone from the police shot Sheila while other police officers were in attendance, so from day one when it would not have mattered if the police shot the killer, easy to get out of or cover up, SHE CAME AT US WITH a gun, police shoot dead women who murdered her family, hero police shoot dead women who massacred her family EASY PEASY.
Without any input from the family or anyone else they decided to change it to a suicide, it's easy, let's stage it so it looks like Sheila shot herself twice shall we. So they went from police covering up shooting Sheila to Sheila shooting herself twice and When they couldn't get away with this they had another idea, lets frame Bamber and everyone associated with the police went along with it or couldn't be bothered?
What has been suggested though Justice - is that an officer accidentally shot her with the anshutz (or another rifle). Not a police weapon. Not really easy to explain. Or perhaps it might have been possible to explain, if police had decided to do so from the outset.
-
Adam my scenario is the best and it could change your stance on this case and you will be posting as JB innocent. Be patient a wee bit longer it is nearly finished. I am busy just now researching happenings from 1745 this will be ongoing so will set it aside and get back to my Sheila scenario.
Hopefully Susan will provide her scenario shortly. It was due on Saturday but didn't arrive, without an explanation. Which was disappointing. No future date has been given which again is disappointing.
Not sure why the time 17.45am is being investigated. Sheila committed the massacre between 3.10am/3.36am - 3.48am
-
Susan's scenario could be the last chance after Buddy's & Lucy's scenario's this month were dismissed. It will indeed need to be 'the best'
There is no way Nugs or Lookout will ever provide one. I've no confidence David's 5th attempt he's been working on for 5 months will be sufficient as the other four were so appalling. Mike's not going to elaborate from 'by shooting them' & Roch's not going to elaborate from 'Sheila shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'.
-
You might have misunderstood my post. The top brass as far up as Simpson already know what happened in the farmhouse - i.e. Harris / Simpson. So there would be no need for more junior officers to close ranks to prevent top brass from finding out.
I dont know what you mean about officers jumping ship and hitting top brass?
I think people concentrate too much on who is at the 'heart' of any conspiracy.
There are probably officers who knew exactly what happened in the farmhouse - who expressed concerns upon being shown videos of crime scene photos - but who were not prepared to take it any further than that. It was not these officers' decison to prosecute JB.
There are some investigative officers who knew what happened and it's been alleged other officers were not privy to the same level of knowledge at the outset. Some officers arrived later than others. Some officers were only required in a certain aspect of the case and will have concentrated on their duties. Some officers will have viewed the crime scene close up while others enerting the farmhouse may have glanced without entering in to any detailed study.
Traditionally - EP have managed the case in a defensive manner i.e. Jeremy Bamber was convicted in a court of law - Jeremy Bamber has had access to the appeals process - Enquiries have not uncovered anything to suggest the conviction is wrong etc etc etc. In that sense the conspiracy is wider.
The comment about jumping ship came from you, not sure what you meant by it?
I don't think it mattered what weapon was used to shoot Sheila, if there was a struggle then it's quite easy to see how she might have been shot. I don't think this would warrant any kind of cover up I don't but this as a theory at all.
-
What has been suggested though Justice - is that an officer accidentally shot her with the anshutz (or another rifle). Not a police weapon. Not really easy to explain. Or perhaps it might have been possible to explain, if police had decided to do so from the outset.
The bloodstains on her nightie show that both wounds were inflicted while Sheila was sitting upwards.
Another big problem for this theory is the trajectories as Sheila would be lying flat.
The whole theory originates from Dr Craig being incompetent and not doing his job properly.
-
The comment about jumping ship came from you, not sure what you meant by it?
I don't think it mattered what weapon was used to shoot Sheila, if there was a struggle then it's quite easy to see how she might have been shot. I don't think this would warrant any kind of cover up I don't but this as a theory at all.
Yeah, I meant simply that officers went along with the change in direction, on account of it being the wishes of their second in command (of the force).
I think we will have to wait and see if anything else is put forward to advance the theory that the police were responsible in some way for either shot, whether as part of a struggle or by accident. Officially JB has always sought to argue that Sheila shot her self twice. MT claimed that Jeremy took this line because it was deemed to be the 'path of least resistance' regarding EP / authorities.
-
Yeah, I meant simply that officers went along with the change in direction, on account of it being the wishes of their second in command (of the force).
I think we will have to wait and see if anything else is put forward to advance the theory that the police were responsible in some way for either shot, whether as part of a struggle or by accident. Officially JB has always sought to argue that Sheila shot her self twice. MT claimed that Jeremy took this line because it was deemed to be the 'path of least resistance' regarding EP / authorities.
Well, Jeremy said that he doesn't hole with MT's theories because he 'speculates' too much. If there were any truth in the police shooting Sheila, Jeremy would be more clued up than most.
-
The bloodstains on her nightie show that both wounds were inflicted while Sheila was sitting upwards.
Another big problem for this theory is the trajectories as Sheila would be lying flat.
The whole theory originates from Dr Craig being incompetent and not doing his job properly.
Can you demonstrate 100% that both shots can only have been received while she was sitting upwards? No pressure like :))
-
Can you demonstrate 100% that both shots can only have been received while she was sitting upwards? No pressure like :))
COA section 45.
Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries. After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back.
We only have photos of the nightdress in the crime scene photos. Its rather scrunched up but if you look closely can see two distinct streams of blood running parallel to the wounds.
Then we have the blood stain on Sheila's neck.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7805.msg369805.html#msg369805 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7805.msg369805.html#msg369805)
-
COA section 45.
Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries. After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back.
We only have photos of the nightdress in the crime scene photos. Its rather scrunched up but if you look closely can see two distinct streams of blood running parallel to the wounds.
Then we have the blood stain on Sheila's neck.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7805.msg369805.html#msg369805 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7805.msg369805.html#msg369805)
It's a pity we cant sit the figure on the left up - so as to see what it looks like regarding angles / trajectories.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4464;image)
-
It's a pity we cant sit the figure on the left up - so as to see what it looks like regarding angles / trajectories.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4464;image)
That can be done in 3D! ;D
-
Jeremy Bamber was / is the victim of a conspiracy to make him the killer! There is no scientific, Ballistic, or exhibited item which cannot be explained away satisfactorily, that makes him the stand out killer in this case! For example, Sheila's blood inside the silencer - it got there when cops brought the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window to Sheila's body on the bedroom floor. At this time the anshuzt rifle was fitted with the said silencer! After the weapon so configured was presented to Sheila's body as part of police 'informatives' the second fatal shot was received under the chin with the length of the weapon resting on top of her body, with muzzle of silencer in contact with the flesh around the chin area. Sheila's blood got into the silencer at that stage by a process of backspatter! The time of the second shot (bullet PV/19) occurred at exactly 9.13am that morning. The bullet which killed her at this moment was fired via the family owned anshuzt rifle fitted with the silencer. That weapon with its silencer did not inflict the first shot (the original PV/20 bullet) fired across the throat which occurred during a struggle with the gunman as cops forced their way into the kitchen, coming around the opening edge of an internal kitchen door! The struggle spilled into the kitchen itself, with Sheila and the cop fighting over possession of the cops weapon. Two different guns were responsible for the shooting of Sheila Caffell, a cop weapon downstairs in the kitchen which was spoken about as a suicide because the cop that shot her said that Sheila appeared to be trying to pull the muzzle end of his weapon in towards her head when the trigger of his gun got activated amidst the tugging and pulling, this way then that by Sheila and the cop. It was just a coincidence that the original shot was fired across her throat. It did so because Sheila and the cop were engaged in a frantic struggle over the control of the barrel of the cops gun! An 'Officers Report' covers the full circumstances of that shooting incident in the kitchen! When the cop returned his weapon and ammunition to the force Armoury later that morning, one round short, a full explanation had to be given as to why one bullet was missing in the officers cache of issued ammunition! There was an internal police investigation into the use of that bullet and it's discharge in the kitchen at the farmhouse! The 'Officers Report', aforementioned, was created and produced in respect of that internal police investigation into the discharge of a cops gun during the attempt to bring the seige situation to a conclusion! The report gives an accurate and factual account surrounding the shooting of Sheila Caffell downstairs in the kitchen, facts which were recorded in police message logs around 7.37am, 7.38am, and 7.45am, detailing the find /report of two bodies being present in the kitchen, not one! One of the two bodies being a male (Neville Bamber) the second body being described as a female (which could only have been reference to Sheila Caffell, because according to evidence elsewhere June Bambers bullet riddled body never left the confines of her own bedroom after she was shot, once, twice, three times, four times, five times, six times, and for a seventh time). By 7.45am, staff back in the control room had the knowlege that one of these two bodies was being referred to as a murder, whilst the second body in the kitchen was being talked of in terms of that death being a suicide! The only death of the five victims which could be described as possibly being a suicide was the death of Sheila Caffell, all the other four victims were clearly murdered! At the time Sheila's body was being spoken about as a suicide (by 7.45am) she only had one bullet wound in her throat ( the shot which went across her neck) which hardly bled at all externally. This lack of bleeding after the cop shot her may have caused the police to believe (mistakenly) that she was dead! There is no doubt whatsoever that between 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, that Sheila Caffells body was present downstairs in the kitchen, and absent in its entireity from being present anywhere upstairs in the farmhouse because during this entire period since there were only three bodies upstairs (June Bambers, and the two child victims) until around 8.15 to 8.30am that morning! The details surrounding this are retained as part of the internal police investigation into the shooting incident in the kitchen to which the aforementioned 'Officers Report' relates! Police over the years since the tragedy inside the farmhouse took place, have tried to mislead the public into thinking there had been some sort of a mistake, or confusion over the identity of one body in the kitchen by claiming that PC Collins reported seeing the body of a female behind the kitchen door, from his vantage point outside the kitchen window, which later turned out to be the body of Neville Bamber, once he entered the kitchen! That account cannot be true, for a number of reasons, the chief one of which is that there is no way on god's blue earth that Neville Bambers death could be spoken about in terms of his death being reported as a suicide, since he had been shot, once, twice, three times, four times, five times, six times, seven times, and possibly an eighth time! Additionally, if it had been the mix up that PC Collins has us believe, how come that by the conclusion of the first part of the firearm operation inside the farmhouse (7.30am to 8.10am) when PS Adams was Commander of the operation that there were only three bodies present upstairs in the bedrooms, not four?
-
The original argument that with the silencer fitted to the rifles barrel the weapon would have been too long to enable Sheila Caffell to shoot herself with use of it originated from senior officers who gathered around Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor during 'informatives', at which stage they realised that they could not account for the only bullet entry wound in Sheila's throat having been inflicted with use of the aforementioned rifle and silencer because it was too long!
-
The original argument that with the silencer fitted to the rifles barrel the weapon would have been too long to enable Sheila Caffell to shoot herself with use of it originated from senior officers who gathered around Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor during 'informatives', at which stage they realised that they could not account for the only bullet entry wound in Sheila's throat having been inflicted with use of the aforementioned rifle and silencer because it was too long!
After the anshuzt rifle was brought to Sheila's body in the main bedroom from the box room window, and Sheila received the second fatal shot beneath the chin which pentrated her brain, cops removed the silencer and staged Sheila Caffells death scene on the bedroom floor in possession of the silencerless anshuzt rifle, before allowing SOCO into the bedroom to take control of the scene! Cops removed the silencer from the gun barrel because it was too long, not Sheila herself, not Jeremy Bamber, not any as yet unidentified killer or assassin, the cops removed the silencer from the gun! They didn't hide it in the gun cupboard downstairs, nobody hid it at that stage. DS 'Stan' Jones returned to the farmhouse from Jeremy's cottage that morning and took it away (SBJ/1), along with a further three exhibits (SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4). It was kept on DCI 'Taff' Jones desk in his office at Witham police station until 9th August 1985 at which point Jones and Jones went to see Jeremy at his cottage and questioned him amongst other things about the silencer! They wanted to know if it was fitted to the barrel of the rifle he had possession of on the eve of the shootings? 'No', he said, 'the silencer was not fitted to the gun barrel when he saw and handled the rifle on that occasion'! Later that same evening, Jones and Jones, took the silencer with them to whf when they handed the keys to the farmhouse over to Ann Eaton and gave her a running commentary in each room where things had happenned! At this time 'Stan' Jones took the opportunity to slip the silencer (SBJ/1) into the gun cupboard!
-
After the anshuzt rifle was brought to Sheila's body in the main bedroom from the box room window, and Sheila received the second fatal shot beneath the chin which pentrated her brain, cops removed the silencer and staged Sheila Caffells death scene on the bedroom floor in possession of the silencerless anshuzt rifle, before allowing SOCO into the bedroom to take control of the scene! Cops removed the silencer from the gun barrel because it was too long, not Sheila herself, not Jeremy Bamber, not any as yet unidentified killer or assassin, the cops removed the silencer from the gun! They didn't hide it in the gun cupboard downstairs, nobody hid it at that stage. DS 'Stan' Jones returned to the farmhouse from Jeremy's cottage that morning and took it away (SBJ/1), along with a further three exhibits (SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4). It was kept on DCI 'Taff' Jones desk in his office at Witham police station until 9th August 1985 at which point Jones and Jones went to see Jeremy at his cottage and questioned him amongst other things about the silencer! They wanted to know if it was fitted to the barrel of the rifle he had possession of on the eve of the shootings? 'No', he said, 'the silencer was not fitted to the gun barrel when he saw and handled the rifle on that occasion'! Later that same evening, Jones and Jones, took the silencer with them to whf when they handed the keys to the farmhouse over to Ann Eaton and gave her a running commentary in each room where things had happenned! At this time 'Stan' Jones took the opportunity to slip the silencer (SBJ/1) into the gun cupboard!
David Boutflour recovered this silencer on the following day (10 August 1985), it had already got Sheila Caffells blood inside it! A presence of Sheila's blood inside the silencer does not prove that Jeremy Bamber must be the killer! What it does prove is that somebody did remove the silencer from the end of the guns barrel after Sheila had already been shot and killed , she couldn't have done it herself because she would have been dead by the time the second shot got inflicted!
Cops removed the silencer from the gun, because they wouldn't have been able to proceed with the argument that the same weapon had fired both shots into Sheila's throat, because the rifle with its silencer fitted was too long to have caused one of the two wounds there! By removing the silencer, it paved the way for cops to proceed on the footing that the silencerless anshuzt rifle had fired both shots!
-
By the time the matter came to trial in October 1986, the prosecution were well versed in alleging that Bamber had made the mistake of using the silencer on the gun when shooting his sister because after he had shot her he realised that with the silencer fitted onto the rifles barrel that the weapon was too long to allow Sheila to shoot herself with use of it, so he removed it and hid it in the gun cupboard downstairs! None of which was true, because cops had removed the silencer themselves for these very same reasons, and cops had placed the silencer back in the gun cupboard on evening 9 August 1985, not Jeremy!!
-
That can be done in 3D! ;D
But how do you know which angle she was sitting up at?
-
By the time the matter came to trial in October 1986, the prosecution were well versed in alleging that Bamber had made the mistake of using the silencer on the gun when shooting his sister because after he had shot her he realised that with the silencer fitted onto the rifles barrel that the weapon was too long to allow Sheila to shoot herself with use of it, so he removed it and hid it in the gun cupboard downstairs! None of which was true, because cops had removed the silencer themselves for these very same reasons, and cops had placed the silencer back in the gun cupboard on evening 9 August 1985, not Jeremy!!
So what you are saying it was Jones and Jones who planted the silencer in the cupboard for the relatives to find? Your accepting it was Sheila's blood in the silencer through being shot with the anshulzt rifle, if she was shot with the silencer on and Jones and Jones was aware about it, no one planted Sheila's blood in the silencer (relatives or police). Big decision by Jones and Jones to first not use the silencer as evidence, hide it and hope no one ever says it was on the rifle and then send it off for evidence when the relatives hand it in?
Here's what you thought on earlier threads
The parker hale silencer belonging to the anshuzt rifle was 'not fitted' to the barrel end of the anshuzt rifle prior to the shootings, it wasn't attached during the shootings, and nobody removed it after the shootings, because it was 'never' attached.
-
But how do you know which angle she was sitting up at?
No one knows that, whch is why these things are simply a best guess but could be way off.
-
So what you are saying it was Jones and Jones who planted the silencer in the cupboard for the relatives to find? Your accepting it was Sheila's blood in the silencer through being shot with the anshulzt rifle, if she was shot with the silencer on and Jones and Jones was aware about it, no one planted Sheila's blood in the silencer (relatives or police). Big decision by Jones and Jones to first not use the silencer as evidence, hide it and hope no one ever says it was on the rifle and then send it off for evidence when the relatives hand it in?
Here's what you thought on earlier threads
The parker hale silencer belonging to the anshuzt rifle was 'not fitted' to the barrel end of the anshuzt rifle prior to the shootings, it wasn't attached during the shootings, and nobody removed it after the shootings, because it was 'never' attached.
The wind changed Justice. ;)
-
But how do you know which angle she was sitting up at?
How else would/could she be sitting?
-
How else would/could she be sitting?
That's how I thought her was on the first shot and prone on the brain shot.
-
Would she not have automatically jolted backwards after the force of the shots ? A bit awkward sitting up against the cabinet. Wouldn't she have slumped sideways rather than how she'd been found ?
-
By the time the matter came to trial in October 1986, the prosecution were well versed in alleging that Bamber had made the mistake of using the silencer on the gun when shooting his sister because after he had shot her he realised that with the silencer fitted onto the rifles barrel that the weapon was too long to allow Sheila to shoot herself with use of it, so he removed it and hid it in the gun cupboard downstairs! None of which was true, because cops had removed the silencer themselves for these very same reasons, and cops had placed the silencer back in the gun cupboard on evening 9 August 1985, not Jeremy!!
'Stan' Jones took control of the silencer from the guns barrel at the scene late morning when he returned to the farmhouse to take control of it acting on the instructions of DCI 'Taff' Jones, who knew the truth about its use with the anshuzt rifle brought from the box room window into the main bedroom whilst senior officers performed 'informatives' around Sheila's body which had only been shot once by that stage! The silencer had to be taken off the barrel of the rifle because with the silencer fitted it was impossible for cops to suggest that it had fired the original shot across the neck because the distance from the weapons trigger to the muzzle end of the silencer fitted onto the barrel of the rifle was too long, it could not be accommodated as having been the gun which had fired that original shot! Things deteriorated dramatically once the anshuzt rifle with its silencer still fitted to the end of its barrel discharged the second fatal shot beneath her chin because then cops were faced with the problem of Sheila having been shot by two different guns, initially downstairs in the kitchen she got shot by a bullet from a police issue weapon during a struggle to gain control of the firearm officers rifle! The second time she got shot in the bedroom, it was by use of the anshuzt rifle with silencer fitted! Police found themselves in a dilemma! What were they to do? What did they do?
-
Would she not have automatically jolted backwards after the force of the shots ? A bit awkward sitting up against the cabinet. Wouldn't she have slumped sideways rather than how she'd been found ?
An expert in the 2002 appeal said her legs were pulled after the second shot. Thread created.
-
The crime scene photographs depicting Sheila's body on the bedroom floor in possession of the silencerless anshuzt rifle with the muzzle of the barrel end either resting alongside the left of her neck, or hovering in close proximity to the general area of her chin where the two bullet winds are situated, were stage managed photographs, staged to lend credence to senior officers whim to treat Sheila's death as a suicide, she having shot herself twice! How could the anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted have been resting against a first floor box room window at and from 7.15am, and then also be in the possession of Sheila's body inside the main bedroom, at one and the same time?
It couldn't have been in two different parts of the farmhouse at the same time, can it?
-
The actual raid of the farmhouse was fabricated with a reliance upon the position of Sheila's body as set by 10 O'clock that morning. PC Bird captured the images, and during a debriefing held at Witham later that same evening, senior officers instructed them to fill out their reports based upon the location captured in PC Birds photographs, as though cops had found all the bodies as shown!
-
So the cops shot Sheila not once but twice? She was a right tough women Sheila, she battered and killed Neville, killed everyone else, wrestled with the cops in the kitchen and gets shot under the chin, somehow manages to run upstairs and gets shot again with a different rifle while police stage managed her suicide? Makes you wonder why they wanted to stage manage a suicide when she attacked the police in the kitchen and murdered all her family?
Taff notices that the rifle with silencer attached is too long and Sheila could not have shot herself, so he orders Stan to remove it and hide it, so Stan hides it and does as he is told, the two of them are not bothered what everyone else thinks,it doesn't matter they are risking their whole career to cover up for someone, there is only about 30 other people know about this silencer being on the rifle anyway. So a meeting is held and everyone is told what to write nudge nudge wink wink Sheila committed suicide.
Then low and behold the bloody relatives find the silencer that had been hid, they notice blood on it and take it to the police. So it's wasn't the relatives fault after all, anybody else would do the same thing, they are in the dark and don't know that Jones and Jones are behind it, so Jones and Jones send the silencer off to the Lab for tests realise Sheila's blood is in the silencer and panic, " were done" says Taff, "were not" says Stan we can Blame Bamber. Taff doesn't want to go along with this because that would be lying and it was Sheila who committed suicide he knows the truth. Hang on a minute Taff the police shot Sheila sas Stan, can't we just frame Bamber says Stan, yes but that's not the truth says Taff, Sheila committed suicide with two shots from the police. So even though Taff new the truth he was lying all the time?
-
So the cops shot Sheila not once but twice? She was a right tough women Sheila, she battered and killed Neville, killed everyone else, wrestled with the cops in the kitchen and gets shot under the chin, somehow manages to run upstairs and gets shot again with a different rifle while police stage managed her suicide? Makes you wonder why they wanted to stage manage a suicide when she attacked the police in the kitchen and murdered all her family?
Taff notices that the rifle with silencer attached is too long and Sheila could not have shot herself, so he orders Stan to remove it and hide it, so Stan hides it and does as he is told, the two of them are not bothered what everyone else thinks,it doesn't matter they are risking their whole career to cover up for someone, there is only about 30 other people know about this silencer being on the rifle anyway. So a meeting is held and everyone is told what to write nudge nudge wink wink Sheila committed suicide.
Then low and behold the bloody relatives find the silencer that had been hid, they notice blood on it and take it to the police. So it's wasn't the relatives fault after all, anybody else would do the same thing, they are in the dark and don't know that Jones and Jones are behind it, so Jones and Jones send the silencer off to the Lab for tests realise Sheila's blood is in the silencer and panic, " were done" says Taff, "were not" says Stan we can Blame Bamber. Taff doesn't want to go along with this because that would be lying and it was Sheila who committed suicide he knows the truth. Hang on a minute Taff the police shot Sheila sas Stan, can't we just frame Bamber says Stan, yes but that's not the truth says Taff, Sheila committed suicide with two shots from the police. So even though Taff new the truth he was lying all the time?
The voice of sanity. GREAT post, Justice.
-
That's how I thought her was on the first shot and prone on the brain shot.
Second shot follows a second after the first. Cylindrical grip on the barrel pulls the trigger into her finger/fingers as her upper body begins to fall backwards.
-
Second shot follows a second after the first. Cylindrical grip on the barrel pulls the trigger into her finger/fingers as her upper body begins to fall backwards.
I thought Sheila was leaning against the bedside cabinet when she shot herself. Twice.
-
I thought Sheila was leaning against the bedside cabinet when she shot herself. Twice.
You thought wrong.
-
You thought wrong.
Yes I can see that. Now you're diagram is up.
-
Second shot follows a second after the first. Cylindrical grip on the barrel pulls the trigger into her finger/fingers as her upper body begins to fall backwards.
One wonders where the bible is at this point. ???
-
One wonders where the bible is at this point. ???
I hope David provides his 5th scenario soon. Which he said he is working on. Rather than just XXXXXXXX around the forum putting random diagrams, pictures & videos up.
I know his other 4 scenarios were appalling & a poster on Red even copied & pasted one particulary bad one. But he's been working on his 5th scenario for 5 months. So it's surely ready.
Don't know why after 32 years it's so hard to create a Sheila scenario to match the crime scene & phone calls.
-
One wonders where the bible is at this point. ???
2 Bibles.
-
So the cops shot Sheila not once but twice? She was a right tough women Sheila, she battered and killed Neville, killed everyone else, wrestled with the cops in the kitchen and gets shot under the chin, somehow manages to run upstairs and gets shot again with a different rifle while police stage managed her suicide? Makes you wonder why they wanted to stage manage a suicide when she attacked the police in the kitchen and murdered all her family?
How do you in your infinite wisdom explain the reports of there being two dead bodies, 'can you contact the police surgeon regarding two dead bodies, 1 dead male, 1 dead female' (7.35am) 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found in kitchen upon entry' (7.37am), 'one dead male, one dead female' (7.38am), 'a murder and a suicide' (7.45am), and 'there' only being a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total'(8.10am) - how does any of this fit in with your idea of the truth?Taff notices that the rifle with silencer attached is too long and Sheila could not have shot herself, so he orders Stan to remove it and hide it, so Stan hides it and does as he is told, the two of them are not bothered what everyone else thinks,it doesn't matter they are risking their whole career to cover up for someone, there is only about 30 other people know about this silencer being on the rifle anyway. So a meeting is held and everyone is told what to write nudge nudge wink wink Sheila committed suicide. your logic is garbage!Then low and behold the bloody relatives find the silencer that had been hid, they notice blood on it and take it to the police. which is what the prosecutions case alleged, only rather than DS Jones hiding the silencer in the gun cupboard on evening of 9 August, their case was that Jeremy hid it there on the night of the murders two days earlier! So it's wasn't the relatives fault after all, anybody else would do the same thing, they are in the dark and don't know that Jones and Jones are behind it, so Jones and Jones send the silencer off to the Lab for tests realise Sheila's blood is in the silencer and panic, " were done" says Taff, "were not" says Stan we can Blame Bamber. No, it didn't pan out like that, the complete truth of this matter is outlined elsewhere in this thread! Taff doesn't want to go along with this because that would be lying and it was Sheila who committed suicide he knows the truth. it depends what you think you mean when you say that 'Taff' Jones knew Sheila had committed suicide! Since, the second shot which killed her off was inflicted without any involvement or knowlege on Sheila Caffells part! Hang on a minute Taff the police shot Sheila sas Stan, can't we just frame Bamber says Stan, yes but that's not the truth says Taff, Sheila committed suicide with two shots from the police. that's just the point, she didn't commit suicide, so that kind of makes a complete nonsense of your attempt to appear clever.. So even though Taff new the truth he was lying all the time? he knew the truth that Jeremy had not shot and killed his sister, that's all he needed to know as far as that s concerned! As for being part of a lie in the bigger picture, it's what police do, they back eachother up when they have to, even when it's a lie they are seeking to promote! You can't blame Jeremy for that part of a policeman psyche...
-
2 Bibles.
Just one Lookout, just one.
-
When interviewed by the COLP investigators, PS Adams told them that when speaking to PC Collins in the bedroom at around 9 am, they believed it appeared that June and Sheila had both been Bible reading before the shootings started! Therefore, the inference is that there must have been two Bibles in the main bedroom, not one! Additionally, the house cleaners described a total of four Bibles that she knew about existed inside the farmhouse, one f which has not officially been accounted for, although the relatives were handed one of these Bibles back!
-
Let's put names to the people it can be proven knew there were two bodies in the kitchen, one dead male, one dead female, one a murder, the other a suicide between 7.35am and 7.45am, and that there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am - we know this because it's documented by the police themselves...
DCI Terry Gibbons, PS Bews, PC Myalls, and PS Saxby!!
-
So the cops shot Sheila not once but twice? She was a right tough women Sheila, she battered and killed Neville, killed everyone else, wrestled with the cops in the kitchen and gets shot under the chin, somehow manages to run upstairs and gets shot again with a different rifle while police stage managed her suicide? Makes you wonder why they wanted to stage manage a suicide when she attacked the police in the kitchen and murdered all her family?
Taff notices that the rifle with silencer attached is too long and Sheila could not have shot herself, so he orders Stan to remove it and hide it, so Stan hides it and does as he is told, the two of them are not bothered what everyone else thinks,it doesn't matter they are risking their whole career to cover up for someone, there is only about 30 other people know about this silencer being on the rifle anyway. So a meeting is held and everyone is told what to write nudge nudge wink wink Sheila committed suicide.
Then low and behold the bloody relatives find the silencer that had been hid, they notice blood on it and take it to the police. So it's wasn't the relatives fault after all, anybody else would do the same thing, they are in the dark and don't know that Jones and Jones are behind it, so Jones and Jones send the silencer off to the Lab for tests realise Sheila's blood is in the silencer and panic, " were done" says Taff, "were not" says Stan we can Blame Bamber. Taff doesn't want to go along with this because that would be lying and it was Sheila who committed suicide he knows the truth. Hang on a minute Taff the police shot Sheila sas Stan, can't we just frame Bamber says Stan, yes but that's not the truth says Taff, Sheila committed suicide with two shots from the police. So even though Taff new the truth he was lying all the time?
Excellent post Justice!
-
Let's put names to the people it can be proven knew there were two bodies in the kitchen, one dead male, one dead female, one a murder, the other a suicide between 7.35am and 7.45am, and that there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am - we know this because it's documented by the police themselves...
DCI Terry Gibbons, PS Bews, PC Myalls, and PS Saxby!!
So, we know that at least these four individuals knew that Sheila's body was downstairs in the kitchen prior to it arriving upstairs in the main bedroom after 8.10am! I don't think it's necessary to have to identify anyone else involved in the cover up, these four named identified coppers are sufficient enough to do the job!
-
So the cops shot Sheila not once but twice? She was a right tough women Sheila, she battered and killed Neville, killed everyone else, wrestled with the cops in the kitchen and gets shot under the chin, somehow manages to run upstairs and gets shot again with a different rifle while police stage managed her suicide? Makes you wonder why they wanted to stage manage a suicide when she attacked the police in the kitchen and murdered all her family?
How do you in your infinite wisdom explain the reports of there being two dead bodies, 'can you contact the police surgeon regarding two dead bodies, 1 dead male, 1 dead female' (7.35am) 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found in kitchen upon entry' (7.37am), 'one dead male, one dead female' (7.38am), 'a murder and a suicide' (7.45am), and 'there' only being a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total'(8.10am) - how does any of this fit in with your idea of the truth?Taff notices that the rifle with silencer attached is too long and Sheila could not have shot herself, so he orders Stan to remove it and hide it, so Stan hides it and does as he is told, the two of them are not bothered what everyone else thinks,it doesn't matter they are risking their whole career to cover up for someone, there is only about 30 other people know about this silencer being on the rifle anyway. So a meeting is held and everyone is told what to write nudge nudge wink wink Sheila committed suicide. your logic is garbage!Then low and behold the bloody relatives find the silencer that had been hid, they notice blood on it and take it to the police. which is what the prosecutions case alleged, only rather than DS Jones hiding the silencer in the gun cupboard on evening of 9 August, their case was that Jeremy hid it there on the night of the murders two days earlier! So it's wasn't the relatives fault after all, anybody else would do the same thing, they are in the dark and don't know that Jones and Jones are behind it, so Jones and Jones send the silencer off to the Lab for tests realise Sheila's blood is in the silencer and panic, " were done" says Taff, "were not" says Stan we can Blame Bamber. No, it didn't pan out like that, the complete truth of this matter is outlined elsewhere in this thread! Taff doesn't want to go along with this because that would be lying and it was Sheila who committed suicide he knows the truth. it depends what you think you mean when you say that 'Taff' Jones knew Sheila had committed suicide! Since, the second shot which killed her off was inflicted without any involvement or knowlege on Sheila Caffells part! Hang on a minute Taff the police shot Sheila sas Stan, can't we just frame Bamber says Stan, yes but that's not the truth says Taff, Sheila committed suicide with two shots from the police. that's just the point, she didn't commit suicide, so that kind of makes a complete nonsense of your attempt to appear clever.. So even though Taff new the truth he was lying all the time? he knew the truth that Jeremy had not shot and killed his sister, that's all he needed to know as far as that s concerned! As for being part of a lie in the bigger picture, it's what police do, they back eachother up when they have to, even when it's a lie they are seeking to promote! You can't blame Jeremy for that part of a policeman psyche...
The truth is there for all to see!
Two bodies downstairs in the kitchen, three bodies upstairs in the bedrooms!
-
The truth is there for all to see!
Two bodies downstairs in the kitchen, three bodies upstairs in the bedrooms!
It certainly is!
-
It certainly is!
But it's your truth,Caroline,that's being brought into question,is it not ?
-
How did DCI 'Terry' Gibbons know there was one dead male, and one dead female in the kitchen upon entry, (7.35am) before the occupants of CA07, passed the now known about police radio message from the scene to the control room, at 7.37am?
-
But it's your truth,Caroline,that's being brought into question,is it not ?
Sorry? There is only ONE truth Lookout.
-
How did DCI 'Terry' Gibbons know there was one dead male, and one dead female in the kitchen upon entry, (7.35am) before the occupants of CA07, passed the now known about police radio message from the scene to the control room, at 7.37am?
So, DCI Terry's Gibbons knew (7.35am) that there were two dead bodies in the kitchen, before the occupants of CA07 reported the same (7.37am)!!
-
Sorry? There is only ONE truth Lookout.
Of course there is.
-
The truth is there for all to see!
Two bodies downstairs in the kitchen, three bodies upstairs in the bedrooms!
And you don't think your logic is garbage?
MIKES earlier post
The parker hale silencer belonging to the anshuzt rifle was 'not fitted' to the barrel end of the anshuzt rifle prior to the shootings, it wasn't attached during the shootings, and nobody removed it after the shootings, because it was 'never' attached.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3132.0;attach=38128
At 8.13 am he was informed ALL his family are dead, his father, his Mother his Sisiter and his two nephews, were ALL found dead. No wonder Bamber doesn't agree with you that the police shot SHEILA
So at 8.15am after the house had been raided and inspected, Gibbons had a word with Bews and Bews made his way to Bamber who was away from the farm and told him all his family had been FOUND dead.
So in this short time they had decided to do a cover up?
-
So, DCI Terry's Gibbons knew (7.35am) that there were two dead bodies in the kitchen, before the occupants of CA07 reported the same (7.37am)!!
'Terry' Gibbons was located inside the forward control point in a nearby outbuilding to the farmhouse at 7.35am! He was known to be in the company there of DCI 'George' Harris, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, and PS Adams (the firearm operational Commander)! It stands to reason and logic that Gibbons received information regarding the existence of the two bodies situated inside the kitchen, from another source, namely via the raid teams communication equipment (radios) fastened to the shoulders of the six man raid party! Somebody from inside the kitchen prior to 7.37am, passed a message via the operational hand / shoulder sets, that two bodies were present inside the kitchen, not one! Two bodies, the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, which caused DCI 'Terry' Gibbons to instruct that confirmation of this be relayed back to the control room for the police surgeon, and the Coroner's officer, to be notified of the two dead bodies, One dead male, one dead female (7.35am)! If such information was transmitted from an officer inside the kitchen of the farmhouse to the forward control point in a nearby outbuilding, then of course, not only would all the firearm officers who had entered the kitchen by that stage know, but so too would all the person's holes up in the forward control point also have heard, or known of the fact that two bodies had been present in the kitchen since before or prior to the occupants of CA07 relayed similar information from the scene at 7.37am back to the control room in Chelmsford! Insofar as, those present inside the forward control point, included, DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, DCI 'George' Harris, A DCI Clarke, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, and PS Adams...
-
And you don't think your logic is garbage? my logic is better than yours will ever be!
MIKES earlier post
The parker hale silencer belonging to the anshuzt rifle was 'not fitted' to the barrel end of the anshuzt rifle prior to the shootings, it wasn't attached during the shootings, and nobody removed it after the shootings, because it was 'never' attached.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3132.0;attach=38128
At 8.13 am he was informed ALL his family are dead, his father, his Mother his Sisiter and his two nephews, were ALL found dead. at that stage and up to 8.10am, there were only three bodies upstairs,and two bodies downstairs! No wonder Bamber doesn't agree with you that the police shot SHEILA it's irrelevant what Jeremy Bamber thinks or believes happened! He obviously does not agree with a lot of what alot of people say about his case! How would Jeremy know that cops hadn't shot Sheila,if she died in the main bedroom after 8.10am? Bambers beliefs are no more believable or acceptable than any body elses opinion on the matter, if he wasn't the person who killed his family! My logic is far more superior to his, his views don't carry any more weight than mine or anybody elses providing he isn't the killer!
So at 8.15am after the house had been raided and inspected, Gibbons had a word with Bews and Bews made his way to Bamber who was away from the farm and told him all his family had been FOUND dead. two bodies downstairs, and three bodies upstairs by this stage, and PS Bews was a member of CA07 which past the key police radio messages, timed at 7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am, confirming two bodies downstairs. And only three bodies upstairs! So, your point is rather mute, don't you agree! Since, how does the fact of'Terry' Gibbons requesting PS Bews at 8.13am to go and tell Jeremy that all his family are dead in any way prove there was only one dead body in the kitchen, and four dead bodies upstairs? What sort of logic sre you applying then? By 8.13am PS Bews and the other occupants of CA07 had already past messages that there were two dead bodies in the kitchen upon entry, the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female (7.37am), one dead male, one dead female (7.38am), and that 'a furyher three bodies had been found upstairs by 8.10am, so prey enlighten me and please explain in basic English where there exists any evidence at all for that body count to have become altered by the displacement of one female body from the kitchen to the bedroom in a three minute period (8.10am to 8.13am)?
So in this short time they had decided to do a cover up? Hang on, so based on your logic, your implying that because DCi 'Terry' Gibbons told PS Bews to go and have a word with Jeremy at 8.13am to inform him that all his family had been found dead inside the farmhouse, that this in some way proves Sheila's body was upstairs by that stage, when the documentary police evidence confirms that 'Terry' Gibbons himself had already instructed that the control room be contacted at 7.35am to inform the police surgeon, and the Coroner's Officer, be contacted regarding two bodies found upon entry to the kitchen, 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female' and that the occupants of CA07 (which includes Ps Bews) had passed messages, 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, found in kitchen upon entry' (7.37am), 'one dead male, one dead female' (7.38am), and 'a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total' (8.10am)?
-
And you don't think your logic is garbage?
Who's that guy who believes JB is guilty. Because some guy at a wedding told him so? ::)
-
Who's that guy who believes JB is guilty. Because some guy at a wedding told him so? ::)
So having said "It's just my way of dealing with those who are not here for serious debate", as Justice clearly IS here for "serious debate" but is neither troll nor dimwit, are we to assume you regard as being such, anyone who doesn't agree with you?
-
Who's that guy who believes JB is guilty. Because some guy at a wedding told him so? ::)
Didn't you once agree with Justice?
-
Who's that guy who believes JB is guilty. Because some guy at a wedding told him so? ::)
That guy is me David and it wasn't a guy who told me so and it wasn't just at a wedding, I met HER at the wedding but I have known her ages and Jane knows where this person lives. Its very nice that you make my post personal David it shows it's rattled you. I like the fact your sticking up for your leader. You can take him word for word and say nothing, that's fine by me, your the last person on this forum who I would trust.
Ps I never revealed the pm you sent me XXXX XXX XXXXXXX XX XXXXXXX
-
And also, this guy (me) has had lunch with Anne Eaton and some of her family on a few occasions and surprise surprise they seem normal and not the monsters you make out
And Also, this guy (me) are friends with some Essex police officers and one of their fathers worked on forensics in the Bamber case and surprise surprise they are normal
And also, this guy (me) worked in the area for 9x seasons and knows the area really really well, unlike you who is a armchair spectator who takes Mikes word as gospel.
-
Anyway let's back to debating Bamber, we are falling for his ways.
-
Ha Ha Roch I like you
It's mutual mate.
-
So, we have DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, and the occupants of CA07 (Bews, Myalls and Saxby) all knowing that there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, and that the other two bodies, one dead male, one dead female downstairs in the kitchen from 7.35am, onward! How could all four police officers not be aware of these facts by 8.13am when Gibbons tells PS Bews to go and break the news to Jeremy that all his family have been found dead inside the farmhouse?
-
So, we have DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, and the occupants of CA07 (Bews, Myalls and Saxby) all knowing that there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, and that the other two bodies, one dead male, one dead female downstairs in the kitchen from 7.35am, onward! How could all four police officers not be aware of these facts by 8.13am when Gibbons tells PS Bews to go and break the news to Jeremy that all his family have been found dead inside the farmhouse?
Note, how in his reference to the time Gibbons asked him to break the news to Jeremy at 8.13am, that neither Gibbons or Bews mention the distribution of bodies downstairs (2), and upstairs (3) known about minutes beforehand!
-
Note, how in his reference to the time Gibbons asked him to break the news to Jeremy at 8.13am, that neither Gibbons or Bews mention the distribution of bodies downstairs (2), and upstairs (3) known about minutes beforehand!
I suppose a lot can happen in three minutes!
A dead female downstairs in the kitchen in addition to the body of Neville Bamber, from 7.35am, onward (Gibbons), 7.37am (occupants of CA07), 7.38am (occupants of CA07), and only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am (occupants of CA07) is sufficient testimony to the truth in this matter to prove that Jeremy Bamber did not shoot dead his sister!
-
I suppose a lot can happen in three minutes! (8.10am - 8.13am)...
A dead female downstairs in the kitchen in addition to the body of Neville Bamber, from 7.35am, onward (Gibbons), 7.37am (occupants of CA07), 7.38am (occupants of CA07), and only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am (occupants of CA07) is sufficient testimony to the truth in this matter to prove that Jeremy Bamber did not shoot dead his sister!
How was this possible after 8.10am?
-
I suppose a lot can happen in three minutes! (8.10am - 8.13am)...
A dead female downstairs in the kitchen in addition to the body of Neville Bamber, from 7.35am, onward (Gibbons), 7.37am (occupants of CA07), 7.38am (occupants of CA07), and only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am (occupants of CA07) is sufficient testimony to the truth in this matter to prove that Jeremy Bamber did not shoot dead his sister!
How was this possible after 8.10am?
somehow, in a three minute period (8.10am to 8.13am) Jeremy Bamber sneaked into the farmhouse, obtained the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window, and shot his sister dead with use of it in the main bedroom without any cop outside the farmhouse or inside the farmhouse seeing him doing it!
He supposedly removed the silencer from the end of the guns barrel after he shot and killed Sheila, and somehow managed to take it and conceal it inside a cupboard in the downstairs office, and then somehow get back outside into the front passenger seat of PS Saxbys patrol car in time for PS Bews to come and tell him (8.13am) acting upon 'Terry' Gibbons instruction to inform Jeremy that all his family had been found dead inside the farmhouse!
What...
Are you kidding!
-
My logic is sound enough, unlike the garbage spoken about by people who can't think!
How the fuck did the anshuzt rifle get from its position leaning against a first floor box room window (7.15am, WPC Jeapes, and PC Brown observation), onto Sheila Caffells body in time for PC 'David' Bird to start taking his Crime Scene photographs which show the same rifle in her possession from around 10 am, onward?
-
My logic is sound enough, unlike the garbage spoken about by people who can't think!
How the fuck did the anshuzt rifle get from its position leaning against a first floor box room window (7.15am, WPC Jeapes, and PC Brown observation), onto Sheila Caffells body in time for PC 'David' Bird to start taking his Crime Scene photographs which show the same rifle in her possession from around 10 am, onward?
The anshuzt rifle can't have been at the first floor box room window at 7.15am, and with Sheila's body in the main bedroom at the same time! Likewise, from 10 am, onward, the anshuzt rifle can't have been in Sheila's possession on her body in the main bedroom, and still be leaning against the first floor box room window, at one and the same time!
-
The anshuzt rifle can't have been at the first floor box room window at 7.15am, and with Sheila's body in the main bedroom at the same time! Likewise, from 10 am, onward, the anshuzt rifle can't have been in Sheila's possession on her body in the main bedroom, and still be leaning against the first floor box room window, at one and the same time!
Sheila's body can't have been in the kitchen downstairs at either 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, with the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window (7.15am) in her possession, or upstairs on the main bedroom floor in possession of the anshuzt rifle, all at one and the same time (after 8.10am) - impossible!!
-
Whilst ever there were two bodies downstairs, (7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am) there could never have been four bodies upstairs (8.10am) at one and the same time!
-
Whilst every there were two bodies downstairs, (7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am) there could never have been four bodies upstairs (8.10am) at one and the same time!
Whilst ever there were only three bodies upstairs (8.10am), there could never only have been one body downstairs in the kitchen (7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am) at one and the same time!
-
With the silencer fitted to the end of the anshuzt rifles barrel (irrespective of who shot and killed Sheila Caffell in the main bedroom), only one of the two shots inflicted upon Sheila's throat could have been caused by the weapon so configured! The other bullet wound can be excluded because of the distance between the trigger on the rifle and the muzzle end of the silencer being to great in length to have enabled that other shot to be made by it!
Two differently configured guns then used in the shooting of Sheila Caffell...
-
With the silencer fitted to the end of the anshuzt rifles barrel (irrespective of who shot and killed Sheila Caffell in the main bedroom), only one of the two shots inflicted upon Sheila's throat could have been caused by the weapon so configured! The other bullet wound can be excluded because of the distance between the trigger on the rifle and the muzzle end of the silencer being to great in length to have enabled that other shot to be made by it!
Two differently configured guns then used in the shooting of Sheila Caffell...
Cops substituted the original piece of badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) and replaced it with a dodgy test fired round fired via the anshuzt rifle, so that the prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcom Bonnet could conclude that both bullets recovered from Sheila's body had been fired via the same anshuzt rifle!
-
Cops substituted the original piece of badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) and replaced it with a dodgy test fired round fired via the anshuzt rifle, so that the prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcom Bonnet could conclude that both bullets recovered from Sheila's body had been fired via the same anshuzt rifle!
This was not strictly true, since only one of these two bullets (PV/19) had been fired via the anshuzt rifle at the scene, the other (PV/20) had been test fired via the anshuzt rifle post date the shootings, and swapped over with the original PV/20 round which consisted of a piece of badly fragment round fired from the other gun!
-
The displacement of Sheila Caffells body, from behind the kitchen door, onto the bed in the main bedroom, then onto the main bedroom floor, the displacement of the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window onto Sheila Caffells body on the main bedroom floor, and the substitution of one of the two bullets used in the shooting of Sheila, highlight exactly what cops got up to, in order to pull the wool over the public's eyes in this matter! One round of live ammunition was used during the seige at whf, that round was the bullet (PV/20) fired across Sheila's neck in the kitchen!
-
If the firearms operation concluded with the finding of the fifth body inside the farmhouse 'a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total' (8.10am), why were two different firearm commanders appointed between 5am, and 9am (PS Adams 5am until 8.15am, then PI Montgomery 8.15am until 9am)?
-
If the firearms operation concluded with the finding of the fifth body inside the farmhouse 'a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total' (8.10am), why were two different firearm commanders appointed between 5am, and 9am (PS Adams 5am until 8.15am, then PI Montgomery 8.15am until 9am)?
Is there any available evidence that confirms two different officers held that role during the morning's events?
-
If the firearms operation concluded with the finding of the fifth body inside the farmhouse 'a further three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total' (8.10am), why were two different firearm commanders appointed between 5am, and 9am (PS Adams 5am until 8.15am, then PI Montgomery 8.15am until 9am)?
As part of the regulations an inquiry had to be held into the changeover in Commandershiphip of the operation which formed in two parts - part (1) lasted between 5am and 8.15am, Commander being PS Adams! Part (2) lasted between 8.15am and 9am, Commander being PI Montgomery!
-
The 'Officers Report' which covers the shooting incident in the kitchen when Sheila was shot across the neck occurred in part (1) of the operation when PS Adams was Commander! By the time of the second shot upstairs in the main bedroom (9.13am) PS Adams had already left the scene, and the shot which killed Sheila occurred after part (2) of the operation had commenced and concluded with PI Montgomery as Commander! The fatal shot which killed Sheila was inflicted whilst senior officers were conducting 'informatives' around Sheila's body with the anshuzt rifle brought from the first floor box room window!
-
Cops made a fundamental mistake in declaring Sheila dead in the kitchen, at 7.35am, 7.37am and 7.38am...
The police surgeon, Dr Craig made an additional mistake in pronouncing Sheila as dead at 8.44am upstairs on the far side of the bed - this mistake was compounded by the fact that Craig failed to perform or carry out a physical examination!
Another fundamental mistake at the heart of this tragedy, was that no-one checked the anshuzt rifle which had been resting against the first floor box room window, to make sure it contained no live ammunition, and to make the weapon safe! These failings contributed to Sheila's eventual death during the 'informatives' being conducted around and upon her body, as senior officers looked to try and find an alternative way to explain her death - she was killed when the anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted was being manipulated on top of Sheila's body and the trigger mechanism got activated sending the bullet (PV/19) up into her brain!
-
The reason no clear fingerprints were not found on the anshuzt rifle and silencer was because after cops shot Sheila and the silencer was removed, cops wiped the gun and the silencer down with a cloth thus eradicating evidence that cops had handled the gun and the silencer during 'informatives'...
-
Immediately after the second shot got discharged and the bullet of which penetrated into her brain, cops removed the rifle and stood it against the main bedroom window where it was later photographed by PC 'David' Bird (SOCO) as photograph number 23...
-
Immediately after the second shot got discharged and the bullet of which penetrated into her brain, cops removed the rifle and stood it against the main bedroom window where it was later photographed by PC 'David' Bird (SOCO) as photograph number 23...
At the time the anshuzt rifle got placed at the main bedroom window, DI 'Ron' Cook was not present inside the bedroom! It is important to remember this because during the trial whilst on the verge of being exposed as a cop who had been criminalised, Cook would testify that he himself had removed the anshuzt rifle and placed it at the bedroom window, when he couldn't have because although Cook did not arrive at the scene until 9.20am, he and his team of SOCO were not given the farmhouse to examine until 10 O'clock, and more significantly, PC Bird had photographed the anshuzt rifle leaning against the main bedroom window (photo' No. 23) prior to him taking subsequent photographs with that same anshuzt rifle now in the possession of Sheila Caffells body on the bedroom floor as per photograph No's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, thus establishing without any doubt whatsoever that cops staged Sheila's death scene on the main bedroom floor after bringing the anshuzt rifle from the main bedroom window and placing it with Sheila's body! Of course, it then becomes relatively simply to see what followed by the time of the debriefing held at Witham Police station later that same evening, with the showing of PC Birds video footage of the crime scene showing the bodies of the victims not necessarily in the same place where they had originally been found by the raid team upon entry to the premises for the first time earlier that morning! At the debrief senior officers instructed the raid team to make out their reports and fill in their notebooks as though what they had been dealing with was a seige situation involving what turned out to be four murders and a suicide, where Sheila had shot and killed the others, and then turned the gun on herself taking her own life! More astutely, they were to report the find of the five bodies as shown in the video footage taken by PC Bird (SOCO) from around 10 O'clock, onward, and now how and where they had found, in particular the body of Sheila Caffell and June Bamber!
-
i HAVE REMOVED A NUMBER OF POSTS.... I REPEAT AGAIN FOR ABOUT THE HUNDRETH TIME THAT IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE TO DEBATE ON THE OPEN FORUM WHY ANY MEMBER WAS BANNED. WHO SAID WHAT TO WHOM VIA PM OR MAKE UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS ABOUT OTHER POSTERS.
I HAVE POSTED BEFORE THAT SCOPIO WAS FIRST BANNED BY MIKE AND LATER LEMONHEAD WAS BANNED BY A JOINT DECISION OF MODS AND ADMIN BECAUSE IT WAS VERY OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WHO COMPARED THE IP ADDRESSES THAT IT WAS THE SAME PERSON.
ADMIN AND MODS ARE ABLE TO REASON THAT OUT WITHOUT NEEDING IT TO BE POINTED OUT TO THEM BY OTHER MEMBERS. STRANGE AS IT MAY SEEM TO SOME WE TOOK THE DECISION WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE FORUM.
CAN THIS PLEASE BE THE LAST TIME WE HAVE THIS ACCUSATION POSTED ON THE OPEN FORUM. :-X :-X
-
i HAVE REMOVED A NUMBER OF POSTS.... I REPEAT AGAIN FOR ABOUT THE HUNDRETH TIME THAT IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE TO DEBATE ON THE OPEN FORUM WHY ANY MEMBER WAS BANNED. WHO SAID WHAT TO WHOM VIA PM OR MAKE UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS ABOUT OTHER POSTERS.
I HAVE POSTED BEFORE THAT SCOPIO WAS FIRST BANNED BY MIKE AND LATER LEMONHEAD WAS BANNED BY A JOINT DECISION OF MODS AND ADMIN BECAUSE IT WAS VERY OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WHO COMPARED THE IP ADDRESSES THAT IT WAS THE SAME PERSON.
ADMIN AND MODS ARE ABLE TO REASON THAT OUT WITHOUT NEEDING IT TO BE POINTED OUT TO THEM BY OTHER MEMBERS. STRANGE AS IT MAY SEEM TO SOME WE TOOK THE DECISION WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE FORUM.
CAN THIS PLEASE BE THE LAST TIME WE HAVE THIS ACCUSATION POSTED ON THE OPEN FORUM. :-X :-X
If someone accuses me of LYING I will respond. He started the personal attacks not me. He did send me a pm accusing someone. I was concerned how he got ip addresses and worried, he gave me a name who gave it to him.
-
i HAVE REMOVED A NUMBER OF POSTS.... I REPEAT AGAIN FOR ABOUT THE HUNDRETH TIME THAT IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE TO DEBATE ON THE OPEN FORUM WHY ANY MEMBER WAS BANNED. WHO SAID WHAT TO WHOM VIA PM OR MAKE UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS ABOUT OTHER POSTERS.
I HAVE POSTED BEFORE THAT SCOPIO WAS FIRST BANNED BY MIKE AND LATER LEMONHEAD WAS BANNED BY A JOINT DECISION OF MODS AND ADMIN BECAUSE IT WAS VERY OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WHO COMPARED THE IP ADDRESSES THAT IT WAS THE SAME PERSON.
ADMIN AND MODS ARE ABLE TO REASON THAT OUT WITHOUT NEEDING IT TO BE POINTED OUT TO THEM BY OTHER MEMBERS. STRANGE AS IT MAY SEEM TO SOME WE TOOK THE DECISION WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE FORUM.
CAN THIS PLEASE BE THE LAST TIME WE HAVE THIS ACCUSATION POSTED ON THE OPEN FORUM. :-X :-X
Maggie quite right the forum does not need such posting from members it has just settled down again and it was becoming quite enjoyable :)
-
At the time the anshuzt rifle got placed at the main bedroom window, DI 'Ron' Cook was not present inside the bedroom! It is important to remember this because during the trial whilst on the verge of being exposed as a cop who had been criminalised, Cook would testify that he himself had removed the anshuzt rifle and placed it at the bedroom window, when he couldn't have because although Cook did not arrive at the scene until 9.20am, he and his team of SOCO were not given the farmhouse to examine until 10 O'clock, and more significantly, PC Bird had photographed the anshuzt rifle leaning against the main bedroom window (photo' No. 23) prior to him taking subsequent photographs with that same anshuzt rifle now in the possession of Sheila Caffells body on the bedroom floor as per photograph No's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, thus establishing without any doubt whatsoever that cops staged Sheila's death scene on the main bedroom floor after bringing the anshuzt rifle from the main bedroom window and placing it with Sheila's body! Of course, it then becomes relatively simply to see what followed by the time of the debriefing held at Witham Police station later that same evening, with the showing of PC Birds video footage of the crime scene showing the bodies of the victims not necessarily in the same place where they had originally been found by the raid team upon entry to the premises for the first time earlier that morning! At the debrief senior officers instructed the raid team to make out their reports and fill in their notebooks as though what they had been dealing with was a seige situation involving what turned out to be four murders and a suicide, where Sheila had shot and killed the others, and then turned the gun on herself taking her own life! More astutely, they were to report the find of the five bodies as shown in the video footage taken by PC Bird (SOCO) from around 10 O'clock, onward, and now how and where they had found, in particular the body of Sheila Caffell and June Bamber!
'Ron' Cook did remove the anshuzt rifle from Sheila's body after it had been photographed in Sheila's possession as per photo's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, but photograph 23 was not a photograph of the rifle he had placed there! Photograph No. 23 was taken after Sheila was shot with the anshuzt rifle and it was placed there during the 'informatives' which went dramatically wrong!
-
'Ron' Cook did remove the anshuzt rifle from Sheila's body after it had been photographed in Sheila's possession as per photo's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, but photograph 23 was not a photograph of the rifle he had placed there! Photograph No. 23 was taken after Sheila was shot with the anshuzt rifle and it was placed there during the 'informatives' which went dramatically wrong!
The COLP photographic schedule produced as part of it's enquiry, clearly shows that photograph Number. 23, was taken before photo's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33! Therefore, without question or doubt, the anshuzt rifle was photographed leaning against the main bedroom window, prior to all the occasions (25 to 33 inclusive) the same rifle was photographed with Sheila's body! The gun at the window before the same gun was photographed with the body tells it's own story regarding the possibility or otherwise of Jeremy Bamber being his sister's killer, and he alone being responsible for staging his sister's death scene, removing the silencer from the gun and hiding the silencer in the gun cupboard, any time after 8.10am!
-
The COLP photographic schedule produced as part of it's enquiry, clearly shows that photograph Number. 23, was taken before photo's 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33! Therefore, without question or doubt, the anshuzt rifle was photographed leaning against the main bedroom window, prior to all the occasions (25 to 33 inclusive) the same rifle was photographed with Sheila's body! The gun at the window before the same gun was photographed with the body tells it's own story regarding the possibility or otherwise of Jeremy Bamber being his sister's killer, and he alone being responsible for staging his sister's death scene, removing the silencer from the gun and hiding the silencer in the gun cupboard, any time after 8.10am!
It couldn't possibly have been done by Jeremy Bambers own hand!
-
And so, this brings us around to the presence of Sheila Caffells unique blood group activity found deep inside that silencer!
If Sheila did not get shot at all until after the raid team commenced its approach to enter the farmhouse at around 7.30pm, with the anshuzt rifle already showing at the first floor box room window (7.15am), then how was it at all possible for Jeremy Bamber to be responsible for why his sister's blood ended up inside the silencer? How was he able to shoot his sister in the kitchen from as early as 7.35am with the silencer attached to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle resting against a first floor box room window? How did he manage to do that then? Without being physically inside the farmhouse at around 7.15am, or thereafter? His sister was mistakenly believed to be dead downstairs in the kitchen, 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, and believed to have committed suicide in the kitchen by 7.45am! How else could she have committed suicide in the kitchen other than being shot across the neck, by a bullet which had to be substituted, so that the prosecutions ballistic expert could conclude that both rounds had been fired via the anshuzt rifle?
-
The key to exposing the truth is contained in the senior officers report concerning the nature of the 'informatives' carried out in the main bedroom involving the anshuzt rifle, it's silencer, the sequence with which the rifle was photographed at the main bedroom window, prior to it being photographed in Sheila's possession!
-
The key to exposing the truth is contained in the senior officers report concerning the nature of the 'informatives' carried out in the main bedroom involving the anshuzt rifle, it's silencer, the sequence with which the rifle was photographed at the main bedroom window, prior to it being photographed in Sheila's possession!
The senior officers involved in these 'informatives' under the authorisation of ACC 'Peter' Simpson, were DCI 'George' Harris, DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, and DCI Clarke...
-
The senior officers involved in these 'informatives' under the authorisation of ACC 'Peter' Simpson, were DCI 'George' Harris, DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, and DCI Clarke...
And, DCI 'Taff' Jones...
-
Please bear in mind, the fact that if Sheila's body had been laid on the main bedroom floor in possession of the anshuzt rifle as shown in PC 'David' Birds crime scene photographs, when the raid team first set foot inside the farmhouse, then of course why were only three bodies found upstairs by 8.10am? If Sheila's body had been upstairs all along, on the bedroom floor, at first sighting in possession of that rifle, shot twice in the throat as the raid teams witness statements would have us believe, and that her body and the rifle were left undisturbed there in situ with the gun upon her body, then please could someone with far more intelligence than I possess explain how in between such an eventuality that both DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC 'Mick' Clark should visit the main bedroom idependantly of one another after their arrival at the scene and before both left to go with Jeremy to his cottage to obtain his first witness statement, that they saw Sheila Caffells and June Bambers bodies on top of the bed alongside one another either side of Neville Bambers teddy bear, with a gun resting on the bed between both bodies?
How did this happen if Sheila's body had always been laid upon the bedroom floor in possession of the only rifle upstairs, ever since the raid team first set eyes upon her body anywhere at all inside the farmhouse? How did the anshuzt rifle get from its location at a first floor box room window (7.15am) onto the body of Sheila Caffell any time afterwards, if the gun was already with her body inside the main bedroom?
Jones and Clark told Ann Eaton that morning that Neville Bambers body had been found downstairs in the kitchen, that the two child victims had been found in their beds, and that Sheila and Junes bodies were laid on top of the bed side by side, with the gun used in the shootings in between both of the bodies, and that Sheila had a bible on her chest! But, if the raid team had found Sheila's body laid on the bedroom floor in possession of the rifle, exactly as shown by PC Birds crime scene photographs taken from 10am, onward how could Sheila's body and the body of June Bamber have been found laid on the bedroom floor either side of the bed with the gun resting upon Sheila's body, and the bible now on the floor adjacent to her upper right arm? For this to be true, the bodies of both females had to have been moved from the position the raid team found them in on the floor either side of the bed with Sheila in possession of the gun with Bible nearby, and the bodies of both women laid out on the bed alongside eachother, with the gun laid between both bodies on the bed, and the bible placed on Sheila's chest, in time for 'Stan' Jones, and 'Mick' Clarke to see the bodies there prior to them leaving the scene to go to Jeremy's cottage where they recounted to Ann Eaton these facts! Then, cops must have moved the two bodies of the females back onto the floor either side of the bed into the positions captured by PC 'David' Bird in his crime scene photographs!
I find this possible eventuality to be unlikely to say the least...
What also does not sit well with the claim that the raid team originally came upon Sheila's body upstairs in the main bedroom on the floor in possession of gun and Bible, is of course the contents of police radio message logs, timed at 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, two bodies found in kitchen, a male and a female, a murder, and a suicide, and the other three bodies found upstairs, five dead in total! Add to this the testimony given to the COLP investigators by PS Adams (Commander) who visited the main bedroom scene at around 9am, he having no recollection of the rifle being with Sheila's body by that stage, and of course, let us not forget the evidence given by the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright who arrived at the scene at 9.30am and who viewed Sheila's body in the main bedroom at that time, he told COLP investigators that the rifle had been removed from Sheila's body by the time he saw her body on the bedroom floor! So how can Sheila Caffells body have lain there on the bedroom floor in possession of the anshuzt rifle and let's include the bible too, how can any of this be true if what Jones and Clarke saw is true, and what Adams and then PC Wright saw was true?
Sheila's body cannot have been laid on the bedroom floor in possession of gun and Bible whilst the only gun found upstairs was seen resting against a first floor box room window at 7.15am, at one and the same time! Her body cannot have been lain there on the bedroom floor in possession of gun and Bible, if her body had been on top of the bed alongside June's body, with a Bible on Sheila's body and the gun used in the shootings laid upon the bed in-between both bodies, at one and the same time! The anshuzt rifle cannot have remained on top of Sheila's body on the floor of the bedroom whilst ever there were only three bodies upstairs, nor it be on her body when viewed by PS Adams at around 9am, or by PC Wright at 9.30am...
The body of Sheila Caffell was staged by those responsible for killing her! Jeremy Bamber was not one of those people! He cannot have been the killer, he cannot have unscrewed the silencer from the barrel of the gun after Sheila had been shot and killed by a bullet fired from it in the bedroom after 8.10am, that morning!
-
I have always taken great pride in myself and the way the truth in any matter can be reconstructed!
You can't reconstruct something by making snap decisions based upon (in cases like this) the truth as believed by the prosecution, police, or any of its witnesses who have had their witness statements made for them, often edited by police officers whose mindset is often tainted by them knowing what needs to be recorded capable of being the very evidence as it were, capable of helping to secure a conviction against this person, or that person! Police officers do not make it a habit to record evidence in a witness statement they have made for somebody which tends to support the fact that an accused person may well be innocent! This is why miscarriages of justice occur! These cops are only interested in gathering evidence and recording it in somebody elses name, if what is recorded paints an accused person, or a defendant in a poor light!
-
I have always taken great pride in myself and the way the truth in any matter can be reconstructed!
You can't reconstruct something by making snap decisions based upon (in cases like this) the truth as believed by the prosecution, police, or any of its witnesses who have had their witness statements made for them, often edited by police officers whose mindset is often tainted by them knowing what needs to be recorded capable of being the very evidence as it were, capable of helping to secure a conviction against this person, or that person! Police officers do not make it a habit to record evidence in a witness statement they have made for somebody which tends to support the fact that an accused person may well be innocent! This is why miscarriages of justice occur! These cops are only interested in gathering evidence and recording it in somebody elses name, if what is recorded paints an accused person, or a defendant in a poor light!
Every witness should make their own witness statements, using their own words and their own phrases, simply recording whatever it is they think a court may need to know about this incident or that event! Cops making eachother, and other people's witness statements amounts to a deception! It is akin to putting words into the mouths of people which ordinarily such people would not say! Police are therefore criminals in uniform perverting the course of justice, here, there, and everywhere! Lying and deception is part of their remit and job!
-
Every witness should make their own witness statements, using their own words and their own phrases, simply recording whatever it is they think a court may need to know about this incident or that event! Cops making eachother, and other people's witness statements amounts to a deception! It is akin to putting words into the mouths of people which ordinarily such people would not say! Police are therefore criminals in uniform perverting the course of justice, here, there, and everywhere! Lying and deception is part of their remit and job!
Cops engaged in the shooting investigation into the five deaths at whf were no exception!!!
-
Do cops lie? Yes, they do! Do cops fabricate evidence? Yes, they do! You can't trust a cop if your an accused person, a defendant, an appellant! Lying evil fukkers that's what they are to most people unfortunate enough to become a victim of their antics! If your on the other side of the fence, someone who the police have never had the time to persecute because of a lack of man power not only in the police force, but in the Criminal justice system which deals with prosecutions of people, or organisations, your views will be very different to mine! Your eyes might only ever become open to the truth if you yourself had some bad experience or other involving these criminals in uniform! There's an old saying which goes along the lines, 'it' takes a crook to catch a crook', which is almost accurate and true! I believe this because these crooks use the benefit of and their abilities to prosecute and convict innocent people, so in these cases it is more truer to say, that 'it takes a crook to snare and wrongly prosecute and convict an innocent person or party'!
-
Just a general quiz,
Which of the following will produce most back splatter?
A). Head shot at 2 inches
B) Chest shot at 8 inches
C) Foot shot from 12 inches
D) leg shot from 2 feet
Blood Splatter from a gunshot wound can travel horizontally about
A) 2 feet
B) 4 feet
C) 6 feet
D) 10 feet
We are asked to believe that the police shot Sheila not once but twice by two different weapons, imagine the amount of people who would be involved in this cover up, imagine the police officers who attended the crime scene telling their wife's how they found two little boys shot in quick succession with their thumbs still in their mouths, imagine what they went through, then they are told under no certain terms they are going to have to lie who did it. For the rest of your life's you are going to cover up the fact police shot Sheila, not once but twice and then you are going to have to lie and say Bamber did it even though we shot Sheila. Put yourself in that position of being the wife or the police or even down to the person that accounts for police annumition ( police have to account for every bullet fired, filling many documents in) it was quickly stated to Bamber ALL his family had been FOUND dead, for WHAT, to frame an innocent man because the family wanted it that way?
I will agree with one some points, the silencer was used, it was hid and it had Sheila's blood in it.
-
Do cops lie? Yes, they do! Do cops fabricate evidence? Yes, they do! You can't trust a cop if your an accused person, a defendant, an appellant! Lying evil fukkers that's what they are to most people unfortunate enough to become a victim of their antics! If your on the other side of the fence, someone who the police have never had the time to persecute because of a lack of man power not only in the police force, but in the Criminal justice system which deals with prosecutions of people, or organisations, your views will be very different to mine! Your eyes might only ever become open to the truth if you yourself had some bad experience or other involving these criminals in uniform! There's an old saying which goes along the lines, 'it' takes a crook to catch a crook', which is almost accurate and true! I believe this because these crooks use the benefit of and their abilities to prosecute and convict innocent people, so in these cases it is more truer to say, that 'it takes a crook to snare and wrongly prosecute and convict an innocent person or party'!
Cops in the whf investigation were quick to pin the responsibility of Sheila Caffells death on herself, claiming she had committed suicide, when they knew she had not!
-
They almost got away with it, until the following month when relatives put pressure on ACC 'Peter' Simpson to open a fresh investigation based upon the fact that relatives knew that cops had staged the death scenes of June Bamber and Sheila Caffell in the main bedroom! Relative Robert Boutflour recounted to 'Peter' Simpson in a meeting at the beginning of September 1985, ' how come cops photographed Sheila's and Junes bodies on the bedroom floor either side of the bed, with Sheila's body in possession of the rifle, when DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC 'Mick' Clarke had seen both of these bodies laid on top of the bed alongside eachother, with a rifle laid in-between both bodies on the bed, and Sheila with a Bible on her chest'..
-
Every person that attended WHF that morning would have gone back home and told their families relations etc what they had encountered that morning.
-
Just a general quiz,
Which of the following will produce most back splatter?
A). Head shot at 2 inches
B) Chest shot at 8 inches
C) Foot shot from 12 inches
D) leg shot from 2 feet
Blood Splatter from a gunshot wound can travel horizontally about
A) 2 feet
B) 4 feet
C) 6 feet
D) 10 feet
We are asked to believe that the police shot Sheila not once but twice by two different weapons,
which is the absolute truth imagine the amount of people who would be involved in this cover up, what part of the cover up are you referring to?imagine the police officers who attended the crime scene telling their wife's how they found two little boys shot in quick succession with their thumbs still in their mouths, imagine what they went through, then they are told under no certain terms they are going to have to lie who did it. your way off the mark here, since the two little boys were shot whilst sleeping, one had his thumb in his mouth, but I don't know where you get the notion from that they told their wives or girlfriends that they had to lie about anything!For the rest of your life's you are going to cover up the fact police shot Sheila, that's something those in the know would have to live with in any event, they would be looking over their shoulders and rightly so! None of which would be Jeremy Bambers fault!not once but twice that is what the police documentation suggests did happen, again nothing whatsoever to do with Jeremy Bamber! Stop and try to think for a moment, how could Sheila's body be upstairs any time before 8.10am? Are you going to be blaming Jeremy because by 8.10am there were only three bodies upstairs? Oh, and how did the only rifle present upstairs and at the first floor box room window at 7.15am, end up with Sheila's body in time for PC Bird (SOCO) to photograph the same rifle in Sheila's possession by 10 O'clock? How do you fit Jeremy Bambers involvement into these circumstances!and then you are going to have to lie it depends what you mean by lying, by whom and what they might be lying about!and say Bamber did it but these cops didn't and don't say Bamber killed his sister, DCS 'Mick' Ainsley never attended the incident at whf, he was an outsider! even though we shot Sheila. Who shot Sheila, surely it was only two cops at most involved in the actual shooting of Sheila once downstairs, and a second time upstairs in the bedroom Put yourself in that position of being the wife or the police or even down to the person that accounts for police annumition ( police have to account for every bullet fired, filling many documents in) it was quickly stated to Bamber ALL his family had been FOUND dead, which is what Bews told Jeremy at 8.13am, but none of which proves Jeremy Bamber is the killer..for WHAT, to frame an innocent man Bews informing Jeremy Bamber that all his family was found dead was not told to him by any police officer who had shot his sister, PS Bews was not present inside the kitchen when Sheila got shot across the neck during a struggle involving a firearms officer, but Bews knew that two bodies (not one) had been found downstairs in the kitchen, the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, and more importantly that by 8.10am that there were only three bodies found upstairs by that stage because the family wanted it that way? Again, your jumping the gun, and trying to make out that the relatives stance at this stage was down to Jeremy being the killer! The killer of whom, I might enquire, certainly not Sheila Caffell. Relatives were able to cause police to change the direction of the original investigation from being one of four murders and a suicide, into five murders, because of knowlege imparted to the relatives by DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC 'Mick' Clarke regarding June and Sheila's bodies being on the bed when viewed by Jones and Clarke before they left the scene to go to Jeremy's cottage, and the fact that during the inquests the bodies of both females had been photographed on the bedroom floor - of course any relative worth its weight in salt would be damn right angry that cops had been tampering with the location and position of the two female bodies! Relatives found out the truth, they know cops shot Sheila and they black mailed Essex police into prosecuting Jeremy Bamber as the killer! I understand that relatives believed that Jeremy was an accomplice of Sheila's in the killing of the other four victims...
I will agree with one some points, the silencer was used, it was hid and it had Sheila's blood in it.
-
In the Hillsboro' cover up, not all the police officers on duty at the stadium on 15 April 1989 knew about the witness statements of many police witness statements had been re-written, or edited and composite versions of statements had been created in some police officers names without the knowlege or consent of those individual officers! The police officers responsible for this criminal activity had the knowlege of what they had done, but the named officers whose statements were 'doctored' had no such knowledge! Some cops got innocently caught up in a conspiracy run by a handful of bent coppers and a dodgy senior Crown Prosecution manager!
Same type of corruption, different case, Bamber case and Hillsboro cover up!
-
Every person that attended WHF that morning would have gone back home and told their families relations etc what they had encountered that morning.
Hi Justice. Those officers who inspected the scenes at close quarters will have been able to discern that Sheila Caffell was responsible for the killings. Officers who did not study the scenes in detail - perhaps not.
Some of the first officers in the farmhouse inspected the crime scenes close enough, to be able to notice that there was no gun on top of Sheila's body. More than one officer noted that the rifle was not on Sheila's body. All of these officers viewed and noted the scene before SOC photography. Jeremy Bamber has been in prison over 30 years because of what is in the SOC photography. How does that work?
-
I think, if they could get away with it... many guilters would argue that 'although the police placed the rifle on top of Sheila's body, it doesn't mean that Jeremy is innocent'. But these same guilters know deep down, that this aspect cannot be accepted - because it would by default, grossly undermine Jeremy's conviction.
So rather than being prepared to admit the poice did this - they deny it took place - because - this is the only position they can realistically take - in order to continue to voice that Jeremy is guilty.
Am I right? (chorus... "You're not wrong!"). :))
-
Hi Justice. Those officers who inspected the scene at close quarters will have been able to discern that Sheila Caffell was responsible for the killings. Officers who did not study the scenes in detail - perhaps not.
Some of the first officers in the farmhouse inspected the crime scenes close enough, to be able to notice that there was no gun on top of Sheila's body. More than one officer (that we know of so far) noted that the rifle was not on Sheila's body. All of these officers viewed and noted the scene before SOC photography. Jeremy Bamber has been in prison over 30 years because of what is in the SOC photography. How does that work?
So the police shot Sheila. Twice. With the WHF rifle used for shooting vermin. Rather than their own guns.
Officers that entered WHF afterwards & before the crime scene photographer arrived saw Sheila without the rifle. Although only one officer 'that we know of' after 32 years knows of this.
The police then put the rifle on Sheila to make it look like murder/suicide. This tactic was successful but the police decided to frame Bamber a month later.
-
At the moment I'm reading the Attorney General's Guidelines on non-disclosure of evidence. ( online )
The more I read,the more I know that the prosecution is hiding something,including third parties such as forensics,social workers reports and schools.
-
No one's ever said why Sheila would kill 4 people between 3.10am/3.36am - 3.48am, then stay alive for the next 3 hours.
If she wanted to committ murder/suicide as supporters claim, she would kill herself straight after killing everyone else.
If she just wanted to kill everyone but stay alive, she had 3 hours to give herself up while the police were outside.
-
It seems Sheila wanted to committ murder/suicide, as claimed by supporters. However only committed murder.
After deciding not to committ suicide she chose not to give herself up to the police for 3 hours. Preferring to pretend to be dead in the kitchen.
The raid team then shot an unarmed Sheila with a WHF rifle for shooting vermin. Rather than their own guns.
The police then successfully made it look like murder/suicide before deciding to frame Bamber a month later.
It's all falling into place.
-
Maybe we should have a vote on the forum - as to whose posts are the most boring - your or mine?
BTW, I dont recall saying that the police definitely shot Sheila? Get back to me when you can prove otherwise.
I don't believe the police shot Sheila either and I don't think Jeremy does? My post is all about that episode Roch, you have to dismiss false accusations before you move on.
-
Maybe we should have a vote on the forum - as to whose posts are the most boring - your or mine?
BTW, I dont recall saying that the police definitely shot Sheila? Get back to me when you can prove otherwise.
Lets do a trade deal Roch, one from each side lol
-
I don't believe the police shot Sheila either and I don't think Jeremy does? My post is all about that episode Roch, you have to dismiss false accusations before you move on.
Mike used to claim that Jeremy chose the line of least resistance (in retaining the approach that Sheila inflicted both of her shots). It doesn't seem to have made much difference to the level of resistance.
-
Unlike the hillsborouh tragedy, the police in the Bamber case have never been accused of causing the death or actually killing anyone and because it cannot be proved that Sheila shot her family or more so took her own life with 2 suicide shots and because people accept the silencer was used, the silencer was put back in the cupboard and Sheila's blood was in the silencer it had to be someone else who inflicted those shots to Sheila.
-
The OS says the police shot Sheila.
If all the trained raid team entered WHF with their high powered rifles, I don't know how Sheila would end up with rifle shots from the WHF rifle used for shooting vermin.
Either Sheila was holding the rifle or the rifle was no where near her. Either way the raid team would either shoot her with their own guns, or not shoot her at all.
The.police would not touch another weapon to negate Sheila.
-
Unlike the hillsborouh tragedy, the police in the Bamber case have never been accused of causing the death or actually killing anyone and because it cannot be proved that Sheila shot her family or more so took her own life with 2 suicide shots and because people accept the silencer was used, the silencer was put back in the cupboard and Sheila's blood was in the silencer it had to be someone else who inflicted those shots to Sheila.
I don't think that the silencer was used.
-
The OS says the police shot Sheila.
If all the trained raid team entered WHF with their high powered rifles, I don't know how Sheila would end up with rifle shots from the WHF rifle used for shooting vermin.
Either Sheila was holding the rifle or the rifle was no where near her. Either way the raid team would either shoot her with their own guns, or not shoot her at all.
The.police would not touch another weapon.
Where does it say that?
-
581 photographs taken in connection with this tragedy, but only 223 disclosed to the solicitors representing Jeremy Bamber prior to commencement of the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial - 358 photographs not disclosed at all, not in time for the commencement of the trial in 1986, or by the time f the 2002 appeal!
358 photographs many of which were capable of casting serious doubt on the claim by firearm officers that the bodies of the two females had been originally found on the floor either side of the bed in the main bedroom, Sheila's body in possession of a gun she had no right to be in possession of, if Jeremy Bamber, had shot and killed her, in view of the fact that that rifle was at 7.15am resting against a first floor box room window, as confirmed by two police officers performing containment and observation duties in the grounds of the farmhouse! A rifle at the box room window, and on the body of Sheila on the bedroom floor to the left of the bed as viewed from the foot of the said bed? A rifle in two different places at one and the same time (if Jeremy Bamber be the killer), 7.15am..
A body in two different places, a dead female downstairs in kitchen (7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am), and only three further bodies upstairs by 8.10am, but if the raid team found Sheila's body upstairs as claimed in their witness statements there would have only been one body downstairs at 7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am, and four bodies upstairs by 8.10am...
-
I don't think that the silencer was used.
So, prey tell how did Sheila's unique blood get inside the silencer?
-
Where does it say that?
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/what-really-happened
Sorry I've just re read it. It says Sheila was alive when the raid team entered WHF. However she then shot herself.
The police deciding to frame Bamber a month later because they wanted to hide the fact that Sheila was still alive in the kitchen.
It is posters on here who are suggesting that the police shot Sheila.
-
Blood is blood is blood--------------so many variations so many with the same grouping. What is most important is DNA of which there'd proved to have been a mixture,not just Sheila's.
-
Never a true word said (paragraph 2 bottom lines)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1624.0;attach=7669
-
Never a true word said (paragraph 2 bottom lines)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1624.0;attach=7669
Nice one Justice!
-
Never a true word said (paragraph 2 bottom lines)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1624.0;attach=7669
Taken literally it could only mean one of the following:
He knew they would find everyone injured or dead because he had foreknowledge of Sheila's intentions and/or he assisted her in some way - i.e. concocted a reason to leave a loaded weapon out.
He had a 'second sight' intuition that things had gone badly inside the farmhouse, since receiving his father's call.
What it most likely means is that his emotions were vacillating between hope, fear and dread. One minute he thought the worst - the next minute he reassured himself that things might not be that bad. We all do it in times of great stress - for example - a GP referral to a specialist because of a lump or mole or whatever.
-
Taken literally it could only mean one of the following:
He knew they would find everyone injured or dead because he had foreknowledge of Sheila's intentions and/or he assisted her in some way - i.e. concocted a reason to leave a loaded weapon out.
He had a 'second sight' intuition that things had gone badly inside the farmhouse, since receiving his father's call.
What it most likely means is that his emotions were vacillating between hope, fear and dread. One minute he thought the worst - the next minute he reassured himself that things might not be that bad. We all do it in times of great stress - for example - a GP referral to a specialist because of a lump or mole or whatever.
Again it could mean the police lied about this statement, part of the cover up, when you do profile analysis of criminals they do give a past tense referral, if he had said that he feared what they might find it is different to saying knowing what they might find, criminal Profile analysis watch for these signs. It can often be a dead give away now days Roch.
-
Again it could mean the police lied about this statement, part of the cover up, when you do profile analysis of criminals they do give a past tense referral, if he had said that he feared what they might find it is different to saying knowing what they might find, criminal Profile analysis watch for these signs. It can often be a dead give away now days Roch.
It's a good spot by you Justice. Like many things - it's open to interpretation. I've never felt surer about Sheila having been the killer - it's so frustrating because we have to wait for further evidence to become known publicly. But because I am so sure - I can only interpret your spot in the manner aleady described.
-
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/what-really-happened
Sorry I've just re read it. It says Sheila was alive when the raid team entered WHF. However she then shot herself.
The police deciding to frame Bamber a month later because they wanted to hide the fact that Sheila was still alive in the kitchen.
It is posters on here who are suggesting that the police shot Sheila.
OK, cheers.
-
Never a true word said (paragraph 2 bottom lines)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1624.0;attach=7669
Sheila making no contribution at all to fostering conversations suggests she was zonked out on Haloperidol.
The suggestion that she was so quiet as she was planning the massacre in her mind has received no support.
-
Yes Sheila was alive when police entered farmhouse and the TFG left her in the master bedroom with a rifle at her side. Not on top of her. Later on, for some inextricable reason, other officers saw fit to place a rifle on top of her body before the SOC photography began. The police didn't shoot her by accident with one of the rifles in the farmhouse or anything ridiculous like that. They just decided to move a rifle on top of her body - for no reason whatsoever
-
Sheila making no contribution at all to fostering conversations suggests she was zonked out on Haloperidol.
The suggestion that she was so quiet as she was planning the massacre in her mind has received no support.
Ever heard of the phrase-----calm before the storm ? Well this also reflects a person's behaviour as well as an imminent storm at sea. Except at sea it's predictable,in a human,it isn't.
-
Has Jeremy ever displayed any unpredictable mental health traits in his 31 years ? Such as outbursts of violence,night terrors or unusual behaviour akin to him having issues ?
-
https://youtu.be/mmCART1vcCo
Mike believes the police killed Sheila & stage managed the scene.
Who knows.
-
Yes Sheila was alive when police entered farmhouse and the TFG left her in the master bedroom with a rifle at her side. Not on top of her. Later on, for some inextricable reason, other officers saw fit to place a rifle on top of her body before the SOC photography began. The police didn't shoot her by accident with one of the rifles in the farmhouse or anything ridiculous like that. They just decided to move a rifle on top of her body - for no reason whatsoever
Ok, and then they substituted a piece of badly fragmented bullet which was the original PV/20, by replacing it with a whole test fired round test fired via the anshuzt rifle so that their ballistic expert could conclude that both rounds inflicted into Sheila's throat, had been fired via the exact same anshuzt rifle, something which he could not have concluded if the original piece of badly fragmented bullet had not been replaced...
-
So, does anybody have any ideas why police felt is was necessary to replace the original piece of badly fragmented bullet that was exhibit PV/20, with a whole test fired round?
-
So, does anybody have any ideas why police felt is was necessary to replace the original piece of badly fragmented bullet that was exhibit PV/20, with a whole test fired round?
Oh, its ok, let these criminals in uniform do the fuk what they like falsifying the contents of witness statements, tampering with the sequence photographs were taken, giving different accounts where the bodies were found downstairs and upstairs, and switching one of the two bullets used in the shooting of Sheila!
These mother fukkers can fabricate as much evidence as they feel the need to do, and members of the public don't give a flying fuk how corrupt and dishonest these criminals in uniform behave, react or proceed!
-
So, does anybody have any ideas why police felt is was necessary to replace the original piece of badly fragmented bullet that was exhibit PV/20, with a whole test fired round?
So that they could cover the fact that she had received injuries from two different non-police weapons in the farmhouse, as a result of an accident or complications during the TFG operation?
-
Sheila making no contribution at all to fostering conversations suggests she was zonked out on Haloperidol.
The suggestion that she was so quiet as she was planning the massacre in her mind has received no support.
The medical records of when she received the injections and how much, suggest otherwise.
-
So that they could cover the fact that she had received injuries from two different non-police weapons in the farmhouse, as a result of an accident or complications during the TFG operation?
It was an accident, I will accept that, both shots were, albeit the second shot which killed her on the bedroom floor at precisely 9.13am could have been avoided. Cops failed to check that the gun was ammunition free and safe prior to them using it in 'informatives'...
-
So that they could cover the fact that she had received injuries from two different non-police weapons in the farmhouse, as a result of an accident or complications during the TFG operation?
That didn't happen.
-
That didn't happen.
What's the story regarding the substituted bullet?
-
The medical records of when she received the injections and how much, suggest otherwise.
Sheila couldn't perform basic functions. As she was suffering from some or most of the 60+ side effects of Haloperidol. Being on a moderate amount of a very powerful drug. Thread created.
If Sheila was planning the massacre in her head, why was Nevill able to make a phone call ? It would just be a successful silent execution attempt or Nevill would stop her after getting out of bed.
-
What's the story regarding the substituted bullet?
Subsituted bullet ;D
-
Different rifle ?
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8262.0.html
This is the thread on the Sheila pre planning the massacre suggestion.
This is the only alternative suggestion to Haloperidol which has been submitted on why Sheila was so quiet and passive at supper.
It has received no support.
-
That didn't happen.
Well, well, well - we agree on something!
-
That didn't happen.
David what did happen then? :)
-
David what did happen then? :)
Everyone is hoping you tell us when you submit you're scenario.
-
Sheila couldn't perform basic functions. As she was suffering from some or most of the 60+ side effects of Haloperidol. Being on a moderate amount of a very powerful drug. Thread created.
::)
-
::)
Yeah yeah. You've just spent the last one hour looking for one of you're one sheet documents.
So why was she so passive at supper over fostering conversations & with PB ?
You didn't support Roch's suggestion that it was because she was planning the massacre in her head.
-
What's the story regarding the substituted bullet?
Both of Sheila's injuries are contact wounds inflicted while she was sitting upwards. This is established via the blood stain patterns on her nightdress and the shoot/abrasions on the wounds.
The police cannot possibly have inflicted them.
Why a bullet was swapped with another I really don't know. All it proves is that someone at the lab was either dodgy or incompetent.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8254.0.htm
Here's my 'Effects of Haloperidol' thread. Complete with Youtube videos & links.
Sheila could not function if she was experiencing a handful of the 60 + side effects.
I suspect the average person would be experiencing around half of side effects.
-
Supporters are contradicting themselves.
Saying the Haloperidol made Sheila into a crazy killer. Five hours after going to bed.
But then failing to explain why she was so passive, quiet & easy to control a few hours earlier. Before she went to bed at 10pm.
-
Both of Sheila's injuries are contact wounds inflicted while she was sitting upwards. This is established via the blood stain patterns on her nightdress and the shoot/abrasions on the wounds.
The police cannot possibly have inflicted them.
Why a bullet was swapped with another I really don't know. All it proves is that someone at the lab was either dodgy or incompetent.
Mike, what do you think of this?
And David, where does this leave us with several officers who either note or complain that the rifle was not on top of Sheila prior to photography?
-
Everyone is hoping you tell us when you submit you're scenario.
Adam you are not going to believe this my computer crashed and I lost all my files one was on the scenario on how Sheila carried out the murders. Back to the drawing board for me :'(
-
Mike, what do you think of this?
And David, where does this leave us with several officers who either note or complain that the rifle was not on top of Sheila prior to photography?
They don't. Its in Dickinson's notes "(c) no recollection of gun" That's means they don't remember its original position compared to the photos.
-
Adam you are not going to believe this my computer crashed and I lost all my files one was on the scenario on how Sheila carried out the murders. Back to the drawing board for me :'(
You mean you can't explain how Sheila committed the massacre. That is ok as no one else can.
Very disappointing that after 4 years you said you were finally going to submit a scenario last Saturday. But then didn't without an explanation. Then said you were still working on it. But now you're saying you've lost the files.
Thought you would be able to reel one off in 10 minutes. As I did for Bamber. Mind you David's spent 5 months on his fifth scenario.
-
Adam you are not going to believe this my computer crashed and I lost all my files one was on the scenario on how Sheila carried out the murders. Back to the drawing board for me :'(
My new laptop crashed and it's going to cost nearly as much to repair as it would to buy a new one----it's fit for the bin after 7 months use >:(
-
You mean you can't explain how Sheila committed the massacre. That is ok as no one else can.
Very disappointing that after 4 years you said you were finally going to submit a scenario last Saturday. But then didn't without an explanation. Then said you were still working on it. But now you're saying you've lost the files.
Thought you would be able to reel one off in 10 minutes. As I did for Bamber. Mind you David's spent 5 months on his fifth scenario.
Lets see you produce an illustrated scenario.
-
Lets see you produce an illustrated scenario.
You mean with nice diagrams. No need & I don't know how. But looking forward to seeing yours which you have chosen to include with diagrams.
-
You mean with nice diagrams. No need & I don't know how. But looking forward to seeing yours which you have chosen to include with diagrams.
Fair Enough.
Explain how Nevill can have been shot in bed given these trajectories.
-
Fair Enough.
Explain how Nevill can have been shot in bed given these trajectories.
No.
Can you just submit you're 5th scenario you've been working on for the last 5 months.
If, like Susan you're scared to & are just going to post random diagrams, just say.
-
I've never said Nevill was shot in bed. No one has. He was shot in the bedroom as that's where the cartridges fell.
-
I've never said Nevill was shot in bed. No one has. He was shot in the bedroom as that's where the cartridges fell.
There was blood on both side of the bed: I assume that the bloodiest side with the duvet turned back was where Nevill slept?
-
My new laptop crashed and it's going to cost nearly as much to repair as it would to buy a new one----it's fit for the bin after 7 months use >:(
Didn't you get a years warranty?
-
::)
I don't know why you keep posting that, Sheila had none of those reactions to haloperidol. The people mentioned in the article, reacted straight away to being given the drug. It bears no relation to this case or Sheila whatsoever. ::)
-
My new laptop crashed and it's going to cost nearly as much to repair as it would to buy a new one----it's fit for the bin after 7 months use >:(
Sorry lookout technology is fine as long as it's working.
-
They don't. Its in Dickinson's notes "(c) no recollection of gun" That's means they don't remember its original position compared to the photos.
How does that fit in with them having 'real concerns' and requesting a meeting about those concerns?
-
There was blood on both side of the bed: I assume that the bloodiest side with the duvet turned back was where Nevill slept?
Nope. Only June's side was covered with blood.
-
How does that fit in with them having 'real concerns' and requesting a meeting about those concerns?
Concerns about the position of the body and the bible. If the police shot and killed Sheila then staged the scene they would have no 'concerns' of this nature as they would know exactly what they done.
Think about it. ;)
-
Concerns about the position of the body and the bible. If the police shot and killed Sheila then staged the scene they would have no 'concerns' of this nature as they would know exactly what they done.
Think about it. ;)
The scene was staged after the original TFG had completed their duties (i.e. stormed the building and located the inhabitants).
-
The scene was staged after the original TFG had completed their duties (i.e. stormed the building and located the inhabitants).
It was staged before that. People are arguing over small discrepancies in recollection from one or two of the TFG.
-
Didn't you get a years warranty?
The guarantee ran out last December as it had been bought for me the Christmas before.I only began using it in May of last year,and in the December gone,it went haywire-------after 7 months,and it's a quad core processor.
-
It was staged before that. People are arguing over small discrepancies in recollection from one or two of the TFG.
Miller and I think one TFG have cited the gun as being at the side of Sheils's body - not balancing on top of it as depicted. Another TFG has 'no recollection of gun' which is probably because when they viewed her body - the gun was at the side of her, not on top. This is in addition to the concerns about bible, body, head etc.
Hardly small discrepancies - if it caused challenges to both heads of investigation.
-
Sorry lookout technology is fine as long as it's working.
A dead loss Steve,and the guarantee ran out when it decided to go wrong. My luck ::)
-
The guarantee ran out last December as it had been bought for me the Christmas before.I only began using it in May of last year,and in the December gone,it went haywire-------after 7 months,and it's a quad core processor.
Ouch! That's unlucky Lookout. Do you know what is wrong with it? Where did you take it for repair?
-
Miller and I think one TFG have cited the gun as being at the side of Sheils's body - not balancing on top of it as depicted. Another TFG has 'no recollection of gun' which is probably because when they viewed her body - the gun was at the side of her, not on top. This is in addition to the concerns about bible, body, head etc.
Hardly small discrepancies - if it caused challenges to both heads of investigation.
I would say they were small, it's 2 people and we don't know how long they were there, how good a look they got etc. Were they concerns? Or just questions over discrepancies? I believe both officers agreed they could have been wrong so I don't believe that 'challenges' is the right word. If they police shot Sheila as part of your particular theory, why would they challenge anything? Surely they would be doing there best to keep it all quiet (although I don't believe there is any reason why they would, regardless of which firearm was responsible).
-
Ouch! That's unlucky Lookout. Do you know what is wrong with it? Where did you take it for repair?
It certainly was unlucky. It began when the cursor had a complete mind of its own and just danced around the screen,so obviously I couldn't highlight anything because it wouldn't keep still. Then the volume went and I was left with a crackle instead,though saying that there was like a telephone conversation going on coming through the speakers,it was weird. Jinxed,I'd say.
On this old laptop I got messages of hacking " Cloudbleed data leak " which I'd had Cloud on the broken laptop,but not this one.
A good thing I hadn't transferred documents onto it or I'd have lost them.
I haven't taken it to any repair place as I hardly think it's worth it,it's jiggered.
-
My new laptop crashed and it's going to cost nearly as much to repair as it would to buy a new one----it's fit for the bin after 7 months use >:(
Hi lookout For what they charge to repair it is cheaper to get another one I am lucky I have spares I pay about £150 for mine maybe the ones at £500 will be better but for my use the cheaper ones are good enough ;D
-
No.
Can you just submit you're 5th scenario you've been working on for the last 5 months.
If, like Susan you're scared to & are just going to post random diagrams, just say.
Adam I was scared to submit my scenario as I knew you would laugh and tear it into pieces :'(
-
It certainly was unlucky. It began when the cursor had a complete mind of its own and just danced around the screen,so obviously I couldn't highlight anything because it wouldn't keep still. Then the volume went and I was left with a crackle instead,though saying that there was like a telephone conversation going on coming through the speakers,it was weird. Jinxed,I'd say.
On this old laptop I got messages of hacking " Cloudbleed data leak " which I'd had Cloud on the broken laptop,but not this one.
A good thing I hadn't transferred documents onto it or I'd have lost them.
I haven't taken it to any repair place as I hardly think it's worth it,it's jiggered.
Hi Lookout, that doesn't sound too serious, I would take it to PC world and get them to look at it for you. I'm pretty sure it's nothing serious.
-
Hi lookout For what they charge to repair it is cheaper to get another one I am lucky I have spares I pay about £150 for mine maybe the ones at £500 will be better but for my use the cheaper ones are good enough ;D
Hi Susan,I rather think this one was expensive as it was bought for me between my daughter and g/son as a Christmas present,they went halves. It would probably cost me around £200 to fix------but I don't like,or trust things that have been fixed,so I'll be getting a new one. Even this old thing needs a battery now,but I can't get into the other one to remove the new battery.
I don't think you can throw comps into the bin either,they have to be " disposed " of separately.
At least I've got a couple of 8gb usb sticks to keep hold of pics/documents.
The things you've got to do ::)
-
Adam I was scared to submit my scenario as I knew you would laugh and tear it into pieces :'(
I never have laughed at anyone's scenario as appreciate they made the effort.
I'll debate it, look for faults & ask questions. People can do that with my Bamber scenario.
-
Hi Susan,I rather think this one was expensive as it was bought for me between my daughter and g/son as a Christmas present,they went halves. It would probably cost me around £200 to fix------but I don't like,or trust things that have been fixed,so I'll be getting a new one. Even this old thing needs a battery now,but I can't get into the other one to remove the new battery.
I don't think you can throw comps into the bin either,they have to be " disposed " of separately.
At least I've got a couple of 8gb usb sticks to keep hold of pics/documents.
The things you've got to do ::)
It won't cost anything like that but it's up to you.
-
lookout my problem is I know nothing about computers I should have gone on a course I bought a printer two years ago and still have not got it to work I am hopeless my damaged one is in the cupboard till I get somebody to do whatever one does with them :)) :)) :))
-
Hi Lookout, that doesn't sound too serious, I would take it to PC world and get them to look at it for you. I'm pretty sure it's nothing serious.
I never thought of PC World,that's an idea so I'll give it a go as it's barely used.Thank you for that.
-
I never have laughed at anyone's scenario as appreciate they made the effort.
I'll debate it, look for faults & ask questions. People can do that with my Bamber scenario.
Adam I guess I am lacking in confidence as my knowledge on this case is dreadful as you rightly told me :-[
-
lookout my problem is I know nothing about computers I should have gone on a course I bought a printer two years ago and still have not got it to work I am hopeless my damaged one is in the cupboard till I get somebody to do whatever one does with them :)) :)) :))
Hahahaha,I gave a printer,camera and microphone to my g/son thinking you had to have them with the comp. Just a damn nuisance with wires,etc and the cats had a field day,so blow that. What a clutter.
-
I never thought of PC World,that's an idea so I'll give it a go as it's barely used.Thank you for that.
No problem. Before taking it in, give the a ring and an idea of what the problem is.
-
No problem. Before taking it in, give the a ring and an idea of what the problem is.
Okay I'll do that.
-
Adam I guess I am lacking in confidence as my knowledge on this case is dreadful as you rightly told me :-[
Sorry I over reacted to something you posted. You have a good knowledge of the case. Have you read CC's book ? That will have a lot of information I won't know.
To create a scenario you just need to know the crime scene inside WHF. Which you do know.
-
Miller and I think one TFG have cited the gun as being at the side of Sheils's body - not balancing on top of it as depicted. Another TFG has 'no recollection of gun' which is probably because when they viewed her body - the gun was at the side of her, not on top. This is in addition to the concerns about bible, body, head etc.
Hardly small discrepancies - if it caused challenges to both heads of investigation.
Miller had not seen the body until 9.30am anyway. He notes the rifle as being by her right side when its actually on her right side.
-
It was staged before that.
Show evidence.
-
Miller had not seen the body until 9.30am anyway. He notes the rifle as being by her right side when its actually on her right side.
This rather crude diagram should make one realise that the position of the rifle in the photos. Is the correct and original location.
-
Show evidence.
You mean like your silly pictures> Yeah right! I don't need to show evidence, I'm not trying to convince anyone and you're trying too hard. Mike's diagrams on IA were far superior.
-
That didn't happen.
It did happen, Sheila couldn't have shot herself twice with the use of the same gun, her body couldn't be downstairs between 7.35am and 8.10am, supposedly dead in kitchen after only being shot once by a rifle resting against a first floor box room window, and also be with Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor at one and the same time later on, if Jeremy was the killer! Jeremy Bamber was not the killer of his sister he couldn't have shot her twice and staged her death scene sporting two bullet holes in her neck after 8.10am, since by that stage there were only three bodies upstairs! As soon as Sheila arrived upstairs that total changed to four! At the same time where there had been two bodies in the kitchen upon entry, after 8.10am, there was then only one body!
-
It did happen, Sheila couldn't have shot herself twice with the use of the same gun, her body couldn't be downstairs between 7.35am and 8.10am, supposedly dead in kitchen after only being shot once by a rifle resting against a first floor box room window, and also be with Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor at one and the same time later on, if Jeremy was the killer! Jeremy Bamber was not the killer of his sister he couldn't have shot her twice and staged her death scene sporting two bullet holes in her neck after 8.10am, since by that stage there were only three bodies upstairs! As soon as Sheila arrived upstairs that total changed to four! At the same time where there had been two bodies in the kitchen upon entry, after 8.10am, there was then only one body!
Sheila could not have shot herself twice in the bedroom otherwise the silencer containing her unique blood would have still been fitted to the barrel of the rifle after she killed herself! Furthermore, with the silencer fitted to the barrel of the rifle Sheila could not have self inflicted the first of the two shots across her own throat because the distance between the trigger of the rifle and the flat muzzle end of the silencers end cap was to large preventing the first shot being inflicted by use of it! If Sheila had shot herself, the silencer with her blood inside it would have still been attached to the barrel of the gun after the moment she actually died! Cops wouldn't have removed the silencer in those circumstances until after crime scene photographs had been taken showing the silencer attached to the barrel of the rifle on Sheila's body! The blood in the silencer was accepted as being Sheila's unique blood during the trial, so n this basis it had to have been fitted to the barrel of the gun at the time Sheila was shot and killed! What I'm saying is that the only people who had the opportunity to remove any silencer from any gun at the scene were the police themselves! Police records show that there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, the two bodies already having been accounted for downstairs in the kitchen from as long ago as 7.35am! At some point after 8.10am, Sheila arrived upstairs in the main bedroom, collapsed on her parents bed sporting a solitary bullet wound to her throat! Let's hit the nail on the head, later that same morning DS 'Stan' Jones returned to the scene and collected the very same silencer which had been taken of the gun during 'informatives' that were conducted in the main bedroom between 9am and 10am! 'Stan' Jones recovered the silencer (SBJ/1) from the scene after 11.15am. He was instructed to leave it on 'Taff' Jones desk where it remained until early evening 9 August 1985 when Jones slipped it into the cupboard from where David Boutflour would later find it on the following date?
-
This rather crude diagram should make one realise that the position of the rifle in the photos. Is the correct and original location.
If the rifle in the photos is in the correct position then the police didn't touch Sheila or the rifle prior to crime scene photos being taken. Which would have been protocol in 1985.
So who pulled Sheila's legs after the second shot ?
-
Miller had not seen the body until 9.30am anyway. He notes the rifle as being by her right side when its actually on her right side.
according to Jones and Clarke Sheila's body was laid on top of the bed alongside the body of June Bamber, with the rifle in-between both bodies on the bed, and Sheila having a bible on her chest! That's what they told Ann Eaton that morning after both officers had visited the main bedroom and seen the bodies of the two females, Sheila only having one bullet hole in her neck by that stage!
-
Sorry I over reacted to something you posted. You have a good knowledge of the case. Have you read CC's book ? That will have a lot of information I won't know.
To create a scenario you just need to know the crime scene inside WHF. Which you do know.
Adam thank you for your advice I do have the book but sadly I have not read it but I will do. I think Sheila started off in the downstairs bathroom and was shouting and threatening Nevill heard her went downstairs tried to phone Jeremy she heard him and off upstairs she went shot June turned the gun on Nevill who then retreated downstairs to arm himself followed by Sheila and the rest you know. I think she killed the twins last. She had a shower put on a clean nightdress belonging to June then shot herself. I will need to work on this more.
-
It's not as though Sheila hadn't been known for kicking off in the early hours was it ? Being at WHF was no exception. It had happened at her flat in Maida Vale,so she'd been very unwell during her last weeks.
Phoning her father at all hours just for someone to talk to.
Sheila's non-compliance during the day would have been as a result of a sleepless night and that would have impacted on her drowsy state of mind during the day. After resting and being immobile during the day would then have led to another sleepless night and so it would go on as the sleep pattern was more and more disrupted due to medication.
-
Correction. You have no evidence.
What are your eighteen thousand posts in aid of then?
???
(http://i.imgur.com/Qrt6ML1.jpg)
???
You're right, I don't have any evidence because I am an individual writing on a forum and not pretending to be the worlds greatest detective. The evidence is already there, gathered by others. I do however have an opinion, an opinion just like you but you're deluded enough to think your opinion is evidence - it's not - it's your OPINION. You're deluded enough to try and rid the forum of people who don't rate you - Scipio being one of them. Did you actually answer my question about which mod gave you IP info?
Mike's drawings are better because they actually show something, yours are just you trying to look as though you have some kind of professional ability but you actually got the idea from Mike and Myster - copying again! ::)
-
Taken literally it could only mean one of the following:
He knew they would find everyone injured or dead because he had foreknowledge of Sheila's intentions and/or he assisted her in some way - i.e. concocted a reason to leave a loaded weapon out.
He had a 'second sight' intuition that things had gone badly inside the farmhouse, since receiving his father's call.
What it most likely means is that his emotions were vacillating between hope, fear and dread. One minute he thought the worst - the next minute he reassured himself that things might not be that bad. We all do it in times of great stress - for example - a GP referral to a specialist because of a lump or mole or whatever.
Yet with "second sight" intuition" he waited the best part of half an hour before contacting the police about a phone call which "second sight" could have warned him was coming?
-
I don't think that anyone could have foreseen what was going to happen,as part of you doesn't believe it's possible. Had everyone involved known Sheila's personal and behavioural background then perhaps a clearer understanding of what took place would have been easier to accept.
-
Taken literally it could only mean one of the following:
He knew they would find everyone injured or dead because he had foreknowledge of Sheila's intentions and/or he assisted her in some way - i.e. concocted a reason to leave a loaded weapon out.
He had a 'second sight' intuition that things had gone badly inside the farmhouse, since receiving his father's call.
What it most likely means is that his emotions were vacillating between hope, fear and dread. One minute he thought the worst - the next minute he reassured himself that things might not be that bad. We all do it in times of great stress - for example - a GP referral to a specialist because of a lump or mole or whatever.
He had first sight, because he knew.
-
It's not as though Sheila hadn't been known for kicking off in the early hours was it ? Being at WHF was no exception. It had happened at her flat in Maida Vale,so she'd been very unwell during her last weeks.
Phoning her father at all hours just for someone to talk to.
Sheila's non-compliance during the day would have been as a result of a sleepless night and that would have impacted on her drowsy state of mind during the day. After resting and being immobile during the day would then have led to another sleepless night and so it would go on as the sleep pattern was more and more disrupted due to medication.
Sheila HAD been known for "kicking off" in the times prior to her being on medication. Is there evidence that she was phoning Nevill "at all hours for someone to talk to" after discharging herself from hospital in March 1985?
-
Adam thank you for your advice I do have the book but sadly I have not read it but I will do. I think Sheila started off in the downstairs bathroom and was shouting and threatening Nevill heard her went downstairs tried to phone Jeremy she heard him and off upstairs she went shot June turned the gun on Nevill who then retreated downstairs to arm himself followed by Sheila and the rest you know. I think she killed the twins last. She had a shower put on a clean nightdress belonging to June then shot herself. I will need to work on this more.
Thank you. You agree with most other people that Nevill did not ring the police.
Why do you think Sheila took the rifle and locked herself in the downstairs bathroom, & started to shout & threaten ? If she wanted to committ murder/suicide with the rifle she had taken, she just needed to go upstairs with it before anyone woke.
If locking herself in the bathroom & waking Nevill meant she had no plans to kill anyone, what made her change her mind ? Sheila wouldn't know Nevill was ringing Bamber as she was behind a closed door.
There is a slim chance Sheila would hear Nevill say 11 words to Bamber. If still in the downstairs bathroom. I don't know why that would upset Sheila so much to go upstairs & start shooting. However if it did, Nevill could stop her as the call went dead after those 11 words.
Did Nevill not see or hear Sheila go upstairs with the rifle ? He was in the kitchen ringing Bamber. Sheila was making enough noise earlier behind a downstairs closed door to wake him. Although no one else woke. So very doubtful Sheila went upstairs silently.
If Nevill had either heard upstairs shots or seen Sheila go upstairs with the rifle, why was he so unprotected when going upstairs. Sheila was allowed 4 close range shots to Nevill's face.
-
Adam will reply when I get back from my walk :)
-
Sheila HAD been known for "kicking off" in the times prior to her being on medication. Is there evidence that she was phoning Nevill "at all hours for someone to talk to" after discharging herself from hospital in March 1985?
Many " earlier " posts,circa 2011/13, mention the phone-calls between Sheila and her father-----Tyler for instance who was a well-versed,well-informed member had mentioned it among many other things to jog the memory,so her information was reliable to my mind.
-
Many " earlier " posts,circa 2011/13, mention the phone-calls between Sheila and her father-----Tyler for instance who was a well-versed,well-informed member had mentioned it among many other things to jog the memory,so her information was reliable to my mind.
Indeed they do, and not for a moment would I suggest that Tyler wasn't "well-versed, well informed" BUT did ANY of her posts say that these calls occurred AFTER she came out of St Andrew's in March 1985, or are you just assuming that they did? Even reliable information can be misinterpreted.
-
You're right, I don't have any evidence because I am an individual writing on a forum and not pretending to be the worlds greatest detective. The evidence is already there, gathered by others. I do however have an opinion, an opinion just like you but you're deluded enough to think your opinion is evidence - it's not - it's your OPINION. You're deluded enough to try and rid the forum of people who don't rate you - Scipio being one of them. Did you actually answer my question about which mod gave you IP info?
Mike's drawings are better because they actually show something, yours are just you trying to look as though you have some kind of professional ability but you actually got the idea from Mike and Myster - copying again! ::)
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/b3/b38fe70b221aa6a84197df5d150633002228f1a25ec853a3272f0f48771ac80f.jpg)
-
Indeed they do, and not for a moment would I suggest that Tyler wasn't "well-versed, well informed" BUT did ANY of her posts say that these calls occurred AFTER she came out of St Andrew's in March 1985, or are you just assuming that they did? Even reliable information can be misinterpreted.
In the thread dated 2013," Truth of the night before ",tyler had written a post about the phone-calls between Sheila and her father occurring,and being that it seemed to have been a recognised thing,nobody disputed it. I would have said it had been the same year of the tragedies during when Sheila had been discharged from the hospital,since her condition had deteriorated.
-
The silencer should never have been used as evidence. It had been handled by too many people .
Strange that "Sheila's" blood was recovered from the baffle number five, but nothing on 1 2 3 4 6.
Two fingerprints found on rifle one Jeremy, expected one from Sheila, expected.
It is so obvious that the rifle had been wiped by the police, because of multiple handling by EP.
Sheila was not in the kitchen. Nevill was mistaken for a female.
Cops had it right the first time murder/suicide.
-
The silencer should never have been used as evidence. It had been handled by too many people .
Strange that "Sheila's" blood was recovered from the baffle number five, but nothing on 1 2 3 4 6.
Two fingerprints found on rifle one Jeremy, expected one from Sheila, expected.
It is so obvious that the rifle had been wiped by the police, because of multiple handling by EP.
Sheila was not in the kitchen. Nevill was mistaken for a female.
Cops had it right the first time murder/suicide.
"The early common law position in relation to the admissibility of evidence highlighted the relevance of the evidence rather than how it was obtained. In R v Leatham (1861)[1 ] we find the statement of Crompton J., "It matters not how you get it; if you steal it even, it would be admissible". Whilst this view was not wholeheartedly supported by the judiciary, over a hundred years on; in R v Sang [1980][2 ],it was stated that there was "no discretion to refuse to admit relevant admissible evidence on the ground that it was obtained by improper or unfair means. The court is not concerned with how it was obtained". "
-
"The early common law position in relation to the admissibility of evidence highlighted the relevance of the evidence rather than how it was obtained. In R v Leatham (1861)[1 ] we find the statement of Crompton J., "It matters not how you get it; if you steal it even, it would be admissible". Whilst this view was not wholeheartedly supported by the judiciary, over a hundred years on; in R v Sang [1980][2 ],it was stated that there was "no discretion to refuse to admit relevant admissible evidence on the ground that it was obtained by improper or unfair means. The court is not concerned with how it was obtained". "
Yes, but this was not improper, or unfair. It was contaminated.
-
It did happen, Sheila couldn't have shot herself twice with the use of the same gun, her body couldn't be downstairs between 7.35am and 8.10am, supposedly dead in kitchen after only being shot once by a rifle resting against a first floor box room window, and also be with Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor at one and the same time later on, if Jeremy was the killer! Jeremy Bamber was not the killer of his sister he couldn't have shot her twice and staged her death scene sporting two bullet holes in her neck after 8.10am, since by that stage there were only three bodies upstairs! As soon as Sheila arrived upstairs that total changed to four! At the same time where there had been two bodies in the kitchen upon entry, after 8.10am, there was then only one body!
If Sheila was seen downstairs she was unharmed and mistaken for dead. Or it was an error in communication. I believe its the latter.
-
In the thread dated 2013," Truth of the night before ",tyler had written a post about the phone-calls between Sheila and her father occurring,and being that it seemed to have been a recognised thing,nobody disputed it. I would have said it had been the same year of the tragedies during when Sheila had been discharged from the hospital,since her condition had deteriorated.
Absolutely. Jeremy spoke, in a WS, of these "all night calls" to Nevill, but it was prior to her first admission to hospital, in 1983. He makes no mention of such occurrences after her 1985 release. Although I'm sure you'd like to believe they were still happening, there doesn't appear to be any evidence of it.
-
Yes, but this was not improper, or unfair. It was contaminated.
The problem is the defence strategy.
-
What else was there in which to convict ?
Convoluted tales/lies from JM ?
Contaminated silencer ?
-
The silencer was picked up by an officer who was pissed [much to PE disgust] put in a kitchen roll holder. not a evidence bag, a hair disappeared which I doubt, and sent to the lab days later.
It is telling that PE admitted that he tried to dismantle the silencer. Why. PE repaired guns but couldn't do it. Perhaps he DID manage to do it.
-
The problem is the defence strategy.
Yes I agree, his defence was crap.
-
Jeremy Bamber was guilty of being a big headed spoilt brat, but nothing more.
-
Jeremy Bamber was guilty of being a big headed spoilt brat, but nothing more.
Hello Buddy I agree with you on all those points I also think he was immature and did not live in the real world.
-
Jeremy Bamber was guilty of being a big headed spoilt brat, but nothing more.
I agree buddy.
-
Hello Buddy I agree with you on all those points I also think he was immature and did not live in the real world.
Yes Susan very immature, and never really thought that he would found guilty, it must have been a shock. He realised too late that others had a lot to lose if he was acquitted.
-
I agree buddy.
Lookout, I believe he pissed off Jones, and he thought he would show Jeremy who was boss.
-
Lookout, I believe he pissed off Jones, and he thought he would show Jeremy who was boss.
I've no doubt about that buddy.
-
Lookout, I believe he pissed off Jones, and he thought he would show Jeremy who was boss.
The investing of so much emotional involvement -that he was prepared to send a man down for life to get revenge- in a policeman's relationship with a suspect, is laughable.
-
according to Jones and Clarke Sheila's body was laid on top of the bed alongside the body of June Bamber, with the rifle in-between both bodies on the bed, and Sheila having a bible on her chest! That's what they told Ann Eaton that morning after both officers had visited the main bedroom and seen the bodies of the two females, Sheila only having one bullet hole in her neck by that stage!
Jones and Clarke saw Sheila and Junes body on the bed prior to cops moving June's body onto the bedroom floor by the door on one side of the bed, and Sheila's body on the floor on the other side of the bed! The rifle which Jones and Clarke saw laid in-between the bodies of Sheila and June on the bed, was then deliberately placed on top of Sheila's body in time for PC Bird to take photographs of it there after 10 O'clock that same morning!
Anyone who claims Jeremy killed his sister with use of the anshuzt rifle and silencer on the bedroom floor after 8.10am cannot grasp reality, because there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, and Sheila was not one of those three bodies!
-
The investing of so much emotional involvement -that he was prepared to send a man down for life to get revenge- in a policeman's relationship with a suspect, is laughable.
Not impossible though.
-
Yes Susan very immature, and never really thought that he would found guilty, it must have been a shock. He realised too late that others had a lot to lose if he was acquitted.
Buddy he came over as being quite arrogant and cocky in Court and I have to ask myself had he killed his family he would never have behaved like that he would have been mournful and sad. His behaviour helped to convict him he was never expecting to be found guilty I think I read he made a deal with some newspaper about his acquittal. What a silly young ma. His behaviour after the murders was not that of a guilty man but an immature attention seeking silly boy.
-
Not impossible though.
Try proving it. It seems to me that it's alleged character flaws that are being levied against the police to try to show that Jeremy is innocent, yet it's denied that Jeremy had any.
-
Try proving it. It seems to me that it's alleged character flaws that are being levied against the police to try to show that Jeremy is innocent, yet it's denied that Jeremy had any.
A clash of personalities in the police department,or indeed any establishment,is a recipe for disaster.
It becomes a " game " of who can deflate someone's big fat ego,first.
-
A clash of personalities in the police department,or indeed any establishment,is a recipe for disaster.
It becomes a " game " of who can deflate someone's big fat ego,first.
So are you saying the police regarded, as a joke, that they were able to put Jeremy behind bars? Bottom line was, it was down to the jury.
-
A female body which moved from the kitchen downstairs to the main bedroom upstairs after 8.10am, a rifle at the first floor box room window (7.15am) onto Sheila's body after 8.10am, the substitution of one of the two original bullets recovered from Sheila's body so cops could make out the case for her death being caused by two shots from the same gun, an hour's worth of 'informatives' necessary to make the minds up of the senior cops at the scene, on the best way to proceed in presenting the death of Sheila in the main bedroom despite her death already having been reported downstairs in the kitchen earlier, Sheila's body along with June's both on the bed, then moved to the floor after the TFG had left the scene soon after 9am, and blood from Sheila's wounds inside a silencer tell a story all by itself!
Jeremy did not kill his sister, in the main bedroom after 8.10am that morning! Her body wasn't even upstairs by that stage, there were only three bodies upstairs! How was it possible for Sheila to have already been dead elsewhere in the farmhouse (kitchen) with the rifle she supposedly used to kill herself being at a first floor box room window from 7.15am onward? Who moved the rifle from that box room window into the possession of Sheila on the bedroom floor after 8.10am? Not Sheila if she was already dead that's for sure, and not Jeremy because he had no opportunity to kill his sister in the main bedroom after her body arrived there beyond 8.10am! Then of course, because somebody removed the silencer from the gun after Sheila had been shot and killed on the bedroom floor long after 8.10am, the only people who could possibly have done this were the police themselves, not Sheila, not Jeremy, not any as yet unidentified assassin or hitman, only the cops themselves! And, how much of a coincidence is it that 'Stan' Jones should return to the scene from Jeremy's cottage after 11am, to collect 4 exhibits, SBJ/1, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4, (SBJ/1 being the silencer)? How could David Boutflour then find the same silencer on 10th August 1985, if Jones had taken possession of it on the first morning of the investigation and he had removed it from the scene once already? 'Stan' Jones would tell the COLP investigators in 1992 that he could not remember why he returned to the farmhouse late on that first morning or what he did on that occasion? The entries in the original Major Incident Property Register created in connection with the four murders and a suicide investigation tell a different story, Jones took possession of four exhibits from the scene on 7 August 1985, one of which (SBJ/1) was the silencer! These four exhibits were ommitted from the new Major Incident Register created a month later by which time the course of the investigation had changed into one of five murders! Why did cops try to conceal the fact that 'Stan' Jones had seized the silencer from the scene on the first morning of the investigation?
Well, because by that stage relatives were pinning a lot of hope upon the silencer with Sheila's blood inside it that David Boutflour recovered from the cupboard on 10 August 1985! If the truth had come out during the 1986 trial and the subsequent 2002 appeal that cops had removed the silencer from the scene and kept it for a couple of days before returning it to the scene by the evening of 9 August 1985, it would have impacted upon the integrity of the silencer evidence in general in the eventual prosecution of Jeremy Bamber! Jones and Jones, knew that the silencer had been fitted to the barrel of the anshuzt rifle at the time Sheila got shot and killed on the bedroom floor, and the cops tried to conceal its use in that shooting because it presented the cops with an insurmountable problem if they hoped to present the circumstances of Sheila's death as caused by use of one gun which fired both bullets!
-
Yes I agree, his defence was crap.
Why ?
-
Jeremy Bamber was guilty of being a big headed spoilt brat, but nothing more.
The problem is the only Sheila scenario you created has been dismissed. No one agrees Nevill rang Bamber after being shot 4 times.
-
Buddy he came over as being quite arrogant and cocky in Court and I have to ask myself had he killed his family he would never have behaved like that he would have been mournful and sad. His behaviour helped to convict him he was never expecting to be found guilty I think I read he made a deal with some newspaper about his acquittal. What a silly young ma. His behaviour after the murders was not that of a guilty man but an immature attention seeking silly boy.
Yes he didn't come across well after the massacre. And then after his arrest. That was because he was innocent ?
Can you respond to my questions on you're Sheila scenario. Otherwise it will have to be dismissed.
If yours gets dismissed all supporters will have to support Bamber for new reasons as no one can explain in 32 years how Sheila committed the massacre.
Either Mike's/Sherlock's suggestions a hit man team/RB committed the massacre or Bamber somehow had an unfair trial which supporters always claim.
There is no way Nugs or Lookout will create a scenario while Mike & Roch are not going to elaborate from 'by shooting them' or 'Sheila shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'. I'm not going to wait for David's fifth attempt he's apparently been working on for 5 months.
-
No one agrees Nevill rang Bamber after being shot 4 times.
That's because he rang Bamber before he was shot four times.
The only plausible explanation for the trajectories is Neville being shot while coming up the stairs and retreating. What was he doing downstairs? making the phone call.
-
That's because he rang Bamber before he was shot four times.
The only plausible explanation for the trajectories is Neville being shot while coming up the stairs and retreating. What was he doing downstairs? making the phone call.
That is correct...
-
The shooter must have been stood on the top landing or in the doorway of the main bedroom when she shot Neville as he was fleeing down the main stairs! After this at some stage, the shooter placed the rifle she had used against the first floor box room window by 7.15am! This rifle eventually found its way onto the body of Sheila Caffell in time for PC Bird to photograph it in Sheila's possession from 10am, onward...
-
The shooter must have been stood on the top landing or in the doorway of the main bedroom when she shot Neville as he was fleeing down the main stairs! After this at some stage, the shooter placed the rifle she had used against the first floor box room window by 7.15am! This rifle eventually found its way onto the body of Sheila Caffell in time for PC Bird to photograph it in Sheila's possession from 10am, onward...
Jeremy had no involvement in any of this!
-
Sheila killed the other four victims, but she did not kill herself!
-
Sheila killed the other four victims, but she did not kill herself!
How do I know this?
Well she had control of a loaded rifle, and she pointed it in the direction of each of the other four victims and simply shot them!
-
The child victims were easy targets a sleep in their beds!
The parents were targeted whilst isolated from one another!
-
Yes he didn't come across well after the massacre. And then after his arrest. That was because he was innocent ?
Can you respond to my questions on you're Sheila scenario. Otherwise it will have to be dismissed.
If yours gets dismissed all supporters will have to support Bamber for new reasons as no one can explain in 32 years how Sheila committed the massacre.
Either Mike's/Sherlock's suggestions a hit man team/RB committed the massacre or Bamber somehow had an unfair trial which supporters always claim.
There is no way Nugs or Lookout will create a scenario while Mike & Roch are not going to elaborate from 'by shooting them' or 'Sheila shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'. I'm not going to wait for David's fifth attempt he's apparently been working on for 5 months.
Adam off on my second walk will respond when I get back please don't dismiss my scenario I have more to add
-
Adam off on my second walk will respond when I get back please don't dismiss my scenario I have more to add
Have a good walk.
-
How do I know this?
Well she had control of a loaded rifle, and she pointed it in the direction of each of the other four victims and simply shot them!
Having personally met hundreds of 'lifers', in jail, many of who were convicted on murder and armed robbery offences, I soon learnt valuable lessons - one such lesson is that a person in possession of a loaded gun will shoot you if you give him reason to! Sometimes a gun man doesn't need a reason to shoot anybody! If somebody in possession demands you hand something over, if you do this or that, it would be unwise not to cooperate! Somebody who carries a loaded gun is prepared to use it, with or without justification, or otherwise! The person in charge of the loaded gun can shoot you, and kill you!
Sheila was this person inside whf, she had the loaded gun, she shot the other four victims, for one reason or another! Anyone who relies on the pathetic argument that despite Sheila having possesion of a loaded gun she would not have been able to over power Neville Bamber (bullshit)! I have personally been held at gun point twice in my life, it was a terrifying experience, I did what was being asked of me, I was being controlled! The size of a gun man or woman compared to the size of a victim under their control has little if any bearing on the question of a victim being capable of somehow controlling or getting the better of the gun man!
Sheila had the loaded gun, Neville Bamber would have appreciated that if he did not try to handle the situation in a particular way that in all probability his daughter would shoot him! She did shoot him, and these are the facts!
-
I have also been held at knife point, and by use of a Stanley knife blade!
-
I have also been held at knife point, and by use of a Stanley knife blade!
I have been deliberately run over and knocked down by a 17.5 ton truck, and my body thrown into a deep ravine at the roadside at the bottom of which was a stream and left for dead! I have been beaten with use of a baseball bat and left for dead in the hedge of a field, I was unconscious for over nine and a half hours! I mention these things here, not to brag, but to try and demonstrate that I fully understand what it's like to be a victim! Neville Bamber was a victim of Sheila Caffell, so was June Bamber, Nicholas and Daniel Caffell! But she did not kill herself, and Jeremy Bamber did not kill her!
-
I have been sexually abused whilst incarcerated in a detention centre and an approved school (St Williams) by members of staff when I was a teenager
-
I have been sexually abused whilst incarcerated in a detention centre and an approved school (St Williams) by members of staff when I was a teenager
I have on occasions been falsely arrested by cops, remanded in custody, convicted and sentenced to lengthy terms of imprisonment, I have been a victim of police, home office and judiciary corruption!
-
If Jeremy Bamber is not the killer, how can it be said that his view on what took place surounding the death of the five members of his family, is any more accurate than my view?
Jeremy Bamber uses people until he thinks they are of n longer use to him!
I am one of his victims...
-
If Jeremy Bamber is not the killer, how can it be said that his view on what took place surounding the death of the five members of his family, is any more accurate than my view?
Jeremy Bamber uses people until he thinks they are of n longer use to him!
I am one of his victims...
Well he was outside that morning you was not, so I would put his view more accurate.
-
That's because he rang Bamber before he was shot four times.
The only plausible explanation for the trajectories is Neville being shot while coming up the stairs and retreating. What was he doing downstairs? making the phone call.
It was agreed that all the shots were close contact shots, most within a few inches, the furthest being 4' away? The two facial shots wound have bled freely and was in an area that is rich in blood, his mouth would have filled quickly and he would have spat blood out all over the stairs and where ever Neville was, and a good deal of blood, this was agreed by the defence.
-
How come, one minute supporters say Sheila didn't have to be a good shot because all the shots were close contact, then to fit another sinario they have her like an assasin from bedroom doors and two of the shots very near each other in the face as he's coming up stairs at distance?
-
How come, one minute supporters say Sheila didn't have to be a good shot because all the shots were close contact, then to fit another sinario they have her like an assasin from bedroom doors and two shots very near each other in the face as he's coming up stairs at distance?
Coz it's easier to take individual 'frames' and make it fit what they're proposing than to take the thing as a whole, because then all that's left is gut instinct and a belief in Jeremy.
-
Well he was outside that morning you was not, so I would put his view more accurate.
What a load of codswallop!
How the xxxx can anyone say that Jeremy Bamber knows the truth more than anyone else, how his family died, just because he was at the scene albeit outside in the grounds! He is not as intelligent as you give him credit for! He was a bit behind the door intelligence wise when I first came into contact with him in 1989! Anyway, you believe what you want! No court in the land will ever accept that Sheila killed herself, like Jeremy Bamber is maintaining, because she didn't kill herself! Oh, and Bamber didn't kill his sister either! Where did he kill her then? Downstairs in the kitchen, upstairs on top of the bed. Or on the bedroom floor? What gun did he shoot her dead with in the kitchen? How did Jeremy shoot his sister dead, or she allegedly shoot herself dead with the anshuzt rifle resting at the first floor box room window? I suppose you've got an explanation for all these eventualities, you being far more intelligent and logical than I could ever hope to be!
Stop talking bullshit!
-
Many of the scenarios introduced appear shallow in there presentation, not many people on here have yet looked at and considered the bigger picture, building into their version of their scenario all known relevant facts, and the interpretation of all known facts...
-
What a load of codswallop!
How the xxxx can anyone say that Jeremy Bamber knows the truth more than anyone else, how his family died, just because he was at the scene albeit outside in the grounds! He is not as intelligent as you give him credit for! He was a bit behind the door intelligence wise when I first came into contact with him in 1989! Anyway, you believe what you want! No court in the land will ever accept that Sheila killed herself, like Jeremy Bamber is maintaining, because she didn't kill herself! Oh, and Bamber didn't kill his sister either! Where did he kill her then? Downstairs in the kitchen, upstairs on top of the bed. Or on the bedroom floor? What gun did he shoot her dead with in the kitchen? How did Jeremy shoot his sister dead, or she allegedly shoot herself dead with the anshuzt rifle resting at the first floor box room window? I suppose you've got an explanation for all these eventualities, you being far more intelligent and logical than I could ever hope to be!
Stop talking bullshit!
Why the need to swear, you asked a question I answered it, he was outside, don't ask the question if you don't want people to answer. I didn't swear in my answer. I wouldnt call anyone thick that passed 7 O levels.
-
What a load of codswallop!
How the xxxx can anyone say that Jeremy Bamber knows the truth more than anyone else, how his family died, just because he was at the scene albeit outside in the grounds! He is not as intelligent as you give him credit for! He was a bit behind the door intelligence wise when I first came into contact with him in 1989! Anyway, you believe what you want! No court in the land will ever accept that Sheila killed herself, like Jeremy Bamber is maintaining, because she didn't kill herself! Oh, and Bamber didn't kill his sister either! Where did he kill her then? Downstairs in the kitchen, upstairs on top of the bed. Or on the bedroom floor? What gun did he shoot her dead with in the kitchen? How did Jeremy shoot his sister dead, or she allegedly shoot herself dead with the anshuzt rifle resting at the first floor box room window? I suppose you've got an explanation for all these eventualities, you being far more intelligent and logical than I could ever hope to be!
Stop talking bullshit!
But it isn't as if any "court in the land" is being asked to "accept that Sheila killed herself like Jeremy Bamber is maintaining". The relevant court accepted that Jeremy killed her, AND his family.
-
Thank you. You agree with most other people that Nevill did not ring the police.
Why do you think Sheila took the rifle and locked herself in the downstairs bathroom, & started to shout & threaten ? If she wanted to committ murder/suicide with the rifle she had taken, she just needed to go upstairs with it before anyone woke.
If locking herself in the bathroom & waking Nevill meant she had no plans to kill anyone, what made her change her mind ? Sheila wouldn't know Nevill was ringing Bamber as she was behind a closed door.
There is a slim chance Sheila would hear Nevill say 11 words to Bamber. If still in the downstairs bathroom. I don't know why that would upset Sheila so much to go upstairs & start shooting. However if it did, Nevill could stop her as the call went dead after those 11 words.
Did Nevill not see or hear Sheila go upstairs with the rifle ? He was in the kitchen ringing Bamber. Sheila was making enough noise earlier behind a downstairs closed door to wake him. Although no one else woke. So very doubtful Sheila went upstairs silently.
If Nevill had either heard upstairs shots or seen Sheila go upstairs with the rifle, why was he so unprotected when going upstairs. Sheila was allowed 4 close range shots to Nevill's face.
Adam maybe Sheila was in the kitchen with the rifle and Nevill heard her he came downstairs and she ran off into the bathroom locked the door maybe at this stage she was really freaking out this is when he range Jeremy she would have heard him she dashed back uptairs shot June Nevill entered the room and was shot on his approach he went off to arm himself and she was following him. I have another theory will tell you tomorrow.
-
It was agreed that all the shots were close contact shots, most within a few inches, the furthest being 4' away? The two facial shots wound have bled freely and was in an area that is rich in blood, his mouth would have filled quickly and he would have spat blood out all over the stairs and where ever Neville was, and a good deal of blood, this was agreed by the defence.
For what its worth. The theory is Neville retreats holding the wounds just inflicted. This then puts the shoulder into a perfect location for the shot from above to be inflicted.
The shell casings eject forward and can travel up to six feet (apparently). Three of them bounce off the bedroom wall and onto the floor were found (as demonstrated). The one found on the stairs got passed the wall and onto the stairs were it was found.
-
The court which convicted Jeremy Bamber did not know or hear about a lot of evidence which impacted on the evidence which was relied upon by the prosecution, it's witnesses, it's experts, the fact that 'Stan' Jones took the silencer away from the scene on the first morning of the investigation, and returned it into the so called gun cupboard in the den on evening of 9 August 1985, which paved the way for David Boutflour to recover it on the following day!
-
The court which convicted Jeremy Bamber did not know or hear about a lot of evidence which impacted on the evidence which was relied upon by the prosecution, it's witnesses, it's experts, the fact that 'Stan' Jones took the silencer away from the scene on the first morning of the investigation, and returned it into the so called gun cupboard in the den on evening of 9 August 1985, which paved the way for David Boutflour to recover it on the following day!
The exhibit reference (SBJ/1) to the silencer came into force on the first morning of the police investigation (7 August 1985) which becomes problematic for the prosecutions case, because the jury which convicted Jeremy Bamber, and the judge (Drake) which sentenced him to life imprisonment were deceived into thinking the same silencer emerged for the first time when it was found by David Boutflour in the gun cupboard at the farmhouse on 10 August 1985! If the prosecutions case were true, how come 'Stan' Jones had possession of it (SBJ/1) on the first morning of the police investigation? How come upon returning to the scene from Jeremy's cottage that SOCO permitted Jones to remove four different exhibits from the crime scene including the silencer (SBJ/1) if it was scenes of crime officers task and duty to seize and take possession of all or any exhibits linked to any of the deaths? The significance of this matter none more exposed by the fact that when the case was being treated as 'four murders and a suicide' that the silencer (SBJ/1) was logged in a Major Incident Property Register along with three other SBJ exhibits taken from the scene on that first morning! However, once the nature of the investigation changed into one of 'five murders', all 'Stan' Jones four exhibits including the silencer (SBJ/1) were struck out from a new version of the Major Incident Property Register, as though it had never existed or been recovered at all by 'Stan' Jones! Suddenly the silencer was hailed as being found and recovered for the very first time by David Boutflour from the gun cupboard in the den at the scene on 10 August 1985 (4 days after it had already been seized by 'Stan' Jones)!!
-
With the silencer (SBJ/1) in his possession from the first morning of the police investigation, how as it panned out, Jones and Jones went to see Jeremy Bamber at his cottage on the afternoon 9 August 1985, and amongst other things queried Jeremy as to whether or not the silencer was fitted to the guns barrel at the time he took possession of the anshuzt rifle late evening on the 6th August 1985? 'No' responded Jeremy. He told them that the silencer was not fitted to the gun at that time! Once Jones and Jones satisfied themselves of this fact, they took the opportunity later that same evening to return the silencer back into the farmhouse, into the gun cupboard in the den, where David Boutflour later recovered it again on the following day!
-
With the silencer (SBJ/1) in his possession from the first morning of the police investigation, how as it panned out, Jones and Jones went to see Jeremy Bamber at his cottage on the afternoon 9 August 1985, and amongst other things queried Jeremy as to whether or not the silencer was fitted to the guns barrel at the time he took possession of the anshuzt rifle late evening on the 6th August 1985? 'No' responded Jeremy. He told them that the silencer was not fitted to the gun at that time! Once Jones and Jones satisfied themselves of this fact, they took the opportunity later that same evening to return the silencer back into the farmhouse, into the gun cupboard in the den, where David Boutflour later recovered it again on the following day!
All the while, Sheila's blood secreted inside it!
-
This begs the questions - (1) why did SOCO permit 'Stan' Jones to remove the silencer from the scene on the first morning of the police investigation (2) why did Jones and Jones return the said silencer to the farmhouse on evening of 9 August 1985 knowing it had been used on the rifle which shot and killed Sheila Caffell, and (3) the strong likelihood that it contained Sheila's blood inside it?
-
For what its worth. The theory is Neville retreats holding the wounds just inflicted. This then puts the shoulder into a perfect location for the shot from above to be inflicted.
The shell casings eject forward and can travel up to six feet (apparently). Three of them bounce off the bedroom wall and onto the floor were found (as demonstrated). The one found on the stairs got passed the wall and onto the stairs were it was found.
The shots to Neville's Jaw and lip, the muzzle of the gun was within a few inches of the skin, the other two shots were fired close as well, the four to the head were fired in the kitchen within a few inches, fired in quick succession.
-
The silencer should never have been used as evidence. It had been handled by too many people .
Strange that "Sheila's" blood was recovered from the baffle number five, but nothing on 1 2 3 4 6.
Two fingerprints found on rifle one Jeremy, expected one from Sheila, expected.
It is so obvious that the rifle had been wiped by the police, because of multiple handling by EP.
Sheila was not in the kitchen. Nevill was mistaken for a female.
Cops had it right the first time murder/suicide.
Where do you get that impression, it was only on the fifth baffle? He saw it Down to the fourth and fifth, there could also have been some as far as the sixth and seventh baffle not only Sheila's blood but also a possibility a mix of June and Neville? Why is it not possible Bamber wiped the rifle, what makes you think the police would be that stupid as to wipe the murder weapon when it wouldn't have matter if any police finger prints were found on the rifle. I do agree on one point Sheila was mistaken for Neville.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7638.0;attach=44761
-
This begs the questions - (1) why did SOCO permit 'Stan' Jones to remove the silencer from the scene on the first morning of the police investigation (2) why did Jones and Jones return the said silencer to the farmhouse on evening of 9 August 1985 knowing it had been used on the rifle which shot and killed Sheila Caffell, and (3) the strong likelihood that it contained Sheila's blood inside it?
These events occurred as described because cops involved in the death of Sheila Caffell did not want it made known publickly that Sheila died as a result of her being shot by them, once downstairs by use of a police weapon whilst the anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted resting against a first floor box room window, and shot a second time upstairs on the bedroom floor once the said weapon had been brought from its place against the box room window during 'informatives' to Sheila's body and it discharged a live round up into and through the void of her mouth until the bullet nestled in her brain! In the first instance Sheila got shot by an armed cop as that cop attempted to come around the opening edge of an internal kitchen back hallway door, whilst Sheila was under a truce of white flag, she having showed the rifle at the first floor box room window (7.15am) and made her way unarmed downstairs to the kitchen. In the second instance, she was shot and killed because of gross police negligence, cops choosing to perform duties known as 'informatives' with a gun which had not been made safe before it was taken from its location at the box room window and brought to her body in the main bedroom! If Sheila had really shot herself and committed suicide as cops had everyone believe, then why did cops have to bring the anshuzt rifle from its location at the first floor box room window and plant it in Sheila's possession on the bedroom floor? How did Sheila get shot twice and be deemed to have killed herself without any gun being with her body in the main bedroom until the anshuzt rifle was purposefully brought from the box room window to her body by the police themselves? She committed suicide by shooting herself twice without a gun even being present in the main bedroom? Of course she did, because cops said she had!
-
Stop and think about that for a moment, Sheila's body dead on the bedroom floor, two bullet holes in her neck, without so much as a peashooter being present in the main bedroom - the closest gun to her body after it arrived in the main bedroom after 8.10am being the anshuzt rifle that from 7.15am had been resting against the first floor box room window!
-
Stop and think about that for a moment, Sheila's body dead on the bedroom floor, two bullet holes in her neck, without so much as a peashooter being present in the main bedroom - the closest gun to her body after it arrived in the main bedroom after 8.10am being the anshuzt rifle that from 7.15am had been resting against the first floor box room window!
How on earth did that rifle end up with Sheila's body on the bedroom floor by the time PC 'David' Bird started to take the crime scene photographs which by then show the same weapon (minus it's silencer) on the body of Sheila Caffell?
-
Somebody must have moved it from one part of the farmhouse (box room) to the other (upon Sheila's body on the bedroom floor) after it was first spotted leaning against the first floor box room window by WPC Jeapes, and a PC Brown at around 7.15am!
If that person was Sheila then of course Jeremy Bamber cannot be responsible for shooting her dead with use of that gun in the main bedroom, or with staging her death scene there, or even making the claim that his sister had committed suicide?
-
Somebody must have moved it from one part of the farmhouse (box room) to the other (upon Sheila's body on the bedroom floor) after it was first spotted leaning against the first floor box room window by WPC Jeapes, and a PC Brown at around 7.15am!
If that person was Sheila then of course Jeremy Bamber cannot be responsible for shooting her dead with use of that gun in the main bedroom, or with staging her death scene there, or even making the claim that his sister had committed suicide?
It just doesn't make sense that according to the witness statement events of firearm officers who first set foot into the farmhouse at around 7.30am, with the anshuzt rifle already spotted at the first floor box room window (7.15am) before the TFG actually entered the farmhouse, that Sheila's body was already upstairs dead on the main bedroom floor sporting not one but two bullet wounds to her throat, and that Jeremy Bamber could be responsible for shooting his sister dead and staging her death scene to fool cops into accepting his sister had committed suicide after killing the others? How can that possibly be true, if the rifle used to shoot and kill Sheila was at a first floor box room window from 7.15am, onward? How did Jeremy manage somehow to get into the farmhouse after 7.15am and take the aforementioned rifle from its position at the box room window, and place it with his sister's body in order for him to be responsible for staging his sister's suicide on the main bedroom floor, when his sister's body wasn't even anywhere present upstairs until after 8.10am in any event?
-
It just doesn't make sense that according to the witness statement events of firearm officers who first set foot into the farmhouse at around 7.30am, with the anshuzt rifle already spotted at the first floor box room window (7.15am) before the TFG actually entered the farmhouse, that Sheila's body was already upstairs dead on the main bedroom floor sporting not one but two bullet wounds to her throat, and that Jeremy Bamber could be responsible for shooting his sister dead and staging her death scene to fool cops into accepting his sister had committed suicide after killing the others? How can that possibly be true, if the rifle used to shoot and kill Sheila was at a first floor box room window from 7.15am, onward? How did Jeremy manage somehow to get into the farmhouse after 7.15am and take the aforementioned rifle from its position at the box room window, and place it with his sister's body in order for him to be responsible for staging his sister's suicide on the main bedroom floor, when his sister's body wasn't even anywhere present upstairs until after 8.10am in any event?
The claim that Jeremy and no-one else shot and killed his sister and that only Jeremy could have staged his sister's suicide on the main bedroom floor cannot be true, is not true!
-
Jeremy didn't set his sister's death scene on the main bedroom floor with the intention of fooling cops into accepting that Sheila had committed suicide, the cops themselves sought to present her death as a suicide, when they know it wasn't! Not only this but cops knew that it could not be proven that the same gun had fired both shots into Sheila's throat by use of the anshuzt rifle with its silencer attached, because of the distance between the muzzle end of the silencer and the trigger of the anshuzt rifle being too long for that weapon to have fired the original shot across the throat. In other words, Sheila was definitely shot by somebody else, she did not self inflict the first of the two shots! The second shot which I shall refer to as the fatal shot was fired via the anshuzt rifle with the silencer attached, hence how Sheila's blood ended up being drawn into the silencer where it was detected much later! Now, based on other now known factors, the anshuzt rifle could not be with Sheila's body on the bedroom floor at the same time it was resting against the first floor box room window! It can't have been in two different rooms of the farmhouse at one and the same time! We know that by reliance on the contents of police radio message logs timed at 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.45am, and 8.10am, that even after the anshuzt rifle had first been seen at the first floor box room window (7.15am) that Sheila's body was not upstairs on the bedroom floor, otherwise there would have only been one body in the kitchen, and four bodies upstairs by 8.10am! The messages passed by DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, (7.35am), PS Bews, PC Myalls, and PS Saxby (7.37am, 7.38am, and 8.10am) leave no room for doubt that there were two bodies downstairs in the kitchen and only three bodies upstairs making five dead bodies in total by 8.10am. The circumstances which cover how that body count altered after 8.10am, is something the TFG and senior officers involved in the 'informatives' are reluctant to talk about! But, a change in body count downstairs and upstairs did change after 8.10am! By 8.44am the police surgeon verified Sheila dead her body on the far side of the bed hidden from view by the bedroom door! It is unlikely if not impossible for Sheila's body to have already been on the floor by that stage, because shortly after 9am with the commencement of 'informatives' by senior officers, both 'Stan' Jones, and 'Mick' Clarke visited the main bedroom and saw the bodies of Sheila and June laid on top of the bed with a rifle on the bed in-between both bodies. There was a bible on Sheila's body at this time! Jones and Clarke then left the scene to go with Jeremy to his cottage in nearby Goldhanger to take his witness statement! Senior officers did not arrange for the movement of the two bodies from a top the bed until Jones and Clarke had left the scene. Upon arriving at Jeremy's cottage, Jones and Clarke came into contact with Ann Eaton and they recounted where the bodies of the five relatives had been found - Neville in the kitchen, Sheila and June on the bed alongside one another, and the two child victims in their beds in another bedroom! Jones and Clarke told Ann Eaton that it looked like a case of four murders and a suicide, and that Sheila had then shot herself once with the rifle which was on the bed in-between Sheila and Junes bodies!
I doubt very much that by 8.44am when the police surgeon Dr Craig pronounced Sheila dead that her body was already on the bedroom floor by that stage because it would mean that after Craig had verified Sheila's death if her body was on the floor by that stage, that cops moved the bodies of Sheila and June back onto the top of the bed soon after 8.44am, in time for Jones and Clarke to see both bodies on the bed, before they left the scene, and then cops would need to move the two bodies again from on top of the bed back onto the floor on either side of the bed in time for PC 'David' Bird to start Photographing Sheila's and Junes bodies back on the bedroom floor from 10am, onward...
-
We know something had gone dramatically wrong with the firearm operation once DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, DCI 'George' Harris, and PI 'Ivor' Montgomery shuffled into the kitchen of the farmhouse at around 8.15am...
-
We know something had gone dramatically wrong with the firearm operation once DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, DCI 'George' Harris, and PI 'Ivor' Montgomery shuffled into the kitchen of the farmhouse at around 8.15am...
The next 29 minutes of activity after they entered the kitchen covers the disappearence of Sheila's body from the kitchen, displaced upstairs to the bed in the main bedroom! Cops hadn't carried her body there, she made her own way there! This coincided with a shout at the scene by a senior officer requesting that the eavesdrop of the telephone line inside the farmhouse be cut off, and DCI 'George' Harris receiving a radio message for him to telephone ACC 'Peter' Simpson at his home and for Harris to use the landline phone in the kitchen to make that call! The information I have uncovered and gleaned from various sources is that by 8.30am, Sheila was relocated on top of the bed in the parents bedroom believed to be dead again (but was not dead)! The police surgeon, Dr Craig attending in the bedroom and pronouncing Sheila as dead by 8.44am, so we know by reference to all these matters that some stage between 8.10am and 8.44am, that Sheila was able to move around inside the farmhouse despite already having sustained one shot across the neck! What also becomes clear is that within three minutes if it having been confirmed by reference to timed radio log contents, that by 8.13am that DCI 'Terry' Gibbons and PS Bews both knew that two bodies had been found believed dead in the kitchen downstairs, and that the remaining three bodies had been found upstairs in the bedrooms! It is unlikely that the dramatic change in the body count involving bodies downstairs and upstairs altered and became resolved with a matter of three minutes (8.10am, to 8.13am)! 'Terry- Gibbons hadn't even entered the kitchen by that stage (8.13am) so he wouldn't have had any idea that Sheila's body had gone missing out from the kitchen to elsewhere inside the farmhouse! He wouldn't discover this until he physically set foot inside the kitchen with Harris and Montgomery (8.15am)...
-
The shots to Neville's Jaw and lip, the muzzle of the gun was within a few inches of the skin, the other two shots were fired close as well, the four to the head were fired in the kitchen within a few inches, fired in quick succession.
The ballistics expert on the case indicates that the two bullet cases on the landing/doorway (drh13 & 14) related to June, with the shooter standing in the doorway on their return to the room.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4472;image)
-
The ballistics expert on the case indicates that the two bullet cases on the landing/doorway (drh13 & 14) related to June, with the shooter standing in the doorway on their return to the room.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4472;image)
Thanks for that Hartley
-
The ballistics expert on the case indicates that the two bullet cases on the landing/doorway (drh13 & 14) related to June, with the shooter standing in the doorway on their return to the room.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4472;image)
four of the spent bullet cases were added to the main bedroom scenario on instruction of PI 'Bob' Miller (see his handwritten inserts schedule where the original DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4 exhibits were vacated so that four bullet cases could be introduced under the same exhibit references! Why would PI Miller be interested in adding four bullet cases into the main bedroom scenario)? He did this because police wanted to make out a false case that Neville Bamber had been shot four times whilst he was present in the main bedroom, before he went downstairs, and that being the case he would not have been able to speak on the phone to Jeremy or the police, thus undermining Jeremy's claim that he received a call from his dad...
-
Bullet cases DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4, were never found in the main bedroom, four other exhibits originally had these exhibit references which PI 'Bob' Miller vacated so that these extra four bullet cases could be introduced...
-
Bullet cases DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4, were never found in the main bedroom, four other exhibits originally had these exhibit references which PI 'Bob' Miller vacated so that these extra four bullet cases could be introduced...
There were originally only 8 bullet cases found in the main bedroom, an additional one (9th) was found half way down the main stairs!
This tells us that Sheila was only shot once in the main bedroom, and that June Bamber was shot 7 times there! Neville Bamber was shot at as he dashed downstairs to the kitchen phone where he made a swift call to Jeremy, followed by an equally as urgent a call he made to police (3.26am)!
-
Bullet cases DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4, were never found in the main bedroom, four other exhibits originally had these exhibit references which PI 'Bob' Miller vacated so that these extra four bullet cases could be introduced...
'Bob' Miller sought to introduce the four bullet cases so that prosecution could rely upon the false premises that June was shot 7 times, Sheila twice and Neville Bamber 4 times before he fled downstairs! All designed with the idea in mind to fool people into accepting that Sheila had been shot twice in the main bedroom when she had only been shot once there! Also to fool the jury into falsely believing that Neville Bamber had been shot four times, including once in the mouth and jaw thereby making it impossible for him to have spoken on the telephone to anyone least of all to Jeremy or to the police!!!
-
Thanks for that Hartley
Also I noticed in Fletchers evidence that he does indeed indicate that 6 of the shots to Neville were from "within a few inches", as you quite rightly stated.
-
Also I noticed in Fletchers evidence that he does indeed indicate that 6 of the shots to Neville were from "within a few inches", as you quite rightly stated.
Another also. :)
The distance which cartridges are ejected is according to Fletcher, about 4 feet. However he does go on to say that if the cartridges are ejected on to a hard floor then they could bounce/roll a little further, up to 6 feet away.
-
Also I noticed in Fletchers evidence that he does indeed indicate that 6 of the shots to Neville were from "within a few inches", as you quite rightly stated.
Yes I read that and the other two were about 2 feet away?
-
Yes I read that and the other two were about 2 feet away?
He says the other 2 were from "more than two feet away".
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4019.0.html
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4019.0.html)
-
He says the other 2 were from "more than two feet away".
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4019.0.html
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4019.0.html)
Thats right just checked it Hartley thanks.
-
Another also. :)
The distance which cartridges are ejected is according to Fletcher, about 4 feet. However he does go on to say that if the cartridges are ejected on to a hard floor then they could bounce/roll a little further, up to 6 feet away.
Would carpet be classed as hard floor do you think? Or would carpet soften any bounce/roll etc?
-
Would carpet be classed as hard floor do you think? Or would carpet soften any bounce/roll etc?
I think a hard floor would be tiles or timber flooring, maybe lino. I wouldn't say carpet would be considered a "hard" floor. :-\
-
I think a hard floor would be tiles or timber flooring, maybe lino. I wouldn't say carpet would be considered a "hard" floor. :-\
Yes that's my reasoning as well
-
Yes that's my reasoning as well
A wall is hard, but if a shell case only ejects four feet in distance, I can't envisage it travelling a few feet, then hitting a wall and suddenly accelerating a further six feet away (becoming ethereal and passing through a door in the process). ???
-
'Bob' Miller sought to introduce the four bullet cases so that prosecution could rely upon the false premises that June was shot 7 times, Sheila twice and Neville Bamber 4 times before he fled downstairs! All designed with the idea in mind to fool people into accepting that Sheila had been shot twice in the main bedroom when she had only been shot once there! Also to fool the jury into falsely believing that Neville Bamber had been shot four times, including once in the mouth and jaw thereby making it impossible for him to have spoken on the telephone to anyone least of all to Jeremy or to the police!!!
https://youtu.be/RZgBhyU4IvQ
-
There is no doubt that Sheila shot and killed the other four victims, at least she definitely played some role in their deaths!
-
There is no doubt that Sheila shot and killed the other four victims, at least she definitely played some role in their deaths!
I would like to compare the handwriting of "I didn't mean to be horrible to Jeremy" to the alleged suicide note.
-
(9) - that the existence of 'an officers report' regarding 'the shooting incident in the kitchen' is reference to the initial shooting of Sheila Caffell during the entry of armed police into the kitchen, and the fact that cops mistakenly thought she had been killed downstairs in the kitchen, as a result of that 'first shot'...
This 'officers Report' was written because of the circumstances Sheila Caffell got shot in the kitchen as touched upon by message log entries, 7.35am, 7.37am and 7.38am ' the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found on entry to kitchen', one dead male, one dead female', etc, etc, etc...
-
There is no doubt that Sheila shot and killed the other four victims
Absolutely no doubt whatsoever. Which is exactly why police correctly assessed the scene as being such.
-
Absolutely no doubt whatsoever. Which is exactly why police correctly assessed the scene as being such.
Only if you believe Bamber is innocent and in my mind, there is 'no doubt whatsoever' that he isn't.
-
Jeremy was convicted of being the killer of the other four victims by default, just because the prosecution managed to fool the jury into accepting that Sheila had not killed herself! She didn't kill herself, she was shot by another person, once in the kitchen when she was conscious, and later on she was shot on the bedroom floor whilst appearing to be dead, but in truth she was only unconscious! The trial judge, Drake would tell the jury that in Sheila's case there were only two issues worthy of note, firstly that the killer was either Sheila herself, or Jeremy! He emphasised that there was no evidence of any third party involvement in Sheila's death! This was very misleading, but a matter not helped because cops and the CPS kept the contents of the key police radio message logs c!owe to their chests, 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.45am and 8.10am, which places two bodies in the kitchen and only three bodies upstairs! They withheld the key information of the rifle at the first floor box room window as the TFG started to approach the farmhouse at 7.15am, and therefore they did not have to account for how and in what circumstances that rifle found its way onto Sheila's body! If there were only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, then the TFG could not have found Sheila's body on the bedroom floor in possession of the aforementioned rifle, with it impacting upon the ability for Jeremy to have been his sister's killer! He can't have been his sister's killer, there's no doubt whatsoever about it, he isn't his sister's killer! The trial judge, Drake, got it wrong by declaring that there was no evidence of a third party involvement in Sheila Caffells death! Because we now know that evidence capable of supporting a third party involvement in Sheila's death did exist but police and CPS suppressed it!
-
Only if you believe Bamber is innocent and in my mind, there is 'no doubt whatsoever' that he isn't.
I can see where you're coming from - but there was physical evidence at the scene that clearly indicated Sheila Caffell had been the murderer (or killer due to diminished responsibility / mental incapacity - whatever the correct term would have been in 1985).
Even if you remove all of the scenarios, claims, theories about Sheila still being alive concurrent with TFG operation (which of course if true, would be the number one reason why police knew Sheila was culpable), there was still physical evidence at the scene anyway.
Sorry if this is not what you and others want to read or think about. I cannot help that.
Everything you or others have come to believe about this case, originally stems from lies which needed to be committed and evidence which needed to be concealed - otherwise - the case would have been thrown out of court on the first day - if it ever even reached such an advanced stage in proceedings.
-
Imagine also, if the court had been told that the original piece of badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) recovered from Sheila's neck had by 20th September 1985, been substituted and replaced by a whole test fired round fired in the anshuzt rifle post the first day of the police investigation, which enabled the prosecutions ballistic expert to conclude not surprisingly that it (the replacement PV/20) had been fired via the anshuzt rifle...
-
I can see where you're coming from - but there was physical evidence at the scene that clearly indicated Sheila Caffell had been the murderer (or killer due to diminished responsibility / mental incapacity - whatever the correct term would have been in 1985).
Even if you remove all of the scenarios, claims, theories about Sheila still being alive concurrent with TFG operation (which of course if true, would be the number one reason why police knew Sheila was culpable), there was still physical evidence at the scene anyway.
Sorry if this is not what you and others want to read or think about. I cannot help that.
Everything you or others have come to believe about this case, originally stems from lies which needed to be committed and evidence which needed to be concealed - otherwise - the case would have been thrown out of court on the first day - if it ever even reached such an advanced stage in proceedings.
But there's no reason to conceal the evidence because that's the way the investigation was progressing, namely Sheila being the culprit. On this reasoning no need to conceal a call from Nevill either.
-
But there's no reason to conceal the evidence because that's the way the investigation was progressing, namely Sheila being the culprit. On this reasoning no need to conceal a call from Nevill either.
The evidence I'm referring to would have been concealed under the stewardship of the detectives who pursued Jeremy.
If during the first investigation, a phone call from Nevill was originally 'concealed' by Chelmsford / HQIR / DCI Jones etc - it may have related to the level of response and the lack of lives saved as a result.
Supposition I admit.
-
But there's no reason to conceal the evidence because that's the way the investigation was progressing, namely Sheila being the culprit. On this reasoning no need to conceal a call from Nevill either.
Absolutely not, Steve. Whatever supporters may say, police knew, categorically, because Jeremy had given them chapter and verse on it, from the alleged call from Nevill, what they were LIKELY to find. So they found a living Sheila who had obviously dispatched the rest of her family, but after some sort of altercation/accident she's shot. SO WHAT? They were within their rights. They were within their line of duty. They knew she was mentally unstable. Jeremy had told them. THE ALLEGED CALL FROM NEVILL HAD CONTAINED THE WORDS THAT SHEILA HAD GONE MAD! WHY were they trying to hide this call. It was testament to what they found. It corroborated what Jeremy said. It put a halt on the relatives accusations. There was no need -no REASON- to implicate Jeremy........................and unless someone can provide me with a comprehensive and plausible reason for them making themselves look like ejits by waiting a month before changing tack and implicating Jeremy, I have to believe he's guilty as charged.
-
I can see where you're coming from - but there was physical evidence at the scene that clearly indicated Sheila Caffell had been the murderer (or killer due to diminished responsibility / mental incapacity - whatever the correct term would have been in 1985).
Even if you remove all of the scenarios, claims, theories about Sheila still being alive concurrent with TFG operation (which of course if true, would be the number one reason why police knew Sheila was culpable), there was still physical evidence at the scene anyway.
Sorry if this is not what you and others want to read or think about. I cannot help that.
Everything you or others have come to believe about this case, originally stems from lies which needed to be committed and evidence which needed to be concealed - otherwise - the case would have been thrown out of court on the first day - if it ever even reached such an advanced stage in proceedings.
What physical evidence ?
-
What physical evidence ?
Evidence that will see you and all your troll pals elsewhere end up with egg over your faces. In your case, we'll all be placing bets online as to which rock you will crawl under. Come the day.
-
Evidence that will see you and all your troll pals elsewhere end up with egg over your faces. In your case, we'll all be placing bets online as to which rock you will crawl under. Come the day.
So no physical evidence at the scene that "clearly indicated Sheila Caffell had been the murderer".
Thought not. But reply 348 looked nice. Then again so do David's diagrams.
-
So no physical at the scene that 'clearly indicated Sheila Caffell had been the murderer'.
Thought not. But it looked nice when you posted reply 348.
If I was you - I'd ask my handler to get me another posting. This case is going to become embarrassing for you.
-
Where do you get that impression, it was only on the fifth baffle? He saw it Down to the fourth and fifth, there could also have been some as far as the sixth and seventh baffle not only Sheila's blood but also a possibility a mix of June and Neville? Why is it not possible Bamber wiped the rifle, what makes you think the police would be that stupid as to wipe the murder weapon when it wouldn't have matter if any police finger prints were found on the rifle. I do agree on one point Sheila was mistaken for Neville.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7638.0;attach=44761
Then why wasn't blood on the first three baffles? I see you say it is a POSSIBILITY of other blood.
WHY would Jeremy wipe the rifle, he had already told the cops he handled the gun the night before.
Anyway according to the guilters he was wearing a wet suit and gloves,
It wasn't a matter of police fingerprints on the weapon, it was more to do with how many different police prints there were. It would show it was handled by multiple police.
-
Then why wasn't blood on the first three baffles? I see you say it is a POSSIBILITY of other blood.
WHY would Jeremy wipe the rifle, he had already told the cops he handled the gun the night before.
Anyway according to the guilters he was wearing a wet suit and gloves,
It wasn't a matter of police fingerprints on the weapon, it was more to do with how many different police prints there were. It would show it was handled by multiple police.
He said he certainly saw it as FAR down as the fifth and there might have been some as far as the sixth and seventh. Justice Drake asked because he heard it was as far as the fourth possibly the fifth, Fletcher reiterated it had traveled as far as the fifth, possibly sixth and seventh. This doesn't mean it missed one two and three out like you are thinking. Dont you think an expert would find it rather odd if blood had missed first four baffle plates and ended up on the fifth.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7638.0;attach=44761
-
What physical evidence ?
The gun laying on top of Shiela, all doors locked, jb outside, the bible
Etc etc
-
The gun laying on top of Shiela, all doors locked, jb outside, the bible
Etc etc
I was reading Jean Bouttell's statement this morning saying that when she last saw the family on the Monday,there was nothing to indicate that anything was wrong with any of the family members,including Sheila who'd appeared the same as she'd always been.
Mrs B went on to say that there were 4 Bibles and it was June who used to write notes and put them inside pages of the Bibles and also leave notes around the farmhouse which were usually Psalms or Scriptures or passages from certain parts of the Bible. The twins had prayer books.
-
I was reading Jean Bouttell's statement this morning saying that when she last saw the family on the Monday,there was nothing to indicate that anything was wrong with any of the family members,including Sheila who'd appeared the same as she'd always been.
Mrs B went on to say that there were 4 Bibles and it was June who used to write notes and put them inside pages of the Bibles and also leave notes around the farmhouse which were usually Psalms or Scriptures or passages from certain parts of the Bible. The twins had prayer books.
"Appeared the same as she'd always been" is a little ambiguous, don't you think? We can have no idea what she means by it without knowing how she defines what Sheila had "always been".
-
"Appeared the same as she'd always been" is a little ambiguous, don't you think? We can have no idea what she means by it without knowing how she defines what Sheila had "always been".
Normal. What else ?
-
Then why wasn't blood on the first three baffles? I see you say it is a POSSIBILITY of other blood.
WHY would Jeremy wipe the rifle, he had already told the cops he handled the gun the night before.
Anyway according to the guilters he was wearing a wet suit and gloves,
It wasn't a matter of police fingerprints on the weapon, it was more to do with how many different police prints there were. It would show it was handled by multiple police.
Brilliant post as usual buddy
-
Normal. What else ?
Would that be your own definition of what constitutes normal or Jean B's of what passed as being normal for Sheila?
-
"Appeared the same as she'd always been" is a little ambiguous, don't you think? We can have no idea what she means by it without knowing how she defines what Sheila had "always been".
But like we cannot know what Granny Speakman thought of Jeremy even though Miss Marple AKA Ann Eaton tried to mislead people about this relationship
-
I can see where you're coming from - but there was physical evidence at the scene that clearly indicated Sheila Caffell had been the murderer (or killer due to diminished responsibility / mental incapacity - whatever the correct term would have been in 1985).
Even if you remove all of the scenarios, claims, theories about Sheila still being alive concurrent with TFG operation (which of course if true, would be the number one reason why police knew Sheila was culpable), there was still physical evidence at the scene anyway.
Sorry if this is not what you and others want to read or think about. I cannot help that.
Everything you or others have come to believe about this case, originally stems from lies which needed to be committed and evidence which needed to be concealed - otherwise - the case would have been thrown out of court on the first day - if it ever even reached such an advanced stage in proceedings.
Unless you say what that evidence is, then it's only words.
I only want the truth Roch - whatever that is.
I don't believe my position stems from lies, although I have read quite a few here in the past. I believe nothing without evidence and so far, you haven't posted any.
-
But like we cannot know what Granny Speakman thought of Jeremy even though Miss Marple AKA Ann Eaton tried to mislead people about this relationship
For once, you have a valid point. How others tell us they experience someone as being doesn't always give a correct indication of who the person is. Going by that, we only have your word for it that Ann tried to mislead. We now have to make a decision about whose word we take. Should it be Ann's who shared Granny S with Jeremy, OR should it be yours, bearing in mind you'd probably do or say anything which would discredit Ann. Hmm. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place here.
-
Evidence that will see you and all your troll pals elsewhere end up with egg over your faces. In your case, we'll all be placing bets online as to which rock you will crawl under. Come the day.
If such evidence existed, why has it taken 30 years for someone to reveal it? Although it would seem that they still haven't - why the big secret? Surely if you and others come prove Jeremy is innocent, you should be shouting it from the rooftops? Or could it be that the 'evidence' can be argued against?
-
But like we cannot know what Granny Speakman thought of Jeremy even though Miss Marple AKA Ann Eaton tried to mislead people about this relationship
Actually we can, he told me they weren't close but he was close to his grandfather.
-
If such evidence existed, why has it taken 30 years for someone to reveal it? Although it would seem that they still haven't - why the big secret? Surely if you and others come prove Jeremy is innocent, you should be shouting it from the rooftops? Or could it be that the 'evidence' can be argued against?
Caroline, I'm experiencing a strange feeling of deja vu. I was saying exactly that when I first joined and it was being suggested that there was evidence which would release Jeremy imminently yet nothing was being done about it.
-
Actually we can, he told me they weren't close but he was close to his grandfather.
Ah. That sounds as if it's as close to the truth as we can get. No need to question it.
-
Would that be your own definition of what constitutes normal or Jean B's of what passed as being normal for Sheila?
Not my definition because it wasn't me that saw her,but Mrs B hadn't remarked on her being abnormal in any way,and being as the woman had known both children over the years I'd have said that she'd been correct in her description.
-
The gun laying on top of Shiela, all doors locked, jb outside, the bible
Etc etc
All those things can be staged by Bamber. The bible shows Bamber is guilty. Threads created.
Bamber could exit WHF by the kitchen window. Then shut the window from outside.
That's why Roch got upset when I responded to his post by asking the reasonable question - 'What Physical Evidence' & just called me a xxxxx.
There is no crime scene physical evidence that shows Sheila is guilty.
-
Then why wasn't blood on the first three baffles? I see you say it is a POSSIBILITY of other blood.
WHY would Jeremy wipe the rifle, he had already told the cops he handled the gun the night before.
Anyway according to the guilters he was wearing a wet suit and gloves,
It wasn't a matter of police fingerprints on the weapon, it was more to do with how many different police prints there were. It would show it was handled by multiple police.
Why would there be blood on the first three baffles ? Back splatter is random & no one will have control of what baffles the blood ends up on.
-
If such evidence existed, why has it taken 30 years for someone to reveal it?
Why has it taken any time for any evidence that could undermine the conviction to be revealed?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86 that police recorded they found two bodies downstairs - one female and one male?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86, that concurrent with the above, SOCO were called (before any bodies were located upstairs) and told there was a muder and a suicide?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86, that TFG officers (who were the first to witness the crime scene) raised "serious concerns" regarding discrepancies between what they recalled in Sheila's crime scene and the video of crime scene photographs they were later shown?
How long did it take to become known that Sheila's feet had spots of blood on them?
Just a few examples.
-
Why has it taken any time for any evidence that could undermine the conviction to be revealed?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86 that police recorded they found two bodies downstairs - one female and one male?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86, that concurrent with the above, SOCO were called (before any bodies were located upstairs) and told there was a muder and a suicide?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86, that TFG officers (who were the first to witness the crime scene) raised "serious concerns" regarding discrepancies between what they recalled in Sheila's crime scene and the video of crime scene photographs they were later shown?
How long did it take to become known that Sheila's feet had spots of blood on them?
Just a few examples.
This isn't much in 32 years. Considering Bamber & his CT have been on the case 24/7 & Bamber has millions of documents in his cell.
It's all hit & hope.
-
That's why Roch got upset when I responded to his post by asking the reasonable question - 'What Physical Evidence' & just xxxxxx xx x xxxxx.
There is no crime scene physical evidence that shows Sheila is guilty.
Don't say I didn't warn you. Current forum users are my witness.
-
Why has it taken any time for any evidence that could undermine the conviction to be revealed? Nothing has been revealed.
Why wasn't it known in 85/86 that police recorded they found two bodies downstairs - one female and one male? Because they didn't find two bodies downstairs, supporters have simply chosen to ignore the explanation that it was a mistake because it better fits a conspiracy.
Why wasn't it known in 85/86, that concurrent with the above, SOCO were called (before any bodies were located upstairs) and told there was a muder and a suicide? Sorry, don't understand this?
Why wasn't it known in 85/86, that TFG officers (who were the first to witness the crime scene) raised "serious concerns" regarding discrepancies between what they recalled in Sheila's crime scene and the video of crime scene photographs they were later shown? I think I have already answered this in a previous post?
How long did it take to become known that Sheila's feet had spots of blood on them? Why would she not have 'a few' blood spots on her feet? The carpet was covered in blood spots but there is certainly no dirt from the kitchen floor.
Just a few examples.
-
Don't say I didn't warn you. Current forum users are my witness.
Sorry Roch, but we have heard this all before.
-
Sorry Roch, but we have heard this all before.
No need to apologise - but not from me they havent.
-
No need to apologise - but not from me they havent.
No, not from you but I am sure if I were making the same claims, you would be as sceptical. I'm sceptical not because I don't believe that you believe there is compelling evidence, just that I don't think I would find it as compelling. From the points you have raised in recent weeks, whatever it is relates to Sheila being alive inside the farmhouse but ALL of the evidence that I have seen, points to her not being alive.
-
Nothing has been revealed.
That's a silly comment.
Because they didn't find two bodies downstairs, supporters have simply chosen to ignore the explanation that it was a mistake because it better fits a conspiracy.
That should have been for a jury to decide. Conspiracies exist.
Sorry, don't understand this?
When the two bodies were mistakenly found - they were described as a murder and a suicide (which SOCO allegedly interpreted as meaning a murder and a suicide or a murder or suicide.
Given that the only person in the house who could be expected to commit suicide was Sheila Caffell - a jury should have been informed of these circs. This was before the bodies were located upstairs.
I think I have already answered this in a previous post?
You answered it, though IMO, not in a manner which satisfactorily explains.
-
No, not from you but I am sure if I were making the same claims, you would be as sceptical.
Yes I understand what you mean.
I'm sceptical not because I don't believe that you believe there is compelling evidence, just that I don't think I would find it as compelling. From the points you have raised in recent weeks, whatever it is relates to Sheila being alive inside the farmhouse but ALL of the evidence that I have seen, points to her not being alive.
Again I see your point. I cant guarantee that you would interpret the evidence as 'compelling'. I suspect though that it would cause you to ruminate a great deal in private. It doesn't necessarily relate to Sheila being alive at the time of the TFG operation. The fact that this evidence was covered up makes it all the more compelling (in my opinion).
-
Yes I understand what you mean.
Again I see your point. I cant guarantee that you would interpret the evidence as 'compelling'. I suspect though that it would cause you to ruminate a great deal in private. It doesn't necessarily relate to Sheila being alive at the time of the TFG operation. The fact that this evidence was covered up makes it all the more compelling (in my opinion).
OK, so as compelling as you believe this thing is, it can't be something that proves Jeremy is innocent because if it did, I doubt you would simply suggest I would 'ruminate'. I will ask one last question on this because as you have already indicate, if you can't talk about 'it', there is little point in discussing it. Have you seen this evidence or have you just been told that it exists?
-
OK, so as compelling as you believe this thing is, it can't be something that proves Jeremy is innocent because if it did, I doubt you would simply suggest I would 'ruminate'. I will ask one last question on this because as you have already indicate, if you can't talk about 'it', there is little point in discussing it. Have you seen this evidence or have you just been told that it exists?
One the first point - I would argue that it is compelling. My suggestion you would ruminate is based upon your current stance - which is entrenched.
-
One the first point - I would argue that it is compelling. My suggestion you would ruminate is based upon your current stance - which is entrenched.
You would argue that it's compelling because of your current stance - which is also entrenched, only the other way. :)
-
You would argue that it's compelling because of your current stance - which is also entrenched, only the other way. :)
Fair comment :))
-
(2) - Jeremy Bamber did not Shoot his sister, Sheila Jean Caffell, dead inside the farmhouse
How can he have when she did not get shot until after the anshuzt rifle was placed by Sheila herself at the first floor box room window by 7.15am, which caused the TFG to make it's move toward the farmhouse, to enter it, and bring the ongoing seige to a conclusion!
-
(2) - Jeremy Bamber did not Shoot his sister, Sheila Jean Caffell, dead inside the farmhouse
How can he have when she did not get shot until after the anshuzt rifle was placed by Sheila herself at the first floor box room window by 7.15am, which caused the TFG to make it's move toward the farmhouse, to enter it, and bring the ongoing seige to a conclusion!
If Sheila did not get shot until the TFG entered the farmhouse, how can Jeremy be his sister's killer?
-
How did the rifle get from its position at the first floor box room window after 7.15am onto and into the possession of Sheila's body upstairs on the bedroom floor any time after 8.10am, considering that between 7.35am and 8.10am, Sheila's body was known to have been present in the kitchen along with and in addition to Neville Bambers body also being in the kitchen, with only a further three bodies upstairs in the bedrooms by 8.10am?
-
How did the rifle get from its position at the first floor box room window after 7.15am onto and into the possession of Sheila's body upstairs on the bedroom floor any time after 8.10am, considering that between 7.35am and 8.10am, Sheila's body was known to have been present in the kitchen along with and in addition to Neville Bambers body also being in the kitchen, with only a further three bodies upstairs in the bedrooms by 8.10am?
The fourth body (Sheila's) did not arrive upstairs until after 8.10am!
-
The fourth body (Sheila's) did not arrive upstairs until after 8.10am!
Police did not carry Sheila's body from the kitchen to the main bedroom, she made her own way there! She was not dead at 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am as first thought downstairs in the kitchen! Dead females can't make their own way from a kitchen downstairs, to a bedroom upstairs!
-
Police did not carry Sheila's body from the kitchen to the main bedroom, she made her own way there! She was not dead at 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am as first thought downstairs in the kitchen! Dead females can't make their own way from a kitchen downstairs, to a bedroom upstairs!
The fact that Sheila's body was reported dead in the kitchen (7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am), before her body ended up in the main bedroom upstairs after 8.10am, establishes beyond doubt that Jeremy Bamber could not possibly have shot her a second time upstairs in the bedroom with the rifle from the box room window and he could not have unscrewed the silencer from the rifles barrel with Sheila's unique blood inside it, and hidden the said silencer in a different part of the downstairs part of the farmhouse, simply because he had no opportunity to do so any time after 7.15am that morning with the rifle not with Sheila's body in the kitchen, and not in the possession of Sheila's body upstairs on the main bedroom floor all at one and the same time!
Impossible for the rifle at the box room window by 7.15am, and for the same rifle to be downstairs in the kitchen, or upstairs on the bedroom floor, at one and the same time!
-
The fact that Jeremy Bamber ended up getting convicted of his sister's murder based upon a stack of false argument and supposition tells it's own story! The police, prosecutions case had to have been a grossly dishonest one with an ulterior motive!
-
The fact that Jeremy Bamber ended up getting convicted of his sister's murder based upon a stack of false argument and supposition tells it's own story! The police, prosecutions case had to have been a grossly dishonest one with an ulterior motive!
That motive appears to have included the fact that Essex police deliberately sought to conceal the true circumstances surrounding the death of Sheila Caffell by reference to her assumed death downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs with her body on top of the bed, because the TFG, and senior officers did not want the public at large to know how incompetent the police had been in the handling of this case, from start to finish! I disagree with any suggestion that police were well within their rights to shoot an unarmed Sheila in the kitchen, acting under a truce of white flag! You can't go around shooting dead an unarmed person acting on a truce of white flag a person who has shown the rifle at a first floor box room window, and made her way downstairs into the kitchen intending to surrender, to give herself up as it were, only to be shot and left for dead, on the basis that police were well within their rights to shoot her dead in any event? Sorry, but in those circumstances cops were not justified in shooting her dead either in the kitchen where her body remained 7.35am until 8.10am, or later after her body arrived upstairs in the main bedroom after 8.10am that same morning, when the anshuzt rifle was brought from the box room window to Sheila's body so that senior officers could perform 'informatives' using the said rifle as a potential source for the original shooting of her downstairs in the kitchen earlier, to be explained!
-
When police adopt the 'informatives' approach in any investigation, they are deliberately seeking to create alternative explanations for why something happenned, not necessarily the real reason or cause why something may have happenned!
-
When police adopt the 'informatives' approach in any investigation, they are deliberately seeking to create alternative explanations for why something happenned, not necessarily the real reason or cause why something may have happenned!
That's why they brought the anshuzt rifle with its silencer attached from the first floor box room window to Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor to see if it was possible to argue that the first shot inflicted across Sheila's neck in the kitchen could have been fired by it, even though it wasn't...
-
Hi All
Have removed the Sports... Relegation chat to Off Topic....
As usual have moved the personal posts to Hidden Threads.
To make it clear to all, Caroline does all the IT work on the forum.
This means she updates and keeps it running smoothly on a day to day and week to week basis which avoids the crashes which used to happen quite often, as long serving members will remember.
When she is using her status as Admin IT she uses a different account known as Zoso. She uses a different account because this makes the whole Admin IT issue easier for her and ngb1066 to deal with.
Hope the above is clear to all forum members. As with all Admin, moderating etc she gives up her own time to perform these necessary tasks and I'm sure you all appreciate her input. :)
-
Hi All
Have removed the Sports... Relegation chat to Off Topic....
As usual have moved the personal posts to Hidden Threads.
To make it clear to all, Caroline does all the IT work on the forum.
This means she updates and keeps it running smoothly on a day to day and week to week basis which avoids the crashes which used to happen quite often, as long serving members will remember.
When she is using her status as Admin IT she uses a different account known as Zoso. She uses a different account because this makes the whole Admin IT issue easier for her and ngb1066 to deal with.
Hope the above is clear to all forum members. As with all Admin, moderating etc she gives up her own time to perform these necessary tasks and I'm sure you all appreciate her input. :)
Think there was only one person here who questioned it, Maggie. ;D
-
Think there was only one person here who questioned it, Maggie. ;D
Just wanted to clarify as we have some new posters who may not be clear about it and I do think people should remember that the forum couldn't run without IT updating etc. :)
-
Think there was only one person here who questioned it, Maggie. ;D
Why do you have to say that ?
-
Just wanted to clarify as we have some new posters who may not be clear about it and I do think people should remember that the forum couldn't run without IT updating etc. :)
Of course :)
-
Hi All
Have removed the Sports... Relegation chat to Off Topic....
As usual have moved the personal posts to Hidden Threads.
To make it clear to all, Caroline does all the IT work on the forum.
This means she updates and keeps it running smoothly on a day to day and week to week basis which avoids the crashes which used to happen quite often, as long serving members will remember.
When she is using her status as Admin IT she uses a different account known as Zoso. She uses a different account because this makes the whole Admin IT issue easier for her and ngb1066 to deal with.
Hope the above is clear to all forum members. As with all Admin, moderating etc she gives up her own time to perform these necessary tasks and I'm sure you all appreciate her input. :)
Thanks Maggie :)
-
One the first point - I would argue that it is compelling. My suggestion you would ruminate is based upon your current stance - which is entrenched.
If the police shot Sheila as suggested and staged her body, why didn't they stage her body in the kitchen? Because they had made the mistake of identifying one dead female for a male etc in the kitchen, it would have been a lot easier to simply stage Sheila in the kitchen job done? If as suggested police moved evidence about i.e. Bullet casing rifles, Sheila from off the bed etc anything else they wanted to cover up would have been easy
The problem for any release for Bamber, has to be the silencer issue, if Sheila's blood is inside the silencer Sheila could not have shot and killed herself and put the silencer back inside the cupboard. So defence was, we have the relatives to blame for falsifying the silencer and people saying the silencer was never used, to now saying the silencer was used and it had Sheila's blood in it and police put the silencer in the cupboard. Bamber himself knows this never happened he was outside and informed at 8.15 am all his family had been found dead, so the police could not have killed and shot Sheila twice and staged her body, what would be the odds of Sheila getting shot down stairs with one rifle wrestling with police and getting shot in the throat, (what was she doing when the police looked through the window when they said one dead female, was she pretending to be dead, then jumped up and wrestled the police?) then the police shoot her in the throat, leave her for dead, she jumps up and runs upstairs lays on the bed, gets shot again with a different rifle and in a short time they decide there and then to say and stage a suicide. It never happened, so if the silencer was used and Sheila's blood was in it, right DOWN to the fifth baffle plate, not just on that ONE baffle plate, possibly DOWN to the sixth and seventh baffle plate, with Sheila's blood inside (like Mike said) possibly a mixture of Nevilles and June's in as well (making it harder for anyone to plant all three in the silencer) Whats the odds of the police accidentally shooting someone twice with two different rifles and covering it up and no one saying Zilch?
Not very well put but I'm no good with comprehension.
-
What was Sheila doing when she was layed on the kitchen floor, was she pretending to be dead, the police hadn't entered at this stage, she hadn't been shot because the police shot her twice when they entered?
-
If the police shot Sheila as suggested and staged her body, why didn't they stage her body in the kitchen? Because they had made the mistake of identifying one dead female for a male etc in the kitchen, it would have been a lot easier to simply stage Sheila in the kitchen job done? If as suggested police moved evidence about i.e. Bullet casing rifles, Sheila from off the bed etc anything else they wanted to cover up would have been easy
The problem for any release for Bamber, has to be the silencer issue, if Sheila's blood is inside the silencer Sheila could not have shot and killed herself and put the silencer back inside the cupboard. So defence was, we have the relatives to blame for falsifying the silencer and people saying the silencer was never used, to now saying the silencer was used and it had Sheila's blood in it and police put the silencer in the cupboard. Bamber himself knows this never happened he was outside and informed at 8.15 am all his family had been found dead, so the police could not have killed and shot Sheila twice and staged her body, what would be the odds of Sheila getting shot down stairs with one rifle wrestling with police and getting shot in the throat, (what was she doing when the police looked through the window when they said one dead female, was she pretending to be dead, then jumped up and wrestled the police?) then the police shoot her in the throat, leave her for dead, she jumps up and runs upstairs lays on the bed, gets shot again with a different rifle and in a short time they decide there and then to say and stage a suicide. It never happened, so if the silencer was used and Sheila's blood was in it, right DOWN to the fifth baffle plate, not just on that ONE baffle plate, possibly DOWN to the sixth and seventh baffle plate, with Sheila's blood inside (like Mike said) possibly a mixture of Nevilles and June's in as well (making it harder for anyone to plant all three in the silencer) Whats the odds of the police accidentally shooting someone twice with two different rifles and covering it up and no one saying Zilch?
Not very well put but I'm no good with comprehension.
I understand exactly what you're saying, Justice. The silencer being found led me to one of the many different mind changes I had. It was quite obvious that Sheila couldn't have 'incompletely' committed suicide with the silencer attached, then, realizing she hadn't done it, taken the silencer off, hidden it in the cupboard -DOWNSTAIRS- and walked back upstairs to finish what she started.
-
What was Sheila doing when she was layed on the kitchen floor, was she pretending to be dead, the police hadn't entered at this stage, she hadn't been shot because the police shot her twice when they entered?
So why would she be laying on the floor in the first place?
-
So why would she be laying on the floor in the first place?
The theory doesn't hold up Jane, she hadn't been shot at this stage, according to some?
-
I understand exactly what you're saying, Justice. The silencer being found led me to one of the many different mind changes I had. It was quite obvious that Sheila couldn't have 'incompletely' committed suicide with the silencer attached, then, realizing she hadn't done it, taken the silencer off, hidden it in the cupboard -DOWNSTAIRS- and walked back upstairs to finish what she started.
She most certainly could not have done. Once Sheila had been blasted or had blasted herself in the neck once... imagine the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body ... her BP would have plummeted and any confused attempt to stand up or even lift her head up would have caused her to faint. That's the way our bodies protect us to keep us alive, the blood rushes away from the peripheral and less important areas towards the life sustaining organs such as the liver, kidneys, heart, lungs to keep us alive therefore we do not have the means to function. Imo it would have been pretty much impossible for Sheila to have been able to think clearly never mind to be able to function on any level.
-
The theory doesn't hold up Jane, she hadn't been shot at this stage, according to some?
It doesn't, Justice, but it seems to me that supporters make their point by creating little cameo's which work as if they're separate snapshots. When the whole picture is examined the cameo's fall apart.
-
If the police shot Sheila as suggested and staged her body, why didn't they stage her body in the kitchen? Because they had made the mistake of identifying one dead female for a male etc in the kitchen, it would have been a lot easier to simply stage Sheila in the kitchen job done?
It would have been a lot easier to simply be honest and say they had to neutralise the threat. :-\
That's not the main reason why I don't believe this "theory". But it makes sense.
-
She most certainly could not have done. Once Sheila had been blasted or had blasted herself in the neck once... imagine the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body ... her BP would have plummeted and any confused attempt to stand up or even lift her head up would have caused her to faint. That's the way our bodies protect us to keep us alive, the blood rushes away from the peripheral and less important areas towards the life sustaining organs such as the liver, kidneys, heart, lungs to keep us alive therefore we do not have the means to function. Imo it would have been pretty much impossible for Sheila to have been able to think clearly never mind to be able to function on any level.
Absolutely so, Maggie. To put forward the notion that she was functioning so well that she could descend and ascend the staircase with that injury is ludicrous beyond words.
-
Absolutely so, Maggie. To put forward the notion that she was functioning so well that she could descend and ascend the staircase with that injury is ludicrous beyond words.
It is impossible, although it is true that because of the body's reaction to severe trauma the injured person will normally not feel pain as such therefore it's common for someone in such circumstances to attempt to get up or try to do whatever they have their muddled mind set on but the physical reaction of the body makes this impossible.
I have always thought that Sheila was blasted in the neck to either kill her or to injure her enough to be able to then finish her off with the second shot. I cannot imagine why anyone trying to kill themselves would have shot themselves at that angle in that area of the throat. All alone in the house after preparing herself she had time to choose the best option for instant death, just doesn't make sense to me.
-
It is impossible, although it is true that because of the body's reaction to severe trauma the injured person will normally not feel pain as such therefore it's common for someone in such circumstances to attempt to get up or try to do whatever they have their muddled mind set on but the physical reaction of the body makes this impossible.
I have always thought that Sheila was blasted in the neck to either kill her or to injure her enough to be able to then finish her off with the second shot. I cannot imagine why anyone trying to kill themselves would have shot themselves at that angle in that area of the throat. All alone in the house after preparing herself she had time to choose the best option for instant death, just doesn't make sense to me.
Well, I guess we've all heard of the chicken which has had it's neck wrung or it's head removed but runs amok around the garden before it dies. However, It doesn't go down a staircase, bend its shattered cervical area to put a silencer in a cupboard and return up the flight of stairs before finally dying.
-
She most certainly could not have done. Once Sheila had been blasted or had blasted herself in the neck once... imagine the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body ... her BP would have plummeted and any confused attempt to stand up or even lift her head up would have caused her to faint. That's the way our bodies protect us to keep us alive, the blood rushes away from the peripheral and less important areas towards the life sustaining organs such as the liver, kidneys, heart, lungs to keep us alive therefore we do not have the means to function. Imo it would have been pretty much impossible for Sheila to have been able to think clearly never mind to be able to function on any level.
Quite right Maggie, if she got Shot in the kitchen on entry she would have lost a lot of blood both external and internal, fractured her 4th vertebrae and yet she stays alive till 8.10am makes her way upstairs onto the bed with numerous police officers missing her move at all, without reading I think Manners had got the kitchen and hall covered?
-
Why run upstairs after being shot by the police, she loved her dad so why not stop in the kitchen where he was, if anything she would have gone to the twins bedroom?
-
Professor Knight testified during the 1986 trial that Sheila could have moved around for as long as half an hour or so after receiving the first shot across the neck! I believe there to be some element of truth in his professional opinion, with the proviso that after Sheila became deeply unconscious immediately upon being shot in the kitchen! She eventually regained consciousness sufficiently to make her way upstairs to the main bedroom after 8.10am, and she collapsed on the bed! She wasn't therefore, moving around for the whole half an hour after she got shot the first time, how long would it take to get from the kitchen to the bedroom, less than a minute, a minute, a minute and a half, two minutes?
-
Professor Knight testified during the 1986 trial that Sheila could have moved around for as long as half an hour or so after receiving the first shot across the neck! I believe there to be some element of truth in his professional opinion, with the proviso that after Sheila became deeply unconscious immediately upon being shot in the kitchen! She eventually regained consciousness sufficiently to make her way upstairs to the main bedroom after 8.10am, and she collapsed on the bed! She wasn't therefore, moving around for the whole half an hour after she got shot the first time, how long would it take to get from the kitchen to the bedroom, less than a minute, a minute, a minute and a half, two minutes?
It is not known whether Sheila ran upstairs, or walked, or staggered...
-
The distance between the kitchen and the bed in the main bedroom was not an overly distance via the spiral staircase in the corner of the kitchen!
-
Professor Knight testified during the 1986 trial that Sheila could have moved around for as long as half an hour or so after receiving the first shot across the neck! I believe there to be some element of truth in his professional opinion, with the proviso that after Sheila became deeply unconscious immediately upon being shot in the kitchen! She eventually regained consciousness sufficiently to make her way upstairs to the main bedroom after 8.10am, and she collapsed on the bed! She wasn't therefore, moving around for the whole half an hour after she got shot the first time, how long would it take to get from the kitchen to the bedroom, less than a minute, a minute, a minute and a half, two minutes?
Knight was doubtful Jeremy could have concocted the scenario they were all confronted with unravelling but a few pages further (Blood Relations) he's pretty sure Sheila wasn't responsible herself.
-
Professor Knight almost got the interpretation spot on when he said that he would expect Sheila to have been moving around for as much as half an hour after she got shot on the first occasion! Except, that she did not move around continually during that half hour period, chiefly because she had lapsed into unconsciousness for almost the entirety of that estimated period, recovered and found herself collapsing on top of the bed sporting a solitary bullet wound to her throat!
-
Professor Knight almost got the interpretation spot on when he said that he would expect Sheila to have been moving around for as much as half an hour after she got shot on the first occasion! Except, that she did not move around continually during that half hour period, chiefly because she had lapsed into unconsciousness for almost the entirety of that estimated period, recovered and found herself collapsing on top of the bed sporting a solitary bullet wound to her throat!
A source for this might be helpful.
-
Knight was doubtful Jeremy could have concocted the scenario they were all confronted with unravelling but a few pages further (Blood Relations) he's pretty sure Sheila wasn't responsible herself.
I co-operated with Roger Wilkes when he was penning the transcript of his book!
My involvement was chiefly in the role of making the documents available to him...
It's just a coincidence that both Wilkes and myself arrived independently of one another the belief that Sheila had not shot herself! He and I are both correct in our interpretation of the circumstances surrounding Sheila's death! She was shot and killed by another person! Sheila did shoot and kill the other four victims, but she did not kill herself.
-
I co-operated with Roger Wilkes when he was penning the transcript of his book!
My involvement was chiefly in the role of making the documents available to him...
It's just a coincidence that both Wilkes and myself arrived independently of one another the belief that Sheila had not shot herself! He and I are both correct in our interpretation of the circumstances surrounding Sheila's death! She was shot and killed by another person! Sheila did shoot and kill the other four victims, but she did not kill herself.
How can one possibly discern whether somebody shot themselves or whether another hand was on the gun at the time the shot was discharged? It's why Jeremy boasted of committing the perfect crime.
-
If the police shot Sheila as suggested and staged her body, why didn't they stage her body in the kitchen? Because they had made the mistake of identifying one dead female for a male etc in the kitchen, it would have been a lot easier to simply stage Sheila in the kitchen job done? If as suggested police moved evidence about i.e. Bullet casing rifles, Sheila from off the bed etc anything else they wanted to cover up would have been easy
The problem for any release for Bamber, has to be the silencer issue, if Sheila's blood is inside the silencer Sheila could not have shot and killed herself and put the silencer back inside the cupboard. So defence was, we have the relatives to blame for falsifying the silencer and people saying the silencer was never used, to now saying the silencer was used and it had Sheila's blood in it and police put the silencer in the cupboard. Bamber himself knows this never happened he was outside and informed at 8.15 am all his family had been found dead, so the police could not have killed and shot Sheila twice and staged her body, what would be the odds of Sheila getting shot down stairs with one rifle wrestling with police and getting shot in the throat, (what was she doing when the police looked through the window when they said one dead female, was she pretending to be dead, then jumped up and wrestled the police?) then the police shoot her in the throat, leave her for dead, she jumps up and runs upstairs lays on the bed, gets shot again with a different rifle and in a short time they decide there and then to say and stage a suicide. It never happened, so if the silencer was used and Sheila's blood was in it, right DOWN to the fifth baffle plate, not just on that ONE baffle plate, possibly DOWN to the sixth and seventh baffle plate, with Sheila's blood inside (like Mike said) possibly a mixture of Nevilles and June's in as well (making it harder for anyone to plant all three in the silencer) Whats the odds of the police accidentally shooting someone twice with two different rifles and covering it up and no one saying Zilch?
Not very well put but I'm no good with comprehension.
This scenario makes no sense as soon as you think it through, Justice.
First of all, the logs which mention two bodies downstairs, one male one female etc. were withheld for many years only coming to light after the second appeal, I believe. That there was an active attempt to conceal any evidence which might suggest that the crime scene as presented by EP is not necessarily the same as the one found by EP is self evident.
More importantly however is the faulty logic behind your reasoning.
Your suggestion that it would have been easier to stage Sheila's body in the kitchen after she was killed in the bedroom is preposterous. Regardless of your stance on what really did happen, the idea that EP would further contaminate the crime scene by carrying the now deceased body of Sheila back to the kitchen because in the midst of the chaos someone has realised that it has been mentioned on logs that two bodies were found on entry is frankly just silly.
Faced with the dilemma that is alleged, I think that the easiest way to cover up the real facts would be not to move the body back downstairs but instead to hide the logs.
Coincidentally, I'm sure, the logs were withheld/concealed for years, only eventually coming to light due to an error on EP's part.
-
This scenario makes no sense as soon as you think it through, Justice.
First of all, the logs which mention two bodies downstairs, one male one female etc. were withheld for many years only coming to light after the second appeal, I believe. That there was an active attempt to conceal any evidence which might suggest that the crime scene as presented by EP is not necessarily the same as the one found by EP is self evident.
More importantly however is the faulty logic behind your reasoning.
Your suggestion that it would have been easier to stage Sheila's body in the kitchen after she was killed in the bedroom is preposterous. Regardless of your stance on what really did happen, the idea that EP would further contaminate the crime scene by carrying the now deceased body of Sheila back to the kitchen because in the midst of the chaos someone has realised that it has been mentioned on logs that two bodies were found on entry is frankly just silly.
Faced with the dilemma that is alleged, I think that the easiest way to cover up the real facts would be not to move the body back downstairs but instead to hide the logs.
Coincidentally, I'm sure, the logs were withheld/concealed for years, only eventually coming to light due to an error on EP's part.
What logs are you talking about? It's in statements about one dead female in the kitchen which was accepted as being Neville, I think the idea that the police shot Sheila twice with two different rifles once in the kitchen and once upstairs is more silly and preposterous don't you?
-
One dead female on the kitchen floor, supporters have always said Sheila had shot herself once before the raid team entered the kitchen, even though it was Neville's mistaken for a Female, they have used this mistaken identity to fuel a MOJ, so if it was Sheila on the floor layed out before police entered with open mic's, she got shot again by the police downstairs and then got shot again upstairs with two different rifles?
Supporters claim she got shot by police while trying to give herself up (waving a white flag) so to speak, police were outside from 4.00 am onwards unharmed at times surely she had 3.5 hours of time to give herself up?
-
A source for this might be helpful.
I don't think you'll find a source for this Steve,Professor Wright is someone else that I don't particularly hold in high regard for.
-
It is impossible, although it is true that because of the body's reaction to severe trauma the injured person will normally not feel pain as such therefore it's common for someone in such circumstances to attempt to get up or try to do whatever they have their muddled mind set on but the physical reaction of the body makes this impossible.
I have always thought that Sheila was blasted in the neck to either kill her or to injure her enough to be able to then finish her off with the second shot. I cannot imagine why anyone trying to kill themselves would have shot themselves at that angle in that area of the throat. All alone in the house after preparing herself she had time to choose the best option for instant death, just doesn't make sense to me.
Hi Maggie I know the two shots to Sheila's neck has always worried you and as the angle of the shots. Does anyone know if the prosecution used this to convict Jeremy they were short on evidence.
-
Hi Maggie I know the two shots to Sheila's neck has always worried you and as the angle of the shots. Does anyone know if the prosecution used this to convict Jeremy they were short on evidence.
Vanezis said it didn't worry him as he had known cases where suicide victims took multiple shots to kill themselves. This is in the books, though I'm not sure if he was ever asked the question at trial.
-
Vanezis said it didn't worry him as he had known cases where suicide victims took multiple shots to kill themselves. This is in the books, though I'm not sure if he was ever asked the question at trial.
It is noted in one of his later statements I think.
-
Hi Maggie I know the two shots to Sheila's neck has always worried you and as the angle of the shots. Does anyone know if the prosecution used this to convict Jeremy they were short on evidence.
True enough Susie and I do wonder how on earth she was able to carry out the 2nd shot after the first injury. Think we were mislead by the original assertion that she may have been stunned for a short time then able to walk around for about 30 mins.
In theory I can see this may have been possible because the bullet had not hit a vital organ but Sheila was very slender and frail and suffered from an appalling mental health illness which required she was heavily medicated with Haloperidol.
I know they had dropped the dose but it was still a highly effective dose and it would not have run down in her system over the month, such drugs are designed to give off a measured, slow release dose so she would always be protected by it.
I cannot imagine she could possibly have had much resistance to the first blast in the neck. Anyone who has ever been badly injured or tried to stand up too soon after an anaesthetic will know how dreadful that feels as your BP drops and how totally incapacitating it is.
-
Morning Hartley & Steve thank you for your comments I will look through the statements.
-
Morning Hartley & Steve thank you for your comments I will look through the statements.
Morning Susan. If you are referring to the shots to Sheila, it is on page two of these post trial notes:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7638.msg362944.html#msg362944
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7638.msg362944.html#msg362944)
-
Hello Maggie thanks for your explanation and I am sure you are right as I know nothing about these drugs and I know you do. It is quite obvious EP seem to take no notice of all this as I have read little or nothing about it but I do think the police work was somewhat shoddy. Maggie are you ex SAS hehehe X
-
Hartley thank you so much for the link I really found the statement interesting and proves I need to do some more serious reading :)
-
This scenario makes no sense as soon as you think it through, Justice.
First of all, the logs which mention two bodies downstairs, one male one female etc. were withheld for many years only coming to light after the second appeal, I believe. That there was an active attempt to conceal any evidence which might suggest that the crime scene as presented by EP is not necessarily the same as the one found by EP is self evident.
More importantly however is the faulty logic behind your reasoning.
Your suggestion that it would have been easier to stage Sheila's body in the kitchen after she was killed in the bedroom is preposterous. Regardless of your stance on what really did happen, the idea that EP would further contaminate the crime scene by carrying the now deceased body of Sheila back to the kitchen because in the midst of the chaos someone has realised that it has been mentioned on logs that two bodies were found on entry is frankly just silly.
Faced with the dilemma that is alleged, I think that the easiest way to cover up the real facts would be not to move the body back downstairs but instead to hide the logs.
Coincidentally, I'm sure, the logs were withheld/concealed for years, only eventually coming to light due to an error on EP's part.
What logs were withheld?
-
Sorry if this has been covered previously, I don't have time to read all the posts; however if people are going to argue that it would be "ludicruous" to suggest that Sheila managed to get upstairs from the first shot, then "ludicrous" also equally has to apply to June and Neville who both were able to get up and move about after being shot in their beds.
June managed to get up and put up at least some token resistance with the presumable final shot between her eyes indicating that the killer was having some difficulty despatching her for good, even after the additional six shots she had received previously.
For those that argue that Nevill was shot in the mouth upstairs, it would have to be concluded that even after receiving such a debilitating wound he still managed to stay on his feet and put up one helluva fight in the kitchen before succumbing to further shots.
So the point I'm trying to make here is that if a single shot is so debilitating for Sheila, then by the same token, both Nevill and June would not have been able to get out of their beds to defend themselves, which they apparently tried to do with equally debilitating wounds.
Hoots!
-
What logs were withheld?
I asked the same Caroline
-
Sorry if this has been covered previously, I don't have time to read all the posts; however if people are going to argue that it would be "ludicruous" to suggest that Sheila managed to get upstairs from the first shot, then "ludicrous" also equally has to apply to June and Neville who both were able to get up and move about after being shot in their beds.
June managed to get up and put up at least some token resistance with the presumable final shot between her eyes indicating that the killer was having some difficulty despatching her for good, even after the additional six shots she had received previously.
For those that argue that Nevill was shot in the mouth upstairs, it would have to be concluded that even after receiving such a debilitating wound he still managed to stay on his feet and put up one helluva fight in the kitchen before succumbing to further shots.
So the point I'm trying to make here is that if a single shot is so debilitating for Sheila, then by the same token, both Nevill and June would not have been able to get out of their beds to defend themselves, which they apparently tried to do with equally debilitating wounds.
Hoots!
Being shot in the legs, arms and jaw aren't going to be fatal or stop you from moving around, Sheila was shot in the neck, the bullet damaged both her jugular and fractured vertebrae.
-
Sorry if this has been covered previously, I don't have time to read all the posts; however if people are going to argue that it would be "ludicruous" to suggest that Sheila managed to get upstairs from the first shot, then "ludicrous" also equally has to apply to June and Neville who both were able to get up and move about after being shot in their beds.
June managed to get up and put up at least some token resistance with the presumable final shot between her eyes indicating that the killer was having some difficulty despatching her for good, even after the additional six shots she had received previously.
For those that argue that Nevill was shot in the mouth upstairs, it would have to be concluded that even after receiving such a debilitating wound he still managed to stay on his feet and put up one helluva fight in the kitchen before succumbing to further shots.
So the point I'm trying to make here is that if a single shot is so debilitating for Sheila, then by the same token, both Nevill and June would not have been able to get out of their beds to defend themselves, which they apparently tried to do with equally debilitating wounds.
Hoots!
Before you dismiss "ludicrous" as a description of Sheila getting herself downstairs, probably having to either get on her hands and knees or at least bend/crouch to put the silencer at the back of the cupboard, then make her way back upstairs, perhaps you should give greater thought to the injury -the MORTAL injury- she'd sustained. Imagine what the pain would have been, from those two shattered vertebrae, jarring on each tread. Imagine the pain she'd have endured by the strain of having to bend her neck to hide the silencer. All that pain compounded by getting herself back upstairs. Incidentally, how long do you imagine this journey would have taken? Nevill's injuries, at that stage, although painful, weren't life threatening. June only had to drag one foot in front of the other on a flat surface. No distance at all compared with what you're suggesting Sheila covered.
-
Being shot in the legs, arms and jaw aren't going to be fatal or stop you from moving around, Sheila was shot in the neck, the bullet damaged both her jugular and fractured vertebrae.
So, let me get this straight, your saying. "the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body" quoted by Maggie I think, wouldn't have applied to June's neck wound, head wound above her ear, the wounds on her upper and lower part of her chest, all conceivably when she still lay in bed, as well as Nevill's mouth wound which also could have been received in bed amongst other wounds?
Hoots!
-
So, let me get this straight, your saying. "the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body" quoted by Maggie I think, wouldn't have applied to June's neck wound, head wound above her ear, the wounds on her upper and lower part of her chest, all conceivably when she still lay in bed, as well as Nevill's mouth wound which also could have been received in bed amongst other wounds?
Hoots!
Flights of stairs generally numbering 13 means they alone would have taken Sheila 26 EXCRUCIATINGLY painful steps to negotiate. That's without the bending involved and all the extra steps.
-
So, let me get this straight, your saying. "the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body" quoted by Maggie I think, wouldn't have applied to June's neck wound, head wound above her ear, the wounds on her upper and lower part of her chest, all conceivably when she still lay in bed, as well as Nevill's mouth wound which also could have been received in bed amongst other wounds?
Hoots!
June's neck wound was through cervical musculature not through bone and it did not hit her jugular and other than the wound that killed her, it seems there was nothing that would have stopped her walking and there is evidence that she did. There is none to suggest that Sheila did - even the blood on her nightdress proved she didn't walk anywhere. Nevill being shot in the jaw, wouldn't stop him from walking but as there is no blood on his side of the bed, it's not clear where he was shot.
-
Before you dismiss "ludicrous" as a description of Sheila getting herself downstairs, probably having to either get on her hands and knees or at least bend/crouch to put the silencer at the back of the cupboard, then make her way back upstairs, perhaps you should give greater thought to the injury -the MORTAL injury- she'd sustained. Imagine what the pain would have been, from those two shattered vertebrae, jarring on each tread. Imagine the pain she'd have endured by the strain of having to bend her neck to hide the silencer. All that pain compounded by getting herself back upstairs. Incidentally, how long do you imagine this journey would have taken? Nevill's injuries, at that stage, although painful, weren't life threatening. June only had to drag one foot in front of the other on a flat surface. No distance at all compared with what you're suggesting Sheila covered.
I'm not the one doing the suggesting, I'm merely trying to find out why "the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body" was significantly more debilitating for Sheila with one shot than Nevill or June specifically, who may have suffered the majority of her wounds in bed and suffered significantly more "impact and trauma" yet was able to get up and try to defend herself regardless of having wounds that may have proved equally fatal through blood loss, even if the final shot between the eyes had not been delivered.
Hoots!
-
Whose blood was it on Neville's side of the bed ?
-
I'm not the one doing the suggesting, I'm merely trying to find out why "the impact and subsequent trauma that would have caused to her body" was significantly more debilitating for Sheila with one shot than Nevill or June specifically, who may have suffered the majority of her wounds in bed and suffered significantly more "impact and trauma" yet was able to get up and try to defend herself regardless of having wounds that may have proved equally fatal through blood loss, even if the final shot between the eyes had not been delivered.
Hoots!
I imagine it's been explained rather clearly. Had June been treated prior to the head shot she may not have died. Unlike Sheila whose wound was mortal -fatal but not immediately so- and would undoubtedly have been exacerbated by the amount of steps, and the accompanying jarring which would have occurred.
-
Whose blood was it on Neville's side of the bed ?
Hi lookout
I did not know there was any blood on Nevill's side of the bed and this has always been a mystery to me. I thought I had read that some blood was on the floor outside Sheila's room.
-
Hi lookout
I did not know there was any blood on Nevill's side of the bed and this has always been a mystery to me. I thought I had read that some blood was on the floor outside Sheila's room.
Hi Susan,yes there is blood on that side as I remember it being said that maybe Sheila had sat on the edge because at the back of her nightdress was a bloodstain which could well have mirrored where she'd sat. The pic is on the forum somewhere of both the bed and the nightdress.
-
Sorry if this has been covered previously, I don't have time to read all the posts; however if people are going to argue that it would be "ludicruous" to suggest that Sheila managed to get upstairs from the first shot, then "ludicrous" also equally has to apply to June and Neville who both were able to get up and move about after being shot in their beds.
June managed to get up and put up at least some token resistance with the presumable final shot between her eyes indicating that the killer was having some difficulty despatching her for good, even after the additional six shots she had received previously.
For those that argue that Nevill was shot in the mouth upstairs, it would have to be concluded that even after receiving such a debilitating wound he still managed to stay on his feet and put up one helluva fight in the kitchen before succumbing to further shots.
So the point I'm trying to make here is that if a single shot is so debilitating for Sheila, then by the same token, both Nevill and June would not have been able to get out of their beds to defend themselves, which they apparently tried to do with equally debilitating wounds.
Hoots!
Nevill & June were not shot in the same position as Sheila was. June didn't resist. She just moved a few feet. Nevill was stronger than both & two of his upstairs shots were body shots.
The evidence shows that Sheila died after two shots & Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs & got downstairs.
There was no possibility Sheila could have shot herself once & walked around WHF. And no reason why she would do this.
-
One of the raid team,PC Manners in his 1991 COLP interview had said that it had looked as though June had been dragged from her bed by her feet,which would have indicated that she'd been shot whilst in bed. There are pics showing different positions of her,so she had been moved from her bed,then propped up against the bedroom door,lying on her side,then on her back.
Going by this,it would have appeared to have been Junes blood on the other side of the bed if she'd been dragged off it.
What a bloody awful thought.
-
Sorry if this has been covered previously, I don't have time to read all the posts; however if people are going to argue that it would be "ludicruous" to suggest that Sheila managed to get upstairs from the first shot, then "ludicrous" also equally has to apply to June and Neville who both were able to get up and move about after being shot in their beds.
June managed to get up and put up at least some token resistance with the presumable final shot between her eyes indicating that the killer was having some difficulty despatching her for good, even after the additional six shots she had received previously.
For those that argue that Nevill was shot in the mouth upstairs, it would have to be concluded that even after receiving such a debilitating wound he still managed to stay on his feet and put up one helluva fight in the kitchen before succumbing to further shots.
So the point I'm trying to make here is that if a single shot is so debilitating for Sheila, then by the same token, both Nevill and June would not have been able to get out of their beds to defend themselves, which they apparently tried to do with equally debilitating wounds.
Hoots!
Sheila received both shots at the same time while she was sitting upwards.
"Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries. After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back." COA 2002
(https://s23.postimg.org/j21q30ed7/trails.jpg)
(https://s23.postimg.org/io0e3eu9n/blood_trails.jpg)
-
Hi Susan,yes there is blood on that side as I remember it being said that maybe Sheila had sat on the edge because at the back of her nightdress was a bloodstain which could well have mirrored where she'd sat. The pic is on the forum somewhere of both the bed and the nightdress.
Thanks lookout maybe my wee pal Adam will find it for us
-
One of the raid team,PC Manners in his 1991 COLP interview had said that it had looked as though June had been dragged from her bed by her feet,which would have indicated that she'd been shot whilst in bed. There are pics showing different positions of her,so she had been moved from her bed,then propped up against the bedroom door,lying on her side,then on her back.
Going by this,it would have appeared to have been Junes blood on the other side of the bed if she'd been dragged off it.
What a bloody awful thought.
Both Nevill and June were both able to get out of bed and put up some sort of defence with the possibility of June taking a head and chest shots at least. There is this from Vanezis from CAL's book
"Vanezis was unable to assess the order in which June had received her wounds. He suspected that the shots to her right arm and leg were fired as she tried to ward off her killer, while the copious blood smears on her lower limbs occurred as she lay on the floor: "
So Vanezis is of the opinion that she at least tried to defend herself. Nevill certainly did defend himself with significant "impact and trauma" wounds compared with only one that appears to have completely disabled Sheila. The points I'm trying to make is that both Nevill and June suffered "impact and traumatising" and still managed to resist, if they weren't "impact and traumatising" wounds what were they?
I been answered with the theory that Sheila's wound disrupted her jugular vein was unique in the circumstances and would have disabled her quickly; however I think that the alleged "excruciating agony" that has been offered is no different from the excruciating agony that Nevill would have suffered but put up a resolute defence, so no doubt adrenaline hits the fan at some stage with Nevill and perhaps Sheila too.
I can take the theory of Sheila's wound being potentially fatal since it disrupted her jugular vein, in the meantime; however whether she could have stood up and walked about for any length of time hasn't been proved one way or the other with Vanezis apparently changing his mind on this.
If there are medical reasons or other professional articles that can explain this change of mind please let me know.
Hoots!
-
Both Nevill and June were both able to get out of bed and put up some sort of defence with the possibility of June taking a head and chest shots at least. There is this from Vanezis from CAL's book
"Vanezis was unable to assess the order in which June had received her wounds. He suspected that the shots to her right arm and leg were fired as she tried to ward off her killer, while the copious blood smears on her lower limbs occurred as she lay on the floor: "
So Vanezis is of the opinion that she at least tried to defend herself. Nevill certainly did defend himself with significant "impact and trauma" wounds compared with only one that appears to have completely disabled Sheila. The points I'm trying to make is that both Nevill and June suffered "impact and traumatising" and still managed to resist, if they weren't "impact and traumatising" wounds what were they?
I been answered with the theory that Sheila's wound disrupted her jugular vein was unique in the circumstances and would have disabled her quickly; however I think that the alleged "excruciating agony" that has been offered is no different from the excruciating agony that Nevill would have suffered but put up a resolute defence, so no doubt adrenaline hits the fan at some stage with Nevill and perhaps Sheila too.
I can take the theory of Sheila's wound being potentially fatal since it disrupted her jugular vein, in the meantime; however whether she could have stood up and walked about for any length of time hasn't been proved one way or the other with Vanezis apparently changing his mind on this.
If there are medical reasons or other professional articles that can explain this change of mind please let me know.
Hoots!
Except that you're having Sheila walk much further -with a spinal injury which was mortal AND a 'disrupted' jugular- than either Nevill and June. Why do you think medics never move people who they suspect of having spinal injuries?
-
Except that you're having Sheila walk much further -
I'm not having Sheila walk any specific distance. I think it's you that trying to take me a little walk.
Hoots!
-
I'm not having Sheila walk any specific distance. I think it's you that trying to take me a little walk.
Hoots!
How, then, do you think she managed to put the silencer in the gun cupboard under the stairs without walking down the stairs? Are you imagining she slid down the banister or perhaps bumped down, stair by stair, on her bottom? :)
-
I'm not having Sheila walk any specific distance. I think it's you that trying to take me a little walk.
Hoots!
So you've rejected Mike's theory that Sheila was in the kitchen when the Raid Team entered. Pathologist Peter Vanezis said the two shots occurred when Sheila was seated and within close proximity. I'm not sure what the point is if you're trying to make Jeremy innocent of the crimes?
-
How, then, do you think she managed to put the silencer in the gun cupboard under the stairs without walking down the stairs? Are you imagining she slid down the banister or perhaps bumped down, stair by stair, on her bottom? :)
I consider the original point I made upthread to be pretty much exhausted. I have my considerations on the moderator, but you'll have to wait for that. Good day to y'all.
Hoots!
-
I consider the original point I made upthread to be pretty much exhausted. I have my considerations on the moderator, but you'll have to wait for that. Good day to y'all.
Hoots!
Hoot
Enjoy your haggis ;)
-
I co-operated with Roger Wilkes when he was penning the transcript of his book!
My involvement was chiefly in the role of making the documents available to him...
It's just a coincidence that both Wilkes and myself arrived independently of one another the belief that Sheila had not shot herself! He and I are both correct in our interpretation of the circumstances surrounding Sheila's death! She was shot and killed by another person! Sheila did shoot and kill the other four victims, but she did not kill herself.
He doesn't mention you in his Acknowledgements?
-
Sheila received both shots at the same time while she was sitting upwards.
"Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries. After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back." COA 2002
(https://s23.postimg.org/j21q30ed7/trails.jpg)
(https://s23.postimg.org/io0e3eu9n/blood_trails.jpg)
Professor knights opinion differs to that of Peter Venezis, what you have to bear in mind in that Venezis removed a badly fragmented piece of bullet (PV/20) during the autopsy performed on Sheila Caffell on 7th August 1985, yet by 20th September 1985, that bullet had become transformed into a whole bullet which enabled the prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, to conclude that both bullets had been fired from the same gun! Venezis did not challenge the transformation of the original piece of badly fragmented into a whole bullet, and Venezis alluded to the possibility that both shots could have been inflicted one after the other, involving 'recoil', therefore turning a blind eye to the substitution of one piece of bullet, for a whole test fired round! This tells me that Venezis was part of the problem! I choose to rely upon the testimony of professor Knight over the dodgy approach of Venezis. Knight had got nothing to gain from giving his opinion on the delay between both shots, he concluding that there could have been half an hour between shot 1 and shot 2, as opposed to Venezis who went for the two shots being received one immediately after the other!
Venezis must have known that the original piece of badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) had been swapped by cops, and he must have known the reason why cops had to swap the bullet. In my book Venezis was in on the cover up!
-
Professor knights opinion differs to that of Peter Venezis, what you have to bear in mind in that Venezis removed a badly fragmented piece of bullet (PV/20) during the autopsy performed on Sheila Caffell on 7th August 1985, yet by 20th September 1985, that bullet had become transformed into a whole bullet which enabled the prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcom Fletcher, to conclude that both bullets had been fired from the same gun! Venezis did not challenge the transformation of the original piece of badly fragmented into a whole bullet, and Venezis alluded to the possibility that both shots could have been inflicted one after the other, involving 'recoil', therefore turning a blind eye to the substitution of one piece of bullet, for a whole test fired round! This tells me that Venezis was part of the problem! I choose to rely upon the testimony of professor Knight over the dodgy approach of Venezis. Knight had got nothing to gain from giving his opinion on the delay between both shots, he concluding that there could have been half an hour between shot 1 and shot 2, as opposed to Venezis who went for the two shots being received one immediately after the other!
Venezis must have known that the original piece of badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) had been swapped by cops, and he must have known the reason why cops had to swap the bulket. In my book Venezis was in on the cover up!
I have to say, that after much consideration, I'm more inclined to go with Vanezis. What you say of him is only your opinion, isn't it.
-
He doesn't mention you in his Acknowledgements?
Wasn't it also published before MT was given the documents by JB?
-
Wasn't it also published before MT was given the documents by JB?
Not sure when that was but Blood Relation was first published in 1994.
-
Not sure when that was but Blood Relation was first published in 1994.
There's a letter on here dated around 2003 or 2004 I think, which is when MT was given the files.
-
There's a letter on here dated around 2003 or 2004 I think, which is when MT was given the files.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56414.html#msg56414
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56414.html#msg56414)
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56414.html#msg56414
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56414.html#msg56414)
:o
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56414.html#msg56414
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56414.html#msg56414)
Who was his current 'squeeze'? WHO was "sweetheart"?
-
Some kind soul who believed in him ?
-
He doesn't mention you in his Acknowledgements?
There's a copy of a letter from Wilkes that was written to Mike in 1991.
-
There's a copy of a letter from Wilkes that was written to Mike in 1991.
Where?
-
Where?
Here.
-
Why would somebody with my integrity lie about being in touch with Roger Wilkes!
-
Sheila did not shoot herself, either in the kitchen, or upstairs on the bedroom floor!
-
Why would somebody with my integrity lie about being in touch with Roger Wilkes!
All supporters " tell lies ",Mike. :o
-
All supporters " tell lies ",Mike. :o
Halleluia!!! Praise the Lord!!! The penny's dropped!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Halleluia!!! Praise the Lord!!! The penny's dropped!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
I'm glad you think so.
-
All supporters " tell lies ",Mike. :o
I'm not telling lies...
When I say that physical evidence existed at the scene strongly implicating Sheila Caffell in the killings.
Regardless of whether Sheila Caffell had or hadn't been alive when TFG entered farmhouse - any police officers who paid sufficient attention inside the building, would have recognised and understood the significance of the evidence.
The nature of the evidence was/is exculpatory with regard to Jeremy: although he was not a police suspect at that time - he very quickly became a suspect in the eyes of some relatives.
Relatives were provided with information by police on several occasions - to the point were at least two of them accepted Sheila could have committed the killings.
Relatives chose to reject this information. The eventual culmination of the relatives choosing this path - was that the evidence that implicated Sheila and exculpated Jeremy was concealed, in order that Jeremy could be prosecuted for the killings.
All truth - no lies here I'm afraid.
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
-
I'm not telling lies...
When I say that physical evidence existed at the scene strongly implicating Sheila Caffell in the killings.
Regardless of whether Sheila Caffell had or hadn't been alive when TFG entered farmhouse - any police officers who paid sufficient attention inside the building, would have recognised and understood the significance of the evidence.
The nature of the evidence was/is exculpatory with regard to Jeremy: although he was not a police suspect at that time - he very quickly became a suspect in the eyes of some relatives.
Relatives were provided with information by police on several occasions - to the point were at least two of them accepted Sheila could have committed the killings.
Relatives chose to reject this information. The eventual culmination of the relatives choosing this path - was that the evidence that implicated Sheila and exculpated Jeremy was concealed, in order that Jeremy could be prosecuted for the killings.
All truth - no lies here I'm afraid.
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
Of course, when you speak about "the relatives", you're referring to those of 30+ years ago, whose grandchildren may now be those responsible for the day to day running of the business. As parents, whatever it is that YOU insist they've done, I think it highly unlikely that, having seen their children working hard to take the business forward -the Osea site is quite spectacular, I believe- they'll be doing anything soon to put their grandchildren's futures in jeopardy. As for blaming Julie!!!? The poor girl was YEARS younger than the youngest family member who was involved. Apart from which, you haven't given ANY valid or plausible reason as to why the police would want to frame an innocent man when they had a culprit who wasn't going to make noises about an MoJ.
-
Hi Roch myself and many others know you only tell the truth and from reading your posts I know the evidence you refer to will exist and will implicate Sheila I don't have to see it to believe it I hope it does come to light at sometime as I now feel an innocent man is serving life for crimes he did not commit and that is horrendous >:( :(
-
I think that the relatives will continue their convincing " war-cry " that they " live in fear of him ever being released ".Much the same as JM had said that " she would fear for her family ".
This " trick " was evident when AE and co. visited/wrote to both EP and their then local MP when JB's category had been reduced to a B. Within no time at all,he was back up to an A.
Because the relative's spokesperson is no longer around they still remain to have various individuals who have enough clout to continue where RWB left off,those who've been befriended who work/worked for EP at the time and also local MP's.
I don't think the relatives will ever accept that Jeremy was/is innocent,no matter what,but I hope that Pam is still around to see Jeremy acquitted.
-
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
Perverting the course of justice can lead to prison you know. What goes around comes around.
-
I'm not telling lies...
When I say that physical evidence existed at the scene strongly implicating Sheila Caffell in the killings.
Regardless of whether Sheila Caffell had or hadn't been alive when TFG entered farmhouse - any police officers who paid sufficient attention inside the building, would have recognised and understood the significance of the evidence.
The nature of the evidence was/is exculpatory with regard to Jeremy: although he was not a police suspect at that time - he very quickly became a suspect in the eyes of some relatives.
Relatives were provided with information by police on several occasions - to the point were at least two of them accepted Sheila could have committed the killings.
Relatives chose to reject this information. The eventual culmination of the relatives choosing this path - was that the evidence that implicated Sheila and exculpated Jeremy was concealed, in order that Jeremy could be prosecuted for the killings.
All truth - no lies here I'm afraid.
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
What physical evidence existed at the scene that 'implicated Sheila as the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What evidence were the relatives given that saw two of them 'accept that Sheila could have been the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What two relatives were these ? How do you know this ?
What evidence was concealed that had shown Sheila was the killer ? How do you know this ?
Why did the police conceal evidence to frame an innocent man ?
When do you believe the truth will be made public ? It's been 32 years.
-
Of course, when you speak about "the relatives", you're referring to those of 30+ years ago, whose grandchildren may now be those responsible for the day to day running of the business. As parents, whatever it is that YOU insist they've done, I think it highly unlikely that, having seen their children working hard to take the business forward -the Osea site is quite spectacular, I believe- they'll be doing anything soon to put their grandchildren's futures in jeopardy. As for blaming Julie!!!? The poor girl was YEARS younger than the youngest family member who was involved. Apart from which, you haven't given ANY valid or plausible reason as to why the police would want to frame an innocent man when they had a culprit who wasn't going to make noises about an MoJ.
With respect - relatives and original, senior police officers involved, would be aware of said reasons. Why should I have to explain the motivations and/or criminal decisions of others? Why would I be privy to such information anyway? You should seek your answers in such matters from people who were at the business end of proceedings in 85/86 etc.
Vic used to post on here that the 'relatives are no fan of Julie Mugford'. This indicates the alleged level contempt from the relatives towards her. Yet to me, she seems a pawn caught between Stan Jones / Ainsley / Simpson and the relatives themselves.
If you and others let the relatives off the hook - and allow the blame to be placed upon police and Julie - you and others will be doing the truth a great disservice.
All relevant components should be apportioned blame. Relatives - Police - Julie - justice system etc.
That is my point.
-
I think that the relatives will continue their convincing " war-cry " that they " live in fear of him ever being released ".Much the same as JM had said that " she would fear for her family ".
This " trick " was evident when AE and co. visited/wrote to both EP and their then local MP when JB's category had been reduced to a B. Within no time at all,he was back up to an A.
Because the relative's spokesperson is no longer around they still remain to have various individuals who have enough clout to continue where RWB left off,those who've been befriended who work/worked for EP at the time and also local MP's.
I don't think the relatives will ever accept that Jeremy was/is innocent,no matter what,but I hope that Pam is still around to see Jeremy acquitted.
I'm really not too surprised that Julie says she will fear for her family. I'm given to understand she has just cause. I don't imagine that the family had any hand, at all, in Jeremy's reinstatement as a CAT A. I can't imagine that there are many lifers who, with no hope of release, are promoted to CAT B.
-
With respect - relatives and original, senior police officers involved, would be aware of said reasons. Why should I have to explain the motivations and/or criminal decisions of others? Why would I be privy to such information anyway? You should seek your answers in such matters from people who were at the business end of proceedings in 85/86 etc.
Vic used to post on here that the 'relatives are no fan of Julie Mugford'. This indicates the alleged level contempt from the relatives towards her. Yet to me, she seems a pawn caught between Stan Jones / Ainsley / Simpson and the relatives themselves.
If you and others let the relatives off the hook - and allow the blame to be placed upon police and Julie - you and others will be doing the truth a great disservice.
All relevant components should be apportioned blame. Relatives - Police - Julie - justice system etc.
That is my point.
Roch, I think it highly likely that, for whatever their motive/agenda, not ONE of those involved is snowy, virgin white................however, I'm including Jeremy in the mix. Whatever were their motives it doesn't make Jeremy innocent.
-
Hopefully Roch will answer my 6 basic questions in reply 484. Which all related to his earlier post.
Bit strange that Roch says the police & relatives framed Bamber. But in the next post says -
'Why should I have to explain their motivations'.
'Why would I be privy to such information'.
-
I'm really not too surprised that Julie says she will fear for her family. I'm given to understand she has just cause. I don't imagine that the family had any hand, at all, in Jeremy's reinstatement as a CAT A. I can't imagine that there are many lifers who, with no hope of release, are promoted to CAT B.
The family did have input concerning the category because RWB wrote to EP to express his disappointment. Then he contacted the MP John Whittingdale to " bear it in mind " at the next Parliamentary session. Whatever was said,it worked. There is documentation about RWB's contacts re.this particular matter,somewhere on the forum. The MP,after the relatives befriended him,still pays visits to WHF. Priti Patel is also another " friend " of theirs who shares the relatives grievances and is kept informed.
-
Perverting the course of justice can lead to prison you know. What goes around comes around.
I can't see prison happening.
-
Maybe the relatives weren't over-friendly with JM,but they did nothing to stop her being the main prosecution witness. It wouldn't have " sat right " if they'd been in her place,would it ??
-
I'm not telling lies...
When I say that physical evidence existed at the scene strongly implicating Sheila Caffell in the killings.
Regardless of whether Sheila Caffell had or hadn't been alive when TFG entered farmhouse - any police officers who paid sufficient attention inside the building, would have recognised and understood the significance of the evidence.
The nature of the evidence was/is exculpatory with regard to Jeremy: although he was not a police suspect at that time - he very quickly became a suspect in the eyes of some relatives.
Relatives were provided with information by police on several occasions - to the point were at least two of them accepted Sheila could have committed the killings.
Relatives chose to reject this information. The eventual culmination of the relatives choosing this path - was that the evidence that implicated Sheila and exculpated Jeremy was concealed, in order that Jeremy could be prosecuted for the killings.
All truth - no lies here I'm afraid.
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
What I meant by that remark I made was ( in the eyes of the guilters )
-
Just to keep the record straight.
-
The family did have input concerning the category because RWB wrote to EP to express his disappointment. Then he contacted the MP John Whittingdale to " bear it in mind " at the next Parliamentary session. Whatever was said,it worked. There is documentation about RWB's contacts re.this particular matter,somewhere on the forum. The MP,after the relatives befriended him,still pays visits to WHF. Priti Patel is also another " friend " of theirs who shares the relatives grievances and is kept informed.
I wouldn't dream of suggesting he didn't. Since when did it become illegal for any citizen to contact their MP? I've done it myself. You will undoubtedly, also know how little time each MP has to ask questions. If all MP's voiced all of their constituents' concerns it would take them into the next Parliament. There appears to be documentation here about just about anything. It's validity/authenticity, as you're probably aware, is another thing. Priti Patel undoubtedly knows the family. I imagine they contribute/work hard for the Party. It might though, be worth considering that she was hardly born in 1885. She probably does understand their grievances. "Sharing" them, I believe, is hardly likely. I think it has to be remembered that Jeremy Bamber isn't at the forefront of MOST peoples' minds.
-
I wouldn't dream of suggesting he didn't. Since when did it become illegal for any citizen to contact their MP? I've done it myself. You will undoubtedly, also know how little time each MP has to ask questions. If all MP's voiced all of their constituents' concerns it would take them into the next Parliament. There appears to be documentation here about just about anything. It's validity/authenticity, as you're probably aware, is another thing. Priti Patel undoubtedly knows the family. I imagine they contribute/work hard for the Party. It might though, be worth considering that she was hardly born in 1885. She probably does understand their grievances. "Sharing" them, I believe, is hardly likely. I think it has to be remembered that Jeremy Bamber isn't at the forefront of MOST peoples' minds.
I don't even know who my MP is.In fact I'm constantly bombarded with letters,etc by the MP of the opposition more than anyone,although I do know that she helps and has helped on a personal level.
I'm now looking for the verification of the reason for the continued upgrade in JB's cat. as it was at the request of RWB as again I know it's here somewhere.
I might be ancient,but I don't know anyone who was born in 1885. That's nearly as bad as my great grandson's reply when I told him I remembered the dinosaurs and he answered WOW,did you ? Not a laughing matter.
-
I don't even know who my MP is.In fact I'm constantly bombarded with letters,etc by the MP of the opposition more than anyone,although I do know that she helps and has helped on a personal level.
I'm now looking for the verification of the reason for the continued upgrade in JB's cat. as it was at the request of RWB as again I know it's here somewhere.
I might be ancient,but I don't know anyone who was born in 1885. That's nearly as bad as my great grandson's reply when I told him I remembered the dinosaurs and he answered WOW,did you ? Not a laughing matter.
;D ;D Oooops!!! No, she definitely wasn't born in 1885!!! I'll accept that you weren't either :) 1895? ;D ;D
-
I don't even know who my MP is.In fact I'm constantly bombarded with letters,etc by the MP of the opposition more than anyone,although I do know that she helps and has helped on a personal level.
I'm now looking for the verification of the reason for the continued upgrade in JB's cat. as it was at the request of RWB as again I know it's here somewhere.
I might be ancient,but I don't know anyone who was born in 1885. That's nearly as bad as my great grandson's reply when I told him I remembered the dinosaurs and he answered WOW,did you ? Not a laughing matter.
Its just been on Sky news Lookout, missing link to Jurassic park Dinosaurs found? It's not you is it Lookout?
-
Its just been on Sky news Lookout, missing link to Jurassic park Dinosaurs found? It's not you is it Lookout?
You never know,justice. Stranger things have happened.
-
;D ;D Oooops!!! No, she definitely wasn't born in 1885!!! I'll accept that you weren't either :) 1895? ;D ;D
It's not 1895 either.
Found the reference for the downgrade,NGB had posted that " Representations were made to the Home Secretary by the family's MP who'd acted on their behalf " POST 30-May 12th 2013.
-
It's not 1895 either.
Found the reference for the downgrade,NGB had posted that " Representations were made to the Home Secretary by the family's MP who'd acted on their behalf " POST 30-May 12th 2013.
Not for a moment am I denying the possibility, Lookout, but the 'fault' lay with which ever authority took it upon themselves to promote a CAT A lifer, without hope of parole, to a CAT B, which, if I understand correctly, is given to those with lesser sentences OR those near to being released.
-
Not for a moment am I denying the possibility, Lookout, but the 'fault' lay with which ever authority took it upon themselves to promote a CAT A lifer, without hope of parole, to a CAT B, which, if I understand correctly, is given to those with lesser sentences OR those near to being released.
The Home Office again.They decide on a prisoners category,probably because they'd thought that JB wasn't the high-risk that they'd anticipated him to be,but because the relatives had objected,it was increased again,after 3 months.
Which proved at the time the amount of weight the relatives carried regarding the justice system.
-
Of course, when you speak about "the relatives", you're referring to those of 30+ years ago, whose grandchildren may now be those responsible for the day to day running of the business. As parents, whatever it is that YOU insist they've done, I think it highly unlikely that, having seen their children working hard to take the business forward -the Osea site is quite spectacular, I believe- they'll be doing anything soon to put their grandchildren's futures in jeopardy. As for blaming Julie!!!? The poor girl was YEARS younger than the youngest family member who was involved. Apart from which, you haven't given ANY valid or plausible reason as to why the police would want to frame an innocent man when they had a culprit who wasn't going to make noises about an MoJ.
If it comes to light any of the family has perfected the course of justice they must each one face the most severe sentances ever handed out. You cannot put a price on an innocent man being in prison for over 30 years and not being able to have a family himself. I will have to ask NGB but I think the harshest sentance for perverting the course of justice is a life sentance
-
The Home Office again.They decide on a prisoners category,probably because they'd thought that JB wasn't the high-risk that they'd anticipated him to be,but because the relatives had objected,it was increased again,after 3 months.
Which proved at the time the amount of weight the relatives carried regarding the justice system.
Really, Lookout, this isn't entirely fair, is it now? The presiding judge told Jeremy, at the time he handed him a MINIMUM of 25 years, that it remained to be seen whether it was ever considered that he was safe to be released. You can't blame the relatives for that. I can only think he was promoted in error. Lifers with no hope of release aren't given that sort of promotion. I don't think it has anything to do with individual prison governors. Their orders come from higher up.
-
I can't see prison happening.
We totally disagree on this point Lookout
-
It's not 1895 either.
Found the reference for the downgrade,NGB had posted that " Representations were made to the Home Secretary by the family's MP who'd acted on their behalf " POST 30-May 12th 2013.
More importantly is the reason Jeremy was downgraded so soon
-
Really, Lookout, this isn't entirely fair, is it now? The presiding judge told Jeremy, at the time he handed him a MINIMUM of 25 years, that it remained to be seen whether it was ever considered that he was safe to be released. You can't blame the relatives for that. I can only think he was promoted in error. Lifers with no hope of release aren't given that sort of promotion. I don't think it has anything to do with individual prison governors. Their orders come from higher up.
Once again you can only think JB was downgraded in error
Yet you have not got a shred of evidence to back this comment up
Lookout is right you are desperate for JB to be guilt
-
Really, Lookout, this isn't entirely fair, is it now? The presiding judge told Jeremy, at the time he handed him a MINIMUM of 25 years, that it remained to be seen whether it was ever considered that he was safe to be released. You can't blame the relatives for that. I can only think he was promoted in error. Lifers with no hope of release aren't given that sort of promotion. I don't think it has anything to do with individual prison governors. Their orders come from higher up.
Have you got any other bright ideas why the JB category was downgraded
-
If it comes to light any of the family has perfected the course of justice they must each one face the most severe sentances ever handed out. You cannot put a price on an innocent man being in prison for over 30 years and not being able to have a family himself. I will have to ask NGB but I think the harshest sentance for perverting the course of justice is a life sentance
The they should be applauded ;D ;D ;D
-
With respect - relatives and original, senior police officers involved, would be aware of said reasons. Why should I have to explain the motivations and/or criminal decisions of others? Why would I be privy to such information anyway? You should seek your answers in such matters from people who were at the business end of proceedings in 85/86 etc.
Vic used to post on here that the 'relatives are no fan of Julie Mugford'. This indicates the alleged level contempt from the relatives towards her. Yet to me, she seems a pawn caught between Stan Jones / Ainsley / Simpson and the relatives themselves.
If you and others let the relatives off the hook - and allow the blame to be placed upon police and Julie - you and others will be doing the truth a great disservice.
All relevant components should be apportioned blame. Relatives - Police - Julie - justice system etc.
That is my point.
No one is saying your should explain the motivations of others but in order to put meat on what you are saying, there needs to be reason behind why these individuals would put themselves in such a position. They had the means (I guess) and also the opportunity but what your explanation lacks, is 'motive'. Jeremy had all three means (access the guns and the victims) motive (financial gain) opportunity (they were all sitting ducks at WHF).
-
It's just occurred to me that if supporters are so certain that lies were told to convict Jeremy, I wonder how they'd feel about lies being told to get convictions of those they believe guilty?
-
We totally disagree on this point Lookout
It should happen,Jackie--------but sadly it won't.
-
It should happen,Jackie--------but sadly it won't.
Believe me it will and all the people involved know it too
-
Believe me it will and all the people involved know it too
In your dreams.
-
I think it says more about you! ;D ;D ;D ;D
You know exactly what I mean and I intend to be right there when it happens
-
In your dreams.
And I will be right there
-
It's just occurred to me that if supporters are so certain that lies were told to convict Jeremy, I wonder how they'd feel about lies being told to get convictions of those they believe guilty?
Which lies?
-
Which lies?
You tell me.
-
What physical evidence existed at the scene that 'implicated Sheila as the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What evidence were the relatives given that saw two of them 'accept that Sheila could have been the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What two relatives were these ? How do you know this ?
What evidence was concealed that had shown Sheila was the killer ? How do you know this ?
Why did the police conceal evidence to frame an innocent man ?
When do you believe the truth will be made public ? It's been 32 years.
Hopefully Roch will respond to my questions above. Which were asked earlier directly after reply 479 had been posted by him.
I got no reply earlier.
-
Hi Roch myself and many others know you only tell the truth and from reading your posts I know the evidence you refer to will exist and will implicate Sheila I don't have to see it to believe it I hope it does come to light at sometime as I now feel an innocent man is serving life for crimes he did not commit and that is horrendous >:( :(
Hi Susan,
I may have been wrong in my interpretation of some aspects, nuances, documents etc over the years - but then again, so may have many others on here from both sides of the divide, so to speak. Sometimes it comes down to opinions or even spin.
I am not known for leading members up the garden path. Neither is the evidence I am referring to, likely to be open to interpretation.
-
You tell me.
I dont follow hat you mean
-
Which lies?
Hi Roch, you don't think a lot of lies and innuendo's have been made by people to do with Bamber then? The problem with any conviction and any prosecution they get one shot at putting their case forward to a jury, if lies are found on the way the case collapses and the defendant gets off, the defence can invent innuendos and lies and make believe even after trial, until or hope something sticks.
Read a great article and listened to Jim Clemente about OJ Simpson and how he got off, unbelievable when he talked about the wetsuit and it being perfect for a murder, stops any scratches, bruises and easy to get rid of forensics, it was widely known to be the perfect garment for a murder?
-
I dont follow hat you mean
Roch, I don't think I could have made my question more clear. Supporters are saying that, amongst other things, lies were told which helped convict Jeremy, and because of that, innocent or guilty, he should be released. My question is, should lies be told to obtain a conviction for those who allegedly told the lies, would supporters say the conviction should be quashed?
-
Hi Roch, you don't think a lot of lies and innuendo's have been made by people to do with Bamber then? The problem with any conviction and any prosecution they get one shot at putting their case forward to a jury, if lies are found on the way the case collapses and the defendant gets off, the defence can invent innuendos and lies and make believe even after trial, until or hope something sticks.
Read a great article and listened to Jim Clemente about OJ Simpson and how he got off, unbelievable when he talked about the wetsuit and it being perfect for a murder, stops any scratches, bruises and easy to get rid of forensics, it was widely known to be the perfect garment for a murder?
Hi Justice. Interesting - but there is / was no proof that any wetsuit was linked to the murders. I think Janes is implying that the evidence I'm referring to is lies?
-
It seems that Roch is not going to answer my questions. Which I posted in replies 484 & 520. In response to his reply 479.
I don't mind posters making several huge statements in one long post. Providing they have sources to justify these.
If they have no sources, that is fine as making wild claims that can't be proven is a tactic of most supporters. However it is dangerous as gullible posters like Susan will be influenced by long posts. Even if they are unsourced.
-
Hi Justice. Interesting - but there is / was no proof that any wetsuit was linked to the murders. I think Janes is implying that the evidence I'm referring to is lies?
Quite right Roch, I think a lot of proof was lost early doors, it was a theory put forward and makes sense though?
-
Roch, I don't think I could have made my question more clear. Supporters are saying that, amongst other things, lies were told which helped convict Jeremy, and because of that, innocent or guilty, he should be released. My question is, should lies be told to obtain a conviction for those who allegedly told the lies, would supporters say the conviction should be quashed?
OK I think I get the gist now. Turn it on its' head. If lies have to be told in order to convict somebody (or for that matter, evidence has to be concealed) how likely is that the person was never guilty in the first place?
-
Hi Justice. Interesting - but there is / was no proof that any wetsuit was linked to the murders. I think Janes is implying that the evidence I'm referring to is lies?
[/quote
OI!! I didn't say that and I wasn't implying it!!
-
Hi Susan,
I may have been wrong in my interpretation of some aspects, nuances, documents etc over the years - but then again, so may have many others on here from both sides of the divide, so to speak. Sometimes it comes down to opinions or even spin.
I am not known for leading members up the garden path. Neither is the evidence I am referring to, likely to be open to interpretation.
Right so if it's 'conclusive' evidence of Jeremy's innocence, how come those who know about (and to be fair including yourself) are sitting on it?
-
OK I think I get the gist now. Turn it on its' head. If lies have to be told in order to convict somebody (or for that matter, evidence has to be concealed) how likely is that the person was never guilty in the first place?
NO! Just because lies may be told to get a conviction, it doesn't mean the defendant is innocent.
-
Either Roch's finally put me on ignore. Which he said he was going to do. Then changed his mind and continued responding to my posts.
Or he's just not answering my simple questions in response to his long post, 479. Which made huge never before made claims. Without elaborating or providing any proof.
-
I think you are mistaking me for you
I couldn't repeat on here what he said about you
By the way have you ever spoken to him on the phone?
You haven't spoken or had a letter from him for years MORE LIES! Err no Jackie, I wouldn't want to speak to him on the phone, he's not a celebrity! ::)
-
No one is saying your should explain the motivations of others but in order to put meat on what you are saying, there needs to be reason behind why these individuals would put themselves in such a position. They had the means (I guess) and also the opportunity but what your explanation lacks, is 'motive'. Jeremy had all three means (access the guns and the victims) motive (financial gain) opportunity (they were all sitting ducks at WHF).
The relatives put themselves in that position - partly because they were vultures. Perhaps they also unwittingly put themselves in that position (to the extent that they were victims of their own arrogance and used to getting their own way). They come across as being full of self belief, very judgemental and (like virtully everone else) lacking in knowledge regarding the extent of Sheila's mental health and her circs. It's a bit of a lethal combination for setting off down a blind alley, away from the truth.
We may never know exactly how Jeremy's uncle Bobby managed to 'turn' Peter Simpson.
I think there were four sitting ducks for Sheila. And then there was only one sitting duck left for the relatives.
-
It seems that Roch is not going to answer my questions. Which I posted in replies 484 & 520. In response to his reply 479.
I don't mind posters making several huge statements in one long post. Providing they have sources to justify these.
If they have no sources, that is fine as making wild claims that can't be proven is a tactic of most supporters. However it is dangerous as gullible posters like Susan will be influenced by long posts. Even if they are unsourced.
Adam you know me so well I must admit I am influenced by long drawn out posts they have to be true even without sources.
-
I think you are mistaking me for you
I couldn't repeat on here what he said about you
By the way have you ever spoken to him on the phone?
When was it he dumped you, then Jackie? Wasn't it around 2011? I guess even you can't repeat what hasn't been said. Oh! but you CAN, can't you. It's your speciality.
-
Also, I thought yo said you had never heard him speak ill of anyone? Tut, tut! They just keep coming!
-
NO! Just because lies may be told to get a conviction, it doesn't mean the defendant is innocent.
OK. Do you agree though that telling lies a dangerous strategy to convict a 'guilty' person? It's not exactly a sound base to begin from is it?
-
The relatives put themselves in that position - partly because they were vultures. Perhaps they also unwittingly put themselves in that position (to the extent that they were victims of their own arrogance and used to getting their own way). They come across as being full of self belief, very judgemental and (like virtully everone else) lacking in knowledge regarding the extent of Sheila's mental health and her circs. It's a bit of a lethal combination for setting off down a blind alley, away from the truth.
We may never know exactly how or Jeremy's uncle Bobby managed to 'turn' Peter Simpson.
I think there four sitting ducks for Sheila. And then there was only one sitting duck left for the relatives.
Without knowing, there is nothing to prove he did.
-
OK. Do you agree though that telling lies a dangerous strategy to convict a 'guilty' person? It's not exactly a sound base to begin from is it?
I guess they simply fight fire with fire when required.
-
Adam you know me so well I must admit I am influenced by long drawn out posts they have to be true even without sources.
Did you not think to ask the questions I did to Roch ?
Or have you already got the answers & sources ? If so please divulge.
-
This were the questions. In direct response to claims in reply 479 -
What physical evidence existed at the scene that 'implicated Sheila as the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What evidence were the relatives given that saw two of them 'accept that Sheila could have been the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What two relatives were these ? How do you know this ?
What evidence was concealed that had shown Sheila was the killer ? How do you know this ?
Why did the police conceal evidence to frame an innocent man ?
When do you believe the truth will be made public ? It's been 32 years.
-
Did you not think to ask the questions I did to Roch ?
Or have you already got the answers & sources ? If so please divulge.
Adam so sorry I have forgot the questions will have to go and have a wee look Roch is so busy answering all the questions
-
Right so if it's 'conclusive' evidence of Jeremy's innocence, how come those who know about (and to be fair including yourself) are sitting on it?
It's not my evidence to sit on and I have no influence over defence strategy. But it might be a mistake to assume that it's being sat on. This is why I am trying to communicate about what I think will happen further down the line.
-
This were the questions. In direct response to claims in reply 479 -
What physical evidence existed at the scene that 'implicated Sheila as the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What evidence were the relatives given that saw two of them 'accept that Sheila could have been the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What two relatives were these ? How do you know this ?
What evidence was concealed that had shown Sheila was the killer ? How do you know this ?
Why did the police conceal evidence to frame an innocent man ?
When do you believe the truth will be made public ? It's been 32 years.
Adam I think the post Roch has just made to Caroline answers all your questions the evidence is not his to tell you guess we will have to wait and see what happens further down the line.
-
Without knowing, there is nothing to prove he did.
Actually there is: as Simpson knew there was evidence that Sheila was responsible.
-
OK. Do you agree though that telling lies a dangerous strategy to convict a 'guilty' person? It's not exactly a sound base to begin from is it?
It wouldn't be my first choice for convicting a guilty person, but if it was one of my family who'd been robbed, hurt, raped or killed I don't think I'd be precious about it.
-
However it is dangerous as gullible posters will be influenced by long posts. Even if they are unsourced.
You sound worried that I may be influencing members' thinking on the forum.
-
Actually there is: as Simpson knew there was evidence that Sheila was responsible.
We can't really debate this Roch without you saying what and how he knew it. You were right when you said it would be frustrating. All I can say is, that if he did have such evidence, it would have been all he needed to get the relatives off his and EP's back once and for all and he would have saved EP a LOT of embarrassment.
-
Adam so sorry I have forgot the questions will have to go and have a wee look Roch is so busy answering all the questions
I re posted the questions in reply 548. Which are not going to be answered.
If huge claims are made by a poster, you need to request they are justified. With sources. The same applies to me. Rather than just accept the post.
Yesterday I said the evidence showed there was no conversations at supper regarding fostering. This was backed up with 4 WS's regarding over 40 minutes of phone conversations.
-
It wouldn't be my first choice for convicting a guilty person, but if it was one of my family who'd been robbed, hurt, raped or killed I don't think I'd be precious about it.
Isn't that the whole point though? Which came first - the chicken or the egg?
You and others are providing the relatives with excuses - when there is no guarantee in the first place that they were correct in their suspicions.
They will try to blame police and possibly Mugford, for the wrongful conviction. Without the relative's intervention - there would be no wrongful conviction.
-
Isn't that the whole point though? Which came first - the chicken or the egg?
You and others are providing the relatives with excuses - when there is no guarantee in the first place that they were correct in their suspicions.
They will try to blame police and possibly Mugford, for the wrongful conviction. Without the relative's intervention - there would be no wrongful conviction.
Or just conviction.
-
We can't really debate this Roch without you saying what and how he knew it. You were right when you said it would be frustrating. All I can say is, that if he did have such evidence, it would have been all he needed to get the relatives off his and EP's back once and for all and he would have saved EP a LOT of embarrassment.
Either something went wrong in the farmhouse - TFG complications / informatives / economical with the truth / scene staged etc or Robert Boutflour had something on Simpson.
By agreeing to investigate (frame) Jeremy - the police effectively bought time to control the evidence that Robert would have threatened to expose - if they didn't agree to.
-
Or just conviction.
No - it was Sheila. I'm giving you all the opportunity to reconsider your positions - and the case.
-
No - it was Sheila. I'm giving you all the opportunity to reconsider your positions - and the case.
I won't be doing that.
-
Either something went wrong in the farmhouse - TFG complications / informatives / economical with the truth / scene staged etc or Robert Boutflour had something on Simpson.
By agreeing to investigate (frame) Jeremy - the police effectively bought time to control the evidence that Robert would have threatened to expose - if they didn't agree to.
Just how would RWB be party to such information? The man thought Bamber wore a wetsuit for goodness sake.
-
No - it was Sheila.
She knows.
I'm giving you all the opportunity to reconsider your positions - and the case.
But there is no going back. ;D
-
She knows.
But there is no going back. ;D
I won't be changing my mind to innocent - Bamber is guilty!
-
A source for this might be helpful.
-
Sheila did not remove any silencer, nor did she crawl downstairs on her hands and knees to conceal it in any so called gun cupboard! The correct sequence of events is that the senior officers removed the silencer during 'informatives', and that DS 'Stan' Jones returned to the farmhouse on the first morning of the investigation to collect the silencer and take it away. On the evening of 9August 1985, Jones and Jones returned the silencer to the farmhouse. The silencer was placed in the gun cupboard by 'Stan' Jones whilst 'Taff' Jones distracted Ann Eaton showing her around all the rooms inside the farmhouse telling her what had happened here and there! On the following day (10 August 1985) David Boutflour recovered the silencer from where Jones had placed it the previous evening!
-
Sheila did not remove any silencer, nor did she crawl downstairs on her hands and knees to conceal it in any so called gun cupboard! The correct sequence of events is that the senior officers removed the silencer during 'informatives', and that DS 'Stan' Jones returned to the farmhouse on the first morning of the investigation to collect the silencer and take it away. On the evening of 9August 1985, Jones and Jones returned the silencer to the farmhouse. The silencer was placed in the gun cupboard by 'Stan' Jones whilst 'Taff' Jones distracted Ann Eaton showing her around all the rooms inside the farmhouse telling her what had happened here and there! On the following day (10 August 1985) David Boutflour recovered the silencer from where Jones had placed it the previous evening!
Refer to legend:-
(17) - that by around 9am PS Adams visited the main bedroom scene and saw Sheila's body upon the bed, with no weapon in her possession, and the bible elswhere on the bedroom floor. Adams and the vast majority of the other firearm officers (with the exception of PI Montgomery, and PS Woodcock who remained present at the farm) then left the scene! This coincided with a number of senior officers looking very closely at the bodies of the victims, including Sheila Caffell, and thus commencing 'informatives', whereby cops tried to fathom out the sequence of events leading up to the five deaths. These 'informatives' lasted in duration for about an hour (between 9 am and 10am), until SOCO (DI 'Ron' Cook, DS 'Neil' Davidson, DC 'David' Hammersley, DC Henderson, PC 'David' Bird, and one other) took control of the various crime scenes inside the kitchen, main bedroom and the children's bedroom! At various stages whilst 'informatives' were being carried out, other key police officers, including DCI 'Taff' Jones, DS 'Stan' Jones, DC 'Mick' Clark, and the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright, arrived at the scene!
(18) - during 'informatives' being conducted around and in the vicinity of the body of Sheila Caffell in the main bedroom, certain officers noted key factors including the fact that (a) her body was laid on top of the bed, (b) that Sheila only had one bullet wound to her throat, (c) that there was no rifle or other weapon present inside the bedroom where her body was located on the bed, (d) that she had sustained the only shot to her throat downstairs in the kitchen and had mistakenly been pronounced as being dead there after being shot by use of a police issue round fired from a police weapon (the shooting would be covered in an officers report into that shooting incident which happened downstairs earlier in the kitchen) (e) upon making her way from the kitchen downstairs from after 8.10am which coincided with real confirmation by armed officers completing a full search of the farmhouse, that two bodies had already been found and located downstairs by 7.37am, onward, and 'a further three bodies (only) had been found and located upstairs', Sheila's body had been relocated upstairs on top of the bed in a collapsed state (8.30am), and verified as being dead by the police surgeon, Dr Craig at 8.44am, with what appeared to be a bullet wound to her throat, thus altering the bodily distribution which originally had been confirmed as two bodies downstairs (7.37am), three bodies upstairs (8.10am), to one body downstairs and four bodies upstairs by 8.30am, (f) that PS Adams had been the Commander of the firearm operation at the scene between 5am and 8.15am, which coincided with the operation inside the farmhouse going pearshaped, as described, (g) at which point PI 'Ivor' Montgomery had assumed Commanders, he being trapped inside the kitchen at the time Sheila's body had gone AWOL
(19) - DCI 'Taff' Jones, DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC 'Mick' Clark, visited the main bedroom of the farmhouse whilst Sheila Caffells body was still laid on top of the bed, bearing only a single bullet entry wound to her throat! At this stage the body of June Bamber was also on top of the bed! Somebody had brought the rifle from its resting place against a first floor 'box room' window and placed in-between both bodies on top of the bed, as confirmed by DS 'Stan' Jones, and DC ' Mick's Clark who told Ann Eaton this when all were present inside Jeremy's cottage that same norning!
(20) - DC 'Mick' Clark, and DS 'Stan' Jones left the scene to go with Jeremy to his cottage from 9 Head Street, Goldhanger, to take his first witness statement (dated, 7 August 1985)
(21) - the bodies of Sheila Caffell and June Bamber! were then moved from on the bed, to the bedroom floor either side of the bed! At this stage Sheila Caffell had only been shot once, a shot which travelled horizontal in fashion across her throat, from left to right (to which the original badly fragmented bullet PV/20 referred). Once June Bambers body was lifted from the bed, cops took three photographs of Sheila's lone body still on the bed. The photographs only show one bullet hole in her throat at that stage, with no rifle on her body! No blood can be seen to be leaking from the corners of her mouth! There was no triangular bloodstain on the front upper right hand of her light blue nightie! There was no bloodied hand print present upon the front lower right of the same!
(22) - the anshuzt rifle brought from the first floor box room window was fitted with a Parker Hale silencer
(23) - the only rifle upstairs was brought from its location leaning against a first floor 'box room window', and placed in position on to Sheila's body at 9.13am for 'gauging purposes' during 'informatives'. This rifle (anshuzt) had not fired the first shot (the piece of the badly fragmented PV/20 bullet recovered from Sheila Caffells neck, during autopsy by Peter Venezis, pathologist) received in the kitchen, but 'this rifle' would in due course, inflict the fatal shot (PV/19, a whole bullet recovered from Sheila Caffells brain by Peter Venezis during the same autopsy) which ultimately killed her off instanteneously!
(24) - senior officers huddled around Sheila Caffells body now on the bedroom floor!
(25) - they were pondering whether it might be possible or not to present the single shot (at that time) as having been inflicted with use of the silencer fitted to the anshuzt rifle, rather than to admit that she had been shot and had been killed by use of a police weapon and one police round (the shooting incident in the kitchen event which later became subject of an 'Officers Report' into the shooting of Sheila Caffell after police entered the kitchen of the farmhouse)
(26) - the anshuzt rifle with silencer attached onto the end of its barrell was duly offered to Sheila Caffells body, police making sure that the fingers of her right hand could reach the trigger mechanism of the rifle! At this stage it became apparent that the barrel of the rifle with its silencer attached virtually eradicated any prospective of it being capable of use at the time the single shot (at that time) had been inflicted! One officer took it upon himself to try to squeeze the additional two inches required to make the rifle so configured into the gun which had fired the shot! He stretched Sheila's arm as far as it would extend whilst at the same time trying to manipulate the muzzle end of the silencer fitted to the guns barrel into position against the solitary bullet wound hole in Sheila Caffells neck! During this time an abrasion mark was created around the bullet entry hole on her throat!
(27) - whilst in the process of trying to make the anshuzt rifle with silencer fit into the gap (distance) between the trigger of the aforementioned weapon and the location of the single bullet wound hole in Sheila's throat, the trigger mechanism of the said rifle got activated and a shot was discharged higher up on Sheila's throat which sent the bullet (PV/19) up through her mouth and which lodged in her brain! As soon as this second wound was inflicted fresh blood started to pour from the corners of her mouth, from the newly inflicted wound, and her left nostril
-
The exhibit reference 'SBJ/1' came into force on the morning of 7 August 1985 at the scene when 'Stan' Jones returned to the farmhouse to collect the silencer! At the same time Jones seized three other SBJ exhibits, SBJ/2, SBJ/3 and SBJ/4! The silencer, therefore was in police possession (7 August 1985) prior to David Boutflour recovering 'it' from the gun cupboard on 10 August 1985!
Refer Legend:-
(33) - once the second 'higher up on the throat shot got inflicted, police found themselves facing an additional dilemma. Now Sheila had two shots on her throat, one fired by a police weapon when cops stormed the kitchen, to which an 'Officers Report' refers (the shooting incident in the kitchen), a second shot which had inadvertently been fired via the anshuzt rifle with a silencer fitted to its barrel! The anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted could not possibly have been responsible for inflicting the first shot across the throat because the distance between the rifles trigger and the muzzle end of the silencer that was fitted to the guns barrel was too long! On the other hand, the anshuzt rifle with its silencer fitted had inflicted the second 'higher up on the throat' shot! Senior cops carrying out the informative considered recoil as being a possible solution to the problem cops now faced, but this was rejected because the same gun could not have fired both shots into Sheila's throat
(34) - Sheila's blood got into the silencer as a result of the silencer still being fitted to the barrel end of the anshuzt rifle at the time 'the second higher up on the throat shot got inflicted'
(35) - senior officers found themselves at a cross roads, they had a victim who had been shot twice by two different guns, which excluded the possibility of cops arguing that 'recoil' might account for the two shots! They decided to remove the silencer, and proceed as though there had never been a silencer involved with the family owned anshuzt rifle, so they removed the silencer, and proceeded to stage Sheilas death using the anshuzt rifle minus it's silencer! DS 'Stan' Jones, would leave Jeremy's cottage later that same morning and retrieve the aforementioned silencer and give it to DCI 'Taff' Jones who kept it on his office desk at Witham Police Station and used it as a temporary paper weight!
(37) - after returning to the scene at just before dinner time, on that first morning, 'Stan' Jones recovered four exhibits in total, bearing exhibit marks, SBJ/4, SBJ/3, SBJ/2 and SBJ/1 (the silencer) these four exhibits, including the silencer were logged in an Essex Police Major Incident Property Register bearing a Crime Reference No. SC/688/85...
-
How could the SBJ/1, 2, 3, and 4 exhibits/items exist before David Boutflour recovered the silencer from the gun cupboard in the den on 10th August 1985, unless cops already had the silencer, that they placed it back to the scene on evening 9th August 1985, only for a relative (David Boutflour) to find it there on the following day?
-
I won't be doing that.
Nobody has to. But I feel better for at least trying to make members aware. It's really just a heads up more than anything else.
-
Just how would RWB be party to such information? The man thought Bamber wore a wetsuit for goodness sake.
Perhaps Justice also wonders the same. I see RWB and the other relatives as desperately needing to be right about Jeremy. When it came to evidence, the ends justified the means. Therefore:
Evidence that indicated Sheila was not what they wanted to hear or accept. They would simply adapt their Jeremy theories around it or attempt to incorporate it.
Information about anomalies in the scene or gossip about what took place that morning, was potential leverage to harass police with - to manipulate things more towards the direction they wanted.
-
Either something went wrong in the farmhouse - TFG complications / informatives / economical with the truth / scene staged etc or Robert Boutflour had something on Simpson.
By agreeing to investigate (frame) Jeremy - the police effectively bought time to control the evidence that Robert would have threatened to expose - if they didn't agree to.
Hi Roch, unless this becomes available or someone reveals all this it will be hard to prove. Don't get me wrong I and I think Caroline Jane etc would like it to be a MOJ, but the information I have or what's available doesn't suggest it, the lack of evidence doesn't point to suicide/murder etc. You of all people know we have been down this road before and the longer we have been on the forum the innuendo's have been exposed, you yourself Roch have been nearly in this non believer position, so if you are privileged to new and unmistakeable evidence fair dues and I take my hat of to you, but you cannot blame us for not believing at this stage until it becomes available.
-
Hi Roch, unless this becomes available or someone reveals all this it will be hard to prove. Don't get me wrong I and I think Caroline Jane etc would like it to be a MOJ, but the information I have or what's available doesn't suggest it, the lack of evidence doesn't point to suicide/murder etc. You of all people know we have been down this road before and the longer we have been on the forum the innuendo's have been exposed, you yourself Roch have been nearly in this non believer position, so if you are privileged to new and unmistakeable evidence fair dues and I take my hat of to you, but you cannot blame us for not believing at this stage until it becomes available.
Guilters keep posting that this or that 'doesn't make Jeremy innocent'. Likewise - it being difficult to prove something doesn't mean it didn't happen. For me the proof is there already - because I know part of what has been covered up. Therefore for me, proof already exists that some kind of deal was struck between Boutflour and Simpson. It is essentially, the only logical explanation. Simpson had clear proof of Sheila's involvement in the killings. The officer he appointed to appease Boutflour was tasked with covering it up.
I'm sorry if that's not what people want to read or consider. It is a shameful truth nonetheless.
-
Guilters keep posting that this or that 'doesn't make Jeremy innocent'. Likewise - it being difficult to prove something doesn't mean it didn't happen. For me the proof is there already - because I know part of what has been covered up. Therefore for me, proof already exists that some kind of deal was struck between Boutflour and Simpson. It is essentially, the only logical explanation. Simpson had clear proof of Sheila's involvement in the killings. The officer he appointed to appease Boutflour was tasked with covering it up.
I'm sorry if that's not what people want to read or consider. It is a shameful truth nonetheless.
Well, the jury were satisfied, Roch, and unless you were there, you only know what you've been told. Who knows what was the agenda of whoever imparted the information to you. It just seems very strange to me that, if all this suspicion is out there and available, it's been kept under wraps for so long.
-
Perhaps Justice also wonders the same. I see RWB and the other relatives as desperately needing to be right about Jeremy. When it came to evidence, the ends justified the means. Therefore:
Evidence that indicated Sheila was not what they wanted to hear or accept. They would simply adapt their Jeremy theories around it or attempt to incorporate it.
Information about anomalies in the scene or gossip about what took place that morning, was potential leverage to harass police with - to manipulate things more towards the direction they wanted.
Gossip and information anomalies were enough to to make chief constable frame an innocent man for the murder of the family he just lost when he had hard evidence to set the relatives on their way? You're basically suggesting he was blackmailed - I doubt he's have stood for that, not when he had evidence to prove Sheila's guilt and if the family knew she was guilty, what they were asking would have found them in court - but as a defendant.
-
Well, the jury were satisfied, Roch, and unless you were there, you only know what you've been told. Who knows what was the agenda of whoever imparted the information to you. It just seems very strange to me that, if all this suspicion is out there and available, it's been kept under wraps for so long.
That could relate to grounds restrictions and CCRC processes? Perhaps the system is set up to constrict over time, with regard to what can be classed as a 'new ground' . I'm not sure. But people are really not getting what I am saying. There would have been no trial and no jury to reach a verdict, if this evidence had been disclosed at the outset of Jeremy being charged.
-
Gossip and information anomalies were enough to to make chief constable frame an innocent man for the murder of the family he just lost when he had hard evidence to set the relatives on their way? You're basically suggesting he was blackmailed - I doubt he's have stood for that, not when he had evidence to prove Sheila's guilt and if the family knew she was guilty, what they were asking would have found them in court - but as a defendant.
Depends upon what took place in the farmhouse and how true EP's official line was at the outset.
-
That could relate to grounds restrictions and CCRC processes? Perhaps the system is set up to constrict over time, with regard to what can be classed as a 'new ground' . I'm not sure. But people are really not getting what I am saying. There would have been no trial and no jury to reach a verdict, if this evidence had been disclosed at the outset of Jeremy being charged.
I refer you back to Caroline's last post.
-
That could relate to grounds restrictions and CCRC processes? Perhaps the system is set up to constrict over time, with regard to what can be classed as a 'new ground' . I'm not sure. But people are really not getting what I am saying. There would have been no trial and no jury to reach a verdict, if this evidence had been disclosed at the outset of Jeremy being charged.
You're talking about non-disclosure again? If what you are talking about hasn't been disclosed, how are you or those who told you - party to it?
-
Depends upon what took place in the farmhouse and how true EP's official line was at the outset.
There's that 'something' again :). Without a motive this whole theory just falls flat. If this 'something' was big enough to make a chief constable put his career on the line and silence the whole of EP for 30 years, I doubt it would have been allowed to form part of gossip loose enough to land in the lap of RWB.
-
You're talking about non-disclosure again? If what you are talking about hasn't been disclosed, how are you or those who told you - party to it?
Tricky one that. Part of it has been disclosed in some form from the outset. Part of it hasn't until recent years. Some of it disclosed in between. Tricky.
-
Tricky one that. Part of it has been disclosed in some form from the outset. Part of it hasn't until recent years. Some of it disclosed in between. Tricky.
A jigsaw?
-
A jigsaw?
Ha ha. I understand that for many of you (on the dark-side) my posts must be bloody frustrating! For those like me, who wield the sword of justice like a shining light however... :))
-
A jigsaw?
I love jigsaws but I'm lost on this one. What evidence is roch referring to. Non disclosure for me is the biggest thing in this case, I don't think we have seen nearly enough,
-
What logs are you talking about? It's in statements about one dead female in the kitchen which was accepted as being Neville, I think the idea that the police shot Sheila twice with two different rifles once in the kitchen and once upstairs is more silly and preposterous don't you?
The message and radio logs which were withheld from the defence at the initial trial and both appeals. Do you dispute this?
I would have thought that it was easily inferred which logs I was referring to from the following,
"First of all the logs ,which mention two bodies downstairs, one male one female etc. were withheld for many years until after the second appeal, I believe"
There are a few clues here to enable you to discern which logs I am referring to.
1) The ones that refer to finding two bodies upon entry( one male and one female)
2) The ones that were withheld for years.
3) The ones that came to light only after the second appeal.
This is why your claim that it would have been easier to move Sheila's dead body downstairs to the kitchen is ludicrous. It also ignores the fact that EP did withhold/conceal logs which refer to this.
-
I love jigsaws but I'm lost on this one. What evidence is roch referring to. Non disclosure for me is the biggest thing in this case, I don't think we have seen nearly enough,
Hello Notsure I understand the evidence Roch is referring to is material that has convinced him Sheila was the killer this evidence I think has been shown to him in confidence and he is not able to share with us. I have known Roch on this forum for many years to know he would not try and deceive us :)
-
Ha ha. I understand that for many of you (on the dark-side) my posts must be bloody frustrating! For those like me, who wield the sword of justice like a shining light however... :))
Hi Roch you sound elated and that must be a wonderful feeling to have knowing in your heart of hearts you are not wrong in your belief Sheila was the killer.
-
Cops aren't corrupt according to some people, the cops don't falsify evidence, they don't try to cover things up, no not the cops, try telling that to all the acclaimed miscarriages of justice and the victims of these tactics over the years - the stark truth is that cops do tamper with the evidence, and they do cover things up! They don't always need a motive to do these things, they do these things because they can!
-
Hello Notsure I understand the evidence Roch is referring to is material that has convinced him Sheila was the killer this evidence I think has been shown to him in confidence and he is not able to share with us. I have known Roch on this forum for many years to know he would not try and deceive us :)
You should know better than this.
Sources are required from both guilters & supporters. Espescially when making massive claims such as in post 479.
You've asked me for sources enough times. Often more than once for the same things.
-
You should know better than this.
Sources are required from both guilters & supporters. Espescially when making massive claims such as in post 479.
You've asked me for sources enough times. Often for the same thing more than once.
Adam stop being so cross with me you know I try my best and I know I cannot never post with the knowledge and confidence you do. :'(
-
Anyway Roch said yesterday regarding his post 479 "why would I be privy to such information".
So obviously isn't witholding his sources , but just posting what he would like the situation to be.
-
Anyway Roch said yesterday regarding his post 479 "why would I be privy to such information".
So obviously isn't witholding his sources , but just posting what he would like the situation to be.
Two different situations - albeit linked together by me in my posts. I may have a Simpson Boutflour theory for you. I might post it up later on.
-
If Jeremy had been the shooter,and an " ace " one at that,why so many shots to two sleeping children and only two into an adult ?
-
Sources are required from both guilters & supporters. Especially when making massive claims such as in post 479.
You mean this post
I'm not telling lies...
When I say that physical evidence existed at the scene strongly implicating Sheila Caffell in the killings.
Regardless of whether Sheila Caffell had or hadn't been alive when TFG entered farmhouse - any police officers who paid sufficient attention inside the building, would have recognised and understood the significance of the evidence.
The nature of the evidence was/is exculpatory with regard to Jeremy: although he was not a police suspect at that time - he very quickly became a suspect in the eyes of some relatives.
Relatives were provided with information by police on several occasions - to the point were at least two of them accepted Sheila could have committed the killings.
Relatives chose to reject this information. The eventual culmination of the relatives choosing this path - was that the evidence that implicated Sheila and exculpated Jeremy was concealed, in order that Jeremy could be prosecuted for the killings.
All truth - no lies here I'm afraid.
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
-
The message and radio logs which were withheld from the defence at the initial trial and both appeals. Do you dispute this?
I would have thought that it was easily inferred which logs I was referring to from the following,
"First of all the logs ,which mention two bodies downstairs, one male one female etc. were withheld for many years until after the second appeal, I believe"
There are a few clues here to enable you to discern which logs I am referring to.
1) The ones that refer to finding two bodies upon entry( one male and one female)
2) The ones that were withheld for years.
3) The ones that came to light only after the second appeal.
This is why your claim that it would have been easier to move Sheila's dead body downstairs to the kitchen is ludicrous. It also ignores the fact that EP did withhold/conceal logs which refer to this.
So your saying PC Collins statement and Woodcocks statements 20th Sept (raid team) wasn't available to the defence both mention seeing a female on the kitchen floor? PC Collins also says he had mentioned this in his original statement as well, so it seems to me that they are not trying to cover this up?
-
If Jeremy had been the shooter,and an " ace " one at that,why so many shots to two sleeping children and only two into an adult ?
Because it wasn't meant to look like the work of a competent shooter and the adult was only meant to have had one.
-
Because it wasn't meant to look like the work of a competent shooter and the adult was only meant to have had one.
Yeah ! Well it was NEVER the work of a competent shooter,was it ?
-
Yeah ! Well it was NEVER the work of a competent shooter,was it ?
He made an excellent job of making it look incompetent until his mistake with Sheila. It caused you to comment on the seeming INcompetence.
-
He made an excellent job of making it look incompetent until his mistake with Sheila. It caused you to comment on the seeming INcompetence.
An even more of an impossible task when he wasn't even there !
-
An even more of an impossible task when he wasn't even there !
You prove it. I don't need to prove anything.
-
You prove it. I don't need to prove anything.
The evidence from the scene that indicates Sheila, points away from Jeremy. Jeremy would not have been able to create this evidence. If this evidence had been properly disclosed from the outset - there would have been no trial against Jeremy.
-
You prove it. I don't need to prove anything.
Well it's certainly no hardship on your part at all not proving anything for as far as you're concerned the job was done. Those of us who use our brains can see the cracks which had been papered over by those responsible for their shonky investigations and statements,which takes more brain power than just locking a door and throwing away the key.
Left to you,the prisons would be packed to the gunnels with innocent people,while you sit back arguing the toss without a care for anyone but yourself.
-
The evidence from the scene that indicates Sheila, points away from Jeremy. Jeremy would not have been able to create this evidence. If this evidence had been properly disclosed from the outset - there would have been no trial against Jeremy.
What evidence?
-
The only evidence that could point away from Jeremy an onto Sheila would be something like a suicide note, written in her handwriting? The rifle would be the same in both instances, the amo - nothing about the scene needs to change in both circumstances - but if there was a suicide note .........?
-
Well it's certainly no hardship on your part at all not proving anything for as far as you're concerned the job was done. Those of us who use our brains can see the cracks which had been papered over by those responsible for their shonky investigations and statements,which takes more brain power than just locking a door and throwing away the key.
Left to you,the prisons would be packed to the gunnels with innocent people,while you sit back arguing the toss without a care for anyone but yourself.
It was using my brain to see the cracks in supporters' walls which caused me to change from innocent to guilty. Left to you, the guilty would be 'disposed of' without a backward glance.
-
The only evidence that could point away from Jeremy an onto Sheila would be something like a suicide note, written in her handwriting? The rifle would be the same in both instances, the amo - nothing about the scene needs to change in both circumstances - but if there was a suicide note .........?
Afraid I cant cooperate in a process of elimination with regard to 'what evidence?'. Therefore I cannot confirm either way on anything suggested. I understand this is of no use to you but it's the position I am in. What I know - you will also come to know - but when is out of my hands entirely.
-
Afraid I cant cooperate in a process of elimination with regard to 'what evidence?'. Therefore I cannot confirm either way on anything suggested. I understand this is of no use to you but it's the position I am in. What I know - you will also come to know - but when is out of my hands entirely.
You've placed yourself in a very elevated position here, haven't you, Roch. It could seem like you're carrot dangling.
-
Afraid I cant cooperate in a process of elimination with regard to 'what evidence?'. Therefore I cannot confirm either way on anything suggested. I understand this is of no use to you but it's the position I am in. What I know - you will also come to know - but when is out of my hands entirely.
I didn't think you would but there is little about the crime scene that would eliminate one and incriminate the other exclusively. A note by Sheila, proof she was alive, proof of the phone call - that's all I can think of.
-
It was using my brain to see the cracks in supporters' walls which caused me to change from innocent to guilty. Left to you, the guilty would be 'disposed of' without a backward glance.
Blimey,couldn't you do better than that ?
-
Blimey,couldn't you do better than that ?
Why would it need to be? It's FACT
-
Hi Roch you sound elated and that must be a wonderful feeling to have knowing in your heart of hearts you are not wrong in your belief Sheila was the killer.
thanks susan, take no notice of adam.
-
thanks susan, take no notice of adam.
Hopefully you & Susan realise all posters need to provide sources to back up what is written.
Accepting Roch's major claims just because he wrote a long post is not sufficient.
I will re post my questions to Roch for the 4th time & the forum can debate his answers & sources.
-
I'm not telling lies...
When I say that physical evidence existed at the scene strongly implicating Sheila Caffell in the killings.
Regardless of whether Sheila Caffell had or hadn't been alive when TFG entered farmhouse - any police officers who paid sufficient attention inside the building, would have recognised and understood the significance of the evidence.
The nature of the evidence was/is exculpatory with regard to Jeremy: although he was not a police suspect at that time - he very quickly became a suspect in the eyes of some relatives.
Relatives were provided with information by police on several occasions - to the point were at least two of them accepted Sheila could have committed the killings.
Relatives chose to reject this information. The eventual culmination of the relatives choosing this path - was that the evidence that implicated Sheila and exculpated Jeremy was concealed, in order that Jeremy could be prosecuted for the killings.
All truth - no lies here I'm afraid.
When the truth is eventually made public - my prediction is that the relatives will continue to try to manipulate and garner sympathy - by blaming the police for the wrongful conviction. They will express that the police withheld information from them. Information that if they had have been made aware of - would have prevented their campaign against Jeremy and the original investigating team.
But it comes full circle. Because they were told convincing information that had confirmed Sheila's role to police. They were told Sheila was the killer.
I bet they also blame Julie Mugford also. They will blame anyone but themselves
What physical evidence existed at the scene that 'implicated Sheila as the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What evidence were the relatives given that saw two of them 'accept that Sheila could have been the killer' ? How do you know this ?
What two relatives were these ? How do you know this ?
What evidence was concealed that had shown Sheila was the killer ? How do you know this ?
Why did the police conceal evidence to frame an innocent man ?
When do you believe the truth will be made public ? It's been 32 years.
Please include sources for each answer.
-
Hopefully you & Susan realise all posters need to provide sources to back up what is written.
Accepting Roch's major claims just because he wrote a long post is not sufficient.
I will re post my questions to Roch for the 4th time & the forum can debate his answers & sources.
adam we don't need to do anything. If we are able to post sources we can but it's not obligatory. I can accept anyone's post if I want to. Roch hasn't actually made any major claims yet but I'll certainly consider them when he does.
-
I didn't think you would but there is little about the crime scene that would eliminate one and incriminate the other exclusively. A note by Sheila, proof she was alive, proof of the phone call - that's all I can think of.
Well there was something in the crime scene that points away from Jeremy and towards Sheila. I suppose we'll just have to see what occurs over the coming year.
-
What physical evidence existed at the scene that 'implicated Sheila as the killer' ? How do you know this ?
Evidence that was there for all to discover, inspect and become informed by, regarding what had most likely taken place during that night.
What evidence were the relatives given that saw two of them 'accept that Sheila could have been the killer' ? How do you know this ?
It's in Ann Eaton's COLP notes - possibly 14th August? You cant have a situation where there is apparently no evidence that Sheila Caffell was the killer - yet there is enough evidence available to impart to two protesting relatives; and enable their acceptance that Sheila may have been the killer.
What two relatives were these ? How do you know this ?
See above
What evidence was concealed that had shown Sheila was the killer ? How do you know this ?
See my first sentence.
Why did the police conceal evidence to frame an innocent man ?
Perhaps at least one of the policemen was corrupt to the extent he could be got at?
When do you believe the truth will be made public ? It's been 32 years.
Probably some point later this year - which in Bamber case terms means next April :))
Please include sources for each answer.
-
Well there was something in the crime scene that points away from Jeremy and towards Sheila. I suppose we'll just have to see what occurs over the coming year.
It wasn't a big sponge finger was it? ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
So your saying PC Collins statement and Woodcocks statements 20th Sept (raid team) wasn't available to the defence both mention seeing a female on the kitchen floor? PC Collins also says he had mentioned this in his original statement as well, so it seems to me that they are not trying to cover this up?
Where did I mention statements?
It was crystal clear that I was referring to the message logs, which were withheld for nearly 20 years.
Why were these withheld, if not to cover up the rather revealing contents?
Woodcock and Collins statements didn't mention finding two bodies downstairs, nor did they mention finding a further three upstairs. The message logs do refer to this and they were withheld.
Where are Woodcocks and Collins original statements, seeing as you brought the matter up? Are they also "unavailable".
Do you, believe that withholding logs and then rewriting statements, after deciding to withhold said logs, is standard practice?
-
Where did I mention statements?
It was crystal clear that I was referring to the message logs, which were withheld for nearly 20 years.
Why were these withheld, if not to cover up the rather revealing contents?
Woodcock and Collins statements didn't mention finding two bodies downstairs, nor did they mention finding a further three upstairs. The message logs do refer to this and they were withheld.
Where are Woodcocks and Collins original statements, seeing as you brought the matter up? Are they also "unavailable".
Do you, believe that withholding logs and then rewriting statements, after deciding to withhold said logs, is standard practice?
In order to believe "that withholding logs and then rewriting statements, after deciding to withhold said logs, is standard practice" it is necessary to believe that logs were withheld and statements were rewritten, OTHER, that is, than in composite form which is accepted, standard practice ie it would take rather too long to read out the statement of someone with a stutter!!!
-
Where did I mention statements?
It was crystal clear that I was referring to the message logs, which were withheld for nearly 20 years.
Why were these withheld, if not to cover up the rather revealing contents?
Woodcock and Collins statements didn't mention finding two bodies downstairs, nor did they mention finding a further three upstairs. The message logs do refer to this and they were withheld.
Where are Woodcocks and Collins original statements, seeing as you brought the matter up? Are they also "unavailable".
Do you, believe that withholding logs and then rewriting statements, after deciding to withhold said logs, is standard practice?
Quite simple really, there wasn't two bodies down stairs.
-
Where did I mention statements?
It was crystal clear that I was referring to the message logs, which were withheld for nearly 20 years.
Why were these withheld, if not to cover up the rather revealing contents?
Woodcock and Collins statements didn't mention finding two bodies downstairs, nor did they mention finding a further three upstairs. The message logs do refer to this and they were withheld.
Where are Woodcocks and Collins original statements, seeing as you brought the matter up? Are they also "unavailable".
Do you, believe that withholding logs and then rewriting statements, after deciding to withhold said logs, is standard practice?
This seems to keep coming up.
The logs simply were NOT withheld!!!
The proof of this is in trial transcripts (available in our library). The logs by Bonnett & West are referred to, read from and even handed out in court back in 1986.
Read them for yourself.
-
This seems to keep coming up.
The logs simply were NOT withheld!!!
The proof of this is in trial transcripts (available in our library). The logs by Bonnett & West are referred to, read from and even handed out in court back in 1986.
Read them for yourself.
The message logs were withheld and were only obtained after the second appeal. As I remember they were only obtained by the defence after a mistake by EP. I believe EP released the first page of a fourteen page log, that had previously been withheld, on the reverse side of some other document that they were disclosing.
Were the message logs read from and discussed in court?
Had they been so, it is difficult to believe that the pathetic excuses given since for these anomalies, would have been bought by the jury.
But we all know really that this is the very reason for the withholding of the message logs.
-
The message logs were withheld and were only obtained after the second appeal. As I remember they were only obtained by the defence after a mistake by EP. I believe EP released the first page of a fourteen page log, that had previously been withheld, on the reverse side of some other document that they were disclosing.
Were the message logs read from and discussed in court?
Had they been so, it is difficult to believe that the pathetic excuses given since for these anomalies, would have been bought by the jury.
But we all know really that this is the very reason for the withholding of the message logs.
The logs were not withheld, that is simply a myth.
The logs were handed to both Bonnet and West whilst in court, as were a number of their statements which make references to the logs.
West
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166)
Bonnett
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604)
These are both in the library, along with the various statements.
-
The logs were not withheld, that is simply a myth.
The logs were handed to both Bonnet and West whilst in court, as were a number of their statements which make references to the logs.
West
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166)
Bonnett
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604)
These are both in the library, along with the various statements.
Thanks H. This regularly trotted out as a weapon in supporters' arsenal.
-
The logs were not withheld, that is simply a myth.
The logs were handed to both Bonnet and West whilst in court, as were a number of their statements which make references to the logs.
West
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166)
Bonnett
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604)
These are both in the library, along with the various statements.
I can't count the number of times that I have said this - what can you do if people just don't take any notice of the facts?
-
Thanks H. This regularly trotted out as a weapon in supporters' arsenal.
Yeah, and they seem to voice it with a really bad almost scoffing attitude.
What's that all about - weird. :-\
-
The logs were not withheld, that is simply a myth.
The logs were handed to both Bonnet and West whilst in court, as were a number of their statements which make references to the logs.
West
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1103.msg34166.html#msg34166)
Bonnett
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8131.msg384604.html#msg384604)
These are both in the library, along with the various statements.
Thanks Harley it's also in members of the raid team statements, they don't hide the fact that what they thought was a female
-
Thanks Harley it's also in members of the raid team statements, they don't hide the fact that what they thought was a female
Yes, you're absolutely right, it is.
-
I can't count the number of times that I have said this - what can you do if people just don't take any notice of the facts?
I know you have Caroline and you get fed up with repeating it, but that's what conspiracies like because it sticks with some.
-
Yes, you're absolutely right, it is.
Youre like the Cavalry Hartley and a man for all occasions.
-
Youre like the Cavalry Hartley and a man for all occasions.
;D
-
I know you have Caroline and you get fed up with repeating it, but that's what conspiracies like because it sticks with some.
Justice, to my eternal shame, that's exactly what I did when I first joined. I picked up on all the conspiracy theories on offer -I guess it's something about fantasy being more exciting than mundane fact- until I came to my senses.
-
Justice, to my eternal shame, that's exactly what I did when I first joined. I picked up on all the conspiracy theories on offer -I guess it's something about fantasy being more exciting than mundane fact- until I came to my senses.
We have all been there Jane, but when you have Sussed it out there's no way back.
-
The logs pertaining to the male and female bodies being found and the resultant actions were withheld. The fact that multiple, uniform statements were typed up regarding Collins' alleged mistake, does not in itself adequately portray the information that appears in the withheld logs.
-
The message logs were withheld and were only obtained after the second appeal. As I remember they were only obtained by the defence after a mistake by EP. I believe EP released the first page of a fourteen page log, that had previously been withheld, on the reverse side of some other document that they were disclosing.
Were the message logs read from and discussed in court?
Had they been so, it is difficult to believe that the pathetic excuses given since for these anomalies, would have been bought by the jury.
But we all know really that this is the very reason for the withholding of the message logs.
They were NOT withheld - here is the judge discussing Bonnett's log and he asking for it to be shown to the jury. I don't know why you keep ignoring this!
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8131.0;attach=47269)
-
Justice, to my eternal shame, that's exactly what I did when I first joined. I picked up on all the conspiracy theories on offer -I guess it's something about fantasy being more exciting than mundane fact- until I came to my senses.
We have all been there Jane, but when you have Sussed it out there's no way back.
What you've actually done is to lead yourselves up a blind alley - from which you refuse to return.
as for conspiracy theories - an easy tag to use to dismiss things. You are going to be in for a shock!
-
What you've actually done is to lead yourselves up a blind alley - from which you refuse to return.
as for conspiracy theories - an easy tag to use to dismiss things. You are going to be in for a shock!
Roch, you're actually starting to come across a little on the rude side, maybe you should tone it down and show some respect to other members of the forum, regardless of their views on the case?
-
Hi Roch you sound elated and that must be a wonderful feeling to have knowing in your heart of hearts you are not wrong in your belief Sheila was the killer.
I'm not sure I'm elated - it's not like I've won the lottery. Having peace of mind is good though. People should remember that at one point i was virtually 50/50. knowing how far from reality debate is on this forum is an eye opener also.
-
Roch, you're actually starting to come across a little on the rude side, maybe you should tone it down and show some respect to other members of the forum, regardless of their views on the case?
Sorry - not my intention to be rude. ;)
-
Sorry - not my intention to be rude. ;)
Just an observation mate.
-
I'm not sure I'm elated - it's not like I've won the lottery. Having peace of mind is good though. People should remember that at one point i was virtually 50/50. knowing how far from reality debate is on this forum is an eye opener also.
Hi Roch sorry I used the wrong word in that of elated I meant to know within yourself your belief's are correct must be very good for the mind other than being all over the place with your fifty/fifty and it is so obvious you know things about the case the rest of us don't but guess we will at some stage.
-
What you've actually done is to lead yourselves up a blind alley - from which you refuse to return.
as for conspiracy theories - an easy tag to use to dismiss things. You are going to be in for a shock!
Well, from what I can see, you (and others) have made many subsequent alley's with the title of 'something' that allow many unfounded theories to be entered as 'fact'. 'Something' happened and 'someone' found out but the theories are always very thin on motive. People work on motives, they are inherent in human nature. The officer(s) you accuse of framing Bamber have no motive because they weren't there and could simply have found a scapegoat much further down the ranks; although as already stated, there is nothing that would warrant such action and you have been unable to provide a good enough reason.
-
Well, from what I can see, you (and others) have made many subsequent alley's with the title of 'something' that allow many unfounded theories to be entered as 'fact'. 'Something' happened and 'someone' found out but the theories are always very thin on motive. People work on motives, they are inherent in human nature. The officer(s) you accuse of framing Bamber have no motive because they weren't there and could simply have found a scapegoat much further down the ranks; although as already stated, there is nothing that would warrant such action and you have been unable to provide a good enough reason.
It brings to mind the manta in "Cold Comfort Farm" about there being "something nasty in the wood house". It undoubtedly caused a frisson but there was nothing to back it up.
-
Sorry - not my intention to be rude. ;)
I don't find you rude, but you do come across differently - you're starting to sound like the CT. The arguments you are using seem to be a match for their recent addition of the 'liars lobby'?
-
Just an observation mate.
Yes fair enough I will tone it down.
Well, from what I can see, you (and others) have made many subsequent alley's with the title of 'something' that allow many unfounded theories to be entered as 'fact'. 'Something' happened and 'someone' found out but the theories are always very thin on motive. People work on motives, they are inherent in human nature. The officer(s) you accuse of framing Bamber have no motive because they weren't there and could simply have found a scapegoat much further down the ranks; although as already stated, there is nothing that would warrant such action and you have been unable to provide a good enough reason.
I think that the concept of police corruption doesn't sit comfortable with you. I did post up an insider's opinion of police culture contemporary to events - tbf. It was dismissed under a flag of convenience as somebody with an 'axe to grind' which is absolute bollocks. It's somebody with a moral compass pointing in the right direction.
And as i have said - I cannot excuse or explain the corrupt actions of others. They've got tongues in their heads. But I cannot force them to speak honestly and openly (the ones who are still alive).
-
Sorry - not my intention to be rude. ;)
Roch, in all honesty you know how many times we and others have been lead up the garden path, surely in your heart you cannot blame people.
-
I don't find you rude, but you do come across differently - you're starting to sound like the CT. The arguments you are using seem to be a match for their recent addition of the 'liars lobby'?
I've had no dealings with them. I think they are in a very difficult position caught in-between the various agencies but I don't always condone the line they take on different things. I recently criticised one of their videos - while praising another.
Roch, in all honesty you know how many times we and others have been lead up the garden path, surely in your heart you cannot blame people.
I think in the long run you will find that on several issues - you were maybe not so much led up the garden path as you think. You have to try and understand that for the defence - solving the case is like piecing together a massive and partly damaged jigsaw with pieces missing.
The very sad fact is that some people knew pretty much what the truth was from the very beginning (I'm not referring to Jeremy and Stan).
-
Well, from what I can see, you (and others) have made many subsequent alley's with the title of 'something' that allow many unfounded theories to be entered as 'fact'. 'Something' happened and 'someone' found out but the theories are always very thin on motive. People work on motives, they are inherent in human nature. The officer(s) you accuse of framing Bamber have no motive because they weren't there and could simply have found a scapegoat much further down the ranks; although as already stated, there is nothing that would warrant such action and you have been unable to provide a good enough reason.
There must also be some thought given to a persons ability to interpret information correctly.
If Roch is not simply having a laugh (which is where my 50p bet goes) and has seen what he thinks is some sort of 'smoking gun evidence', then why should anybody have any faith that he has interpreted the 'evidence' correctly? Especially given the fact that many of us don't believe he has even interpreted information which actually is available correctly.
I'll reserve judgment until/if there is something to judge. In the meantime my gut tells me that the boy is crying wolf .......... again.
-
Yes fair enough I will tone it down.
I think that the concept of police corruption doesn't sit comfortable with you. I did post up an insider's opinion of police culture contemporary to events - tbf. It was dismissed under a flag of convenience as somebody with an 'axe to grind' which is absolute bollocks. It's somebody with a moral compass pointing in the right direction.
And as i have said - I cannot excuse or explain the corrupt actions of others. They've got tongues in their heads. But I cannot force them to speak honestly and openly (the ones who are still alive).
You couldn't be MORE wrong, someone very close to me was framed by a police officer. The officer in question destroyed a piece of evidence that was vital to the defence, after that, it was his word against the person I knew. It was a simple act which affected someone's life but there was no grand conspiracy just one dishonest git who wanted a conviction (that was his motive)!
I'm not a naive idiot - I don't believe the boys in blue are the people's champions - but in order for them to risk everything on the scale you're talking, they would need a motive. No one is asking you to speak for them, just to explain your theory but you can't say what the evidence is (although I still think it might be the suicide note that hasn't been proven to be a suicide note) and you can't provide a motive.
There are lots of bones Roch, just no meat.
-
I don't find you rude, but you do come across differently - you're starting to sound like the CT. The arguments you are using seem to be a match for their recent addition of the 'liars lobby'?
Well, he's certainly coming across with a fervour similar to that of the Jehovah's Witnesses who regularly knock at my door......................lovely people, mind you.
-
There must also be some thought given to a persons ability to interpret information correctly.
If Roch is not simply having a laugh (which is where my 50p bet goes) and has seen what he thinks is some sort of 'smoking gun evidence', then why should anybody have any faith that he has interpreted the 'evidence' correctly? Especially given the fact that many of us don't believe he has even interpreted information which actually is available correctly.
I'll reserve judgment until/if there is something to judge. In the meantime my gut tells me that the boy is crying wolf .......... again.
I think that final remark is bang out of order Hartley and i think you should retract it.
As for the evidence I have been referring to - I think it would be difficult to interpret in any other manner other than the one I have. But perhaps not impossible. Somebody die-hard like Robert Boutflour for example - I doubt he would have interpreted it the same.
-
I think that final remark is bang out of order Hartley and i think you should retract it.
As for the evidence I have been referring to - I think it would be difficult to interpret in any other manner other than the one I have. But perhaps not impossible. Somebody die-hard like Robert Boutflour for example - I doubt he would have interpreted it the same.
In the context of: Sutherst's evidence; Burn Evidence; All of the 2002 Appellant Grounds.
Many things are put forward with such commentary as that displayed by yourself above.
The outcome has always been the same.
-
Sorry - not my intention to be rude. ;)
The time to worry,Roch,is when you start sounding like me. :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
I don't mean to be rude------------I just am !!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
In the context of: Sutherst's evidence; Burn Evidence; All of the 2002 Appellant Grounds.
Many things are put forward with such commentary as that displayed by yourself above.
The outcome has always been the same.
So I put that evidence forward or I touted it 100% as being case breaking or whatever?? How do you know we have seen the last of such issues and that they will not be revisited in some form - for example at a future appeal? To say I personally cry wolf on here is out of order. I have asked you to retract it once and will not ask again.
-
The time to worry,Roch,is when you start sounding like me. :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
I don't mean to be rude------------I just am !!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
It's highly likely that when you start off from an initial position of rudeness, you'll find it's reciprocated and there's no justification for accusing others of it.
-
So I put that evidence forward or I touted it 100% as being case breaking or whatever?? How do you know we have seen the last of such issues and that they will not be revisited in some form - for example at a future appeal? To say I personally cry wolf on here is out of order. I have asked you to retract it once and will not ask again.
I meant Jeremy crying wolf.
Things may or may not get revisited, I'm not sure I see the relevance. My point is simply that one persons interpretation is not always the same as that of another, we have many examples of that in this case, from the CCRC, and the court at trial and appeal.
-
There must also be some thought given to a persons ability to interpret information correctly.
If Roch is not simply having a laugh (which is where my 50p bet goes) and has seen what he thinks is some sort of 'smoking gun evidence', then why should anybody have any faith that he has interpreted the 'evidence' correctly? Especially given the fact that many of us don't believe he has even interpreted information which actually is available correctly.
I'll reserve judgment until/if there is something to judge. In the meantime my gut tells me that the boy is crying wolf .......... again.
Think that's a bit harsh Harters, think Roch has every right to post his opinions etc.
I repeat my never ending, monotonous mantra ..... please attack the post and not the poster. :'(
-
I meant Jeremy crying wolf.
Things may or may not get revisited, I'm not sure I see the relevance. My point is simply that one persons interpretation is not always the same as that of another, we have many examples of that in this case, from the CCRC, and the court at trial and appeal.
Thats how I read it Hartley, when you put the word boy and crying wolf again. Again meaning Bamber
-
Think that's a bit harsh Harters, think Roch has every right to post his opinions etc.
I repeat my never ending, monotonous mantra ..... please attack the post and not the poster. :'(
I think you have simply misunderstood me Maggie.
-
I meant Jeremy crying wolf.
Things may or may not get revisited, I'm not sure I see the relevance. My point is simply that one persons interpretation is not always the same as that of another, we have many examples of that in this case, from the CCRC, and the court at trial and appeal.
I also misunderstood your reference Harters thought you were accusing Roch of having a laugh and crying wolf.
Apologies. 8)
-
I think you have simply misunderstood me Maggie.
I did. :-X
-
I also misunderstood your reference Harters thought you were accusing Roch of having a laugh and crying wolf.
Apologies. 8)
No worries, I still think he may just be having a laugh, motivated and in response to a particular members constant rhetoric, but I could be wrong. :-\
-
It's highly likely that when you start off from an initial position of rudeness, you'll find it's reciprocated and there's no justification for accusing others of it.
Except that I'll admit to rudeness and know it,others, apart from Roch,don't,and don't know it !
I'd rather be in the state of knowing,wouldn't you ??
-
Fair enough Hartley - If i misunderstood then my apologies.
We'll be better able to judge who has been crying wolf over the past 32 years - when further case info comes to light. Personally (and this is not a dig at anyone on here) - I think we will find in the end that the biggest 'wolf cryers' have been the relatives. Which is why I implore people on here to hold them to account when they inevitably try and blame the police.
-
Except that I'll admit to rudeness and know it,others, apart from Roch,don't,and don't know it !
I'd rather be in the state of knowing,wouldn't you ??
How do you know that they're no simply responding with like for like, and why would you wear such a failing, you know you possess, like a badge of honour? I know it's posited that one can't teach an old dog new tricks, but there's also treating others in the way one would like to be treated. I don't believe we have the right to expect back that which we're not prepared to give.
-
I've had no dealings with them. I think they are in a very difficult position caught in-between the various agencies but I don't always condone the line they take on different things. I recently criticised one of their videos - while praising another.
I think in the long run you will find that on several issues - you were maybe not so much led up the garden path as you think. You have to try and understand that for the defence - solving the case is like piecing together a massive and partly damaged jigsaw with pieces missing.
The very sad fact is that some people knew pretty much what the truth was from the very beginning (I'm not referring to Jeremy and Stan).
It will be a wonderful day when the truth is available for the public to see
-
Fair enough Hartley - If i misunderstood then my apologies.
We'll be better able to judge who has been crying wolf over the past 32 years - when further case info comes to light. Personally (and this is not a dig at anyone on here) - I think we will find in the end that the biggest 'wolf cryers' have been the relatives. Which is why I implore people on here to hold them to account when they inevitably try and blame the police.
I think that if there was ever any such evidence then people would consider it and its implications accordingly.
However there is no such evidence available at this time (by your own admission) to forum members which they could use to substantiate such accusations. It is also at the 'very least', possible that no such evidence exists and your accusations are erroneous, via misjudgment or otherwise.
I would suggest that such accusation without evidence is inappropriate.
Indeed our forum guidelines (minimum baseline) includes the following:
.............
Please ensure that references to the victims in any case discussed on the forum are made in a respectful manner. Please remember that victims may include those living as well as those deceased.
..............
-
Fair enough Hartley - If i misunderstood then my apologies.
We'll be better able to judge who has been crying wolf over the past 32 years - when further case info comes to light. Personally (and this is not a dig at anyone on here) - I think we will find in the end that the biggest 'wolf cryers' have been the relatives. Which is why I implore people on here to hold them to account when they inevitably try and blame the police.
Roch,I've never had a good word to say about the relatives at all and I've no intention of ever doing so either. Even if I met them face to face----------not just because I'm behind a screen. They've treated Jeremy appallingly right from day one and it's unforgiveable to my mind. I think Jeremy has been very patient over the years as various files/paperwork has come to light,because I'd have been foaming at the mouth at not being able to " fight back " at them for all the dirty deeds that they'd done.
It'll be interesting to see just who will get the blame.
-
Fair enough Hartley - If i misunderstood then my apologies.
We'll be better able to judge who has been crying wolf over the past 32 years - when further case info comes to light. Personally (and this is not a dig at anyone on here) - I think we will find in the end that the biggest 'wolf cryers' have been the relatives. Which is why I implore people on here to hold them to account when they inevitably try and blame the police.
Don't worry they will be held to account and face serious consequences
They know the truth
-
Don't worry they will be held to account and face serious consequences
They know the truth
Jackie,do you ever remember when the relatives mentioned " packing up and going to live in the Isle of Man ?" I don't know if this was allegedly said before,during,or after the trial. It was DB who'd said it.
Had they then realised the error of their ways,or because they're hard-nosed,they thought they'd see it through,providing Jeremy was out of the way ?
-
Jackie,do you ever remember when the relatives mentioned " packing up and going to live in the Isle of Man ?" I don't know if this was allegedly said before,during,or after the trial. It was DB who'd said it.
Had they then realised the error of their ways,or because they're hard-nosed,they thought they'd see it through,providing Jeremy was out of the way ?
They were so ready to take to the hills -or the Isle of Man- that they're still where they've always been with a thriving business. I MIGHT have understood your accusations of their alleged greed had they sold up, shared the money and lived the high life.
-
I think that if there was ever any such evidence then people would consider it and its implications accordingly.
However there is no such evidence available at this time (by your own admission) to forum members which they could use to substantiate such accusations. It is also at the 'very least', possible that no such evidence exists and your accusations are erroneous, via misjudgment or otherwise.
I would suggest that such accusation without evidence is inappropriate.
Indeed our forum guidelines (minimum baseline) includes the following:
The biggest living victim in all this is Jeremy Bamber. Jeremy Bamber is a victim of the relatives - not the other way round. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
-
They were so ready to take to the hills -or the Isle of Man- that they're still where they've always been with a thriving business. I MIGHT have understood your accusations of their alleged greed had they sold up, shared the money and lived the high life.
I'd have said that it had been pre-trial ! Yes,it was pure unadulterated greed and LIES that kept them going and saved them from the life that Jeremy's having,being isolated. The worm will turn.!
-
They were NOT withheld - here is the judge discussing Bonnett's log and he asking for it to be shown to the jury. I don't know why you keep ignoring this!
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8131.0;attach=47269)
It isn't in dispute that the message logs were withheld.
Do none of you guilters understand the difference between the call logs and the message logs?
The 14 page message log referring to two bodies upon entry and a further three upstairs was not discussed or presented to the court.
It is worth adding that it wasn't available for either appeal and therefore has never been shown to any court let alone the original trial.
To make clear, this is not about the call logs, but the message logs.
-
I'd have said that it had been pre-trial ! Yes,it was pure unadulterated greed and LIES that kept them going and saved them from the life that Jeremy's having,being isolated. The worm will turn.!
So you actually have no idea of when it was allegedly said. Like much said here, it could be apocryphal.
-
So you actually have no idea of when it was allegedly said. Like much said here, it could be apocryphal.
" Much said here " is right-----------from both sides,until everything eventually falls into place on the side of the righteous.
-
The biggest living victim in all this is Jeremy Bamber. Jeremy Bamber is a victim of the relatives - not the other way round. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
JB is a convicted multiple murder, that is simply a fact.
I'm sure NGB could provide you with an explanation of who he had in mind whilst referring to 'Living victims' in the 'Forum Rules'.
-
Jackie,do you ever remember when the relatives mentioned " packing up and going to live in the Isle of Man ?" I don't know if this was allegedly said before,during,or after the trial. It was DB who'd said it.
Had they then realised the error of their ways,or because they're hard-nosed,they thought they'd see it through,providing Jeremy was out of the way ?
Thanks Lookout, maybe Hartley could verify the families plans to move or was it gossip
-
It isn't in dispute that the message logs were withheld.
Do none of you guilters understand the difference between the call logs and the message logs?
The 14 page message log referring to two bodies upon entry and a further three upstairs was not discussed or presented to the court.
It is worth adding that it wasn't available for either appeal and therefore has never been shown to any court let alone the original trial.
To make clear, this is not about the call logs, but the message logs.
According to various sources one of the telephone logs was also withheld, turns out it wasn't. There is a difference between 'withheld' and 'not used'.
-
The biggest living victim in all this is Jeremy Bamber. Jeremy Bamber is a victim of the relatives - not the other way round. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I'd say that was Colin.
-
The biggest living victim in all this is Jeremy Bamber. Jeremy Bamber is a victim of the relatives - not the other way round. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
He was such a stupid, stupid boy, a lamb to the slaughter
-
It isn't in dispute that the message logs were withheld.
Do none of you guilters understand the difference between the call logs and the message logs?
The 14 page message log referring to two bodies upon entry and a further three upstairs was not discussed or presented to the court.
It is worth adding that it wasn't available for either appeal and therefore has never been shown to any court let alone the original trial.
To make clear, this is not about the call logs, but the message logs.
You are attempting to call page 1 a call log and pages 2-14 a message log. Although page 2 of Wests log was actually on the reverse or page 1.
They are one and the same thing. A log completed by Bonnet and a log completed by West.
The logs were handed out in court and were mentioned in statements also handed out in court. It cannot be clearer.
Claims that they were withheld are simply false.
-
I'd say that was Colin.
Yes, indeed. :'(
-
Just a reminder to all forum members, this is a place to discuss miscarriages of justice
-
Mindset of the occupants of CA07 who arrived at the scene by 3.48am, mindset of Jeremy who arrived there some three or four minutes later (by 3.52am), mindset of PS Adams and the first group of 10 firearm officers at the scene by 5am, mindset of Sheila roaming around inside the farmhouse, mindset of PI Montgomery and his group of TFG arriving at the scene by 7am, mindset of WPC Jeapes and PC Brown upon and after sighting of rifle at first floor box room window, mindset of the six man raid team that set off intending to enter the farmhouse and bring the ongoing seige to an end, mindset of senior officers in the forward control point upon learning about two bodies in kitchen upon entry by 7.35am, mindset of same senior officers at the scene and elsewhere upon the being confirmed that a further three bodies had been found upstairs, making five dead in total by 8.10am, mindset of DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, DCI 'George' Harris, and PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, as they left the forward control point at 8.10am intent on entering the farmhouse, only to discover there was only one body in the kitchen by the time they got there, mindset of the raid team inside the farmhouse upon hearing that one of the two bodies present in kitchen from as early as 7.35am, was no longer there after 8.10am, and could be anywhere inside the premises, increasing the tension in the mindset of police inside, outside, and elsewhere, all believing that the missing female was none other than Sheila Caffell, with the possibility that she might rearm herself with a loaded gun and try to shoot dead police, mindset of ACC 'Peter' Simpson after he spoke to 'George' Harris regarding how the police operation had just gone pearshaped, etc, etc, etc...
Nothing that Jeremy could have said, or did say to police before any of these events unfolded, which caused these individual officers to have a mindset arising out for events as they were unfolding without Jeremy's knowlege, or any input from him! For example, Jeremy couldn't have known that Sheila would place the rifle at the first floor box room window, he didn't know that WPC Jeapes and PC Brown would both independent of one another report seeing the said rifle at that window, Jeremy didn't influence where police originally reported finding the bodies of the five victims, two downstairs, three bodies upstairs, Jeremy had no input in the disappearence of a female body from the kitchen which reappeared on the bed in the main bedroom after 8.10am, Jeremy didn't have any input regarding when Gibbons, Harris and Montgomery entered the kitchen only to discover the body of Neville Bamber there, and a female who was reportedly dead there around d half an hour earlier, was no longer present in the kitchen! Where had the body of that missing female disappeared to? Well, just minutes before Gibbons, Harris and Montgomery entered the kitchen a message had come back from inside the farmhouse that three bodies had been found upstairs, the time being 8.10am! So by that stage, Sheila was not upstairs, but these three copateers soon discovered that there was only one dead body downstairs in the kitchen, that being the body of Neville Bamber! The time was 8.15am...
Where exactly was Sheila concealing herself, during those critical 5 minutes between 8.10am and 8.15am, since as far as the body count downstairs and upstairs, there appeared to be a deficit of one female body downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the main bedroom?
-
JB is a convicted multiple murder, that is simply a fact.
I'm sure NGB could provide you with an explanation of who he had in mind whilst referring to 'Living victims' in the 'Forum Rules'.
I accept he is a convicted multiple murderer. I do not accept that he is a multiple murderer.
Jeremy Bamber was convicted after evidence that Sheila had carried out the killings was concealed. The police officer who oversaw the concealment was appointed to appease the relatives.
Colin Caffell is arguably the biggest living victim - he is a victim of Sheila Caffell (without knowing it). His chance to understand the truth in these matters, was stolen from him, when a certain officer was appointed to appease the relatives.
Jeremy Bamber is the next biggest victim. He lost his chance of living nearly all of his adult life a free man and of having his own family. He was sent to prison forever, with the label of child killer hanging around his neck - because of a certain police officer appointed to appease the relatives.
The relatives have no moral high ground here.
If ngb feels I have breached forum etiquette then I would of course take his advice and views in to consideration.
-
Very well said.
-
I accept he is a convicted multiple murderer. I do not accept that he is a multiple murderer.
Jeremy Bamber was convicted after evidence that Sheila had carried out the killings was concealed. The police officer who oversaw the concealment was appointed to appease the relatives.
Colin Caffell is arguably the biggest living victim - he is a victim of Sheila Caffell (without knowing it). His chance to understand the truth in these matters, was stolen from him, when a certain officer was appointed to appease the relatives.
Jeremy Bamber is the next biggest victim. He lost his chance of living nearly all of his adult life a free man and of having his own family. He was sent to prison forever, with the label of child killer hanging around his neck - because of a certain police officer appointed to appease the relatives.
The relatives have no moral high ground here.
If ngb feels I have breached forum etiquette then I would of course take his advice and views in to consideration.
Are you alluding to "A" police officer in general or "THE" police officer in particular? Can you name the police officer concerned.
-
Mindset of the occupants of CA07 who arrived at the scene by 3.48am, mindset of Jeremy who arrived there some three or four minutes later (by 3.52am), mindset of PS Adams and the first group of 10 firearm officers at the scene by 5am, mindset of Sheila roaming around inside the farmhouse, mindset of PI Montgomery and his group of TFG arriving at the scene by 7am, mindset of WPC Jeapes and PC Brown upon and after sighting of rifle at first floor box room window, mindset of the six man raid team that set off intending to enter the farmhouse and bring the ongoing seige to an end, mindset of senior officers in the forward control point upon learning about two bodies in kitchen upon entry by 7.35am, mindset of same senior officers at the scene and elsewhere upon the being confirmed that a further three bodies had been found upstairs, making five dead in total by 8.10am, mindset of DCI 'Terry' Gibbons, DCI 'George' Harris, and PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, as they left the forward control point at 8.10am intent on entering the farmhouse, only to discover there was only one body in the kitchen by the time they got there, mindset of the raid team inside the farmhouse upon hearing that one of the two bodies present in kitchen from as early as 7.35am, was no longer there after 8.10am, and could be anywhere inside the premises, increasing the tension in the mindset of police inside, outside, and elsewhere, all believing that the missing female was none other than Sheila Caffell, with the possibility that she might rearm herself with a loaded gun and try to shoot dead police, mindset of ACC 'Peter' Simpson after he spoke to 'George' Harris regarding how the police operation had just gone pearshaped, etc, etc, etc...
Nothing that Jeremy could have said, or did say to police before any of these events unfolded, which caused these individual officers to have a mindset arising out for events as they were unfolding without Jeremy's knowlege, or any input from him! For example, Jeremy couldn't have known that Sheila would place the rifle at the first floor box room window, he didn't know that WPC Jeapes and PC Brown would both independent of one another report seeing the said rifle at that window, Jeremy didn't influence where police originally reported finding the bodies of the five victims, two downstairs, three bodies upstairs, Jeremy had no input in the disappearence of a female body from the kitchen which reappeared on the bed in the main bedroom after 8.10am, Jeremy didn't have any input regarding when Gibbons, Harris and Montgomery entered the kitchen only to discover the body of Neville Bamber there, and a female who was reportedly dead there around d half an hour earlier, was no longer present in the kitchen! Where had the body of that missing female disappeared to? Well, just minutes before Gibbons, Harris and Montgomery entered the kitchen a message had come back from inside the farmhouse that three bodies had been found upstairs, the time being 8.10am! So by that stage, Sheila was not upstairs, but these three copateers soon discovered that there was only one dead body downstairs in the kitchen, that being the body of Neville Bamber! The time was 8.15am...
Where exactly was Sheila concealing herself, during those critical 5 minutes between 8.10am and 8.15am, since as far as the body count downstairs and upstairs, there appeared to be a deficit of one female body downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the main bedroom?
Where two bodies downstairs in the kitchen had become one body, and three bodies upstairs had become transformed into four bodies!
-
I accept he is a convicted multiple murderer. I do not accept that he is a multiple murderer.
Jeremy Bamber was convicted after evidence that Sheila had carried out the killings was concealed. The police officer who oversaw the concealment was appointed to appease the relatives.
Colin Caffell is arguably the biggest living victim - he is a victim of Sheila Caffell (without knowing it). His chance to understand the truth in these matters, was stolen from him, when a certain officer was appointed to appease the relatives.
Jeremy Bamber is the next biggest victim. He lost his chance of living nearly all of his adult life a free man and of having his own family. He was sent to prison forever, with the label of child killer hanging around his neck - because of a certain police officer appointed to appease the relatives.
The relatives have no moral high ground here.
If ngb feels I have breached forum etiquette then I would of course take his advice and views in to consideration.
Roch, whether you accept JB as a convicted multiple murderer or not, is immaterial. It is simply a fact in Law that he is. If a person refers to JB as a murderer, then they are quite correct to do so.
The relatives (or any number of other people), who you cannot show with evidence to have acted unlawfully, should not be the recipient of any such unsubstantiated and unnecessary accusations.
I think the above is reasonable to accept.
Having said that, I'm not particularly bothered by the unreasonable postings, such rhetoric is common place on the forum and is hardly a new development.
-
Roch, whether you accept JB as a convicted multiple murderer or not, is immaterial. It is simply a fact in Law that he is. If a person refers to JB as a murderer, then they are quite correct to do so.
The relatives (or any number of other people), who you cannot show with evidence to have acted unlawfully, should not be the recipient of any such unsubstantiated and unnecessary accusations.
I think the above is reasonable to accept.
Having said that, I'm not particularly bothered by the unreasonable postings, such rhetoric is common place on the forum and is hardly a new development.
I think your reaction (Roch) when you thought you were being accused of lying, provides an effective example of your position when it comes to unsubstantiated accusations.
-
Roch, whether you accept JB as a convicted multiple murderer or not, is immaterial. It is simply a fact in Law that he is. If a person refers to JB as a murderer, then they are quite correct to do so.
The relatives (or any number of other people), who you cannot show with evidence to have acted unlawfully, should not be the recipient of any such unsubstantiated and unnecessary accusations.
I think the above is reasonable to accept.
Having said that, I'm not particularly bothered by the unreasonable postings, such rhetoric is common place on the forum and is hardly a new development.
There are many people who have been convicted of murder by a unanimous jury decision, who were later found not guilty. JB was a majority decision, it is not unreasonable for some to have doubts.
-
Police at the scene, outside the farmhouse, police inside the farmhouse, police back in Chelmsford police station control room and it's incident room, and ACC 'Peter' Simpson all knew the full circumstances of how that part of the firearm operation to enter the premises and bring the seige to a conclusion had somehow gone dramatically wrong! Now, by 8.15am, three unarmed police officers found themselves trapped in the kitchen where previously two dead bodies had been reportedly accounted for...
-
There are many people who have been convicted of murder by a unanimous jury decision, who were later found not guilty. JB was a majority decision, it is not unreasonable for some to have doubts.
Each persons views on the guilt or innocence of JB are entirely their own. Nobody has suggested otherwise.
-
Police at the scene, outside the farmhouse, police inside the farmhouse, police back in Chelmsford police station control room and it's incident room, and ACC 'Peter' Simpson all knew the full circumstances of how that part of the firearm operation to enter the premises and bring the seige to a conclusion had somehow gone dramatically wrong! Now, by 8.15am, three unarmed police officers found themselves trapped in the kitchen where previously two dead bodies had been reportedly accounted for...
Where, was the female body from the kitchen?
-
Where, was the female body from the kitchen?
By 8.10am Sheila's body was not upstairs by that stage, otherwise the TFG would have reported four bodies found upstairs, not three at that point..
-
Each persons views on the guilt or innocence of JB are entirely their own. Nobody has suggested otherwise.
That's not what I was referring to.
-
By 8.10am Sheila's body was not upstairs by that stage, otherwise the TFG would have reported four bodies found upstairs, not three at that point..
NO Mike they said a further three bodies upstairs. It is clear they were mistaken in two bodies downstairs.
-
Even if by some miracle Sheila's body was always in the bedroom, and we pretend the TFG hadn't declared only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, let's assume they found four bodies upstairs by 8.10am, not three - then the case is still problematic because the only rifle found anywhere upstairs at the scene was resting against the first floor box room window from 7.15am, onward! How did that rifle get from the box room window, onto Sheila's body in time for the TFG to discover her body on the bedroom floor by 8.10am?
It doesn't fit...
-
I think the rifle was removed by the police, and photographed in the box room window, then placed on Sheila's body multiple times. That is why we have different positions of the rifle.
Fact is they had it right the first time murder/suicide. Cops didn't kill her.
-
NO Mike they said a further three bodies upstairs. It is clear they were mistaken in two bodies downstairs.
A further three bodies upstairs (8.10am), five dead in total, after two bodies had been signalled as found downstairs in the kitchen upon entry! No mistake there, simple arithmetic, two plus three equals five! That issue aside, how did the only rifle found upstairs at the scene (the anshuzt rifle) manage to get from its position at the first floor box room window (7.15am) onto Sheila's body on the bedroom floor in time for PC Bird (SOCO) to photograph it there in Sheila Caffells possession after 10 am? This is in addition to the rifle being on the bed between the two bodies of Sheila and June by the time 'Stan' Jones and Mick Clarke visited the main bedroom and viewed the bodies of the two women upon the bed, and by reference to PS Adams who viewed Sheila's body at around 9am, when he told the COLP investigators that he had no recollection of the gun being with Sheila's body by that stage! Adams left the scene shortly after 9am, and there was no gun with Sheila's body by that time! Then we had the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright who arrived at the scene and whilst visiting the main bedroom at around 9.30am, told the COLP investigators that the gun had been removed from Sheila's body by the time he first saw her body! Yet, no sooner does PC 'David' Bird start taking photographs of Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor (not the bed) the anshuzt rifle is in her possession, whereas earlier it could not have been
-
I think the rifle was removed by the police, and photographed in the box room window, then placed on Sheila's body multiple times. That is why we have different positions of the rifle.
Fact is they had it right the first time murder/suicide. Cops didn't kill her.
Cops did kill her, that's why they tampered with one of the two bullets (the original PV/20 was a piece of badly fragmented bullet, which was replaced by a test fired round fired in the anshuzt rifle post date the shootings. The swap over of this bullet enabled the police ballistic expert to conclude that the two wounds received in Sheila's neck had been fired from the same rifle, the rifle cops staged Sheila's death scene on the bedroom floor with, after Jones and Clarke had seen Sheila's and Junes bodies on the bed with the rifle laid on the bed between both bodies, after PS Adams had seen Sheila's body without any gun being in her possession at around 9am, and also after the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright had viewed Sheila's body at 9.30am, when according to PC Wright the gun had been removed from Sheila's body by that stage 9.30am) used in her shooting! If she had killed herself with use of the anshuzt rifle there would have been no need to swap either of the two bullets over!
-
Cops did kill her, that's why they tampered with one of the two bullets used in her shooting! If she had killed herself with use of the anshuzt rifle there would have been no need to swap either of the two bullets over!
Police don't use hollow point ammo.
Anyway why cover it up? They would have been justified in shooting Sheila if she was a threat.
-
Roch, whether you accept JB as a convicted multiple murderer or not, is immaterial. It is simply a fact in Law that he is. If a person refers to JB as a murderer, then they are quite correct to do so.
The relatives (or any number of other people), who you cannot show with evidence to have acted unlawfully, should not be the recipient of any such unsubstantiated and unnecessary accusations.
I think the above is reasonable to accept.
Having said that, I'm not particularly bothered by the unreasonable postings, such rhetoric is common place on the forum and is hardly a new development.
I am not arguing whether it's legally correct or not to refer to Jeremy Bamber as a murderer. Fact is, if somebody hasn't committed any murders - then they're not a murderer. It is possible in this world to be a convicted murderer without having actually committed any murders.
That I personally am not adept, at directly showing how the relatives acted unlawfully, does not mean that they didn't act unlawfully. There'll be a few more twists and turns in this case before it reaches its' culmination, if it ever does.
-
I think your reaction (Roch) when you thought you were being accused of lying, provides an effective example of your position when it comes to unsubstantiated accusations.
Quite possibly, yes. But the nature of an MOJ is that dodgy evidence is substituted for the genuine evidence that was omitted. In this model, if a person chooses to substantiate their arguments from the remaining body of evidence...
-
Are you alluding to "A" police officer in general or "THE" police officer in particular? Can you name the police officer concerned.
Well in the post I was referring to an officer. Having considered your question, I believe several officers were involved to varying degrees (under the stewardship of an officer).
It may be that many officers played a role of sorts. I think that when the full truth comes out, it may pertinent to ask whether for example, officers like Julia Jeapes are fit to serve the public in a civic role? She did not oversee the concealment of evidence did she? But how would you like it if your local councillor was privy to the knowledge that an innocent man was sent to prison while it was known Sheila had been alive in the farmhouse before police went in?
-
Police don't use hollow point ammo.
Anyway why cover it up? They would have been justified in shooting Sheila if she was a threat.
The bullet they substituted was not a .22 hollow point round, it was a police round, which they swapped over with a.22 hollow point test fired control round taken from exhibit DRH/42 (29 live .22 hollow point rounds recovered from the kitchen worktop on the first morning of the investigation!) Only 27 of these 29 control rounds were accounted for during test firing performed by the ballistic expert Fletcher! When queried about these two missing control rounds in the batch of exhibit DRH/42, Fletcher told COLP that they must have been misplaced! Fletcher lied, he knew exactly what had happened to the missing two rounds of .22 hollow point rounds, he had performed unreported test firings in the anshuzt rifle prior to the date (20th September 1985) when he performed the official test firings of the other 27 control rounds! This fact is established beyond doubt by the notes recorded on various General Examination Records' pertaining to pieces of ammunition relating to the five deaths which had comparison tests performed against markings on unreported test fired rounds, enabling the said comparison tests to be performed on dates prior to the 20th September 1985! This proves there was an earlier test fire of the anshuzt rifle and control ammunition belonging to exhibit DRH/42 on or prior to 12th September 1985, because some comparison tests were carried out on 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985 (before the date when the ballistic expert had carried out the official test firing of rifle and 27 of the 29 control rounds n 20th September, 25th September, and 2nd October 1985)...
Cops and their ballistic expert didn't go to all this trouble for no purpose at all! They did it to try and cover up for the fact that a police bullet wounded Sheila during a shooting incident which occurred in the kitchen to which an Officers report had to be submitted! That report concerns the shooting of Sheila in the kitchen, claiming that she appeared to want the officer to shoot her by pulling the barrel of his gun in toward her own throat! There exists a paper trail of compelling evidence to support the fact that cops and their ballistic expert (Malcom Fletcher) tampered with at least one crime scene bullet (PV/20) by replacing it with a test fired control round which had been fired via the anshuzt rifle post the date of the shootings, so that Sheila's death could be presented as a suicide involving one gun which fired both bullets! But the same gun did not fire both bullets which wounded Sheila, the anshuzt rifle only fired one of these, that being bullet PV/19!
-
I don't believe that in the true circumstances of how an unarmed Sheila Caffell was originally shot downstairs in the kitchen by a cop gun, that cops could have justified shooting her, in view of the fact that just prior to them shooting her in the kitchen, Sheila had signalled to the police surrounding the farmhouse her intention to give herself up by showing the rifle at the first floor box room window, and then making her way downstairs to the kitchen to hand herself over to the police! She was affectively acting under a truce of white flag at the time cops shot her! The anshuzt rifle was still resting against the first floor box room window at the time cops pronounced her death downstairs in the kitchen, 7.35am, 7.37am and 7.38am! It stands to reason therefore that Sheila was not originally shot by use of the anshuzt rifle in the kitchen, when the rifle which supposedly inflicted both shots was resting against a first floor box room window upstairs!
-
Well in the post I was referring to an officer. Having considered your question, I believe several officers were involved to varying degrees (under the stewardship of an officer).
It may be that many officers played a role of sorts. I think that when the full truth comes out, it may pertinent to ask whether for example, officers like Julia Jeapes are fit to serve the public in a civic role? She did not oversee the concealment of evidence did she? But how would you like it if your local councillor was privy to the knowledge that an innocent man was sent to prison while it was known Sheila had been alive in the farmhouse before police went in?
It's always possible that little green men live on Mars, I suppose. I don't believe my local counselor was privy to the sort of thing you're suggesting unless he was being lied to.
-
I think the rifle was removed by the police, and photographed in the box room window, then placed on Sheila's body multiple times. That is why we have different positions of the rifle.
Fact is they had it right the first time murder/suicide. Cops didn't kill her.
The rifle was not moved prior to the crime scene photographer arriving.
It was not police protocol to dusturb a crime scene prior to photo's being taken. Otherwise there is no point in taking photo's in the first place.
The police did say they moved her lower arm slightly after the first photo. To show injuries.
-
I am not arguing whether it's legally correct or not to refer to Jeremy Bamber as a murderer. Fact is, if somebody hasn't committed any murders - then they're not a murderer. It is possible in this world to be a convicted murderer without having actually committed any murders.
That I personally am not adept, at directly showing how the relatives acted unlawfully, does not mean that they didn't act unlawfully. There'll be a few more twists and turns in this case before it reaches its' culmination, if it ever does.
For someone who is "not adept at directly showing how the relatives acted unlawfully", you don't half write long posts accusing them.
-
Thanks for answering in reply 608. At the 4th request.
Very vague with no sources or explanations on how you know this. A pity as if one or some of the statements were provable, Bamber would be free.
-
I don't believe that in the true circumstances of how an unarmed Sheila Caffell was originally shot downstairs in the kitchen by a cop gun, that cops could have justified shooting her, in view of the fact that just prior to them shooting her in the kitchen, Sheila had signalled to the police surrounding the farmhouse her intention to give herself up by showing the rifle at the first floor box room window, and then making her way downstairs to the kitchen to hand herself over to the police! She was affectively acting under a truce of white flag at the time cops shot her! The anshuzt rifle was still resting against the first floor box room window at the time cops pronounced her death downstairs in the kitchen, 7.35am, 7.37am and 7.38am! It stands to reason therefore that Sheila was not originally shot by use of the anshuzt rifle in the kitchen, when the rifle which supposedly inflicted both shots was resting against a first floor box room window upstairs!
Cops got their ballistic expert Fletcher to tamper with one of the two bullets used in Sheila's demise, so that it could be claimed that both bullets had been fired by the same anshuzt rifle! It didn't matter apparantly that the pathologist 'Peter' Veniz' had removed a piece of badly fragmented bullet bearing his exhibit reference PV/20, which by 20th September 1975 had mysteriously become transformed into a whole bullet, which enabled the police ballistic expert, Fletcher to conclude that both bullets (PV/20 and PV/19) had been fired from the anshuzt rifle, when the truth is only bullet PV/19 was!
-
I've had no dealings with them. I think they are in a very difficult position caught in-between the various agencies but I don't always condone the line they take on different things. I recently criticised one of their videos - while praising another.
I think in the long run you will find that on several issues - you were maybe not so much led up the garden path as you think. You have to try and understand that for the defence - solving the case is like piecing together a massive and partly damaged jigsaw with pieces missing.
The very sad fact is that some people knew pretty much what the truth was from the very beginning (I'm not referring to Jeremy and Stan).
Maybe not but you appear to be singing from the same song sheet.
-
Maybe not but you appear to be singing from the same song sheet.
Something about a jigsaw and missing pieces here, I think. Can't quite put my finger on it.
-
Maybe not but you appear to be singing from the same song sheet.
How does that indicate I am wrong?
-
Something about a jigsaw and missing pieces here, I think. Can't quite put my finger on it.
I've always used similar language about the position the defence has found itself in.
-
Something about a jigsaw and missing pieces here, I think. Can't quite put my finger on it.
Talking of Jigsaw puzzles
https://www.change.org/p/michael-gove-secretary-of-state-for-justice-essex-police-release-all-documents-withheld-under-pii-to-jeremy-bamber-s-legal-defence/u/13374688
The chosen one ;)
-
Talking of Jigsaw puzzles
https://www.change.org/p/michael-gove-secretary-of-state-for-justice-essex-police-release-all-documents-withheld-under-pii-to-jeremy-bamber-s-legal-defence/u/13374688
The chosen one ;)
I hadn't seen that Justice,many thanks. Stark reality.
-
Talking of Jigsaw puzzles
https://www.change.org/p/michael-gove-secretary-of-state-for-justice-essex-police-release-all-documents-withheld-under-pii-to-jeremy-bamber-s-legal-defence/u/13374688
The chosen one ;)
If of interest, the Dickinson Review can be read here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1168.msg35999.html#msg35999
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1168.msg35999.html#msg35999)
-
I hadn't seen that Justice,many thanks. Stark reality.
Its ok Lookout, I'm all heart and shows how fair I am. I was hoping to take over from Mike when he retires, so I'm changing stance.
-
Its ok Lookout, I'm all heart and shows how fair I am. I was hoping to take over from Mike when he retires, so I'm changing stance.
Me too (Im very competitive) ;D
-
Me too (Im very competitive) ;D
That rules me out then >:(
-
How does that indicate I am wrong?
I think it's best I don't say any more :-X
-
That rules me out then >:(
Oh okay then I concede, all yours. :))
-
Its ok Lookout, I'm all heart and shows how fair I am. I was hoping to take over from Mike when he retires, so I'm changing stance.
Ever the joker,eh ? ;D ;D ;D I know you're fair Justice,it's me that's the nagger. When I have a fixation about something,I remain rigid/immovable and stick to my guns to the bitter end.
-
Ever the joker,eh ? ;D ;D ;D I know you're fair Justice,it's me that's the nagger. When I have a fixation about something,I remain rigid/immovable and stick to my guns to the bitter end.
I bet your a right laugh Lookout really :))
-
Oh okay then I concede, all yours. :))
I can be your number two if you want? ;)
-
I can be your number two if you want? ;)
That doesn't sound nice. ???
-
That doesn't sound nice. ???
Did you go to Colchester often Hartley? I used to work on Mersea and son in law was in parachute regiment, daughter used to live near Abbey fields
-
Ever the joker,eh ? ;D ;D ;D I know you're fair Justice,it's me that's the nagger. When I have a fixation about something,I remain rigid/immovable and stick to my guns to the bitter end.
;D ;D ;D :-*
-
Did you go to Colchester often Hartley? I used to work on Mersea and son in law was in parachute regiment, daughter used to live near Abbey fields
Colchester was my father's last posting, I was there for most of my teens. We used to go to Mersea often in the summer, there used to be a cafe on the beach in an old pill box that I seem to remember well, it was a nice place.
-
Colchester was my father's last posting, I was there for most of my teens. We used to go to Mersea often in the summer, there used to be a cafe on the beach in an old pill box that I seem to remember well, it was a nice place.
Maybe it wasn't a cafe, just an ice cream place. :-\
-
Colchester was my father's last posting, I was there for most of my teens. We used to go to Mersea often in the summer, there used to be a cafe on the beach in an old pill box that I seem to remember well, it was a nice place.
Paras moved from Aldershot to Colchester beginning of 2000 ish all the time we were down in Colchester I've never seen so much building work, the old garrison went and a new one built. Your right Mersea was great, can't remember the cafe on beach though? Maybe Jane can help?
-
Paras moved from Aldershot to Colchester beginning of 2000 ish all the time we were down in Colchester I've never seen so much building work, the old garrison went and a new one built. Your right Mersea was great, can't remember the cafe on beach though? Maybe Jane can help?
I think we moved just after that, I used to play football on the fields that the new barracks were built on.
They've found a Roman circus now, under the old garrison.
-
I bet your a right laugh Lookout really :))
Oh I am, although I say it myself. ;D Always have a smile for folk as well,it costs nothing.
-
I think we moved just after that, I used to play football on the fields that the new barracks were built on.
They've found a Roman circus now, under the old garrison.
I think it was on the old Cavalry Barracks this was found, I think there is a plaque, the parade ground in the Cavalry barracks was used as a back drop in the opening credits on Black Adder goes forth
-
I think it was on the old Cavalry Barracks this was found, I think there is a plaque, the parade ground in the Cavalry barracks was used as a back drop in the opening credits on Black Adder goes forth
I never knew that, but can see it now, they were all 19th century red brick. Some of them must have been listed and saved.
-
I think it's best I don't say any more :-X
Taking pot shots at CT for anything and everything has become very cliched, imho.
It's no different than saying 'everything that Ann Eaton or Bob Miller or Roger Wilkes or Simon McKay ever spoke or wrote is a lie / unrealiable / putting 2 & 2 together and coming up with 10 etc.'
Fact is, many people linked to the case are capable of speaking a truth or of discerning a truth from an untruth or getting a hunch right or wrong or interpreting / misinterpreting an aspect etc.
The truth doesn't belong to every person outside of the CT any more than it does to every person inside of the CT.
-
I never knew that, but can see it now, they were all 19th century red brick. Some of them must have been listed and saved.
Aaah there we go, the old Sergeants Mess is now an Archeologists offices, right in front on the starting gates of the circus.
Which is just off Abbey Fields.
-
Taking pot shots at CT for anything and everything has become very cliched, imho.
It's no different than saying 'everything that Ann Eaton or Bob Miller or Roger Wilkes or Simon McKay ever spoke or wrote is a lie / unrealiable / putting 2 & 2 together and coming up with 10 etc.'
Fact is, many people linked to the case are capable of speaking a truth or of discerning a truth from an untruth or getting a hunch right or wrong or interpreting / misinterpreting an aspect etc.
The truth doesn't belong to every person outside of the CT any more than it does to every person inside of the CT.
I'm not taking pot shots - you just sound very much like them and their recent onslaught is everything you have recently mentioned. You're even using the same language.
-
I'm not taking pot shots - you just sound very much like them and their recent onslaught is everything you have recently mentioned. You're even using the same language.
You're barking up the wrong tree. If I wanted to mimick the CT, why have I not done so (in the manner you are suggeting) in the last six or seven years?
-
You're barking up the wrong tree. If I wanted to mimick the CT, why have I not done so (in the manner you are suggeting) in the last six or seven years.
Where did I say 'mimic'?
-
Where did I say 'mimic'?
It seems to be what you are implying?
-
It seems to be what you are implying?
Actually, it's not.
-
Actually, it's not.
I'm not taking pot shots - you just sound very much like them and their recent onslaught is everything you have recently mentioned. You're even using the same language.
-
OK, what I meant is that you sound as though you are part of the CT - not mimicking them. Everything you have said in recent months is linked to what they have campaigned. It could be coincidence but it doesn't seem like it - however, I could be wrong or as you say, barking up the wrong tree.
When you first came back with what seems like a new 'personality' - I mentioned how I thought your had come to redress the balance a little and it does seem as though you are on a mission. Sorrry, that's just the way I see it - but others have commented too so I guess it's not just me.
-
OK, what I meant is that you sound as though you are part of the CT - not mimicking them. Everything you have said in recent months is linked to what they have campaigned. It could be coincidence but it doesn't seem like it - however, I could be wrong or as you say, barking up the wrong tree.
When you first came back with what seems like a new 'personality' - I mentioned how I thought your had come to redress the balance a little and it does seem as though you are on a mission. Sorrry, that's just the way I see it - but others have commented too so I guess it's not just me.
Well if I've ruffle a few feathers then cant be helped. I am absolutely certain 100% Sheila Caffel was involved in the killings. Same for the physical evidence that was recorded being concealed from defence / trial / jury etc. I think this change happened after I had returned to the forum as opposed to prior.
-
Well if I've ruffle a few feathers then cant be helped. I am absolutely certain 100% Sheila Caffel was involved in the killings. Same for the physical evidence that was recorded being concealed from defence / trial / jury etc. I think this change happened after I had returned to the forum as opposed to prior.
I don't have a feather out of place. :)
-
Well if I've ruffle a few feathers then cant be helped. I am absolutely certain 100% Sheila Caffel was involved in the killings. Same for the physical evidence that was recorded being concealed from defence / trial / jury etc. I think this change happened after I had returned to the forum as opposed to prior.
You haven't, the first time I responded to your rhetoric was this morning.
-
I don't have a feather out of place. :)
Ha ha. Yeah I cant see you getting ruffled! I tell you what - I might take a sabbatical soon, I'm getting exhausted :))
-
Ha ha. Yeah I cant see you getting ruffled! I tell you what - I might take a sabbatical soon, I'm getting exhausted :))
;D
-
Ha ha. Yeah I cant see you getting ruffled! I tell you what - I might take a sabbatical soon, I'm getting exhausted :))
It's not what you have said about Bamber that worries me - I just get the feeling that you have been nobbled my the CT ;) :-*
-
It's not what you have said about Bamber that worries me - I just get the feeling that you have been nobbled my the CT ;) :-*
No - I have not. Though I do sympathise with their cause, if not their methods all of the time.
-
The rifle was not moved prior to the crime scene photographer arriving.
It was not police protocol to dusturb a crime scene prior to photo's being taken. Otherwise there is no point in taking photo's in the first place.
The police did say they moved her lower arm slightly after the first photo. To show injuries.
Police did move the rifle from where it was seen at 7.15am, onward at a first floor box room window!
At 9am when PS Adams visited the main bedroom and saw the body of Sheila he told the COLP investigations he had no recollection of a gun being with Sheila's body at that time! Later DS 'Stan' Jones and DC 'Mick' Clarke visited the main bedroom scene and saw the bodies of Sheila and June on the bed with the rifle laid on the bed in-between both bodies, and Sheila had a bible upon her chest! Then at 9.30am with the arrival at the scene of the Coroners Officer, PC Wright, he would later confirm to the COLP investigators that the rifle had been removed from the body by that time! If the rifle was not in Sheila's possession at these key times 9.00am, 9.05am and 9.30am, and PC Bird photographed Sheila's body in possession of the rifle from 10 am onwards, it leaves little room for doubt that police moved the rifle onto the body where it was eventually photographed from 10am, onward. Cops therefore staged Sheila Caffells death scene with the rifle to leave an impression that she had taken her own life! Jeremy Bamber did not force the police to stage his sister's death with the rifle on the bedroom floor! Cops staged Sheila's death scene using the rifle from the first floor box room window to give the impression that she had taken her own life! If she had taken her own life as claimed by police, cops wouldn't have needed to stage her death scene with any rifle from the box room window, but for some inexplicable reason they did!
-
Police did move the rifle from where it was seen at 7.15am, onward at a first floor box room window!
At 9am when PS Adams visited the main bedroom and saw the body of Sheila he told the COLP investigations he had no recollection of a gun being with Sheila's body at that time! Later DS 'Stan' Jones and DC 'Mick' Clarke visited the main bedroom scene and saw the bodies of Sheila and June on the bed with the rifle laid on the bed in-between both bodies, and Sheila had a bible upon her chest! Then at 9.30am with the arrival at the scene of the Coroners Officer, PC Wright, he would later confirm to the COLP investigators that the rifle had been removed from the body by that time! If the rifle was not in Sheila's possession at these key times 9.00am, 9.05am and 9.30am, and PC Bird photographed Sheila's body in possession of the rifle from 10 am onwards, it leaves little room for doubt that police moved the rifle onto the body where it was eventually photographed from 10am, onward. Cops therefore staged Sheila Caffells death scene with the rifle to leave an impression that she had taken her own life! Jeremy Bamber did not force the police to stage his sister's death with the rifle on the bedroom floor! Cops staged Sheila's death scene using the rifle from the first floor box room window to give the impression that she had taken her own life! If she had taken her own life as claimed by police, cops wouldn't have needed to stage her death scene with any rifle from the box room window, but for some inexplicable reason they did!
If Sheila had killed herself, why did police need to fake her death scene with the rifle in her possession on the bedroom floor at all?
-
Not only did cops fake Sheila"s death scene in possession of the anshuzt rifle from the box room window , but cops were prepared to lie about the circumstances of how and when members of the TFG allegedly found her body earlier, and how her body with the gun had remained undisturbed there on the bedroom floor until after 10am when DI 'Ron' Cook had lifted the anshuzt rifle from Sheila's body and placed it against the main bedroom window!!!
Oh, yeah...
Cook didn't arrive at the scene until 9.20am, by which time PS Adams had already viewed Sheila's body in the main bedroom minus any gun, and 'Stan' Jones and 'Mick' Clarke had already seen June and Sheila's bodies laid on top of the bed with the rifle laid in-between both women! With this in mind, Cooks claim that he was the first person to remove the rifle from Sheila's body is shamefully dishonest to say the very least! Since he could not have been either responsible for removing the rifle from Sheila's body any time until after 10am that morning! How had the rifle got from its original sighting at the first floor box room window (7.15am), onto Sheila's body after 8.10am, who had removed the gun from Sheila's body in time for PS Adams to comment about the rifle not being with the body when he viewed Sheila in the main bedroom prior to leaving the scene at around 9am? 'Ron' Cook is therefore a liar! He couldn't have removed the rifle from Sheila's body prior to PS Adams claiming that the rifle was not with Sheila's body at 9am...
Rifle still not with Sheila's body other than according to DS 'Stan' Jones and DC 'Mick' Clarke's account before they left the scene with Jeremy! Cook had not even arrived at the scene until after the sighting of the two bodies on the bed by Jones and Clarke, so Cook could not have already removed the rifle from the body and placed it already at the main bedroom window by such an early stage! Matters are not helped by what the Coroner's officer, PC Wright had to say, chiefly that by the time he arrived at the scene (9.30am) the rifle had already been removed from the body by that stage! Ok, who had removed it by that stage? More importantly who had planted the anshuzt rifle on Sheila's body any time after 8.10am upstairs in the bedroom? It couldn't have been 'Ron' Cook because he didn't even arrive at the scene until 9.20am...
Rifle was not with the body of Sheila at 7.15am when Jeapes and Brown saw the rifle at the first floor box room window! There can be no doubt whatsoever that the rifle was not in Sheila's possession at one and the same time! Matters are further complicated by the fact that Sheila's had to be the body reportedly dead in the kitchen as per the evidence contained in the police logs timed at 7.35am, 7.37am, and 7.38am! If Sheila's body was the female body reportedly found in the kitchen then her body could not be laid on the bedroom floor in possession of the rifle! Cops have dug a deep hole into which their case is being sucked into, the more you start to look into the detail surrounding Sheila's death, the more significant the case for police themselves staging her death scene with use of the rifle from the box room window!
According to police records, three different police officers removed the rifle from Sheila's possession, those being, PI 'Ivor' Montgomery, DI 'Ron' Cook, and PS Woodcock. It is most striking that PS Woodcock claims he did not remove the rifle from Sheila's body until 11.10am, but by this time 'Ron' Cook had already clearly removed the rifle and stood it against the bedroom window, so how can Woodcock have removed the same rifle from Sheila's body after Cook already had done? Who put the rifle back on Sheila's body in time for Woodcock to remove it again after 10am?
-
Aaah there we go, the old Sergeants Mess is now an Archeologists offices, right in front on the starting gates of the circus.
Which is just off Abbey Fields.
Thats right, I think it's where the Cavalry barracks were? It was a Chariot track as well.
https://www.romancircus.co.uk/
-
Consider the following evidential pattern pointing toward Sheila being alive until after the TFG entered the farmhouse, Sheila shot once downstairs, once upstairs, by a rifle from a box room window, which was brought into the parents bedroom and photographed in her possession on the bedroom floor - how was it possible for one of the two bullets recovered during autopsy became transformed into a whole bullet to enable the police ballistic expert to conclude that both shots into Sheila's throat had been caused by bullets loaded into and fired from the same rifle...
-
Consider the following evidential pattern pointing toward Sheila being alive until after the TFG entered the farmhouse, Sheila shot once downstairs, once upstairs, by a rifle from a box room window, which was brought into the parents bedroom and photographed in her possession on the bedroom floor - how was it possible for one of the two bullets recovered during autopsy became transformed into a whole bullet to enable the police ballistic expert to conclude that both shots into Sheila's throat had been caused by bullets loaded into and fired from the same rifle...
Impossible!!
-
If a so called mistake occurred in identifying one body as two bodies in the kitchen in between PC Collins peering into the kitchen window, and he then entering the kitchen itself, then why were messages passed that 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found on entry to kitchen' (7.35am, 7.37am) ' one dead male, one dead female' (7.38am) ' can you contact the police surgeon and Coroner's officer regarding two dead bodies' (7.42am) ' police are dealing with an incident at whf involving a murder, and a suicide (7.45am) and that ' a further three bodies had been found upstairs, five dead in total (8.10am)? Cops did not make a mistake in the body count downstairs in the kitchen and upstairs in the bedrooms during this period (7.35am to 8.10am). Similarly, they made no mistake once Sheila regained consciousness in the kitchen and made her way up the set of spiral stairs in the corner of the kitchen and recollapsed on top of the bed (after 8.10am)vwhich altered the body count upstairs from three to four, and the body count downstairs in the kitchen from two to one!
What did not happen is that when the TFG first set foot inside the kitchen (7.35am) there was not only one body (Neville Bamber) but two (Sheila Caffell), and by the time the TFG got upstairs to complete its search of the farmhouse (8.10am) there was not four bodies upstairs but only three (June Bamber, Nicholas Caffell and Daniel Caffell). The witness statement contents of TFG officers are plainly, therefore, forgeries since in them it sets out the case for them only finding one body in the kitchen, and the other four bodies upstairs, something which did not happen until after 8.10am..
-
The TFG, therefore, could not have found Sheila Caffells body on the main bedroom floor in possession of the anshuzt rifle any time prior to 8.10am. Her body arrived in the main bedroom after 8.10am, after the search of the premises had been concluded, with the find of two bodies in kitchen upon entry and a further three bodies upstairs, five dead in total! The investigation went pearshaped after the shout had gone out from inside the farmhouse to the effect that the operation was over at and by 8.10am. it took another 5 minutes before Gibbons, Harris, and Montgomery entered the kitchen (8.15am) only to discover Sheila missing! Up until that point, PS Adams had been Commander of the operation in accordance with firearms policy even though a senior officer (PI Montgomery) arrived at the scene at around 7am, onward! However, once the operation went pearshaped with cops discovering Sheila missing from the kitchen (8.15am) PI Montgomery assumed Commandership in the ongoing second part of the operation involving a fresh search of the farmhouse looking for Sheila! This change in leadership was caused because the nature of the operation inside the farmhouse had changed in the body count in the kitchen from two to one (8.15am). If what I am saying is true then of course Sheila Caffell had not been found dead in the kitchen in keeping with the contents of police messages timed at 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.42am, and 7.45am, she had merely lapsed into unconsciousness! This means that she was mistakenly believed to have been killed there, she wasn't dead, she was still alive the whole time in the kitchen between 7.35am and 8.10am! This means that somebody made a huge mistake assuming that Sheila was dead, that she had been killed in the kitchen as a result of one shot into her neck! We know she was only shot once whilst she was present in the kitchen, because of the need for an internal police firearm enquiry into the change of leadership in the operation, justified because a police weapon had been discharged in the kitchen spoken about in terms of the shooting incident in the kitchen (to which an official officers report exists)...
-
There had to be an internal police enquiry from the moment a police weapon discharged a shot into Sheila's neck downstairs in the kitchen. The officers report which deals with this shooting incident of Sheila in the kitchen is proof enough that Jeremy Bamber for all his faults had not, and did not shoot dead his sister on the main bedroom floor with the rifle in his sister's possession, or remove any silencer from the end of the guns barrel because he supposedly realised that with it fitted to the barrel the weapon would have been too long for Sheila to have shot herself with the weapon so configured!
'Stan' Jones took possession of the silencer (SBJ/1) from the scene on the first morning of the investigation, which he returned to the farmhouse on 9th August, 1985, only for David Boutflour to recover it from the gun cupboard on the very next day!
-
There had to be an internal police enquiry from the moment a police weapon discharged a shot into Sheila's neck downstairs in the kitchen. The officers report which deals with this shooting incident of Sheila in the kitchen is proof enough that Jeremy Bamber for all his faults had not, and did not shoot dead his sister on the main bedroom floor with the rifle in his sister's possession, or remove any silencer from the end of the guns barrel because he supposedly realised that with it fitted to the barrel the weapon would have been too long for Sheila to have shot herself with the weapon so configured!
'Stan' Jones took possession of the silencer (SBJ/1) from the scene on the first morning of the investigation, which he returned to the farmhouse on 9th August, 1985, only for David Boutflour to recover it from the gun cupboard on the very next day!
Evidence exists to back up all of these claims!
-
The claim that Jeremy Bamber somehow conditioned the minds of the police is laughable, considering that police came up with so many different ways of trying to explain what had taken place during 'informatives' that were performed by senior officers huddled around Sheila Caffells body on the main bedroom floor - it became a case of choosing one of the many theories aired, over the others! They settled in the end for it being 'four murders, and a suicide, where Sheila shot and killed the others, then turned the gun on herself!
-
The claim that Jeremy Bamber somehow conditioned the minds of the police is laughable, considering that police came up with so many different ways of trying to explain what had taken place during 'informatives' that were performed by senior officers huddled around Sheila Caffells body on the main bedroom floor - it became a case of choosing one of the many theories aired, over the others! They settled in the end for it being 'four murders, and a suicide, where Sheila shot and killed the others, then turned the gun on herself!
Jeremy Bamber had no input or involvement in the displacement of his sister's body from the kitchen (from 7.35am) to the main bedroom (after 8.10am), nor could he have been physically involved in the transfer of the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window (7.15am) onto Sheila Caffells body where it was photographed by PC David Bird after 10 O'clock...
-
Jeremy Bamber had no input or involvement in the displacement of his sister's body from the kitchen (from 7.35am) to the main bedroom (after 8.10am), nor could he have been physically involved in the transfer of the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window (7.15am) onto Sheila Caffells body where it was photographed by PC David Bird after 10 O'clock...
Police reported Sheila's body dead in the kitchen (7.35am,7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am and 7.45am), then reported her dead body upstairs in the main bedroom (after 8.10am, then at 8.44am, 9.00am, 9.05am, 9.13am, 9.20am, 9.30am, and at 10am, onward)..
-
PC Collins peered in through the kitchen window and reported seeing the dead body of a female behind the door! Upon entry being forced into the farmhouse, and in particular entry into the kitchen, PC Collins said that the body he originally reported being a dead female turned out to be the body of a dead male, Neville Bamber! This explanation does not sit well with the now known facts! Here are some of the inconsistencies with PC Collins account...
(1) He saw Shela's body 'behind one of the doors from his vantage point outside the kitchen window looking inward'. There were only two internal kitchen doors capable of fitting his description of her body being behind one of these doors, namely the doorway at the bottom of the spiral staircase in the corner of the kitchen, or the laundry room / kitchen door (but if the body was behind either of these two doors, the body could not be described as being present in the kitchen, because the body would have had to be outside the boundaries of the kitchen) PC Collins could not see any of the other two doors, one which opened inward of the kitchen from the back passageway, and the other toward the passageway leading to the front main stairs. If there had been a female body in the kitchen as described by PC Collins as viewed by him from outside the kitchen window looking inward then the body in question could not (as it turned out) have been reference to Neville Bambers body in the kitchen which was never behind any kitchen door when viewed from PC Collins vantage point outside the window looking in!
(2) Neville's body was neither behind or in front of any kitchen door when viewed (if it was possible at all to see his body) and if viewed by PC Collins via the kitchen window! His body was photographed slumped over an overturned chair with his head in a metal coal bucket at the left corner of the red painted aga mantelpiece surround..
(3) the relevant portion of police messages which cover the sighting of the dead female, when viewed in the kitchen by PC Collins from outside the kitchen window are missing (rather conveniently)! The first messages that show a true record of messages that were past, commence after the TFG had already entered the kitchen, and in all of these messages reference is made to the presence of two bodies being present inside the kitchen when cops entered the kitchen (not one body) 'the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, found on entry to kitchen' (7.37am) 'one dead male, one dead female' (7.38am) 'contact the police surgeon and Coroner's officer regarding two bodies' (7.42am) 'police are dealing with an incident at whf, involving a murder, and a suicide' (7.45am) - how can PC Collins explanation regarding a mix up involving one body be sorted out once the TFG entered the kitchen, yet thereafter messages are still being passed detailing a presence of two dead bodies, one male, one female, one a murder, the other a suicide? How can Neville Bambers death have been described as a suicide? Reference to a female body in the kitchen falls after mention already of the presence of a dead male (the body of the dead male must be reference to Neville Bamber), and the additional reference to the body of a female, a reference to Sheila Caffell. Neville Bambers death reported as a murder, and Sheila Caffells death being reported as a suicide! Therefore, there was no mix up involving only one body described as the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, a mistake only rectified once PC Collins got into the kitchen! His explanation makes no sense, it doesn't ring true! This is because Neville Bambers death can only be described as a murder, you would be very hard pressed to convince anybody that he committed suicide (shot 8 times)...
And then of course, by 8.10am, only a further three bodies upstairs in the bedrooms..
-
Senior officers decided upon the mindset to be adopted during the investigation! They decided on the five deaths being a case of four murders and a suicide, where Sheila shot and killed the other four victims, and then took her own life by shooting herself twice!
-
Senior officers decided upon the mindset to be adopted during the investigation! They decided on the five deaths being a case of four murders and a suicide, where Sheila shot and killed the other four victims, and then took her own life by shooting herself twice!
This is despite the fact that she did not physically shoot herself twice, either downstairs in the kitchen, or upstairs in the main bedroom!
-
Senior officers decided upon the mindset to be adopted during the investigation! They decided on the five deaths being a case of four murders and a suicide, where Sheila shot and killed the other four victims, and then took her own life by shooting herself twice!
Senior Officers decided during 'informatives', that the best way to proceed with the shootings of Sheila, once downstairs in the kitchen, and secondly upstairs in the main bedroom, was to present her death as a suicide, where she had shot herself twice with use of the same gun! They decided to present the double shooting as injuries that were self-inflicted, one shot following the other by a reliance on 'recoil' capable of occurring in semi-automatic weapons!!
-
Senior Officers decided during 'informatives', that the best way to proceed with the shootings of Sheila, once downstairs in the kitchen, and secondly upstairs in the main bedroom, was to present her death as a suicide, where she had shot herself twice with use of the same gun! They decided to present the double shooting as injuries that were self-inflicted, one shot following the other by a reliance on 'recoil' capable of occurring in semi-automatic weapons!!
This approach was problematic for a number of different reasons, one of which the angles at which both shots had been received, making it unlikely that the two shots could have been self inflicted, one immediately following the other, by use of the same gun, and 'recoil'...
How had Sheila managed to shoot herself twice once with the rifle held more or less horizontal in fashion against her neck, followed by a second shot which was fired with the gun flush with the front of her body!!
-
This approach was problematic for a number of different reasons, one of which the angles at which both shots had been received, making it unlikely that the two shots could have been self inflicted, one immediately following the other, by use of the same gun, and 'recoil'...
How had Sheila managed to shoot herself twice once with the rifle held more or less horizontal in fashion against her neck, followed by a second shot which was fired with the gun flush with the front of her body!!
Not only was the angle and trjectory of the two shots problematic, but so to was the direction in which a spent cartridge case might be extracted / ejected from the rifle once a shot was fired!
-
Not only was the angle and trjectory of the two shots problematic, but so to was the direction in which a spent cartridge case might be extracted / ejected from the rifle nice a shot was fired!
I agree with you on this Mike and it is one of the reasons why I question Sheila's guilt. I cannot accept she was accidentally shot by the police.
-
I agree with you on this Mike and it is one of the reasons why I question Sheila's guilt. I cannot accept she was accidentally shot by the police.
Me too Maggie.
-
I agree with you on this Mike and it is one of the reasons why I question Sheila's guilt. I cannot accept she was accidentally shot by the police.
The fact that she was accidentally shot by the police does not describe exactly how police ended up being responsible for shooting her! That 'she was accidentally shot by police' is misleading because she wasn't shot accidentally! In the first instance the rifle said to have been used to fire both shots was resting at a first floor box room window at about 7.15am - if Sheila had already been shot twice by that stage (7.15am) her body can't have been on the main bedroom floor in possession of that rifle at one and the same time (7.15am). She can't have already been shot twice by that stage (7.15am), and if what I am pointing out be true, then cops must have known that Sheila had not shot herself and committed suicide by that stage, either downstairs in the kitchen, as per the 7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am and 7.45am, or upstairs on the main bedroom floor after 8.10am. Yet, the cops it was who settled on treating these five deaths as four murders and a suicide, where Sheila shot and killed the other four victims, then supposedly then used the gun on herself and she took her own life! Well, she hadn't shot herself with use of that rifle by the time it was presented at a first floor box room window at 7.15am, so cops must know the true circumstances surrounding her death, and in particular the fact that Sheila was shot twice. The claim that the TFG found Sheila's body on the bedroom floor in possession of the rifle soon after entering the premises has to be false by virtue of the fact that the gun was resting against that first floor window from 7.15am, onward! During the performance of 'informatives' by senior officers gathered around Sheila's body after 9am (until 10am) who's task it was to try to identify a number of different ways in which the tragedy could have unfolded? These senior officers know how the anshuzt rifle from the first floor box room window, ended up in the possession of Sheila's body! These very same senior officers must have known who collected the anshuzt rifle from the box room window and brought it to the main bedroom, and the time it was moved from one first floor room to another (main bedroom)! These self same senior officers must have known at what moment in time the rifle had been brought into the main bedroom and placed on the bed in-between the two bodies of Sheila and June Bamber on the bed! These very same senior officers must have known who amongst them had staged Sheila's death scene on the bedroom floor with use of that rifle, and when these senior officers told TFG officers to make out their notes, and reports, along the lines that the bodies of the five victims had been found where PC 'David' Bird (SOCO) had eventually photographed them from 10am, onwards...
So, if the term 'cops shot Sheila accidentally' is anything to go on, then we can safely say that on both occasions where Sheila did get shot (once across the throat during a struggle in the kitchen, and a second time once her body was moved by police from on top of the bed, onto the floor) that these shootings of her by police were not accidental! But shoot her they did...
-
The officers report (1612) which deals with the shooting of Sheila in the kitchen, does not describe the shooting of Sheila as being accidental at all. Instead, her death is dealt with in terms of her death being a suicide, where the officer saw Sheila pulling the muzzle of the police mans own weapon intowards her own neck...
-
Look at the position of the anshuzt rifle that is photographed in Sheila Caffells possession - the fingers of the right hand resting partially consealing the ammunition magazine
-
Look at the position of the anshuzt rifle that is photographed in Sheila Caffells possession - the fingers of the right hand resting partially consealing the ammunition magazine
In some of the images the muzzle end of the rifles barrel is positioned beneath the point of her chin, capable of having been used to fire bullet PV/19. Any bullet fired with the rifle in this position would have ejected a corresponding spent cartridge case beyond Sheila Caffells left shoulder, the bedside cabinet and the bed!
-
In some of the images the muzzle end of the rifles barrel is positioned beneath the point of her chin, capable of having been used to fire bullet PV/19. Any bullet fired with the rifle in this position would have ejected a corresponding spent cartridge case beyond Sheila Caffells left shoulder, the bedside cabinet and the bed!
Now, bring the rifle by its stock away from Sheila's body keeping the muzzle of the guns barrel against the throat, do this until the length of the rifle acquires the same corresponding plane as that of the first shot received across Sheila's neck (as per PV/20). Then without rotating the rifle at all on its own axis, but sliding the rifle around to the left hand side of Sheila's body until the gun fits in with the path taken by the bullet fired across her neck, something really very interesting occurs...
-
Now, bring the rifle by its stock away from Sheila's body keeping the muzzle of the guns barrel against the throat, do this until the length of the rifle acquires the same corresponding plane as that of the first shot received across Sheila's neck (as per PV/20). Then without rotating the rifle at all on its own axis, but sliding the rifle around to the left hand side of Sheila's body until the gun fits in with the path taken by the bullet fired across her neck, something really very interesting occurs...
If Sheila had shot herself across the throat, the hand of her trigger finger would almost certainly have been below the trigger and it's guard, not above them!!
The spent cartridge case associated with the round shot across her throat would have been extracted and ejected into the opposite side of the main bedroom, compared to the direction the other spent cartridge case belonging to bullet PV/19 ..
-
Why then, are we led to believe that bullet cases DRH/1 and DRH/2 were found beneath Sheila Caffells body on the bedroom floor?
-
Why then, are we led to believe that bullet cases DRH/1 and DRH/2 were found beneath Sheila Caffells body on the bedroom floor?
At the time each of the two shots were discharged into Sheila's body, the corresponding spent cartridge cases were extracted and ejected from the same part of the gun! The gun was pointing in two conflicting directions at the time Sheila was shot across the neck, and much later under the chin!
-
At the time each of the two shots were discharged into Sheila's body, the corresponding spent cartridge cases were extracted and ejected from the same part of the gun! The gun was pointing in two conflicting directions at the time Sheila was shot across the neck, and much later under the chin!
At best, one of the two bullets received in Sheila Caffells body was fired via the anshuzt rifle (brought to her body from the first floor box room window) neither DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4 bullet cases, were one of those! Only 9 bullet cases were from inside the main bedroom, PI 'Bob' Miller added four additional bullet case quotas there, so that the prosecution could suggest that Neville Bamber had already been shot before he could have got downstairs to raise the alarm!!
-
Sheila's hand grip on the trigger mechanism was set with the infliction of the fatal shot beneath the chin (PV/19) in mind! This is completely different to how her hand and fingers would have been set at the time the shot across the neck was inflicted (PV/20) if the same rifle had fired both shots. If that had been the case, the position of rifle would have been set differently at the time of each of these two shots? The direction in which spent bullet cases were extracted and ejected at the point when both shots were fired would be different, making it unlikely that both such bullet cases would end up on the bedroom floor beneath Sheila's body (as per DRH/1, DRH/2)!
-
The idea that Sheila had been shot twice in the bedroom, incorporating, the across the throat shot, and the under the chin shot is problematic because both shots could not have been inflicted with Sheila's body laid laid out of the bedroom floor as shown in PC 'David' Birds photographs. None more so than the bed preventing the rifle set horizontal in fashion at the left side of her throat being able to swing so the the rifle fell flush against the front part of her body!
-
The idea that Sheila had been shot twice in the bedroom, incorporating, the across the throat shot, and the under the chin shot is problematic because both shots could not have been inflicted with Sheila's body laid laid out of the bedroom floor as shown in PC 'David' Birds photographs. None more so than the bed preventing the rifle set horizontal in fashion at the left side of her throat being able to swing so the the rifle fell flush against the front part of her body!
Therefore, it is safe to assume that the first shot was inflicted when Sheila was stood upright with the gun angled into her throat! The second shot was inflicted with the gun flush with the front of her body.
.
-
No evidence exists to prove, show, or establish, that both shots were fired simultaneously, one immediately followed by the other with the silencer fitted to the barrel of the gun, when the 'across the neck shot' (PV20) was inflicted.
-
No evidence exists to prove, show, or establish, that both shots were fired simultaneously, one immediately followed by the other with the silencer fitted to the barrel of the gun, when the 'across the neck shot' (PV20) was inflicted.
Yet, an abrasion mark bearing the dimensions and measurements similar to the silencers end cap exists around the 'across the neck' bullet wound, and there is an absence of the same around the 'under the chin' entry wound site, which appears inconsistent with the suggestion that she was shot twice by the same rifle with a silencer fitted..
-
Yet, an abrasion mark bearing the dimensions and measurements similar to the silencers end cap exists around the 'across the neck' bullet wound, and there is an absence of the same around the 'under the chin' entry wound site, which appears inconsistent with the suggestion that she was shot twice by the same rifle with a silencer fitted..
Both shots are described by the prosecutions ballistic expert (Malcom Fletcher) as 'contact shots' where the muzzle of the weapon was in contact with the surface of the skin at the time each shot was received!
-
Mike,at what point would Sheila have lifted up her arm to feel her neck because Vanezis had said in court that her hands had been clean ?
-
Mike,at what point would Sheila have lifted up her arm to feel her neck because Vanezis had said in court that her hands had been clean ?
Her right hand was raised up toward her neck when she grabbed at the muzzle end of the officers rifle - but this did not result in the pooling of blood in the region of her right armpit which was created much later, once she received the second shot after her body was moved from a top the bed, onto the main bedroom floor, and Senior Officers authorised the movement of the anshuzt rifle from its position at a first floor box room window to be brought to Sheila's body during 'informatives'! It was just coincidental that Sheila's right arm folded under the right side of her body when cops frantically put her into the recovery position on her right side! At this time fresh blood from the second fatal shot pooled in the fold of her right arm...
We now know that the top part of Sheila's right hand was bloodstained (which undermines the prosecutions claim that her hands and feet were spotlessly clean)! They controlled which photographs got disclosed, and it follows that the key photographs which confirm Sheila's right hand and the soles of her feet were bloodstained were deliberately withheld..
a bloodied set of fingerprints on the front lower right part of her nightdress appear to relate to Sheila's bloody right hand, as shown in following image. The two bloodied fingermarks on Sheila's throat appear to show that the fingers of her right hand pressed in the region of the fatal under the chin shot, which only goes to prove that cops staged Sheila's body in possession of the gun with her bloodied right hand resting close to the trigger mechanism. How then could Sheila have been found in possession of the anshuzt rifle as depicted by reference to PC 'David' Birds crime scene photographs, if prior to this she must have been holding her neck..
Indeed, there then falls to be considered the bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop in the region where the additional bullets were found - were this bloodied fingermarks made by either Sheila Caffell, or Neville Bamber?
-
Notice, how blood which pours from the fatal under the chin shot, runs over and above the bloodied fingermark impression on the neck!!!
-
Police and CPS have a habit of hiding or withholding information or evidence which tends to weaken its own case!
-
Police and CPS have a habit of hiding or withholding information or evidence which tends to weaken its own case!
This was also the case in the Bamber prosecution, the bodies of victims were moved and staged during 'informatives' and only then we're key photographs that eventually got disclosed get taken! Cops and CPS withheld 358 of the 581 photographs that were taken during the investigation!
-
With well over 50% of the key crime scene photographs not made available to the defence or to the court which tried the matter, it becomes clear that Essex police had something to hide! At least two such photographs to my knowlege had Sheila's body on the bed (alone)! According to what Stan Jones and Mick Clarke told Ann Eaton at Jeremy's cottage on the first morning of the investigation after having visited the main bedroom scene within the previous half hour or so, the bodies of June Bamber and Sheila Caffell were both laid on top of the bed, with a rifle between the bodies, and a bible on Sheila's chest! The Commander of the firearms operation PS Adams told COLP investigators that when he saw Sheila's body at around 9 am, that there was no gun on the body! The Coroner's officer, PC Wright told COLP that when he arrived at 9.30am and he saw Sheila's body, that the gun had been removed from the body by that stage - PC Bird did not start taking pictures inside the bedroom until 10 O'clock, so there is no doubt whatsoever that police staged Sheila Caffells death scene! It was the cops who staged it to look like Sheila had shot herself, nobody else! Cops staged her death scene trying to promote her death as a suicide, when they knew all along it wasn't a suicide!
Cops knew how she'd been shot once downstairs whilst the anshuzt rifle they said had fired both shots (the other shot inflicted upstairs in the bedroom later on) was resting against a first floor box room window from 7.15am to around 8.44am...
Jeremy Bamber was not responsible for either of the two shots received by Sheila, how could he have been when he was outside in the company of the police at the time she got shot (7.35am, and 9.13am)?
The cops framed Jeremy by staging his sister's death after they shot her, with a n anshuzt rifle that was resting against a first floor box room window at the time Sheila was shot across the neck downstairs in the kitchen, and shot a second time upstairs in the bedroom after they brought the aforementioned rifle from the box room into the main bedroom during 'informatives'...
This is the absolute truth!!
-
One round of ammunition was used in the firearm operation, one round less was returned to the force Armoury - and an officers report exists explaining what happenned with the missing round. It involved the shooting incident in the kitchen to which I refer!!