Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: JackieD on August 06, 2017, 08:41:AM
-
Why aren't these statements available
-
Why aren't these statements available
. You could try asking mike ?
They must be out there somewhere because they are often referred to .
-
I know Jan, they are not on the red site either
It's very strange they are missing
-
Little is known about this character-------I wonder why ? I know she'd had a relationship with MM and also that she wasn't averse to the odd " snort " of cocaine. Both her and JM were together on the night before Liz went to the police----------------making up their story,perhaps ?? Pretty odd to me.
-
Little is known about this character-------I wonder why ? I know she'd had a relationship with MM and also that she wasn't averse to the odd " snort " of cocaine. Both her and JM were together on the night before Liz went to the police----------------making up their story,perhaps ?? Pretty odd to me.
If little is known about her, then there is not really anything for you to base such assumptions on.
-
If little is known about her, then there is not really anything for you to base such assumptions on.
Like I said----------little is/was known.
-
Little is known about this character-------I wonder why ? I know she'd had a relationship with MM and also that she wasn't averse to the odd " snort " of cocaine. Both her and JM were together on the night before Liz went to the police----------------making up their story,perhaps ?? Pretty odd to me.
This all sounds suspiciously like if there's nothing on her I'll find something.
-
So we don't know if she had a grudge against JB
Another one of his conquests???
-
This all sounds suspiciously like if there's nothing on her I'll find something.
I am certainly interested in the person for documentary reasons
-
Little is known about this character-------I wonder why ? I know she'd had a relationship with MM and also that she wasn't averse to the odd " snort " of cocaine. Both her and JM were together on the night before Liz went to the police----------------making up their story,perhaps ?? Pretty odd to me.
But why would they ? It does seem to me they were trying to get Julie to go to the police and I don't think they would risk telling lies ?
But nothing Julie told them was specific truth about the crime that no one else knew ?
So we are no further forward really .
We are never going to know if Julie got a call tipping her off about Jeremy being in the frame and perhaps taking her down with him.
We just don't have the evidence .
But a member of the family knew didn't he because he let it slip to Colin . Up to that call he did not have a clue.
-
This all sounds suspiciously like if there's nothing on her I'll find something.
You'll find that she'd slept with her best friend's boyfriend as well as MM,so the " scorned " conversation would have been the highlight of both women.
Go back 4/5 years and test your memory.
-
I am certainly interested in the person for documentary reasons
But she may NOT be interested..............for the same reasons. I really can't see anyone, who was involved at the time, wanting to revisit it. Certainly not publicly.
-
I know Jan, they are not on the red site either
It's very strange they are missing
They aren't missing, they're just not on this site! ::)
-
You'll find that she'd slept with her best friend's boyfriend as well as MM,so the " scorned " conversation would have been the highlight of both women.
Go back 4/5 years and test your memory.
So WHAT, Lookout? This woman is now probably closer to 60 than 50. Why should her past be dragged out for public consumption?
-
Little is known about this character-------I wonder why ? I know she'd had a relationship with MM and also that she wasn't averse to the odd " snort " of cocaine. Both her and JM were together on the night before Liz went to the police----------------making up their story,perhaps ?? Pretty odd to me.
She did NOT have a relationship with MM, it was Malcolm Waters. So now she's a liar? ::)
-
You'll find that she'd slept with her best friend's boyfriend as well as MM,so the " scorned " conversation would have been the highlight of both women.
Go back 4/5 years and test your memory.
She didn't sleep with MM.
-
But why would they ? It does seem to me they were trying to get Julie to go to the police and I don't think they would risk telling lies ?
But nothing Julie told them was specific truth about the crime that no one else knew ?
So we are no further forward really .
We are never going to know if Julie got a call tipping her off about Jeremy being in the frame and perhaps taking her down with him.
We just don't have the evidence .
But a member of the family knew didn't he because he let it slip to Colin . Up to that call he did not have a clue.
Why would Julie know something about the crime that no one else knew? She was fed by Bamber who told her a hit man was responsible. Good thing Colin didn't have suspicions or he'd be called a liar too.
-
So we don't know if she had a grudge against JB
Another one of his conquests???
For what? There is no limits to how many people are supposed to be liars - all having a grudge against the same man? Where are all his friends in this? Who cane forward and argued his corner?
-
Why would Julie know something about the crime that no one else knew? She was fed by Bamber who told her a hit man was responsible. Good thing Colin didn't have suspicions or he'd be called a liar too.
Because if Jeremy had told her what he had done and risked her going to the police at all why give her a load of rubbish .
He would either confess or if he thought she had not cottoned on just keep quiet.
He is either clever or stupid ? Which is it .
-
She didn't sleep with MM.
So I guess,in reality, it doesn't actually matter a toss WHO she slept with. They're determined to pin something on her.
-
But she may NOT be interested..............for the same reasons. I really can't see anyone, who was involved at the time, wanting to revisit it. Certainly not publicly.
But none of us know. She might decide she wants to talk about what happened and she might have doubts
How did she feel about the NOTW article?
She didn't do anything wrong did she?
-
None of us actually know what was going on in Julie's mind in those last few days . Except she was upset about being dumped obviously.
But if she wanted to get some form of revenge on Jeremy then would she have thought that mentioning those things to her friends would have resulted in them forcing her to go to the police ? Why did she resist going even when she had told 4 people? Did she hope they might just don him in and give him a bit of a scare ?
Or she was telling the truth and was just to scared to try and explain to the police why she had not come forward earlier ?
Because on that date as far as I understand thenpolice had nothing else concrete to go on except what RB had gone in to tell them?
-
Because if Jeremy had told her what he had done and risked her going to the police at all why give her a load of rubbish .
He would either confess or if he thought she had not cottoned on just keep quiet.
He is either clever or stupid ? Which is it .
Or perhaps JM started asking questions, ("you did it didn't you?") and JB gave her a story rather than admit he directly carried out the murders.
I don't think we can say with any certainty exactly how this played out. It is however quite feasible that it did.
-
None of us actually know what was going on in Julie's mind in those last few days . Except she was upset about being dumped obviously.
Do we know how their relationship ended, or why?
-
Or perhaps JM started asking questions, ("you did it didn't you?") and JB gave her a story rather than admit he directly carried out the murders.
I don't think we can say with any certainty exactly how this played out. It is however quite feasible that it did.
Yes I agree . We don't really know her thoughts in those few days . Only what is in her friends statements.
-
Do we know how their relationship ended, or why?
I thought it was several things
Jeremy said she did not like Brett
The call and alleged night spent with Virginia ?
There was apparently big arguments but then he helped her move and they never spoke again?
-
Or perhaps JM started asking questions, ("you did it didn't you?") and JB gave her a story rather than admit he directly carried out the murders.
I don't think we can say with any certainty exactly how this played out. It is however quite feasible that it did.
The only thing that is feasible to me is that Julie Mugford was obsessed with Jeremy, she could not bare the thought of him being with anyone else and as a prolific liar was capable of anything in revenge and to top it off sold the story for fame and fortune posing without knickers
Very classy
-
But none of us know. She might decide she wants to talk about what happened and she might have doubts
How did she feel about the NOTW article?
She didn't do anything wrong did she?
If she wants to talk -NOW? After all these years?- I imagine she'll already have spoken, in confidence, to an appropriate person. The NOTW has no more to do with her than it has to do with us. She probably felt about it the way many of us do, but that's her business, and not, I believe for public consumption. I can only say that if I'd been on the periphery of something so terrible, there's NO way I'd speak publicly about it.
-
I thought it was several things
Jeremy said she did not like Brett
The call and alleged night spent with Virginia ?
There was apparently big arguments but then he helped her move and they never spoke again?
Ah okay, some of that rings a bell, I haven't read through the statements in ages.
-
The only thing that is feasible to me is that Julie Mugford was obsessed with Jeremy, she could not bare the thought of him being with anyone else and as a prolific liar was capable of anything in revenge and to top it off sold the story for fame and fortune posing without knickers
Very classy
She never denied it. She said in court "I was very much in love with him. I'd hoped to marry him".
-
The only thing that is feasible to me is that Julie Mugford was obsessed with Jeremy, she could not bare the thought of him being with anyone else and as a prolific liar was capable of anything in revenge and to top it off sold the story for fame and fortune posing without knickers
Very classy
Or perhaps she was just a drama queen and never thought her friends would go to the police . By then she was in a very awkward predicament. I know a few people like that . Good at telling lies until it just happens sometimes without thinking of the consequences.
The fact is what she said was not true , there was no hitman , the bible was not on her chest and the rest was a concoction of stuff that had probably been in the papers .
-
Or perhaps she was just a drama queen and never thought her friends would go to the police . By then she was in a very awkward predicament. I know a few people like that . Good at telling lies until it just happens sometimes without thinking of the consequences.
The fact is what she said was not true , there was no hitman , the bible was not on her chest and the rest was a concoction of stuff that had probably been in the papers .
So she may have been a drama queen? Actually, I'm inclined to agree, but it doesn't make all drama queens, liars, NOR, if Jeremy told her the story of a hit man -or anything else- does it make HER the liar for repeating it.
-
She didn't sleep with MM.
It was you who'd mentioned about the relationship back in 2012/13 and because Liz had previously slept with JB,it appeared that bed-hopping was their favourite pastime.
-
It was you who'd mentioned about the relationship back in 2012/13 and because Liz had previously slept with JB,it appeared that bed-hopping was their favourite pastime.
Yes it was - being human Lookout, I made a mistake and have said so in the past but people ignore that. Just shows how easy it is to create a myth. So you'll remember that it wasn't MM it was MW in future?
-
It was you who'd mentioned about the relationship back in 2012/13 and because Liz had previously slept with JB,it appeared that bed-hopping was their favourite pastime.
So WHAT? Just what are you trying to hang onto this group of 20-25 year old's who did -30+ years ago- what numerous other groups did?
-
So WHAT? Just what are you trying to hang onto this group of 20-25 year old's who did -30+ years ago- what numerous other groups did?
No we can leave that to the family who took great delight in accusing Jeremy with sleeping with men and women . Just to emphasise his bad character.
-
No we can leave that to the family who took great delight in accusing Jeremy with sleeping with men and women . Just to emphasise his bad character.
I think back then, there were less liberal views of such things, particularly from older people.
Adding things to perhaps show Jeremy in a bad light, yes it's quite possible and perhaps even likely. Many are guilty of this even now whilst discussing the case from different viewpoints. Heck some posters even seem to do it to each other whilst trying to hammer their points home.
-
It was on the 10th of Sept.1985 that both JM and LR went to a hotel with a couple of men they'd just met.
I don't imagine the meeting would have been discussing the weather. No,it entailed a round of cocaine !
This is/was the same " friend " who'd rang the police to say that JM was withholding evidence------before flying off to Malta for a holiday with JM.
With friends like that you don't need enemies.
-
It was on the 10th of Sept.1985 that both JM and LR went to a hotel with a couple of men they'd just met.
I don't imagine the meeting would have been discussing the weather. No,it entailed a round of cocaine !
This is/was the same " friend " who'd rang the police to say that JM was withholding evidence------before flying off to Malta for a holiday with JM.
With friends like that you don't need enemies.
Where does this information come from Lookout?
-
No we can leave that to the family who took great delight in accusing Jeremy with sleeping with men and women . Just to emphasise his bad character.
Are you encouraging us to adopt the antediluvian attitudes held then?
-
Yes it was - being human Lookout, I made a mistake and have said so in the past but people ignore that. Just shows how easy it is to create a myth. So you'll remember that it wasn't MM it was MW in future?
Liz had lived with both MM and MW.
-
Liz had lived with both MM and MW.
I thought Liz had her own house?
-
I thought Liz had her own house?
She may have done,we don't know as there isn't enough available information about her,but latterly when she made that phone-call to police she was living with MW.
-
Liz had lived with both MM and MW.
I don't think Liz and MM even knew each other did they.
MM statements are below. There is a second one on page 2.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4034.0.html (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4034.0.html)
-
I don't think Liz and MM even knew each other did they.
MM statements are below. There is a second one on page 2.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4034.0.html (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4034.0.html)
Hopefully, the potential for another myth nipped in the bud.
-
Because if Jeremy had told her what he had done and risked her going to the police at all why give her a load of rubbish .
He would either confess or if he thought she had not cottoned on just keep quiet.
He is either clever or stupid ? Which is it .
Jan I remember Colin said he and Julie had a conversation after JB was convicted or there abouts but he was not prepared to tell us what she told him.
-
Hopefully, the potential for another myth nipped in the bud.
There was an affair between LR and MM. It was no myth.
-
There was an affair between LR and MM. It was no myth.
It appears that not only do you seek revenge on Julie but anyone who dared to be her friend. I can't think why else you'd wish to see dirt heaped on this woman.
-
There was an affair between LR and MM. It was no myth.
I don't believe that's true.
Liz was JM's friend. JB and MM seemed to have some sort of falling out and they hadn't seen each other since the previous year. JB was with another woman when he was friendly with MM.
-
Jan I remember Colin said he and Julie had a conversation after JB was convicted or there abouts but he was not prepared to tell us what she told him.
Yes that has always stuck in my mind as well.
It was after the trial .
-
So she may have been a drama queen? Actually, I'm inclined to agree, but it doesn't make all drama queens, liars, NOR, if Jeremy told her the story of a hit man -or anything else- does it make HER the liar for repeating it.
But she was a liar that is a fact everyone knows that on this forum
-
But she was a liar that is a fact everyone knows that on this forum
Then in order to make good your claim, it's for you to prove that she didn't repeat the words Jeremy told her. It seems she may only be a "Liar" in your opinion and as such, can't be said to be fact.
-
There was an affair between LR and MM. It was no myth.
There wasn't.
-
Liz had lived with both MM and MW.
No she didn't.
-
I don't think Liz and MM even knew each other did they.
MM statements are below. There is a second one on page 2.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4034.0.html (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4034.0.html)
Some years ago I posted that MM had once had a relationship with LR - simply because I have a really bad memory for names and got MM mixed up with MW. It has since been picked up and repeated as a fact, each time I have seen it, I have tried to correct it but some people just don't want to listen because it gives LR a reason for going to the police. The fact that it isn't true doesn't seem to enter into it.
-
Some years ago I posted that MM had once had a relationship with LR - simply because I have a really bad memory for names and got MM mixed up with MW. It has since been picked up and repeated as a fact, each time I have seen it, I have tried to correct it but some people just don't want to listen because it gives LR a reason for going to the police. The fact that it isn't true doesn't seem to enter into it.
So it's your fault then! >:( ;D
-
Some notes here gleaned from Carol Ann Lee's book:
1983-Liz Rimington worked as a waitress at the Frog and Beans pub in Colchester. She is the girlfriend of Malcolm Walters, one of the owners. She would often see Jeremy and Suzette Ford canoodling in a corner whilst her husband babysat the children at home. Jeremy told Liz Nevill and June didn't approve of the relationship and Nevill had threatened to disinherit him if he didn't end it, which he did.
Autumn 1983 Liz is now Michael Deckers' girlfriend, and he and co-owner Malcolm Waters have now sold the Frog and Beans and bought Sloppy Joe's, an American-style pizza parlour. They employ one of Liz's friends, Julie Mugford, as a waitress. Liz is now manageress.
June 1984 Liz has a one night stand with Jeremy, who is now Julie's regular boyfriend. Liz gets the impression that Jeremy has been unfaithful to Julie throughout their relationship. Jeremy tells Liz he has plans to rob an expensive house in Goldhanger but nothing seemed to come of it. Jeremy tells Liz the Bambers intended to adopt the twins and send them to boarding school.
More to follow.
-
Saturday 10 August 1985
Jeremy, Julie, Liz and Charles Marsden meet in Colchester to go bowling. Julie tells Liz:
Jeremy is so cold, he just doesn't care about anything. Believe me, if the devil has a human form on this earth then his name is Jeremy. He's the devil incarnate.
Liz: "He may be in shock.."
Julie: "If only you knew.."
Thursday 15 August
Liz, Julie, Jeremy and Brett go shopping in Colchester for the funeral.
Brett to Jeremy in front of Liz: "Buy yourself something really slick. You're inheriting all this money. Play the part."
They later drive to the Farm, where Jeremy searches for money which might have been hidden away.
Later at Bourtree Cottage Jeremy "delights in the fact that his father has weakened with age in the months before his death." He "might have married Julie and stayed in Goldhanger forever, but "with all this happening" his life would be different."
-
Saturday 31 August
Julie tells Liz she has parted with Jeremy.
Liz: "You're lucky that you're rid of him."
Julie: "You don't know the half of it."
Julie then tells Liz the whole story, and Liz urges her friend to go to the Police.
Friday 6th September
Liz persuades Julie to tell Malcolm Waters, who then urges Liz to telephone Police on Julie's behalf. At 4pm Liz puts a call through to Witham Police Station.
-
There wasn't.
She lied numerous time starting with the cheque fraud
Fact
A nasty scheming trainee teacher who lied
Great role model
-
So it's your fault then! >:( ;D
Yep - all my fault! ;) ;D ;D
-
Saturday 10 August 1985
Jeremy, Julie, Liz and Charles Marsden meet in Colchester to go bowling. Julie tells Liz:
Jeremy is so cold, he just doesn't care about anything. Believe me, if the devil has a human form on this earth then his name is Jeremy. He's the devil incarnate.
Liz: "He may be in shock.."
Julie: "If only you knew.."
Thursday 15 August
Liz, Julie, Jeremy and Brett go shopping in Colchester for the funeral.
Brett to Jeremy in front of Liz: "Buy yourself something really slick. You're inheriting all this money. Play the part."
They later drive to the Farm, where Jeremy searches for money which might have been hidden away.
Later at Bourtree Cottage Jeremy "delights in the fact that his father has weakened with age in the months before his death." He "might have married Julie and stayed in Goldhanger forever, but "with all this happening" his life would be different."
Hearsay
-
Saturday 31 August
Julie tells Liz she has parted with Jeremy.
Liz: "You're lucky that you're rid of him."
Julie: "You don't know the half of it."
Julie then tells Liz the whole story, and Liz urges her friend to go to the Police.
Friday 6th September
Liz persuades Julie to tell Malcolm Waters, who then urges Liz to telephone Police on Julie's behalf. At 4pm Liz puts a call through to Witham Police Station.
Hearsay
-
I cannot wait to see Julie Mugford and Liz rimmingtons matching statements
They will be the same won't they
-
She lied numerous time starting with the cheque fraud
Fact
A nasty scheming trainee teacher who lied
Great role model
She probably did lie about lots of things - so did Jeremy, but how does that make him innocent?
-
She probably did lie about lots of things - so did Jeremy, but how does that make him innocent?
Obviously because we only have her word what Jeremy said to her
Her criminal record, her jealousy, her twisted mind, not wanting anyone else to have Jeremy
She's got a lot to answer too
She gets dumped by Jeremy and goes berserk only later to find out he had slept with her best mate
That must have tipped her over the edge
-
I'd be interested to know from ngb1066 and Petey exactly what hearsay can be allowed in court. For example James Richards was allowed to testify that Jeremy told him vehemently "I hate my f***ing parents" and I don't see why Liz Rimington's testimony is any different. In the David Bain case there was fierce legal argument over Dean Cottle's incest evidence(disallowed in the first trial) and it was this which swung it for Bain in the retrial 13 years later.
-
I'd be interested to know from ngb1066 and Petey exactly what hearsay can be allowed in court. For example James Richards was allowed to testify that Jeremy told him vehemently "I hate my f***ing parents" and I don't see why Liz Rimington's testimony is any different. In the David Bain case there was fierce legal argument over Dean Cottle's incest evidence(disallowed in the first trial) and it was this which swung it for Bain in the retrial 13 years later.
Evidence of what a defendant has said is in law not hearsay, and therefore in principle is admissible in evidence. Evidence of what a third party other than the defendant has said is hearsay and normally inadmissible.
-
There wasn't.
There was.
-
No she didn't.
She did.
-
Supporting evidence to 'confirm there was an attack alarm' which was activated from within the farmhouse by 3.29am, is contained in 'a police telex message' log. All types of alarm such as 'intruder alarms' and 'attack alarms' which were fed directly through to the police are 'automatically recorded' there as one of many telex messages 'when' activated! The times that police units got deployed to respond to such occurences are 'also' recorded! There is little doubt from what I have seen that 'PC Myall' left to go to the farmhouse 'long before the occupants of CA07' containing 'PS Bews' and 'PS Saxby' did! The telex message log I have seen has 'the occupants of CA07' being deployed to the incident at '3.45am', not 3.35am! Bonnetts 'handwritten note' that the occupants of 'CA07' were deployed to the incident at '3.35am', and that they 'arrived' there at '3.48am', is false! From his console (6) in the incident room 'he typed' in the fact that 'CA07 were deployed at 3.45am', hence why in the police 'telex message' log it 'flagged up' correctly as 3.45am! The handwritten version of 'Malcolm Bonnetts' 3.26am log, therefore has 'misleading information' recorded upon it and in it. He 'typed' in at his keyboard that 'CA07 had been deployed to the incident at 3.45am', which was 'after Jeremy called Chelmsford police station' at 3.36am, why would he record the time 'inaccurately' as though they had been deployed '10 minutes' earlier? The answer seems clear to me, the handwritten phone log made by 'Malcolm Bonnett', was 'not' written up contemporaneously, it was made up and 'written out much later' on another occasion! Probably after the 'nature of the police investigation altered' from 'four murders and a suicide', into 'five murders', by which time the 'audio recordings' of Neville Bambers 3.26am call to Witham police station which 'got diverted' to Chelmsford incident room by the 'automated service' deployed back at Witham because there was 'no-one' available to take Nevilles call at that time, and 'Jeremys' call to Chelmsford police station at '3.36am', had both been (arguably) 'destroyed' or 'disposed of' because they were over '28 days' old. Bews and Saxby did 'not arrive' at the scene until '3.58am', they 'weren't there' at '3.48am', but 'PC Myall' was 'already there', he was there in time to see 'the scruffy looking hunched man walking away from the farmhouse' at '3.45am', not at 'about' 3.45am, and certainly not 'about an hour before the firearm officers arrived at the scene' (5am) in keeping with 'Kim Sengupta's News article' on the matter! The reason why 'Bonnetts' 3.26am phone log records the time that CA07 was deployed to the incident and arrived there, is recorded as having taken place 10 minutes sooner than they had been, was because at the time Bonnet wrote out the handwritten version of his 3.26am log, 'Jeremy' had already been interviewed in early September about the sequence with which 'he had called the police and his girlfriend' Julie Mugford! He told the 'interviewing officers' that he had called Julie first then the police! They took Jeremy to task on that asssertion 'reminding him' that on the morning of the incident he had told officers at the scene that 'he had tried phoning Witham police station' but had got no reply, and then 'he had phoned Julie'! Jeremy 'appeared confused' when challenged about this, and 'eventually conceded' that 'what he had originally told the officers at the scene' that he had tried to phone Witham police station before he had phoned Julie, and not the other way round, 'must be the true sequence' of events! But, 'Jeremy' had tried to contact Witham police 'before he phoned his girlfriend' but got no answer, and he had phoned Chelmsford police 'after he had spoken' to Julie! What the police knew and have known all along, is that 'Neville Bambers' distress call was made at 3.26am, and that 'Jeremys' call to Chelmsford occurred at 3.36am, 10 minutes later! Somebody in authority who was possibly 'trying to keep the lid on' the true nature of the 'incident' at the farmhouse (the murders of Neville, June and their two grandchildren on the one hand, and the 'circumstances of the death of Sheila', who perhaps may have originally been 'earmarked as the patsy' to take the blame for the other deaths, if we lean toward Giovanni De Stefano's explanation for what might have occured involving a spy ring conspiracy) realised that by presenting the time of 'Jeremys' 3.36am call to Chelmsford, as having occurred 10 minutes sooner, it would 'serve to mask the fact that Neville Bamber had made his distress call' at around the time that 'Jeremy' had attempted to contact Witham police station himself unsuccessfully! Hence why during the trial 'an attempt was made' to try and get 'PC West' to agree that he could have 'made a mistake' when looking at the control room clock by as much as 10 minutes. In the end though PC West 'wasn't prepared to accept' that he had made such a glaring error! The 'fact is', he didn't...
The contents of both logs (Bonnetts 3.26am log, and Wests 3.36am log) were 'never disclosed together', alongside one another during the trial, or the 'subsequent' failed appeal and the 'contradictory nature' of both were 'never considered' or 'debated, and no court 'judgement' given which dispensed the issues arising therein, because the prosecution made Jeremys call (PC Wests 3.36am log) the subject of 'a mistaken time' having been recorded by PC West. There was 'nothing presented' to suggest or imply that the 'contents of each log' supported the fact that Neville and Jeremy had contacted the police about the same matter, albeit 'couched in terminology' representative of 'Neville telling police himself' what was happening, and 'Jeremy telling police what Neville had told him' was happening!
-
No attack alarm
-
Supporting evidence to 'confirm there was an attack alarm' which was activated from within the farmhouse by 3.29am, is contained in 'a police telex message' log.
Why would a "telex message" say "by 3:29" instead of just giving the time? As you haven't posted the evidence, you presumably don't know for certain that it exists or ever existed.
-
If there was an attack alarm, would it not be to thwart outside attackers ? Bamber being the only person who has publically said he knew how to get into & out of a locked WHF.
A panic alarm was certainly not for Sheila, who had been invited to WHF.
Anyway there is no evidence of an alarm going off. The first phone call that definately happened was Bamber to Chelmsford police/Julie.
-
If there was an attack alarm, would it not be to thwart outside attackers ? Bamber being the only person who has publically said he knew how to get into & out of a locked WHF.
A panic alarm was certainly not for Sheila, who had been invited to WHF.
Anyway there is no evidence of an alarm going off. The first phone call that definately happened was Bamber to Chelmsford police/Julie.
There was no panic alarm...................could be that's why there's no evidence of one.