Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Kaldin on October 07, 2017, 08:55:AM
-
Why are the statements of PC Collins and PC Delgado exactly the same? Is it usual for officers who enter a crime scene together to use the same statement?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4954.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1629.0.html
-
Why are the statements of PC Collins and PC Delgado exactly the same? Is it usual for officers who enter a crime scene together to use the same statement?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4954.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1629.0.html
It's just your interpretation
-
It's just your interpretation
Are you saying they're not the same? Read them.
-
Why are the statements of PC Collins and PC Delgado exactly the same? Is it usual for officers who enter a crime scene together to use the same statement?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4954.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1629.0.html
Laziness?
-
Are you saying they're not the same? Read them.
If they are -and here I'm allowing that, on our behalf, you've looked at every full stop and comma- is there anything more we should be reading into it than one asking the other if he could "cop a butcher's at ya notes, mate"?
-
Laziness?
The content is the same, but the layout is not, and there were very small differences in wording, so they were typed separately. Who made the statement first?
-
If they are -and here I'm allowing that, on our behalf, you've looked at every full stop and comma- is there anything more we should be reading into it than one asking the other if he could "cop a butcher's at ya notes, mate"?
You don't find it odd? I thought people were supposed to make statements in their own words, not copy them from someone else (with very small changes).
-
The content is the same, but the layout is not, and there were very small differences in wording, so they were typed separately. Who made the statement first?
You're making something out of nothing again
-
The content is the same, but the layout is not, and there were very small differences in wording, so they were typed separately. Who made the statement first?
I don't know, but could guess that they didn't type out the statements themselves, an admin of some sort did.
They would be typed out twice, in order to put the correct names on (no computers) which might account for the different layouts and small discrepancies?
-
I don't know, but could guess that they didn't type out the statements themselves, an admin of some sort did.
They would be typed out twice, in order to put the correct names on (no computers) which might account for the different layouts and small discrepancies?
So one of them gave a statement, and his statement was just copied? I don't think that should have happened. I wonder if any of the other statements from the raid team were copied.
-
You don't find it odd? I thought people were supposed to make statements in their own words, not copy them from someone else (with very small changes).
Well, in a perfect world, perhaps. However, given what appears to be going on here at the moment, if one of them had said anything different, it would probably have been jumped on as being potentially significant in the same way the similarities are.
-
So one of them gave a statement, and his statement was just copied? I don't think that should have happened. I wonder if any of the other statements from the raid team were copied.
Or, neither wrote the statements.
An interviewing officer did, whilst interviewing them both together?
-
Or, neither wrote the statements.
An interviewing officer did, whilst interviewing them both together?
That's possible. I just find it quite bad that they didn't use their own words and just used one statement.
-
Statements were suspiciously similar.
-
That's possible. I just find it quite bad that they didn't use their own words and just used one statement.
I don't know enough about the procedures used, so can't really give an informed opinion either way.
-
Statements were suspiciously similar.
Which means what?
-
Which means what?
Very nearly copied as probably whoever typed them had assumed that because all officers were at the scene that everything was the same.
-
Very nearly copied as probably whoever typed them had assumed that because all officers were at the scene that everything was the same.
But we're only talking about similarities between two peoples' notes, NOT the whole of the force. However, it would be odd if there weren't some similarities.
-
I'm not suggesting that anything was invented, I'm just questioning the procedure. If witnesses are not using their own words, anything could be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
-
I'm not suggesting that anything was invented, I'm just questioning the procedure. If witnesses are not using their own words, anything could be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
You are doing what Bamber has done for 32 years. Looking for a 't' without a cross.
-
I'm not suggesting that anything was invented, I'm just questioning the procedure. If witnesses are not using their own words, anything could be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
If they sign them, then are they not therefore taking responsibility and endorsing the contents?
Julie didn't write out her own statements.
-
I'm not suggesting that anything was invented, I'm just questioning the procedure. If witnesses are not using their own words, anything could be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
And if they use their own words and/or their phraseology differs from their colleagues', that, too, could be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
-
If they sign them, then are they not therefore taking responsibility and endorsing the contents?
Julie didn't write out her own statements.
Surely statements are at least dictated by the witness.
-
And if they use their own words and/or their phraseology differs from their colleagues', that, too, could be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
Well then they can be questioned about what they meant.
-
Well then they can be questioned about what they meant.
Then if notes appear significantly similar, they too may be questioned.
-
Surely statements are at least dictated by the witness.
What makes you so sure?
As I said, I don't know the procedures used, therefore I have no idea what was, or wasn't, usual.
-
These are the " notes " which have obviously been withheld. What had been originally presented was no doubt done from memory.
Why did that officer break down during questioning BTW ?
-
Then if notes appear significantly similar, they too may be questioned.
I'm very surprised that they weren't questioned about that.
-
These are the " notes " which have obviously been withheld. What had been originally presented was no doubt done from memory.
Why did that officer break down during questioning BTW ?
DC Hammersley? It was at the COLP interviews wasn't it? I'm not sure why, but I hope he recovered - he sounded quite distressed going by the account of it.
-
DC Hammersley? It was at the COLP interviews wasn't it? I'm not sure why, but I hope he recovered - he sounded quite distressed going by the account of it.
Was Hammersley ever at the scene inside WHF ?
-
Was Hammersley ever at the scene inside WHF ?
Yes, he was the scene of crimes officer who bagged Sheila's hands and took other items.
-
Yes, he was the scene of crimes officer who bagged Sheila's hands and took other items.
Right. I'm getting mixed up with somebody,Kinneally possibly.
-
Right. I'm getting mixed up with somebody,Kinneally possibly.
Forgive the observation, but you frequently do ;D
-
Forgive the observation, but you frequently do ;D
Not as much as you do-----------oh,I forgot,yours is selective.
-
Not as much as you do-----------oh,I forgot,yours is selective.
Maybe. But then I'll admit to being wrong or even put in question marks when I'm not sure.
-
Lookout did ask a question. ::)
-
Lookout did ask a question. ::)
??? ??? ???
-
??? ??? ???
Was Hammersley ever at the scene inside WHF ?
There's nothing wrong with asking that, and there's nothing wrong with sometimes getting people mixed up - there were a lot of officers involved in the case.
-
There's nothing wrong with asking that, and there's nothing wrong with sometimes getting people mixed up - there were a lot of officers involved in the case.
Believe me, Lookout's mix ups are alarmingly frequent. POSSIBLY accidental but equally possible that she just throws it in hoping it will pass and won't be checked.
-
Believe me, Lookout's mix ups are alarmingly frequent. POSSIBLY accidental but equally possible that she just throws it in hoping it will pass and won't be checked.
Please point me in the direction of the " alarmingly frequent mix-ups ". " Possibly accidental ?" It gets worse,then " throws it in hoping it will pass ?" How utterly rude !!
There's a thinly veiled ageist comment if ever I heard one.
-
Please point me in the direction of the " alarmingly frequent mix-ups ". " Possibly accidental ?" It gets worse,then " throws it in hoping it will pass ?" How utterly rude !!
There's a thinly veiled ageist comment if ever I heard one.
Only saying it as I experience it, Lookout. Of course you won't accept it as being right because according to you you're never wrong. I'm actually -though I have scant reason to do it- allowing you the benefit of doubt by conceding that it may be accidental error.
-
Only saying it as I experience it, Lookout. Of course you won't accept it as being right because according to you you're never wrong. I'm actually -though I have scant reason to do it- allowing you the benefit of doubt by conceding that it may be accidental error.
That's one way of getting out of your ill-mannered behaviour I suppose.
-
That's one way of getting out of your ill-mannered behaviour I suppose.
More projection
-
That's one way of getting out of your ill-mannered behaviour I suppose.
I would never subscribe to attaining the heights you take it to.