Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on October 18, 2017, 09:48:AM
-
They were law abiding citizens.
They would have to have the crazy idea in the first place.
If caught they could be put in prison.
If caught, a rich Bamber could sue.
If caught, a rich Bamber could be their enemy regarding farm and land business.
They had to agree together & ensure everyone's account matched.
If one relative cracked under pressure, everything falls apart.
The police & defence lawyers will put pressure on each relative regarding their accounts.
None of them had attempted anything like this before.
They were already wealthy.
They did not know whether other evidence showed Bamber was innocent.
Taff Jones was not co operating with them & would have had a negative reaction to the silencer.
A fabrication attempt was a 1 in a million shot.
They may not know about human back splatter.
They did not know Sheila's blood type.
They did not know Sheila's arm lenght.
They did not know if Sheila received a contact shot.
They did not know if the rifle nozzle already had back splatter.
They would assume the rifle nozzle already had back splatter on as 25 shots had been fired into 5 people from close range.
They did not know how to correctly put blood into the silencer baffles.
They did not know how to scratch the aga to replicate a kitchen fight.
They did not know if crime scene photos already showed the aga without scratches on.
They did not know if the police had already checked the silencers at WHF for blood.
The fabrication was a huge life term committment. Creating false WS's & perjury.
Even if successful with the fabrication, it may not result in a conviction.
Bamber had already said he left the rifle at WHF without the silencer on.
It is possible Bamber would go out to shoot rabbits without a silencer attached.
They did not have time to plan & execute this as quickly as they did.
If the fabrication attempt failed & became public knowledge, they would be labelled as callous criminals throughout the nation & local community.
They were relying on one piece of false evidence to try to convict a perhaps innocent man of killing 5 members of his family.
-
Shouldn't it be Advantages ?
-
Shouldn't it be Advantages ?
Not sure how going to prison & the other 29 points are advantages.
The only other option is the police fabricated the silencer & then asked the relatives to pretend they found it to the courts.
This means both supporters & guilters are in agreement that Sheila's blood is in the silencer. As the police had access to Sheila's blood.
But the silencer was found so soon after the massacre, couldn't the police just say they found it themselves ? It would be a lot less risky & a lot more simple. Why involve the relatives ?
-
I can't think of any cases where the police have asked several members of the public to pretend they found something for them.
Sources here would be appreciated.
-
Didn't SJ tell AE that " she didn't see that ",when referring to a pair of shoes he took from the bedroom ?
He was literally taking away items that pointed to Sheila's guilt.
-
Didn't SJ tell AE that " she didn't see that ",when referring to a pair of shoes he took from the bedroom ?
He was literally taking away items that pointed to Sheila's guilt.
Straight after the massacre, why do you think the police didn't say they found the silencer themselves ?
Asking the relatives, who were law abiding citizens to lie & not crack makes the police's silencer fabrication attempt 10x riskier.
Do you know any other examples where the police have asked several members of the public to pretend they found something for them ?
-
Straight after the massacre, why do you think the police didn't say they found the silencer themselves ? Asking the relatives to lie & not crack makes the silencer fabrication 10x riskier.
Do you know any other examples where the police have asked several members of the public to pretend they found something for them ?
Are you serious ? Do you think it's ever going to come to light what tactics the police might use in cajoling certain members of the public to " play ball ?"
-
Are you serious ? Do you think it's ever going to come to light what tactics the police might use in cajoling certain members of the public to " play ball ?"
So officially it's never happened before.
No members of the public have ever accused the police of asking them to pretend they found something.
No released criminals or aquited people have ever accused the police of asking the public to pretend they found something.
--------------
Things are not looking good for supporters -
It was impossible for the relatives to fabricate the silencer alone. See thread post.
The police didn't need the relatives to pretend they found the silencer. It would just make their frame 10x riskier.
There are no other examples of the police asking the public to pretend they found something for them.
Not sure what else is needed.
-
Are you serious ? Do you think it's ever going to come to light what tactics the police might use in cajoling certain members of the public to " play ball ?"
It's certainly something supporters can always fall back on.
-
Hehehehee! Yeah ;D ;D ;D
She did the right thing exposing him ;D
-
It's certainly something supporters can always fall back on.
I happen to have known that it did happen.
-
Lookout answered a source request with a negative. Basically saying -
I have no source. But that does not mean it has not happened.
Sources urgently need to be supplied of the police previously asking the public to pretend they found incriminating for them.
And good reasons given why the police didn't just say they found the silencer themselves.
Otherwise there will have to block stance changes.
-
I happen to have known that it did happen.
I accept that's how you choose to interpret it.
-
Lookout has no source.
David is probably frantically looking for a source now. Or at least a good reason why the police didn't just say they found the silencer themselves so soon after the massacre.
My thread post has dismissed Nugs's long term view that the relatives could fabricate the silencer independently of the police.
-
Lookout answered a source request with a negative. Basically saying -
I have no source. But that does not mean it has not happened.
Sources urgently need to be supplied of the police previously asking the public to pretend they found incriminating for them.
And good reasons given why the police didn't just say they found the silencer themselves.
Otherwise there will have to block stance changes.
Hopefully these will be supplied today.
-
Lookout has no source.
David is probably frantically looking for a source now. Or at least a good reason why the police didn't just say they found the silencer themselves so soon after the massacre.
My thread post has dismissed Nugs's long term view that the relatives could fabricate the silencer independently of the police.
Oh I certainly do have a source.I'm not in the habit of making things up.
My source comes under the heading of " Sods Law ".
-
Oh I certainly do have a source.I'm not in the habit of making things up.
My source comes under the heading of " Sods Law ".
"One has to laugh"
-
Lookout has no source.
David is probably frantically looking for a source now. Or at least a good reason why the police didn't just say they found the silencer themselves so soon after the massacre.
According to Peter Simpson. The police found a silencer on the day of the massacre. They have already said such thing.
My thread post has dismissed Nugs's long term view that the relatives could fabricate the silencer independently of the police.
Your thread is just another pointless Gish Gallop that no one will bother reading.
-
According to Peter Simpson. The police found a silencer on the day of the massacre. They have already said such thing.
Your thread is just another pointless Gish Gallop that no one will bother reading.
its an attempt to create new threads in order to bury the previous threads.
-
According to Peter Simpson. The police found a silencer on the day of the massacre. They have already said such thing.
Your thread is just another pointless Gish Gallop that no one will bother reading.
If you weren't emotionally involved David you would stand more of a chance of being objective and recognising where you went wrong
-
its an attempt to create new threads in order to bury the previous threads.
Projection
-
its an attempt to create new threads in order to bury the previous threads.
Of course it is nugs.I noticed that years ago. They go over my head fortunately.
-
If you weren't emotionally involved David you would stand more of a chance of being objective and recognising where you went wrong
Now that's what I call a projection ;D
-
Now that's what I call a projection ;D
How on earth am I anyway emotionally involved with Jeremy Bamber and his claims of innocence ha ha ha
-
Of course it is nugs.I noticed that years ago. They go over my head fortunately.
That's a shame lookout
-
Now that's what I call a projection ;D
Do we HAVE to be emotionally involved ? :o
-
According to Peter Simpson. The police found a silencer on the day of the massacre. They have already said such thing.
Your thread is just another pointless Gish Gallop that no one will bother reading.
You have no source and are posting bullshit again.
If Simpson found a silencer on the day of the massacre, why would they need to ask the relatives to say they found a silencer just after the massacre ?
Lookout & Nugs have no source of previous cases where the police have asked the public to pretend they found something. And neither do you.
-
Do we HAVE to be emotionally involved ? :o
You are in denial if you think you arent
-
Nug's lone wolf theory that the relatives could fabricate the silencer independently of the police has been dismissed again. The thread post shows 30 huge & obvious disadvantages & logistical impossibilities.
Lookout, Nugs & David have failed to give one reason why the police would fabricate the silencer straight after the massacre, & then unbelievably ask the relatives to pretend they found it.
Lookout, Nugs & David have failed to provide one example of other cases where the police have been accused of asking the public to pretend they found incriminating evidence for them.
David, when frustrated reverts to his bullshit 'gish gash' posts. Although did say the police had already taken a silencer. So could have just said that one had blood & paint on. Again meaning no reason to bring the relatives into the frame.
-
Oh dear-------we've failed. ::)
-
Failed to read and digest Adam's codswallop. :o
No wonder there are so many MOJ's and those in prison who shouldn't be !!
-
If the police wanted to fabricate the silencer straight after the massacre, they just had to say -
'We found a silencer with blood & paint on & passed it on for testing.'
Why ask the relatives to create false WS's & commit perjury by pretending they found it ? It makes the police's fabrication attempt 10x riskier.
-
David has even said the police found a silencer on the day of the massacre.
The police had Sheila's blood which they could insert. They could scratch the aga & dispose of specific photo's of the aga. Then send the silencer away for testing.
It was a big frame, in a big case. Jobs, pensions, reputations & criminal charges were at stake.
Why risk making it 10x harder by involving law abiding citizens when they didn't need to ?
-
People claim the police fabricated the silencer for a 'noble cause' corruption.
But surely they would have enough morals to not bring in innocent relatives. Putting the relatives at risk of criminal charges & making the police's efforts 10x riskier.
There is also the chance one or all of the relatives would refuse & then report the police suggestion.
It's Sheila's blood in the silencer.
But if the relatives couldn't fabricate the silencer independently & the police wouldn't in a million years ask the relatives to lie for them, what the hell happened ?
-
Nug's lone wolf theory that the relatives could fabricate the silencer independently of the police has been dismissed again. The thread post shows 30 huge & obvious disadvantages & logistical impossibilities.
30 pieces of drivel is all it shows.
Lookout, Nugs & David have failed to give one reason why the police would fabricate the silencer straight after the massacre, & then unbelievably ask the relatives to pretend they found it.
Lookout, Nugs & David have failed to provide one example of other cases where the police have been accused of asking the public to pretend they found incriminating evidence for them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction)
David, when frustrated reverts to his bullshit 'gish gash' posts. Although did say the police had already taken a silencer. So could have just said that one had blood & paint on. Again meaning no reason to bring the relatives into the frame.
Projection.
-
You have no source and are posting bullshit again.
If Simpson found a silencer on the day of the massacre, why would they need to ask the relatives to say they found a silencer just after the massacre ?
You would have to ask ACC Simpson
ESSEX CHRONICLE
TUESDAY, 17TH SEPTEMBER 1985
“Mr Simpson hit out at national newspaper reports and added:
“A silencer was found at the farmhouse on the day
of the killings, but this does not have to mean
anything that is suspicious.
As for being blood –stained, I just don’t know. We
are waiting to hear from ballistics experts.”
-
Projection.
What is was David was an own goal - In other words your projection came back to bite you
Still - you are also a victim of Jeremy Bambers and it is for these reason you cannot see the wood through the trees. You fail to notice your contradictions and hypocrisy. I did it myseldf when I campaigned for SH.
-
You would have to ask ACC Simpson
ESSEX CHRONICLE
TUESDAY, 17TH SEPTEMBER 1985
“Mr Simpson hit out at national newspaper reports and added:
“A silencer was found at the farmhouse on the day
of the killings, but this does not have to mean
anything that is suspicious.
As for being blood –stained, I just don’t know. We
are waiting to hear from ballistics experts.”
So
-
How on earth am I anyway emotionally involved with Jeremy Bamber and his claims of innocence ha ha ha
No. you are just emotionally involved and getting things wrong in general.
-
We all make mistakes David, even police officers
Newspapers are even prone to print typos
You are cherry picking as usual
-
No. you are just emotionally involved and getting things wrong in general.
q
More projection
-
30 pieces of drivel is all it shows.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction)
Projection.
You're wikipedia source shows nothing.
It was impossible for the relatives to independently fabricate the silencer straight after the massacre. Even if they could there were too many huge risks for law abiding citizens.
It is impossible for the police to fabricate the silencer straight after the massacre, then ask several relatives to lie in WS's & in court. It would make the police's fabrication 10x riskier. They didn't need to ask the relatives & could say they found the silencer themselves.
How did the silencer the relatives find have the aga paint & Sheila's blood in ?