Post Mortem

[JackiePreece]

Nothing I said implies that many more believe than don't, and why is that even relevant, it's not as if we get to vote on whether he gets out is it? Clearly there are plenty of people who do believe in them, otherwise Jeremy Kyle would be out of a job.

Yes like these people believe in them



Police trial lie detector tests on suspected sex offenders
Hertfordshire force hails success of polygraphs in assessing risk to children of 25 'low-level' sexual offenders

Association of Chief Police Officers says use of polygraph tests in UK is at a very early stage 


guardian.co.uk, Sat 31 Dec 2011 11.12 GMT


Suspected sex offenders have been targeted with lie detector tests in a police trial to gauge the risk they pose to the public.
Hertfordshire police has been using polygraphs, which monitor heart rate, brain activity, sweating and blood pressure, during questioning to help decide whether to charge suspects.
The force confirmed it had completed a successful pilot scheme in November in which 25 "low level" sex offenders were tested. Many were found to pose a higher risk to children than previously estimated. A further 12-month trial is expected to start in April.
Of the 10 offenders tested in April, six revealed more serious offending. Testing ended so further inquiries could take place, according to the Times. Of the other four, two revealed offences, thus passing the test, and received cautions and attended a sexual offender treatment programme.
The last two made disclosures and passed the test but refused to admit the offences when interviewed later. Their cases went to court. All four were placed on the sex offenders register.
Of the 15 offenders tested in November, eight failed while six passed. One was caught trying to beat the polygraph, breathing erratically and talking slowly.
Detective Chief Inspector Glen Channer, head of Hertfordshire's child protection unit, said the polygraph was an "added weapon in our armoury of investigative techniques". He said the tests were carried out by accredited practitioners in a scientific environment and were not relied upon on their own.
Hertfordshire police said : "The testing is undertaken ahead of any charges being brought and involves specialist officers from the constabulary's paedophile unit working with an expert who conducts the test on first-time offenders who have volunteered to co-operate with police. Evidence elicited during the examinations is not admissible at court."
The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) cautioned that the tests were at a very early stage. A spokesman said: "Polygraph techniques are complex and are by no means a single solution to solving crimes, potentially offering in certain circumstances an additional tool to structured interrogation.
"These initial trials are in their very early stages and we will follow their progress, working with chief officers across the country to provide further guidance if necessary.
"Whether these techniques are adopted elsewhere in the country is a matter for individual chief constables."

[HMEssex]

ChochokEira  Yes I agree Sheila,s clothes could have been in the buckets which Ann took home thinking it was menstrual blood would not think it would smell any different especially if in water as it would be really diluted.  I wonder if anyone ever asked Jeremy what Sheila was wearing when he left that fateful night.It would be interesting to know.

That's a very good question.  Who could ask him?

[Patti]

At the end of the day there were two pairs of green knickers with blood on them left soaking in a bucket. In the other bucket was a pair of jogging bottoms. Both buckets were in the kitchen area.

It does't matter what type of blood it was, the fact is that the evidence was taken and thrown away....by AE who admits there was blood on them.

Could be vital evidence, might not of been....

She saved the contents of a hoover bag, but throw away blood stained clothing....

[Nuala]

That's a very good question.  Who could ask him?

It is a good question and we know who can ask Jeremy, NGB!

[Nuala]

At the end of the day there were two pairs of green knickers with blood on them left soaking in a bucket. In the other bucket was a pair of jogging bottoms. Both buckets were in the kitchen area.

It does't matter what type of blood it was, the fact is that the evidence was taken and thrown away....by AE who admits there was blood on them.

Could be vital evidence, might not of been....

She saved the contents of a hoover bag, but throw away blood stained clothing....

Once again though it comes down to dreadfully inept policing, doesn't it, to appalling negligence and failure to follow the police's own standard investigatory and evidence gathering procedures, time after time? The Keystone Cops strike again. 

EP manipulated, edited, contaminated and destroyed evidence left, right and centre in this case, evidence that should have been carefully gathered and meticulously examined. Evidence that was vital for Jeremy Bamber's defence to properly defend Jeremy and for everyone involved in this case to reached a considered and true opinion of just what did happen at WHF on 7th August 1985.

[bloggs and son]

Didnt we have vanish in 1985 i have a feeling we did. Its been around a long time. I think it strange that a sophisticared london girl like sheila would be putting knickers in a bucket to soak. It sounds wrong.imo

Seems any girl wouldn't like that sort of thing on display for everyone to see? More likely she would have washed them out immediately and then have secreted them away into the washing machine? Just my thoughts on the matter, that's all.

[maggie]

Seems any girl wouldn't like that sort of thing on display for everyone to see? More likely she would have washed them out immediately and then have secreted them away into the washing machine? Just my thoughts on the matter, that's all.

Couldnt have put it better myself bloggsy

[HMEssex]

Once again though it comes down to dreadfully inept policing, doesn't it, to appalling negligence and failure to follow the police's own standard investigatory and evidence gathering procedures, time after time? The Keystone Cops strike again. 

EP manipulated, edited, contaminated and destroyed evidence left, right and centre in this case, evidence that should have been carefully gathered and meticulously examined. Evidence that was vital for Jeremy Bamber's defence to properly defend Jeremy and for everyone involved in this case to reached a considered and true opinion of just what did happen at WHF on 7th August 1985.

All true, Keira.

Yet, from the start EP must have believed that Sheila was responsible?  They should have, however, gathered evidence for all eventualities.

You would think policing had improved since 1985 and, hopefully, in a lot of forces it has, but this latest case of Sam Hallam makes me despair.

[mertol22]

All true, Keira.

Yet, from the start EP must have believed that Sheila was responsible?  They should have, however, gathered evidence for all eventualities.

You would think policing had improved since 1985 and, hopefully, in a lot of forces it has, but this latest case of Sam Hallam makes me despair.

it would appear not standards have declined in those days when you called the police you got to the  police station thesedays its some moron who does not know Christmas from Pancake Tuesday.

[lookout]

Too right,Mertol22.

[Bridget]

No one, in my experience, no matter how tidy or untidy, soaks clothes unless they absolutely have to because no one wants buckets of water slopping all over the place.

And yet we know that people did, and probably still do.

Once clothes are soaking, you have to wash them as soon as possible, say, the next day, don't you? Considersatins such as sufficient clothes to make up a load are entirely secondary once buckets of water are slopping about on your work surface or you're tripping over buckets on the floor.

Perhaps she knew that there were other clothes to wash, perhaps in the boys room, and she didn't want to disturb them - just a thought.

Can I take it that the above reply means yes? Because you would recall the smell if was as strong smelling as the clothes in the bucket that AE came across, wouldn't you?

So, you agree that clothing stained with menstrual blood, once steeped in water - so that the hormonal content is washed out and the hormones and blood are highly diluted - does not smell of blood.

I am not suggesting that AE sniffed the water and contents of the bucket/s. Under the circumstances, indeed in any circumstances, that's the last thing anyone would want to do.

What I am suggesting is that it would be fair to conclude, wouldn't it, that as AE would not actively sniff the bucket/s and contents, that the smell of the contents of the bucket/s was presenting itself to her?

It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the contents of the bucket/s was/were quite high.

So you are using the fact that AE could smell blood to promote the theory that there must have been heavily bloodstained clothing worn by Sheila when she killed her family, including a top and socks which have never been mentioned, in the buckets? If so, why were her knickers in there? They wouldn't have been blood stained if she was wearing the joggers.

Sticking to the facts, it is far more plausible that Sheila discovered that she'd had an accident late in the evening, and put her knickers and joggers in to soak intending to wash them the next day. Because of the tragedy the clothes remained in the bucket for a considerable period of time and the smell arose when the water was disturbed, probably by Ann tipping it out.

[Bridget]

Yes like these people believe in them



Police trial lie detector tests on suspected sex offenders
Hertfordshire force hails success of polygraphs in assessing risk to children of 25 'low-level' sexual offenders

Association of Chief Police Officers says use of polygraph tests in UK is at a very early stage


guardian.co.uk, Sat 31 Dec 2011 11.12 GMT


Suspected sex offenders have been targeted with lie detector tests in a police trial to gauge the risk they pose to the public.
Hertfordshire police has been using polygraphs, which monitor heart rate, brain activity, sweating and blood pressure, during questioning to help decide whether to charge suspects.
The force confirmed it had completed a successful pilot scheme in November in which 25 "low level" sex offenders were tested. Many were found to pose a higher risk to children than previously estimated. A further 12-month trial is expected to start in April.
Of the 10 offenders tested in April, six revealed more serious offending. Testing ended so further inquiries could take place, according to the Times. Of the other four, two revealed offences, thus passing the test, and received cautions and attended a sexual offender treatment programme.
The last two made disclosures and passed the test but refused to admit the offences when interviewed later. Their cases went to court. All four were placed on the sex offenders register.
Of the 15 offenders tested in November, eight failed while six passed. One was caught trying to beat the polygraph, breathing erratically and talking slowly.
Detective Chief Inspector Glen Channer, head of Hertfordshire's child protection unit, said the polygraph was an "added weapon in our armoury of investigative techniques". He said the tests were carried out by accredited practitioners in a scientific environment and were not relied upon on their own.
Hertfordshire police said : "The testing is undertaken ahead of any charges being brought and involves specialist officers from the constabulary's paedophile unit working with an expert who conducts the test on first-time offenders who have volunteered to co-operate with police. Evidence elicited during the examinations is not admissible at court."
The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) cautioned that the tests were at a very early stage. A spokesman said: "Polygraph techniques are complex and are by no means a single solution to solving crimes, potentially offering in certain circumstances an additional tool to structured interrogation.
"These initial trials are in their very early stages and we will follow their progress, working with chief officers across the country to provide further guidance if necessary.
"Whether these techniques are adopted elsewhere in the country is a matter for individual chief constables."

Let's look at that a little more closely:

25 known offenders were tested, 10 in April and 15 in November last year.

Of the 10 tested in April, 6 were found by the test to have committed more serious offences, further investigation were made but they don't say what the results of those investigations were. The other 4 admitted further offences, presumably because they watch too much Jeremy Kyle.

Of the 15 tested in November 8 failed and 6 passed so.... what?

It seems to me that the only benefit the trial of the LD test highlights is the fact that some people can be scared into admitting things.

See also:

He said the tests were carried out by accredited practitioners in a scientific environment and were not relied upon on their own.

[susan]

Good Morning Bridget  I have on many occasions put clothes to steep in cold water as it is said the cold water loosens the stains and they will wash out easier when put in the washing machine I have applied this to coffee stains and many others.  I would never turn on a washing machine for just one or two items it is not good for the machine or my electric bill try and get a full load but I must add the bucket would be left in the laundry room not on the kitchen table.

[lookout]

I still maintain that this clothing was used for " mopping-up " purposes.

[susan]

Hi lookout  I think the panties maybe menstrual blood but the other clothing no for her to need so much clothing she must have been hemorrhaging.  I have been given to understand two buckets of clothes soaking were found so what was the purpose of two she would only need one for her panties.