Author Topic: Police arrival at WHF what next ?  (Read 13463 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2012, 09:26:AM »
Bridget, RM depends on each individual,but once the heart stops,along with brain impulses,the bodys' internal organs,particularly intestines start to break down,and the gases that permeate internally quickly spread. This is why,when someone dies at home,or in hospital even,their bodies are removed within the hour before RM sets in.
3 to 4 hours,and you'd smell the gases. Nowhere have I read that there was a strong smell coming from inside that house.   

Offline Bridget

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5065
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2012, 09:27:AM »
Police logs are the first point of contact and any notes written up after the event should reflect those notes. If they do not then those notes must not only reflect but be subordinate to the logs.

So, if after returning from a highly stressful situation you notice that something in a log has been written in an ambiguous manner, you should not clarify it?
....just cos I eat worms...

Offline sagar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2012, 09:27:AM »
I think it's about time we got a qualified body language expert to do an analysis on David Boutflour

That could be something interesting and something to have a good laugh over don't you think

would be interesting, but i certainly wouldnt laugh, he had his family wiped out that night/morning.

bloggs and son

  • Guest
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2012, 09:29:AM »
To me, with respect, it's a case of making a story fit.

The police used loud hailers to try and get a response. The person reported that they spoke to was bamber. And they got no response.

After all these years with £1m on offer, I'm sure someone would have come forward by now.
What, no response from Bamber? That makes that phrase nonsense.

Offline vidvic

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
  • R.i 99.9
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2012, 09:30:AM »
Yes Vidvic, Hartley and Bridget as bazaar as Robert Boutflour 'FORGETTING'  Sheila had ever handled a gun.

I would have loved to see the spitting and sputtering in the witness box being caught out on that one

I bet that was every bit as hilarious as your posts above

Now who would try and mislead a jury on such an important point giving evidence and why

Oh we all know the answer to that don't we !!!

When did RB get caught out? Nobody from anywhere could ever remember Sheila using a gun. If this is your best example of Sheila's gun use then I'd suggest they were right.

Robert Boutflour was a thoroughly decent, honest man.

To you jackie he's just a name to be attacked in your search for bamber's release, completely unrecognisable to the real person.
rumor vagatus stulti et acceptantur a Idiotae

bloggs and son

  • Guest
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #50 on: May 22, 2012, 09:30:AM »
You didn't Grahame, Mike did, in January.
With respect Vic the post came directly after mine and Mike is not on this thread.

Offline Bridget

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5065
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #51 on: May 22, 2012, 09:30:AM »
Bridget, RM depends on each individual,but once the heart stops,along with brain impulses,the bodys' internal organs,particularly intestines start to break down,and the gases that permeate internally quickly spread. This is why,when someone dies at home,or in hospital even,their bodies are removed within the hour before RM sets in.
3 to 4 hours,and you'd smell the gases. Nowhere have I read that there was a strong smell coming from inside that house.

Ok, so now none of them were dead when the police got there then?
....just cos I eat worms...

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #52 on: May 22, 2012, 09:31:AM »
Sagar,you don't have to be an expert to see that the man's an idiot.
The impression he gives me is that he's a " wide-boy ".Shifty. Clever at getting out of tight corners.

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2012, 09:32:AM »
Colin remembers going on a shoot with Sheila....in his book she was a beater, so that was less than 10 years ago....Unless you are saying he is not telling the truth! :)
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 09:33:AM by Patti »

Offline sagar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #54 on: May 22, 2012, 09:32:AM »
Why didnt the police hear gunshot or see Sheila taking a shower? They were outside at the time.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #55 on: May 22, 2012, 09:33:AM »
Bridget. Did I say that.?

Offline sagar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #56 on: May 22, 2012, 09:33:AM »
Sagar,you don't have to be an expert to see that the man's an idiot.
The impression he gives me is that he's a " wide-boy ".Shifty. Clever at getting out of tight corners.

Excuse me, but who's an idiot?

Offline vidvic

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
  • R.i 99.9
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #57 on: May 22, 2012, 09:33:AM »
What, no response from Bamber? That makes that phrase nonsense.

With respect, you got my point. Talking to bamber. No response from the house.
rumor vagatus stulti et acceptantur a Idiotae

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #58 on: May 22, 2012, 09:35:AM »
David Boutflour,Sagar.

bloggs and son

  • Guest
Re: Police arrival at WHF what next ?
« Reply #59 on: May 22, 2012, 09:35:AM »
To put that into context, he had forgotten that Sheila had come with them on a 3 day shoot some 9 or 10 years earlier. He maintained that he could not recall seeing her handle a gun on that trip, or on any other occasion.
But Bridget, if you read what was actually said in court it soon becomes clear that the defence barrister had to wheedle it out of him. There was a lot of umming and arring in his words. It was clear to me at least that he appeared to reveal the information reluctantly?