Innocent or Guilty?

[Patti]

Obviously there are a lot of people who think Jeremy Bamber is guilty, but equally there are people who think he is innocent. Why is this?

In my opinion its not a case as to whether Jeremy Bamber is guilty or not its a case of whether or not the case was handled correctly from the onset or was it that gross misconduct was/is a key factor in securing Jeremy Bamber's fate.

I would like for everyone to answer my following questions with a yes or no please.

1. The crime scene was made secure. True or false?

2. A full forensic examination was done. True or false?

3. The pathologist was called on site to determine the time of deaths?

4. Exhibit labels were they changed?

Thank you.

[nugnug]

well 1 is defanatly false 2 im guessing is false 3 and 4 i dont know.

[No-Bits]

Obviously there are a lot of people who think Jeremy Bamber is guilty, but equally there are people who think he is innocent. Why is this?

In my opinion its not a case as to whether Jeremy Bamber is guilty or not its a case of whether or not the case was handled correctly from the onset or was it that gross misconduct was/is a key factor in securing Jeremy Bamber's fate.

I would like for everyone to answer my following questions with a yes or no please.

1. The crime scene was made secure. True or false?

2. A full forensic examination was done. True or false?

3. The pathologist was called on site to determine the time of deaths?

4. Exhibit labels were they changed?

Thank you.

1. The question doesn't make sense. Made secure when?

2. Again that question doesn't make sense, what is your definition of 'full'? Clearly an amount of forensic examination did take place.

3. No he most certainly was not.

4. Yes certain references were changed, quite rightly for valid reasons.

[guest154]

1.

Secure. Before they went in? Yes it was. After that? No I think it was trampled on.

2.

A full? For 1986, yes I'd say so.

3.

Nope.

4.

Yup. but that isn't bad. Scipio posted a detailed account of this brilliantly.

[Patti]

1. The question doesn't make sense. Made secure when?

2. Again that question doesn't make sense, what is your definition of 'full'? Clearly an amount of forensic examination did take place.

3. No he most certainly was not.

4. Yes certain references were changed, quite rightly for valid reasons.

Hartley you know the crime scene was not made secure at the onset. To say my question does not make sense is not fair to me..

Regarding the 2nd question, no major forensic examination was done at the onset...

1. The crime scene was made secure?  It certainly was not.
2. A full forensic examination was done? It certainly was not.
3. The pathologist was called on site to determine the time of deaths? He certainly was not called.
4. Exhibit labels were they changed? The labels were certainly changed.

When you evaluate the 4 questions it becomes apparent that there were flaws at the onset and more flaws as the case progressed. 

[nugnug]

well that might explian them not being able to work out the time of death.

[Patti]

1.

Secure. Before they went in? Yes it was. After that? No I think it was trampled on.

2.

A full? For 1986, yes I'd say so.

3.

Nope.

4.

Yup. but that isn't bad. Scipio posted a detailed account of this brilliantly.

Mat if we can discuss my first question please.

Can you confirm to me that the crime scene in your opinion was not sealed off and that the inside of the farm house was trampled on by as many as 20 to 30 people during the first day?

I'm not getting at you or your plunger...lol 

[guest154]

 

Yeah, I think many people entered and because of what they'd been told outside by Bamber they didn't treat the scene in the way they should.

[No-Bits]

Hartley you know the crime scene was not made secure at the onset. To say my question does not make sense is not fair to me..

Regarding the 2nd question, no major forensic examination was done at the onset...

1. The crime scene was made secure?  It certainly was not.
2. A full forensic examination was done? It certainly was not.
3. The pathologist was called on site to determine the time of deaths? He certainly was not called.
4. Exhibit labels were they changed? The labels were certainly changed.

When you evaluate the 4 questions it becomes apparent that there were flaws at the onset and more flaws as the case progressed. 

I think the mistake you are making Patti, is that your questions were obviously intended to be rhetoric.

The police are certainly not above being criticised, but many of the mistakes they made are quite understandable, especially given the fact that there was an attempt made to deceive the investigators.

[Patti]

Yeah, I think many people entered and because of what they'd been told outside by Bamber they didn't treat the scene in the way they should.

OK. So what you are saying then, is that everyone who entered the house had a briefing on what Bamber had said outside of the farm house. Is there any evidence of that Mat?  Bare with me. 

[No-Bits]

OK. So what you are saying then, is that everyone who entered the house had a briefing on what Bamber had said outside of the farm house. Is there any evidence of that Mat?  Bare with me. 

No, that's not what he's saying at all.

Those in charge were acting on the information available and ordered personnel to carry out certain tasks based on the intelligence that they had gathered.

Unfortunately the intelligence that they gathered turned out to be inaccurate due to manipulation from Jeremy.

[Patti]

I think the mistake you are making Patti, is that your questions were obviously intended to be rhetoric.

The police are certainly not above being criticised, but many of the mistakes they made are quite understandable, especially given the fact that there was an attempt made to deceive the investigators.

If my life was at stake Hartley I would not like to think that the police had make mistakes.

One major mistake was not following procedure of calling the pathologist out to determine the time of deaths.

Its not relevant what Bamber has said outside is it to a hand full of people? Its about why procedures were not followed by EP. 

[Patti]

No, that's not what he's saying at all.

Those in charge were acting on the information available and ordered personnel to carry out certain tasks based on the intelligence that they had gathered.

Unfortunately the intelligence that they gathered turned out to be inaccurate due to manipulation from Jeremy.

What you are saying then Hartley is that they had already assessed the situation outside before anyone entered the house and decided that it was unnecessary to cordon off a crime scene base on what Bamber had told a handful of people.....And, that it was not necessary to bring in the pathologist or do a through forensic examination of the property.....Was Bamber in charge here or the police?

Sorry I am being hard.....its time for a snooze. Night all. 

[No-Bits]

If my life was at stake Hartley I would not like to think that the police had make mistakes.

One major mistake was not following procedure of calling the pathologist out to determine the time of deaths.

Its not relevant what Bamber has said outside is it to a hand full of people? Its about why procedures were not followed by EP. 

The information provided by Jeremy is extremely relevant, in fact it is the most relevant part of this entire case.

The procedures that existed in that era were largely followed. The pathologist wrote a report giving advice to a future pathologist that they should attend the scene, clearly it was not something which was always done.

Rather than trying to lead people down an alley by asking them to answer seemingly innocuous questions, why not not just be upfront from the onset, just say what you are trying to say.

[No-Bits]

What you are saying then Hartley is that they had already assessed the situation outside before anyone entered the house and decided that it was unnecessary to cordon off a crime scene base on what Bamber had told a handful of people.....And, that it was not necessary to bring in the pathologist or do a through forensic examination of the property.....Was Bamber in charge here or the police?

Sorry I am being hard.....its time for a snooze. Night all. 

No, wrong again. This is becoming a habit dear.

They used the Intel they had, entered the house, secured it and carried out evidence gathering to the level the felt appropriate based on the intelligence they had gained.

Had they not have been fed false information,  perhaps they would have acted differently, perhaps Myall and Bews would have kicked the door down and not even bothered calling a specialist firearms team.