Key Evidence which was Kept from Jeremy Bamber, his Legal team, and the court

[scipio_usmc]

Under the heading " this shotgun was normally kept loaded under ralph bambers bed ",you'll find a set of questions asked of PE about the shotgun ( which had both prints of father and daughter as well as red paint on its barrel ) where he'd put it back into its case,contaminated as it was,and took it home.

A thread full of distortions.  You still refuse to face that allegations by Mike are not reliable evidence of anything.  Mike made up the claim a spent shotgun shell was found in the shotgun, made up the claim that the shotgun was normally kept loaded under Nevill's bed and is trying to suggest the family put the gun in its case before the murders.

The actual testimony was that police found the shotgun in the cupboard and removed it and left it against the wall as shown in the photos they did that to be able to take a photo of it.  They left it there and never put it away so when the family was allowed in they found the gun out.  PE said it didn't belong out so he put it in its case.  They subsequently took all weapons and all the weapons related materials away for safe keeping until turned over to police. 

[lookout]

 Safe-keeping ? In an empty farmhouse ? A bit late for that,wasn't it ?

[scipio_usmc]

Safe-keeping ? In an empty farmhouse ? A bit late for that,wasn't it ?

They took them to their own house. 

[lookout]

They took them to their own house.

For what reason ? They had no right removing items from a crime scene.

[scipio_usmc]

For what reason ? They had no right removing items from a crime scene.

This comment demonstrates yet again you know nothing about this case.  The police FINISHED processing it as a crime scene, took away the evidence the police decided they wanted and thus turned the house over to the relatives.  It would have been turned over the the deceased had they not been killed.

Basil Cock had no license to possess firearms.  He had the Eatons hold them.  The Eatons notified police about them and turned them over to police when police were willing to get them.  Police initially only cared about the moderator. Later they took the guns, ammo and scope.

[Caroline]

For what reason ? They had no right removing items from a crime scene.

How long do you think it should have remained a crime scene when they 'thought' the perpetrator had shot herself? They 'thought' Sheila was responsible - what would they be waiting for after collecting the evidence they thought relevant at 'that point'?

[lookout]

How long do you think it should have remained a crime scene when they 'thought' the perpetrator had shot herself? They 'thought' Sheila was responsible - what would they be waiting for after collecting the evidence they thought relevant at 'that point'?

Well they certainly all knew what " thought " did,didn't they ?

[Patti]

How long do you think it should have remained a crime scene when they 'thought' the perpetrator had shot herself? They 'thought' Sheila was responsible - what would they be waiting for after collecting the evidence they thought relevant at 'that point'?

They should have performed the correct procedures and they failed to do so. Cook himself says the case was handled badly. 

It did not matter what they thought at the time, they should have followed the correct procedures.

What they thought is a lame excuse.

[Caroline]

They should have performed the correct procedures and they failed to do so. Cook himself says the case was handled badly. 

It did not matter what they thought at the time, they should have followed the correct procedures.

What they thought is a lame excuse.

Well, either way, they got there in the end.

[Jane]

They should have performed the correct procedures and they failed to do so. Cook himself says the case was handled badly. 

It did not matter what they thought at the time, they should have followed the correct procedures.

What they thought is a lame excuse.

They SHOULD have said/NOT said this/done that/NOT done that. The bottom line is what they did/didn't do/say is 30 years past and can't be rerun/undone.

We keep being told, with TOTAL conviction, by those who have never even met him, that Jeremy would NEVER do/say this/that or the other. Now I see that Colin said Sheila would NEVER allow the boys to have toy guns, ergo it's IMPOSSIBLE that they would have played with them..................IMO, this is all RUBBISH!!!! NEVER is a huge, expansively exaggerating term which can't be 100% applied to ANYONE.

Colin didn't live with Sheila. He probably had little concept of how difficult she found mothering at times and would therefore have had little knowledge of how she may lower previously held standards in order to keep the boys happy. Also, it MAY be that it was Colin who was the pacifist and MAY have been he who wouldn't allow the boys to play with toy guns, Sheila being as compliant with some of his wishes as she appears to have been with some of June's.

NONE of us know who Sheila and Jeremy really were -it's looking likely that they didn't have much idea, either- so they have become the people we WANT them to be and at times they seem little more than puppets dancing to the string we pull.

[scipio_usmc]

They should have performed the correct procedures and they failed to do so. Cook himself says the case was handled badly. 

It did not matter what they thought at the time, they should have followed the correct procedures.

What they thought is a lame excuse.

1) The failure to do a more thorough investigation initially is exactly what Jeremy hoped to acocmplish with his lies and efforts and he is the one who profited from it.  Jeremy supporters keep complaining about things that were favorable to Jeremy and thus there is no way to suggest such things hurt him.

2) Lookout attacked the family for doing nothing wrong.  She said who does the family thing they are to go to a crime scene and take items.  She didn't criticize the police for failing to take the items from the outset, she attacked the family as if the family broke into a crime scene before police finished processing it and stole things.  This false characterization is what is being addressed by myself and others. 

Cock told the family to take the firearms and related items rather than leave them there in an unoccupied house.  The family didn't simply take them and then hide them away, the family told police they thought police should investigate these items.  The police took the moderator right away upon hearing it appeared to have blood in it because if true that means somebody was shot with it.  Since the only known shootings of humans was the murder that means it could be relevant to the murders. They saw no potential relevance to anything else at the time so didn't take anything else.  Later on they decided to take and process all firearms related items just in case.

The failure to initially look at this evidence favored Jeremy so there is no way to argue the ineptitude hurt Jeremy or that the police intentionally didn't process things in an effort to harm Jeremy.     

[lookout]

Evidence such as I mentioned earlier about Sheila saying that " All people are bad and should be killed ".
This remark was known by both AE and BW, who,one of them then told S.Jones. He probably told them " you didn't hear it ",like some of the exhibits that " you didn't see ".

[scipio_usmc]

Evidence such as I mentioned earlier about Sheila saying that " All people are bad and should be killed ".
This remark was known by both AE and BW, who,one of them then told S.Jones. He probably told them " you didn't hear it ",like some of the exhibits that " you didn't see ".

You have no idea if Sheila actually said that or not it is hearsay only, and whether she said it or not has no bearing on the evidence that proves she didn't commit the murders.

[Steve_uk]

1) The failure to do a more thorough investigation initially is exactly what Jeremy hoped to acocmplish with his lies and efforts and he is the one who profited from it.  Jeremy supporters keep complaining about things that were favorable to Jeremy and thus there is no way to suggest such things hurt him.

2) Lookout attacked the family for doing nothing wrong.  She said who does the family thing they are to go to a crime scene and take items.  She didn't criticize the police for failing to take the items from the outset, she attacked the family as if the family broke into a crime scene before police finished processing it and stole things.  This false characterization is what is being addressed by myself and others. 

Cock told the family to take the firearms and related items rather than leave them there in an unoccupied house.  The family didn't simply take them and then hide them away, the family told police they thought police should investigate these items.  The police took the moderator right away upon hearing it appeared to have blood in it because if true that means somebody was shot with it.  Since the only known shootings of humans was the murder that means it could be relevant to the murders. They saw no potential relevance to anything else at the time so didn't take anything else.  Later on they decided to take and process all firearms related items just in case.

The failure to initially look at this evidence favored Jeremy so there is no way to argue the ineptitude hurt Jeremy or that the police intentionally didn't process things in an effort to harm Jeremy.   

Isn't it rather misleading to state that the Police took the moderator right away.. It shows you haven't done as much research or read many of Mike's posts on the subject.

[Steve_uk]

By the way wasn't that rather an exclusive election at the start of this thread? From what I can make out only one person voted..