Author Topic: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs  (Read 1289 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LuminousWanderer

The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« on: March 23, 2018, 08:35:45 PM »
This is previous to my original thread: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9273.0

I have now had a chance to re-look at the telephonic records compiled by PC West and the civilian police operator, Malcolm Bonnett.

Here are links to the information I am relying on, all from this website:

Bonnett's statement and document: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=177.0

West's document: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=176.0

West's trial transcript: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=170.0

It's clear that both telephone records were added-to and updated, and they appear to record at least four different phone calls.  Bonnett's records a call from Nevill to Bonnett, and a call from West to Bonnett.  West's records a call from Bamber to West, and another from West to Bonnett.

One possible issue for Bamber is the reference to PC West in the 'Sender' box at the top left of Bonnett's log - i.e. "CD (1990)". I would assume that is there because Bonnett eventually also took a call from West, but that detail could be interpreted differently.

My question is: Why is it believed that these documents do not record a call from Nevill Bamber?  What, specifically, is it that convinces you in this belief?

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2018, 12:33:19 AM »
This is previous to my original thread: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9273.0

I have now had a chance to re-look at the telephonic records compiled by PC West and the civilian police operator, Malcolm Bonnett.

Here are links to the information I am relying on, all from this website:

Bonnett's statement and document: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=177.0

West's document: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=176.0

West's trial transcript: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=170.0

It's clear that both telephone records were added-to and updated, and they appear to record at least four different phone calls.  Bonnett's records a call from Nevill to Bonnett, and a call from West to Bonnett.  West's records a call from Bamber to West, and another from West to Bonnett.

One possible issue for Bamber is the reference to PC West in the 'Sender' box at the top left of Bonnett's log - i.e. "CD (1990)". I would assume that is there because Bonnett eventually also took a call from West, but that detail could be interpreted differently.

My question is: Why is it believed that these documents do not record a call from Nevill Bamber?  What, specifically, is it that convinces you in this belief?

Many reasons - the first being that if you refer to the 'sender' information on West's call, the 'sender (or caller) is listed as Jeremy Bamber. If you refer to the same column on the log you believe is a record of a call from Nevil, it states quite clearly that the sender (or caller) is from CD 1990 which is West's call sign. West called Bonnett while still on the phone to Jeremy and passed the details of Jeremy's call over to Bonnett. Neither log contains the surname of Sheila as Caffell, because Jeremy couldn't remember her married name, it isn't really likely that both Jeremy and Nevil would forget her surname. The log even states that the information was passed to 'CD. (West) by the son of Mr Bamber. Bonnett also documents the word 'berserk' instead of .crazy' which is a word used by him again on the back of his log when describing how the dogs were baking at WHF.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 12:38:22 AM by Caroline »

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2018, 02:58:39 AM »
Many reasons - the first being that if you refer to the 'sender' information on West's call, the 'sender (or caller) is listed as Jeremy Bamber. If you refer to the same column on the log you believe is a record of a call from Nevil, it states quite clearly that the sender (or caller) is from CD 1990 which is West's call sign.

I've already mentioned that in my post above.  And I think that can be explained by the fact that the logs are ongoing rather than a static record.  I don't believe that the reference to 'CD (1990)' can override what is plainly apparent if you accept these documents at their face: there were two different callers.

West called Bonnett while still on the phone to Jeremy and passed the details of Jeremy's call over to Bonnett.

I know, but that doesn't mean that Nevill didn't earlier call Bonnett.  You'll see from West's trial transcript that the call times was a controversy at trial and was the subject of West's cross-examination by Bamber's counsel.

Neither log contains the surname of Sheila as Caffell, because Jeremy couldn't remember her married name, it isn't really likely that both Jeremy and Nevil would forget her surname.

But you resolve that discrepancy yourself in your own comment.  We may well ask: was Sheila still being referred to within the immediate family as a "Caffell"?  My understanding is that she had split or divorced from Colin.  Has it occurred to you that, whatever the formal position, Nevill just called her 'Bamber' and that might explain why Jeremy couldn't remember her married name?  It may also be that the two police operators just assumed her name was Bamber, having simply been told it was Jeremy Bamber's sister and Nevill Bamber's daughter.  In any case, it doesn't prove that there weren't two callers.

The log even states that the information was passed to 'CD. (West) by the son of Mr Bamber.

To be clear, it's not disputed that Jeremy Bamber spoke to PC West.  That's Bamber's own statement.  Bearing in mind these were evolving incident logs, it looks to me like Bonnett is recording another call, this time from PC West, who related the call from Jeremy Bamber.  That does seem, to me, a reasonable interpretation of the document.

Bonnett also documents the word 'berserk' instead of .crazy' which is a word used by him again on the back of his log when describing how the dogs were baking at WHF.

Sorry but I'm not clear how that works against Bamber?
« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 03:15:43 AM by LuminousWanderer »

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2018, 08:34:39 AM »
I've already mentioned that in my post above.  And I think that can be explained by the fact that the logs are ongoing rather than a static record.  I don't believe that the reference to 'CD (1990)' can override what is plainly apparent if you accept these documents at their face: there were two different callers.

I know, but that doesn't mean that Nevill didn't earlier call Bonnett.  You'll see from West's trial transcript that the call times was a controversy at trial and was the subject of West's cross-examination by Bamber's counsel.

But you resolve that discrepancy yourself in your own comment.  We may well ask: was Sheila still being referred to within the immediate family as a "Caffell"?  My understanding is that she had split or divorced from Colin.  Has it occurred to you that, whatever the formal position, Nevill just called her 'Bamber' and that might explain why Jeremy couldn't remember her married name?  It may also be that the two police operators just assumed her name was Bamber, having simply been told it was Jeremy Bamber's sister and Nevill Bamber's daughter.  In any case, it doesn't prove that there weren't two callers.

To be clear, it's not disputed that Jeremy Bamber spoke to PC West.  That's Bamber's own statement.  Bearing in mind these were evolving incident logs, it looks to me like Bonnett is recording another call, this time from PC West, who related the call from Jeremy Bamber.  That does seem, to me, a reasonable interpretation of the document.

Sorry but I'm not clear how that works against Bamber?

"I think you misunderstand the way the legal system works.  To be fair, it's a common misunderstanding."

This point was discussed at trial. The jury disagreed with yours (& Jeremy Bamber's) interpretation.



 


« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 10:10:45 AM by Stephanie »
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2018, 10:18:04 AM »
I've already mentioned that in my post above.  And I think that can be explained by the fact that the logs are ongoing rather than a static record.  I don't believe that the reference to 'CD (1990)' can override what is plainly apparent if you accept these documents at their face: there were two different callers.

I know, but that doesn't mean that Nevill didn't earlier call Bonnett.  You'll see from West's trial transcript that the call times was a controversy at trial and was the subject of West's cross-examination by Bamber's counsel.

But you resolve that discrepancy yourself in your own comment.  We may well ask: was Sheila still being referred to within the immediate family as a "Caffell"?  My understanding is that she had split or divorced from Colin.  Has it occurred to you that, whatever the formal position, Nevill just called her 'Bamber' and that might explain why Jeremy couldn't remember her married name?  It may also be that the two police operators just assumed her name was Bamber, having simply been told it was Jeremy Bamber's sister and Nevill Bamber's daughter.  In any case, it doesn't prove that there weren't two callers.

To be clear, it's not disputed that Jeremy Bamber spoke to PC West.  That's Bamber's own statement.  Bearing in mind these were evolving incident logs, it looks to me like Bonnett is recording another call, this time from PC West, who related the call from Jeremy Bamber.  That does seem, to me, a reasonable interpretation of the document.

Sorry but I'm not clear how that works against Bamber?

By cherry picking, as you appear to be doing, you lose focus of the bigger picture and merely go round in the same circles that many of us have witnessed time and time again..

Do you have anything new to bring to the board?

"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Senior Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6050
  • Total likes: 109
  • Bamber Campaign For Freedom, How Can I Help?!
Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2018, 11:08:07 AM »
Many reasons - the first being that if you refer to the 'sender' information on West's call, the 'sender (or caller) is listed as Jeremy Bamber. If you refer to the same column on the log you believe is a record of a call from Nevil, it states quite clearly that the sender (or caller) is from CD 1990 which is West's call sign. West called Bonnett while still on the phone to Jeremy and passed the details of Jeremy's call over to Bonnett. Neither log contains the surname of Sheila as Caffell, because Jeremy couldn't remember her married name, it isn't really likely that both Jeremy and Nevil would forget her surname. The log even states that the information was passed to 'CD. (West) by the son of Mr Bamber. Bonnett also documents the word 'berserk' instead of .crazy' which is a word used by him again on the back of his log when describing how the dogs were baking at WHF.

I agree. 

Not only was SC referrred to as Bamber in both logs but her age was incorrect too.  I will have to check back but I think JB said something like 26/27 which probably explains the 26 on one log and 27 on the other.  SC was in fact 28.

Even by today's standards this soc would be off the richter scale in UK.  Had NB called EP the idea the call handler wouldn't relay such to senior personnel when the whole of EP was aware of events unfolding is IMO unrealistic.  JB wasn't a serious suspect for over a month so no reason whatsoever to withhold this info. 


Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2018, 11:18:53 AM »
This is previous to my original thread: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9273.0

I have now had a chance to re-look at the telephonic records compiled by PC West and the civilian police operator, Malcolm Bonnett.

Here are links to the information I am relying on, all from this website:

Bonnett's statement and document: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=177.0

West's document: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=176.0

West's trial transcript: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=170.0

It's clear that both telephone records were added-to and updated, and they appear to record at least four different phone calls.  Bonnett's records a call from Nevill to Bonnett, and a call from West to Bonnett.  West's records a call from Bamber to West, and another from West to Bonnett.

One possible issue for Bamber is the reference to PC West in the 'Sender' box at the top left of Bonnett's log - i.e. "CD (1990)". I would assume that is there because Bonnett eventually also took a call from West, but that detail could be interpreted differently.

My question is: Why is it believed that these documents do not record a call from Nevill Bamber?  What, specifically, is it that convinces you in this belief?

From 2010:

But Mr Boutflour said: “If Nevill had phoned police and the phone was off the hook – how could Jeremy have then had a call from his father?

“And who in those circumstances would then take the time to phone their local police station and not dial 999.

“He was driving at about 10mph to the house and the police went rushing past him – that does not seem to me to be like somebody in a hurry to get there.”

Mr Boutflour, a farmer from Wix, added: “Anybody who gives him a new appeal - well I would seriously question their sanity.

“I find all this quite extraordinary, people forget the gravity of the crime and talk about it as if he went and had a cup of tea or punched somebody in the face.

“Two innocent children were shot in their beds. Wake up, this guy is a bloody murderer.

“He killed five people and why is anybody giving him any credibility?

“It is messing about with stupid technicalities and an appeal would be a waste of public time and money.” http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/bamber-is-a-bloody-murderer-says-angry-cousin-1-559104
« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 11:22:04 AM by Stephanie »
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2018, 12:16:00 PM »
I agree. 

Not only was SC referrred to as Bamber in both logs but her age was incorrect too.  I will have to check back but I think JB said something like 26/27 which probably explains the 26 on one log and 27 on the other.  SC was in fact 28.

Even by today's standards this soc would be off the richter scale in UK.  Had NB called EP the idea the call handler wouldn't relay such to senior personnel when the whole of EP was aware of events unfolding is IMO unrealistic.  JB wasn't a serious suspect for over a month so no reason whatsoever to withhold this info.

Of course, there was no need or sensible reason why Bonnett would not have mentioned Nevil's call - he was a civilian and not a police officer but at that time, no grand conspiracy would have been required.

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2018, 12:31:04 PM »
I've already mentioned that in my post above.  And I think that can be explained by the fact that the logs are ongoing rather than a static record.  I don't believe that the reference to 'CD (1990)' can override what is plainly apparent if you accept these documents at their face: there were two different callers.

It completely overrides it, whether you believe it or not - Bonnett wrote the log in an odd way but there is nothing on that log that isn't on the other. The ages are different but as Holly has pointed out, Jeremy reported Sheila's age as 26/27.

I know, but that doesn't mean that Nevill didn't earlier call Bonnett.  You'll see from West's trial transcript that the call times was a controversy at trial and was the subject of West's cross-examination by Bamber's counsel.

Yes, the timings were questioned (and Jeremy has since changed some of his times) however, can you think of any good reason why a civilian police officer wouldn't have mentioned such a call - then or now?

But you resolve that discrepancy yourself in your own comment.  We may well ask: was Sheila still being referred to within the immediate family as a "Caffell"?  My understanding is that she had split or divorced from Colin.  Has it occurred to you that, whatever the formal position, Nevill just called her 'Bamber' and that might explain why Jeremy couldn't remember her married name?  It may also be that the two police operators just assumed her name was Bamber, having simply been told it was Jeremy Bamber's sister and Nevill Bamber's daughter.  In any case, it doesn't prove that there weren't two callers.

But Sheila did use Caffell as her surname and both would have known that. As I said before, it's highly unlikely that both would forget her name.

To be clear, it's not disputed that Jeremy Bamber spoke to PC West.  That's Bamber's own statement.  Bearing in mind these were evolving incident logs, it looks to me like Bonnett is recording another call, this time from PC West, who related the call from Jeremy Bamber.  That does seem, to me, a reasonable interpretation of the document.

Then we agree? The log is not an account of a call from Nevil?


Sorry but I'm not clear how that works against Bamber?

It doesn't, but because West wrote 'crazy' and Bonnett used 'berserk' - it doesn't mean that it was a call from Nevil because it seems to be a work preferred by Bonnett, given that he used it again later in the log.

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2018, 12:35:42 PM »
By cherry picking, as you appear to be doing, you lose focus of the bigger picture and merely go round in the same circles that many of us have witnessed time and time again..

Do you have anything new to bring to the board?

Simply because of the way that Bonnett wrote the log, people dismiss everything else. However, had the call been reported by Nevil Bamber, his name would have been in the sender information and there would have been no need to indicate that 'the call was passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber'. The Jury and the defence saw the log and had no problem with it or the accounts of West and Bonnett as to the logs being from one caller - Jeremy Bamber.

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1612
  • Total likes: 31
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2018, 12:46:08 PM »
Simply because of the way that Bonnett wrote the log, people dismiss everything else. However, had the call been reported by Nevil Bamber, his name would have been in the sender information and there would have been no need to indicate that 'the call was passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber'. The Jury and the defence saw the log and had no problem with it or the accounts of West and Bonnett as to the logs being from one caller - Jeremy Bamber.

Succinctly put, as usual, Carolne!  8((()*/
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2018, 01:05:49 PM »
Succinctly put, as usual, Carolne!  8((()*/

Cheers me dear  8((()*/

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2018, 02:43:16 PM »
"I think you misunderstand the way the legal system works.  To be fair, it's a common misunderstanding."

This point was discussed at trial. The jury disagreed with yours (& Jeremy Bamber's) interpretation.

But...

(i). I'm not taking sides.

(ii). My point about you not understanding the way the legal system works relates to a different discussion and stands.  You don't.  You're an idiot.

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2018, 02:45:27 PM »
By cherry picking, as you appear to be doing, you lose focus of the bigger picture and merely go round in the same circles that many of us have witnessed time and time again..

Do you have anything new to bring to the board?

Who's cherry-picking?  You could argue that YOU'RE cherry-picking. The case is circumstantial, so it depends on who is talking and what their motive is.

My motive is neither for not against Bamber.  I'm no interest in cherry-picking, I'm just finding reasons why the evidence might favour him in order to stress-test the case against him, which is a different thing.

You're misunderstanding why I'm here and the purpose of my posts and it's causing needless issues. 

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2018, 02:54:17 PM »
I agree. 

Not only was SC referrred to as Bamber in both logs but her age was incorrect too.  I will have to check back but I think JB said something like 26/27 which probably explains the 26 on one log and 27 on the other.  SC was in fact 28.

But why would Nevill give her age in an emergency call, when he was talking about his own daughter?  Have you forgotten that these were incident logs as well as telephone records and so were constantly updated, with information being passed from West to Bonnett? 

Just to be clear - I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just pointing to a possible explanation that fits within Bamber's account of events.

Even by today's standards this soc would be off the richter scale in UK.  Had NB called EP the idea the call handler wouldn't relay such to senior personnel when the whole of EP was aware of events unfolding is IMO unrealistic.  JB wasn't a serious suspect for over a month so no reason whatsoever to withhold this info.

But if it was assumed for more than a month that Sheila was the killer, then why didn't this same call handler, Bonnett, come forward and tell Essex Police that they'd got it wrong and there was only one emergency call?  And wouldn't the gap of a month also affect memories?  It only sounds odd that people can forget calls when you're focused on the case in retrospect and all the evidence seems perfectly formed, but to the call handler at the time, this was just another emergency call.  Yes, it was probably the biggest incident of his career, and that is something to take into account when looking at memory, but it's not beyond possibility that he could simply have forgot he'd taken a particular call.  He may also be lying, though I personally doubt that.

Of course, if Bonnett wasn't taking calls from the public (or having such calls passed to him) then that changes the evidence.