Author Topic: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs  (Read 1290 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2018, 05:48:54 PM »
To take this discussion further, I've given you two reasons (which I will repeat below) that would cause me to change my mind about this particular evidence. 

Let me repeat:

I might change my mind about the evidence if you can show me either that:

(i). Bonnett was not taking calls from the public (or being passed such calls);
OR
(ii). Bonnett alerted the police to the fact that there had only been one call and the circumstances show that this was a factor in investigators changing their minds about what must have happened.

Can anybody here produce such evidence?  If so, I'll gladly reconsider.  I hold no brief for Jeremy Bamber.

He took emergency calls. Why would he have had to state that there was only one call, it wasn't until 2007 (ish) that the suggestion of Nevil calling the police came into being.  If there had been two, he would have said so.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 06:13:45 PM by Caroline »

Offline Caroline

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2018, 06:18:24 PM »
I've just provided a possible reason or explanation above.  People like you who mention this point always overlook that Bamber's story was believed for some weeks.  Why was Bamber believed?  If we follow your own logic, wouldn't the operator have immediately come forward and alerted his colleagues to the fact that there was only one call?

You will say that eventually he did and that's why Bamber fell under suspicion, but is that how the process of suspicion happened?

I might change my mind about the evidence if you can show me either that:

(i). Bonnett was not taking calls from the public (or being passed such calls);
OR
(ii). Bonnett alerted the police to the fact that there had only been one call and the circumstances show that this was a factor in investigators changing their minds about what must have happened.

As it is, didn't we have a coroner's hearing and funerals?  What was Bonnett doing while all this was going on?

People like me? Bit rude!

No, I haven't over looked anything of the sort - but I will repeat that Bonnett would have no reason to come forward to say there was only one call because it was never suggested that there were two until around 2007. People like me, knew that fact which is why I asked 'people like you' that question. I assumed you knew the facts.

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 #32 on: March 24, 2018, 11:01:27 PM »
Jeremy Bamber is not claiming that he received a call from Nevill to the effect that Sheila had already started killing people.  Nevill's message was ambiguous.

What do you make of this phone call?

FEBRUARY 2018 - Terrified woman 'receives prison phone call from notorious mass murderer Jeremy Bamber'

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-woman-receives-phone-call-12094569
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 12:22:58 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 LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2018, 04:21:35 AM »
What do you make of this phone call?

FEBRUARY 2018 - Terrified woman 'receives prison phone call from notorious mass murderer Jeremy Bamber'

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-woman-receives-phone-call-12094569

It's completely irrelevant, even if true.  That's what I make of it.

And it's not even clear from the article that Bamber made the call or did anything wrong.

Why do you keep posting off-topic?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 04:42:36 AM by LuminousWanderer »

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #34 on: March 25, 2018, 04:26:02 AM »
He took emergency calls. Why would he have had to state that there was only one call, it wasn't until 2007 (ish) that the suggestion of Nevil calling the police came into being.  If there had been two, he would have said so.

Are you accepting that Bonnett did take calls from the public?  Has that point been established?

I don't agree with your premise about Bonnett.  The issue here is one of interpretation.  What I'm trying to isolate is whether there is a gap in the chain of logic when we apply YOUR interpretation to the Bonnett/West records.

The whole point is that if there were two calls, Bonnett needn't have said anything as the telephone logs he compiled in conjunction with West reflected the position accurately.  If, on the other hand, there was only one caller, Jeremy, I am wondering why that might not have been brought to somebody's attention long before Bamber came under suspicion, as it seems to me a pretty telling indicator that something was not right with Bamber's story. 

Just to be clear, I am not necessarily suggesting that Bonnett personally had a duty to raise the matter.  He was a civilian police telephone operator, not a sworn constable, but if we accept that your reading of the documents is right, it does seem odd that this wasn't raised. 

I think it is possible that Nevill did call and, perhaps briefly, got through to Bonnett, and for any one or combination of reasons, Bonnett has forgotten this as the records were later interpreted as 'one caller' rather than two. 

One final point, for now: I don't believe that it took until 2007 for it to be suggested that Nevill called.  The idea of Nevill dialling 999 or otherwise alerting the authorities is a perfectly obvious line of inquiry.  What looks more likely to me is that no evidence of such a call had been disclosed, and therefore whether or not such a call had been made could not be established by the defence.  The Bonnett log has subsequently been made available at some point, and this does, on its face and when read in conjunction with the West document, suggest there were two callers, not one.

I ought to add that I do accept that Bamber's defence does not rely on Nevill having made a call, and yes, I should have taken that into account in my previous post above when I discussed Bonnett specifically. 
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 08:17:14 AM by LuminousWanderer »

Offline APRIL

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #35 on: March 25, 2018, 09:04:42 AM »
Sorry, but that doesn't overturn the evidence!  Again, I'm not interested in what you believe or disbelieve and I neither believe nor disbelieve anything about this case myself.  I'm only interested in points that will overturn the evidence.

So you don't care that he murdered five members of his family. You're only interested in finding a loophole which will get him released?

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 #36 on: March 25, 2018, 10:02:02 AM »
I am impartial.  Can you show how I'm not, please?  Can you see into my mind the same way that you have second sight and can somehow see what happened at White House Farm?

Your posts are nothing of the sort!

Jeremy Bamber and people like him are of a mindeset where they think - "if no one sees me murder, I will get away with it and be able to say I am innocent if I'm caught.

No one has suggested we can see into your mind yet you are making all sorts of wild claims in relation to your beliefs of OUR thought processes.

Can you not see your double standards?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 05:42:14 PM by Angelo222 »
"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 sika

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2018, 10:16:32 AM »

If it is your objective to learn more about this case, you would do very well to engage with both Caroline and Holly.  They have forgotten more about this case than most of us will ever know.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 05:40:59 PM by Angelo222 »

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2018, 11:13:41 AM »
So you don't care that he murdered five members of his family. You're only interested in finding a loophole which will get him released?

No, you don't understand.  The law says that in the absence of evidence that exonerates him, the only question to consider is whether the convictions are legally safe.  Hence my questions.  How many times must I repeat this?

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2018, 11:15:31 AM »
Your posts are nothing of the sort!

Jeremy Bamber and people like him are of a mindeset where they think - "if no one sees me murder, I will get away with it and be able to say I am innocent if I'm caught.

No one has suggested we can see into your mind yet you are making all sorts of wild claims in relation to your beliefs of OUR thought processes.

Can you not see your double standards?

LOL.  Again, this poster simply refuses to understand the nature of the legal process or the real questions involved.  This poster is emotional and wishes to adopt a partisan attitude to the case.  It's her perfect right to do so, but it's not relevant to my threads and posts on this Forum.  It shows a misunderstanding of why I am here.  I'm not here to argue for Bamber.  If some of my comments seem to favour him, that's only because it is necessary to stress test the Crown's case in order to reach an objective conclusion about it.  That's the way the process works!
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 05:43:04 PM by Angelo222 »

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2018, 11:17:29 AM »
If it is your objective to learn more about this case, you would do very well to engage with both Caroline and Holly.  They have forgotten more about this case than most of us will ever know.

Again, I have set out why I am here.  My position is eminently reasonable: I don't take a view for or against.  I have made this clear.  I have taken on board what people on here say.  If my posts seem aggressive or defensive at times, this is only in response to the way I am being treated by individuals who refuse to read my posts properly and deliberately misconstrue my intentions in order to create needless drama.  Sorry, but if you look carefully back at my original post on this Forum, you will see I outlined in full and in clear, plain language why I am here - and you will then perhaps recognise the reasons for my frustration.

Offline LuminousWanderer

Re: The Bonnett/West Telephonic Incident Logs
« Reply #41 on: March 25, 2018, 11:20:17 AM »
Again, let me repeat the question that remains about this evidence:

Did Bonnett take calls from the public?  Has that point been established?

I would kindly and respectfully ask that there are no further posts to this thread that are off-topic.  Please just answer the question.

Thank you very much.

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 #42 on: March 25, 2018, 11:38:23 AM »
LOL.  Again, this poster simply refuses to understand the nature of the legal process or the real questions involved.  This poster is emotional and wishes to adopt a partisan attitude to the case.  It's her perfect right to do so, but it's not relevant to my threads and posts on this Forum.  It shows a misunderstanding of why I am here.  I'm not here to argue for Bamber.  If some of my comments seem to favour him, that's only because it is necessary to stress test the Crown's case in order to reach an objective conclusion about it.  That's the way the process works!

In you opinion!

How and why do you think Simon Hall was able to dupe so many over such a lengthy period of time?

Where did the arguments come from in relation to substantiating the then beliefs he had been wrongly convicted?

How and why did the CCRC refer his case back to the court of appeal?

Why was it possible for some to question the validity of his confession?

Hall's conviction was calculated to 13 years. The motive was argued by the prosecution to have been a burglary gone wrong. His sentence reflected this.

What are your thoughts on the safety of that conviction, baring in mind, like Bamber, the arguments were based on circumstantial evidence; many of which we learned were inaccurate/wrong.

The murder was sexually motivated. NOTHiNG whatsoever to do with a burglary!

The police chose to not follow this theory; had they have done and Hall was found guilty would have meant his sentence would have been considerably longer than a 13 year tarif. He would have been facing 20 plus years.

I could go on...

What are your thoughts on the safety of this conviction? The Crowns case was flawed on so many levels. Numerous witnesses lied when giving evidence - witness statements are reflective of this.. Etc etc...

Put your emotions to one side, if you are able and let's debate.

My knowledge on both these cases is vast. My knowledge of the criminal justice system is equally so; based on my first hand experience with the Hall case. I lived it.




« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 11:48:40 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 #43 on: March 25, 2018, 01:26:54 PM »
Are you accepting that Bonnett did take calls from the public?  Has that point been established?

I don't agree with your premise about Bonnett.  The issue here is one of interpretation.  What I'm trying to isolate is whether there is a gap in the chain of logic when we apply YOUR interpretation to the Bonnett/West records.

The whole point is that if there were two calls, Bonnett needn't have said anything as the telephone logs he compiled in conjunction with West reflected the position accurately.  If, on the other hand, there was only one caller, Jeremy, I am wondering why that might not have been brought to somebody's attention long before Bamber came under suspicion, as it seems to me a pretty telling indicator that something was not right with Bamber's story. 

Just to be clear, I am not necessarily suggesting that Bonnett personally had a duty to raise the matter.  He was a civilian police telephone operator, not a sworn constable, but if we accept that your reading of the documents is right, it does seem odd that this wasn't raised. 

I think it is possible that Nevill did call and, perhaps briefly, got through to Bonnett, and for any one or combination of reasons, Bonnett has forgotten this as the records were later interpreted as 'one caller' rather than two. 

One final point, for now: I don't believe that it took until 2007 for it to be suggested that Nevill called.  The idea of Nevill dialling 999 or otherwise alerting the authorities is a perfectly obvious line of inquiry.  What looks more likely to me is that no evidence of such a call had been disclosed, and therefore whether or not such a call had been made could not be established by the defence.  The Bonnett log has subsequently been made available at some point, and this does, on its face and when read in conjunction with the West document, suggest there were two callers, not one.

I ought to add that I do accept that Bamber's defence does not rely on Nevill having made a call, and yes, I should have taken that into account in my previous post above when I discussed Bonnett specifically.

For you to believe what you have just written above (and you're forcing the notion home), you think Bamber is innocent and as such, are not a fence sitter.

I have already stated that 'HE TOOK CALLS'.

Anyway. your reasoning is that in one of the biggest murder cases of the 20th century, Bonnett forgot that he spoke to Nevil Bamber and held/holds the key to solving a grave MOJ? He hasn't read anything about Bamber since and has completely missed both Bamber and the CT's claims that Nevil called the police and spoke to him?

There is no reason for Bonnett to mention a call he didn't receive but his statements give an account of what took place, one call from PC 1990, the call was 'STARTED' recorded and documented on the appropriate form, if another call existed (because he maintains that THEE call was from West and ONLY West), he'd have a memory and a record of it. The log is a rolling account which he mentions in his statement but it STARTED with the call from West.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 01:33:15 PM by Caroline »

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 #44 on: March 25, 2018, 06:00:00 PM »
It's completely irrelevant, even if true.  That's what I make of it.

And it's not even clear from the article that Bamber made the call or did anything wrong.

Why do you keep posting off-topic?

The women in the article said she'd never heard of Jeremy Bamber. When she googled him and learned of his crimes she was "terrified." No mention of him been an alledged MOJ? I thought that fact was interesting. Plus the fact the prisoner who she's in contact with is in the same prison. Clearly the other inmates don't believe him to be an MOJ either!?


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