Would a 'legit' journalist lie?
This 2011 article by Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone, has at least ten whopping big lies in it, outlined below.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/10/jeremy-bamber-innocent-of-murder-appealThese aren't innocent mis-typings, these are deliberate and purposeful lies, designed to mis-inform the public.
And I know you've all seen this all before, but it's always good to remind people how 'legit' journalists from national newspapers have supported Jeremy Bamber by publishing bare faced lies.
And if you are reading this Louis Theroux...be ashamed of yourself if you believe these people rather than the known truth. You should be holding these people up to account. These are not 'legit' journalists, I hope your
people don't quote these people as being 'legit' in your documentary.
The question should be, how are these people allowed to get away with it? They should be sacked.
Lie number 1:By the time the police entered the house, all five were dead. The gun was found by Sheila's side, fresh blood still oozing from her mouth.The blood was bone dry, dark in colour and absolutely not fresh.
Even in the notorious faked wet blood images, the blood from her mouth is dark and dry. So Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstone are taking an original lie, and exaggerating it even further.
Lie number 2:A month after the killings, Bamber's cousins found a silencer with flecks of blood on it in a cupboard in the farmhouse .The cousins found the silencer a couple of days after the murders, not a month.
There were 5 people who witnessed the finding of the silencer, including (non-relative) Basil Cock, who was the solicitor and I believe executor of the estate, who was there to total up the value of items in the house. He was effectively just an employee, therefore no vested interest.
The flecks of blood (often described as a speck of blood), was actually described by the scientist who analysed it, as a flake of blood, it was a quarter of an inch long and for testing purposes, was prised off in one lump, then sliced into 4 sections and each section analysed separately for blood groupings.
There was also human blood visible on the first 5-7 baffles, which was independent of the flake of blood.
Lie number 3:a call from Bamber's father to the police, saying his daughter had gone "berserk", had not been disclosed to the jury;There was no call from Nevill Bamber to the police. This comes from a fake narrative that is based on an internal Police form that has nothing to do with receiving a phone call from Jeremy Bambers father.
Lie Number 4:officers had said they had seen somebody moving inside the house before they entered while Bamber was standing next to them. Officers never said they saw somebody moving inside the house. One officer did say he saw some movement in a window, when he, another officer and Bamber himself were doing a recce of the house. But it was a trick of the light that could be repeated by moving backwards and forwards. Bamber himself was there, and agreed at the time (and for the next 20 years) that there was no movement.
Lie Number 5Why did scratch marks on the kitchen mantelpiece that suggested a struggle not exist in the original scene-of- crime photos?The scratch marks did exist, and one of them is visible in the original photos. But the main area of scratches under the mantelshelf were invisible to the photographer taking the crime scene photos, because the scratches were on the underside of the mantelshelf, facing the floor.
Lie number 6Photographs taken on the day of the shootings and not disclosed at trial have emerged showing there were no scratch marks, which contradicts the evidence of a struggle – a completely different picture to the one presented to the jury.Same as lie number 5, one of the scratch marks is clearly visible, but the main area of scratches is facing the floor and invisible to anyone at normal head height.
Lie number 7Bamber appealed for the first time in 1989 on the grounds that the judge had summed the case up unfairly. He was finally granted a second appeal in 2002It is always falsely quoted that Bamber has been to the court of appeal twice. He has only been to the court of appeal once, and that was in 2002.
Between 1986-89 Jeremy Bamber applied for leave to appeal and it was rejected twice. There was no 'court of appeal' in 1989.
Application to the court of appeal is a two round process. Round one is the 'Single Judge' round. If the single judge rejects your application, as happened to Jeremy Bamber, you go to the next round which is called the 'Full Court'. The Full Court is 3 judges rather than 1. The Full Court also rejected Jeremy Bambers leave to appeal.
The 'Full Court' is not the 'Court of Appeal'.
Lie number 8.The silencer was found to contain blood, but it could not be established if it was human or animalThe quarter inch long flake of blood was tested as human not animal (a simple test, and it was clearly stated by the scientists at the time and ever since, that the blood tested as human blood, not animal blood), and it tested positive as Sheila Caffells blood.
All testable blood in the silencer tested positive for human blood.
No animal blood was found inside or outside of the silencer.
Lie number 9Her Bible was found by her side, open at pages containing Psalms 51-55.It wasn't Sheila's bible, it was June Bamber's bible. Junes handwriting was on many of the pages, and she was known to make notes of certain passages.
Lie number 10Photographs also showed a handwritten note sticking up from between the pages of the Bible. The words at the top of the note are "love one another" – the same words were written on a banner on a wall in a room in Jonestown, Guyana, where 909 people died in 1978 in a mass murder-suicide.The handwritten note does exist, but it is nothing to do with Sheila Caffell. The note was in June Bambers handwriting, and it was a known behaviour of hers to write such notes from the bible on separate pieces of paper.
Shame on the Guardian newspaper for willingly and knowingly publishing this stuff.
