https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU
https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU
Very interesting video, Adam... thanks for posting. 8((()*/
The first time I think anyone here has heard Stan Jones speak about the case, and with lots of "new" photographs of the family. A more relaxed David Boutflour and Barbara Wilson than in other interviews too!
But spoiled by a typical gross comment from "bones", as per usual.
Wonder how long ago this was made?... DB and BW look younger than in more recent documentaries. &%+((£
Many thanks Adam. I've been eager to see this for ages. If you were here now I would give you a big hug and x ?{)(**
@ about 42.15 in it makes ref to after 20 years JB is still protesting his innocence so I assume it was about 9/10 years ago?
Praise be!!! &%54% Holly's seen the light and had a miraculous conversion. 8((()*/On the contrary I'm afraid, when I listen to programmes like this it just reinforces my view that JB is the victim of a MoJ.
On the contrary I'm afraid, when I listen to programmes like this it just reinforces my view that JB is the victim of a MoJ.
And it was going all so well until they brought di Stefano into it. For the benefit of those who don't follow these things, Italian fraudster di Stefano was convicted four times in Ireland and the United Kingdom of fraud and related criminal offences, serving a total of eight and a half years for convictions between 1975 and the late 1980s. He was described by a judge as "one of life's great swindlers". His most recent conviction, in March 2013, saw him being sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment after being found guilty or pleading guilty to 27 charges including deception, fraud and money laundering between 2001 and 2011 related to "tricking people into thinking he was a bona fide legal professional"
Now back to the documentary. I thought it was well presented ignoring the di Stefano crap but there were a couple of minor mistakes.
* The claim was made that the house was silent when the police arrived but we know that June Bamber's little dog was heard to make quite a racket at times.
* It was claimed that both the six-year-old twins were shot in the back if the head as they slept but again this is false as one of them was shot in the face.
I found it interesting that the police took the trouble to send two officers to shadow Jeremy Bamber whist he was away on holiday in St Tropez with beau Brett Collins. That DS Stan Jones was of the opinion that the marks on Nevile's back were caused by being pushed down the stairs with the rife being jabbed in his back. That a consultant forensic psychologist confirms that Bamber displayed the classic signs of having been a psychopath.
Thanks for posting it Adam, a reasonable production except for the Stefano nonsense.
That puts you in the Stefano camp Holly. @)(++(*
There are numerous mistakes and contradictions with other programmes. I will go through them all when I have more time but as a taster 8)-)))
- WHF was not in total darkness.
- BW claims JB put rats in June's pocket. In another programme she claims JB put rats in a plastic bag and placed them in June's car.
There's no evidence they sent two officers to shadow JB in St Tropez. It appeared to me a camera was clicking at unknown individuals as they had their back to the camera.
No doubt the late DS Jones was the officer who wrote on the pathology report as follows:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=680 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=680)
I don't believe the so called burn marks have anything to do with the WHF murders:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=292.msg134570#msg134570 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=292.msg134570#msg134570)
Kerry Daynes has never met with JB to carry out a formal assessment. Also she makes no reference to June's mental illness in circa 1959 and likely adverse impact of this on SC.
No contradiction at all. Has it not occurred to you that he could have done both, i.e. put rats in a pocket and in a bag in the car?
The snapshots of individuals in St. Tropez were made for effect in the program and were not of Jezz and Brett, just as many of the internal shots, other than the crime scene ones were not of the actual farm. The staircase was on the wrong side and the back door wasn't white... I could go on.
You'll be trying to hound Kerry Daynes out of her job next!!!
(http://i.imgur.com/4YGUr1e.png?1)
The late Stan Jones whom many have credited with cracking the case.
He doesn't come over as very professional or lawyer like.
There are numerous mistakes and contradictions with other programmes. I will go through them all when I have more time but as a taster 8)-)))
- WHF was not in total darkness.
- BW claims JB put rats in June's pocket. In another programme she claims JB put rats in a plastic bag and placed them in June's car.
There's no evidence they sent two officers to shadow JB in St Tropez. It appeared to me a camera was clicking at unknown individuals as they had their back to the camera.
No doubt the late DS Jones was the officer who wrote on the pathology report as follows:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=680 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=680)
I don't believe the so called burn marks have anything to do with the WHF murders:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=292.msg134570#msg134570 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=292.msg134570#msg134570)
Kerry Daynes has never met with JB to carry out a formal assessment. Also she makes no reference to June's mental illness in circa 1959 and likely adverse impact of this on SC.
Thanks for posting it Adam, a reasonable production except for the Stefano nonsense.
Many, many discrepancies (especially about positions of bodies). Ralph's head isn't in the scuttle.....I've always wondered about this. I doubt if Ralph was found was found so, but it is never discussed. I have my own theory.
Still over the Bamber thing, though.
I voted Monster Raving Loony.
Come on Cynthia, out with it... what's this theory you've got?
And if you say the police moved him, I'll smack the cellulite out of your botty.
Did the Polling Officer not tell you that Lord Sutch died sixteen years ago!!!?
@ 40 mins in DS Jones states:
https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU (https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU)
"He wanted his money from the estate now not later. Because as Julie's mother said why cant you wait you know in a few years time when your parents are old you'll get the farm you'll be laughing you'll have the whole business and he basically said I can't wait that long I want it now".
To my mind DS Jones is saying JB discussed the murders with Julie's mother, Mary Mugford?
I understand after the tragedy Mary Mugford accepted June's car from JB?
I understand she rejected June's car because she already had one! 8((()*/
Ok but am I understanding DS Jones' claims re MM's comments? I think MM gave evidence at trial but as far as I'm aware she didn't know anything about her daughter's claims that JB discussed murdering his family to fast forward his inheritance?
Yep, according to that Stan Jones' interview Mary knew of Bamber's plan, through Julie... unless his memory was faulty.
We don't have all Mary's testimony, but she may have repeated that under examination; refer to Wilkes, p 220.
You can just imagine Stan Jones calling Julie - "Dog Breath"... he's got that sort of jokey affable character!
Anyone who smokes has Dog Breath.
I was brought up to believe it is rude to speak ill of the dead! But if I park that for a moment he comes over as not too bright and a bit dangerous as a result!
The only dangerous individual in the video was the one Stan interviewed! ?8)@)-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=37m20s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=37m20s)
... and di Stefano! 8()(((@#
Julie forgot her toothbrush and paste apparently when undergoing those gruelling interviews.
The only dangerous individual in the video was the one Stan interviewed! ?8)@)-)
Take note of when Bamber realised that his deadly plan had been rumbled in the back of a police van... and the smirkey smiley mask he put on for the cameras moments later...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=37m20s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=37m20s)
Come on Cynthia, out with it... what's this theory you've got?
And if you say the police moved him, I'll smack the cellulite out of your botty.
Did the Polling Officer not tell you that Lord Sutch died sixteen years ago!!!?
Thank you for sorting out my quote!! 8**8:/:
Why don't you tell me YOUR theory, and I promise that Holl and I will come round and spank you until you squeal like a pig on it's honeymoon.
Yes, Lord Sutch is no more. But his spirit lives on in Solihull, thanks to Tarquin Fintim-Limbim-Whimbim Bus Stop-F'Tang-F'tang-Ole-Biscuit -Barrel (2 votes).
?{)(**
PS Bews makes the point that had JB been driving any slower he would have been stopped. In which case I'm surprised he mistook JB's silver Astra GT for a white Nova @)(++(* He makes two references to a Nova. I guess JB might have had a loan car if his car was in for service/repair but AE makes reference to JB having a silver Astra GT.
He said WHF was in darkness. According to PC Delgado lights were on in the kitchen, two upstairs rooms above the kitchen and another above the main door which I'm assuming was some sort of external porch lantern.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=154.0;attach=70 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=154.0;attach=70)
He then adds JB was begging EP to enter WHF but he decided against this due to the potentially dangerous situation.
He claims he was the one to break the bad news to JB adding everyone reacts differently and he never expects anyone to act in a certain way. However he then goes on to question JB's reaction saying he didn't like it and he had a funny feeling!
Because it was a chav's car driven by anyone and everyone called Jeremy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNdygguAMQA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNdygguAMQA)
Depends what one means by "in darkness" - WHF might have appeared so when they first arrived and parked in Pages Lane... the kitchen side is not directly visible from there. It could also refer to the ambient light, say if it was cloudy,
It's called "gut instinct"... I've got plenty of it, too ?>)()< Instinct not gut, that is. 8((()*/
I'm not sure about DS Jones' claims re the "chuckle" &%+((£It was probably something more like a GUFFAW!!!... Jerry>>> @)(++(* Julie>>> £4%4£ Jerry>>> %£5&%
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=9m15s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=9m15s)
DS Jones' trial testimony re the "chuckle"
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1056.0;attach=2206 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1056.0;attach=2206)
JM's WS re the "chuckle"
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1112 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1112)
It seems what one meant by "in darkness" is:
- Weather good
- Clear view of house
- No artificial light, relying on moonlight, clear summers night
He then talks about taking a perimeter tour of the farm yard to see what they could glean from the house.
"But according to retired FBI profiler Mary Ellen O’Toole, Ph.D, relying on our so-called “gut instincts” can get us into trouble — and in some cases, big trouble. For starters, the term “gut instinct” is a “nebulous entity,” said O’Toole who’s also co-author of Dangerous Instincts: How Gut Instincts Betray Us with writer Alisa Bowman. In our culture, we say that some people have better instincts than others, but there’s no way to measure the effectiveness of our instincts or identify ways to improve them, O’Toole said".
http://maryellenotoole.com/ (http://maryellenotoole.com/)
The YouTube time in works 8((()*/ Wow you learn something new every day!
Could also refer to the state of lighting within the house on their arrival. If they all parked in Pages Lane near the entrance to WHF, then only the dark unlit Eastern side of the house would be seen at first. The front of the house with one lit room? faces South, and the kitchen side which was lit is facing West, both away from their direct view.
(http://i.imgur.com/tcDzEo9.jpg)
It was probably something more like a GUFFAW!!!... Jerry>>> @)(++(* Julie>>> £4%4£ Jerry>>> %£5&%
Go easy on that timed video workaround I showed you, Holly... or we'll be inundated!!!
I'll be "Amazon Customer" and you can be "sue b"...
http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B0052RE4U8/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 (http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B0052RE4U8/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1)
... or me Bugs and you Daffy...
(http://i.imgur.com/8VQS16Y.gif)
Remind me... who always outsmarted who? &%+((£
Google Earth provides a better illustration of the remote location relative to Little Britain. WHF are the buildings near Upper Grove.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.7617788,0.8042982,1481m/data=!3m1!1e3 (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.7617788,0.8042982,1481m/data=!3m1!1e3)
I wonder if that's the reason why NB called JB in that WHF was difficult to locate. Perhaps NB experienced delivery drivers and others having difficulty locating it. For the doubters try locating it without sat nav. The turning to Pages Lane is quite concealed and difficult even with sat nav! What sort of navigation system did police patrol cars have in the mid 80's if any? Bearing in mind NB likened Witham police to Dads Army.
Mmm... WHF is isolated, as are most of the others in the area. What a perfect life JB could have had if only he'd waited. As he recalled in the phone conversation with Eric Allison about life on the farm - "You know Eric, it was idyllic!".
Naughty, naughty!... you trying to wind me up!!? You know very well there was no phone call. ?8)@)-)
Delivery and collection drivers would know the farm routes easily enough... a matter of routine with repeated visits. A new inexperienced driver might also have had a co-driver who was familiar with the farms in the area.
There was no GPS satellite navigation available for police use in '85. They probably relied on A-Z's of Essex and radio contact with those back at HQ. John will know and correct me if I'm wrong.
Essex Police were far superior to Dad's Army... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=775DE0YkT3U&list=FLZFZfbU6SgeJiKXJ6fpyWUQ&index=36 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=775DE0YkT3U&list=FLZFZfbU6SgeJiKXJ6fpyWUQ&index=36)
At 14.15 in (the links should (being the operative word) take you directly to the point) we are told by JB's former headmaster at Gresham's:
"I think he was surprisingly sharp tongued and a bit arrogant that was the sort of reputation he had. He was a bit of a loner, not very popular or well liked".
Perhaps JB's former headmaster, Logie Bruce Lockhart, could have done with checking out his school's policy on bullying rather than some 3 decades later making statements such as those above. I shall be writing to him about the matter.
Before you fire off yet another vociferous letter of complaint 8()(((@# ... Mr. Logie Bruce-Lockhart said much the same thing of Jeremy Bamber in 1990. (Murder Casebook No. 7, page 224)
Before you fire off yet another vociferous letter of complaint 8()(((@# ... Mr. Logie Bruce-Lockhart said much the same thing of Jeremy Bamber in 1990. (Murder Casebook No. 7, page 224)
Quote from Murder Casebook.
"Those who knew Bamber at school, noticed his need to express his superiority."
"He was a rather prickly sort of boy" His headmaster at Gresham's, Mr. Logie Bruce-Lockhart, was to recall. "I believe some of the bys found him irritating, in that he could be a relentless tease. I think he showed at touch of arrogance at a very young age"
"A former school friend, John Fielding, remembered Bamber being a bit of an oddball"
Based on the above and DS Jones' claim that JB told Mary Mugford he intended killing his family to fast forward his inheritance I think the whole JM 'evidence' is complete and utter BS. There's no evidence JB discussed anything of the sort with MM. If he had she would have supported her daughter by fessing up at trial and it would have been two consummate actresses at trial.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=40m (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=40m)
Pity he cant post on Blue then as he'd be in good company @)(++(*
So no suspension, expulsion, bullying, arson, violent conduct, inappropriate behaviour towards female pupils, pulling wings off birds, breaking the law, graffiti, criminal damage to school property, disruptive in lessons, his parents attending Gresham's to discuss unacceptable conduct? &%+((£
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/dec/31/chris-jefferies
Shut the door behind you please ?>)()<
I've listened to this section over and over, and imo what sounds at first like "Julie's mother" is in fact a poorly pronounced "Julie Mugford", so it comes over as "Julie Mufford" or "Julie Muffer".
Stan Jones doesn't say "Julie's", but "Julie"... https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU?t=40m2s (https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU?t=40m2s)
In the preceding sentences DS Jones refers to JM as "Julie" and "she" so why would he then revert to "Julie Mugford"? Sounds very much like "Julie's mother" to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=39m (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=39m)
Listen to this. I've reduced the speed and it sounds like "Julie Mugford" to me...
https://soundcloud.com/user9618130/stan-jones-jeremy-bamber-1 (https://soundcloud.com/user9618130/stan-jones-jeremy-bamber-1)
Anyone else think the same?
Point being? Parents pay a LOT of money to have their kids sent to these schools, they don't send notes home each time junior is disruptive! If you don't want to accept what people who actually knew him thought - it's called denial.
'll leave the door open thanks - even though your argument is causing a draft! %56&
Wow you have so many techy tricks. 8((()*/
Sounds even more like "Julie's mother" to me.
No... he says Julie, not Julie's... hence "Julie Muffod said", which is Stanspeak for "Julie Mugford definitely said".
End of story. 8((()*/
Can you imagine, I mean really imagine Jeremy Bamber saying to Mary Mugford that he was going to get rid of his parents? Highly unlikely!!!
I cant imagine for a moment JB saying to anyone that he was going to get rid of his parents but I can imagine DS Jones making a faux pas. Throughout the vid DS Jones refers to JM as "Julie" or "she" so why at the end would he refer to her as "Julie Mugford"? I'm sure audio forensics will be able to supply the definitive answer.
A similar thing exists with the Bain case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mC_U--i-no (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mC_U--i-no)
I agree with one of the commentators - "David Bain slaughtered his family end of story !" It's so obvious what he muttered, hence the reason why the tape wasn't originally played in court.
... and I agree with you that SJ could have made mistake with the name.
But I also think that Julie kept Jeremy Bamber's dark side to herself, and never let on to Mary of his intention, otherwise as a responsible parent I'm sure she would have warned his parents or advised her daughter to do so.
The later part where Stan Jones used her full name might have been filmed earlier, then the sequence reversed during editing.
No... he says Julie, not Julie's... hence "Julie Muffod said", which is Stanspeak for "Julie Mugford definitely said".
End of story. 8((()*/
Can you imagine, I mean really imagine Jeremy Bamber saying to Mary Mugford that he was going to get rid of his parents? Highly unlikely!!!
One of the experts said it was like looking for shapes in clouds in that you could see what you wanted to see (I agree). If it's so obvious how come his conviction has been quashed?
Agreed. Highly unlikely............not entirely impossible though, given that Mary tells us "he always called me Mummy" However, NOT so unlikely is Julie telling Mary what Jeremy had said.
If that was so, do you think that Mary would have encouraged Julie to break off the relationship?
Even if Mary did know of his intention, do you think she would have gone straight to the police to voice her concern on first hearing about the murders, instead of allowing her daughter to continue living in denial for weeks after?
Mike Fielder (Sun journo) confirms he never actually saw the photos of SC that JB was intending to sell which apparently involved a cucumber and vibrator. I think the pair may have been winding him up. Also confirmed the approach to The Sun was made by Brett (BC).
I don't think people understand that JB needed cash or liquid assets to meet the significant inheritance tax liability due on the estate before probate could be granted.
Love MF's claims that JB was a "sexual predator" and "on his nights off from Julie he was rampant around the bars and clubs in South East Essex"
Then intro music: Wham's 'Bad Boy':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eXtPXO3wTU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eXtPXO3wTU)
How the hell does MF know what JB did or didn't do on his nights off from JM? What a load of shite.
Instead of "I shot the prick", David Bain might have muttered "I can't br..(eathe)", as one voice analyst suggested. But would he have been so out of breath, when he only made the urgent-sounding distress call twenty or so minutes after "discovering" the bodies of his family!!?
https://youtu.be/9mC_U--i-no?t=19s (https://youtu.be/9mC_U--i-no?t=19s)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7HsjKDSaKA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7HsjKDSaKA)
And then there's other evidence such as only DB's fingerprint(s) being found on the rifle, his blood-stained jersey in the washing machine, unexplained bruises on his face, odd behaviour later as witnessed by his aunt, etc, etc...
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/2518912/Plenty-of-doubt-in-Bain-jurys-verdict (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/2518912/Plenty-of-doubt-in-Bain-jurys-verdict)
http://tonycollinsblog.com/category/david-bain/ (http://tonycollinsblog.com/category/david-bain/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXK1Pr2K0S8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXK1Pr2K0S8)
I don't really know much about the Bain case but like JB's case it appears there was some dysfunction in the family which was played down along with Robin's (DB's father) depression? Robin Bain's colleagues said he was barely able to function due to depression. Robin had bizarre living arrangements whereby during the week he would sleep in the school house or his campervan then on the w.e he would return to the family home and sleep in a caravan as he was estranged from his wife Margaret. Laniet (DB's sister) told a teacher she had been raped and a friend, Dean Cottle, she was in an incestuous relationship with her father. It is said Laniet was about to spill the beans. The family home was by all accounts messy and unkempt.
David Bain apparently had the potential to become an opera singer.
What would be the motivation for DB to murder his family.?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10854521 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10854521)
Didn't Colin Caffell see them or similar in one of the drawers when he called round at Morshead Mansions to collect Sheila's and the twins' effects? And one of Sheila's close friends mentioned something about an explicit photoshoot in her borrowed back garden, about which Sheila was ashamed.
Most people understand that JB needed cash to spend willy-nilly on a foreign drug run/pleasure trips, and champagne parties to buy peoples' love.
[/color]There's such a thing as visiting JB's old hunting grounds and asking around.
Uncanny similarities with the Bamber case - five family members shot through the head using David Bain's .22 rifle equipped with silencer, magazine(s) and hollow-point bullets; father killed alone downstairs (although the bloody struggle was with his 14 year-old brother); delayed emergency phone call; police making a cock-up gathering evidence; relatives gaining the family inheritance instead of David Bain. Even British firearm's expert Philip Boyce (from "The New Evidence") made an appearance at the retrial in New Zealand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr13rG7YmNY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr13rG7YmNY)
Unlike Jeremy Bamber, David Bain's blood-stained gloves were found hidden underneath his brother's bed.
Police crime scene video of the Bain family house... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwUqReEheE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwUqReEheE)
As to a motive or motives... http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/david-had-a-number-of-possible-motives (http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/david-had-a-number-of-possible-motives)
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/06/the_david_bain_case.html (http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/06/the_david_bain_case.html)
Thanks. I'll delve a bit deeper ?>)()<
I think the counterspin sites are led by Kent Parker and Vic Purkiss who could be seen as akin to the extreme elements on the McCann sites.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q58Blv_fjGo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q58Blv_fjGo)
Listen to this. I've reduced the speed and it sounds like "Julie Mugford" to me...
https://soundcloud.com/user9618130/stan-jones-jeremy-bamber-1 (https://soundcloud.com/user9618130/stan-jones-jeremy-bamber-1)
Anyone else think the same?
Lookout and John said SC was promiscuous:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3860.msg145224#msg145224
There's no evidence she was.
Yes, Julie Mugford. The idea that Julie's mom had prior knowledge of the impending events is rather farfetched.
Other than the multiple pregnancies by different fathers but that is a mere detail.
I don't believe anyone had prior knowledge of the 'impending events' but I can imagine DS Jones making a faux pas.
I guess we should be thankful for small mercies in that DS Jones wasn't tasked with manning the phones on that fateful night.
Otherwise who knows what "Sheilas gone crazy she's got a gun" might have morphed into! (http://i.imgur.com/RifDnsL.gif)
I hope the JB supporters who put a lot of weight on EP in communication with someone inside WHF and two bodies in the kitchen one male, one female will realise that EP circa 1980's was not a professional, highly trained and well managed police force. Mistakes abound were an inevitable part of their bungling incompetence. As can be evidenced by the vid they were barely capable of audible and coherent speech and observing the most basic of details eg mistaking JB's silver Astra for a white Nova. It seems NB was spot on when he likened the police at Witham to Dad's Army.
Who cares?... both stars, aren't they? Jeremy doesn't even remember that he didn't get on with his mum......
http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/happy-mothers-day.html (http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/happy-mothers-day.html)
Who cares?... both stars, aren't they? Jeremy doesn't even remember that he didn't get on with his mum......
http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/happy-mothers-day.html (http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/happy-mothers-day.html)
Since both SC and JB appear to have had a 'difficult' relationship with June surely it begs the question whether the problem was with SC and JB or June? Whose idea was it to adopt?
Who cares?... both stars, aren't they? Jeremy doesn't even remember that he didn't get on with his mum......
http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/happy-mothers-day.html (http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/happy-mothers-day.html)
Ugh. I have never read so much crap in my life. And..."Mum could make cakes to die for." Could he write anything more clumsy and callous?
What an utter, utter cock.
Ugh. I have never read so much crap in my life. And..."Mum could make cakes to die for." Could he write anything more clumsy and callous?
What an utter, utter cock.
Geez... you don't half rabbit on!!! I can see smoke rising from your keyboard!
JB appears to have been honest in his police interviews re his relationship with June describing it as "rough and smooth"Whenever I hear Mary Mugford's name it reminds me of my fave childhood tv prog: Mary, Mungo and Midge ?{)(**
A hell of a lot more rough than smooth as according to Mary Mugford's testimony he hated and never spoke to her. I know who I'd believe.
The adoption and silencer issues have been covered before and done to death. You'll end up talking to yourself if they're repeated constantly.
This obsession with Jeremy Bamber isn't healthy, Holly. I hope you don't think David Bain is innocent as well? &%+((£Obsession &%+((£ Just cos I sleep with his letters under my pillow and stroke each one lovingly every night before I drop off doesn't make me obsessed just a little bit sad 8(8-))
I think the following shows what a liability DS Jones was into the investigation of the WHF murders. At 30.57 he states "If she'd had to load that cartridge case twice with her long manicured fingernails they'd have broken. There's no doubt whatsoever". Really &%+((£
What made DS Jones so sure he was competent to give an opinion when Dr Vanezis the pathologist said he was not competent to state whether SC's nails would be damaged?
DS Jones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=30m57s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=30m57s)
Dr Vanezis
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=206.0;attach=742 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=206.0;attach=742)
Farm Girl - loading cartridges, chambering round and firing gun multiple times with long manicured and polished nails
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s)
Stan Jones?... a liability!!!? He was the best asset Essex Police had... TJ was the stumbling block regarding the Bamber case.
Have you written to Farm Girl to ask if she was doped up with Haldol when loading that magazine?
Mmmm... methinks there's a bit of psychological warfare afoot here. &%+((£ You keep putting semi-naked floozy vids up to get me all hot and bovvered so that eventually I'll agree with you... but it ain't gonna work, madam!
Sheila Caffell's undamaged thumbnail (other nails most likely the same as SJ, BM, PV, etc. observed)...
(http://i.imgur.com/tNHMGxv.jpg)
You'd be better e-mailing an actual Police firearms squad with female members to enquire if they normally keep their fingernails short and what would happen if they loaded magazines with them long!
If Haloperidol impacts a persons ability to operate a gun I would have thought it would feature on the UK Governments list of drugs to consult GP about if driving a motor vehicle? It doesn't:
https://www.gov.uk/drug-driving-law (https://www.gov.uk/drug-driving-law)
Pill-rolling motion and Parkinson-like symptoms (ignoring the other side-effects pertaining to elderly women)...
http://doublecheckmd.com/EffectsDetail.do?dname=Haldol+Decanoate&sid=3626&eid=1875 (http://doublecheckmd.com/EffectsDetail.do?dname=Haldol+Decanoate&sid=3626&eid=1875)
... and I don't think Sheila drove a car.
As previously discussed I can't see any evidence that SC had problems with co-ordination. There's nothing in her medical notes to this effect and she demonstrated her fine motor movement was ok by way of personal grooming: shaped eyebrows, styled hair, applying full face make-up, manicuring and polishing her nails.
*&*%£
SC didn't drive. She had no need to living in London and had a lack of funds to purchase and maintain a car. The point I was endeavouring to make is that Haloperidol is not on the Governments list of prescribed drugs to discuss with GP if driving.
The manufacturers of Haloperidol state less than 1 in 100 users of the drug might suffer
• Parkinsonism (characterised by tremor, rigidity or postural instability)
http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/spcpil/documents/spcpil/con1409897406427.pdf (http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/spcpil/documents/spcpil/con1409897406427.pdf)
The above post/vid with maker of your horniness shows how straightforward it is to load the mag, chamber a round and fire rounds. If SC was truly hopeless in this regard how did she cope with say a twin buggy and vacuum attachments?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_LA_m22URg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_LA_m22URg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrqkWXCFo0Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrqkWXCFo0Y)
(That's a novelty a man with a vacuum cleaner 8)-))) )
But Sheila was used to personal grooming, having been trained at Lucie Claytons and through her modelling work - it's a girly thing... but she wasn't familiar with a newish Anschutz 525.
The first Dyson, a DC01 was only introduced in 1993, so Sheila never got the chance to use one. Complicated attachments and assemblies weren't commonplace in '85 for Hoovers and Electrolux cylinders. I've got a DC04, DC05 and one of the first DC02's which is still going strong, and use them all by myself, no sweat - a woman would miss underneath the furniture and room corners. You should read James Dyson's autobiography “Against The Odds” about the struggle to get his cleaners financed and manufactured. JD like JB was a product of Gresham's but how very different their lives turned out. They had the same Headmaster too - Logie Bruce-Lockhart.
Can't say the same about buggies though... messing about with those is a woman's job.
Your horniness description fits me to a tee! (http://i.imgur.com/RifDnsL.gif)
I read SC attended finishing school, secretarial college and a Lucie Clayton modelling course. However I'm now wondering if there's some overlap:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucie_Clayton_Charm_Academy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucie_Clayton_Charm_Academy)
Regardless of any formal training and her level of competence in personal grooming eg shaping eyebrows, manicuring nails and applying nail polish, applying full face make-up, styling her hair etc she would still require fine motor skills to carry out these tasks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_motor_skill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_motor_skill)
I appreciate Dysons were not around in '85 but vacuums from that period still had several attachments. The point being SC lived a full independent life as mum to the twins and must have been able to use a range of equipment including baby/child care equipment, household appliances and cooking utensils. I doubt she receieved any formal instruction by way of 'How to... ' etc. Loading the mag, chambering a round and firing a rifle doesn't look any more complicated.
Please...take another look at Farm Girl in the vid above and compare the bio-mechanical processes with putting up and down the twin buggy and attaching and removing the various appliances to the Dyson (vids above).
If you disagree I might have to send Farm Girl round to convince you otherwise! See her here firing various weapons with her long nails polished in pearl:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKXzm3jyw8I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKXzm3jyw8I)
This is so cute Farm Girl with her piglets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGjYHsVJ2jM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGjYHsVJ2jM)
Yes JB stands out like a sore thumb amongst old Greshamians incl James Dyson (both on list)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_Greshamians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_Greshamians)
The UK doesn't seem to rate inventors/designers. It's more banking and biotech.
DS Jones "She had two shots to her neck. I understand the first one wouldn't have been fatal but I would think possibly knock her out"
True... had Sheila still been conscious there would have been smeared blood all over her hands and neck. The fact that there wasn't indicates she was unable to react in any way to the first shot.
Why some Essex Police officers who witnessed the scene first hand couldn't appreciate this for themselves is a bit of a mystery but then a round of golf was more important to DI Taff Jones than five murders.
How come you always have to have the last word? ?8)@)-) Stan Jones was a top bloke! 8((()*/
Holl, if there was ANY human blood in the baffles, it proves that Bamber did it.
You do know that, don't you?
Sorry if that blows your theory out of the water, my duck.
Best love and toodly pip.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
SC was probably more suited to simpler catwalk tuition rather than the more demanding secretarial side.
Speaking of assembly skills, when I fitted a new clutch on a Dyson it was by trial and error and took a long time because I'd never done it before. Likewise with the easier task of replacing a broken belt. Similarly, say if I'd never used a semi-auto rifle and, god forbid, was in the throes of shooting my whole family in the middle of the night, loading and fitting a magazine three times on the fly would be difficult without being shown or figuring out how to do it first, giving others time to overpower and stop me in the process. In one of the David Bain videos there's a demo given by an expert in court showing how a magazine is loaded and even he was slow and hesitant in explaining it to the jury.
I totally disagree... so when is Farm Girl paying me a visit? Remind her to bring her bazookas (the soft squidgy type, I mean).
It would have been more exciting if she'd dropped her top and started feeding them, like the thumbnail pics at the end of the video. Wish I had a curvy 50 year old girlfriend who paraded about half-naked while Dysoning the carpet. Come to think about it, this fella's given me ideas...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3102225/Wash-dishes-bit-dusting-naked-Pensioner-places-job-advert-hire-20-hour-nude-cleaner-gets-11-replies-week.html?offset=0&max=100&jumpTo=comment-87439719#comment-87439719 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3102225/Wash-dishes-bit-dusting-naked-Pensioner-places-job-advert-hire-20-hour-nude-cleaner-gets-11-replies-week.html?offset=0&max=100&jumpTo=comment-87439719#comment-87439719)
Relegated to the "Other" division... wonder what the respectable "Others" think about being lumped together with a murderer?
May I ask what makes you think that?
... because she never became a secretary.
Yes but how many times had you observed anyone fitting a new clutch to a Dyson? SC had observed many others handling firearms since childhood. JB left a full mag (10 bullets). The initial injuries June and NB sustained in the bedroom would have incapacitated them to such a degree there was no possibility of either overpowering their assailant and no urgency in reloading. I can't see loading the magazine and attaching it to the gun is anymore complicated than replacing a battery in a remote control.
None... as I said, I installed it by trial and error. I'm no duck-egg! Do you know how many and what sort of firearms she'd seen being handled? The Anschutz was an unfamiliar recent acquisition, and Sheila was only at WHF intermittently during the period since it was bought. Do you not believe Colin Caffell when he said she didn't like them and never used them? Peter Vanezis who you often like to quote said Nevill put up quite a struggle, so I suppose you don't believe him either.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc&feature=youtu.be&t=1m21s)
If we had opinion from a ballistics expert and bio mechanic providing expert testimony re SC's nails and whether someone relatively inexperienced with firearms was capable, or not, of being responsible for the shootings I would be happy to accept his/her opinions but we don't just the ramblings from the likes of us.
I might email Farm Girl and invite her to join the forum to comment on the WHF case with regard to firearms. She sounds pretty cool.
Thought you'd already done that months ago, and there was no response. Ask Farm Girl if she's ever used an Anschutz 525 from scratch and if so, how quickly she figured out loading and inserting the magazine the first few times.
http://bansheemoon.com/about.html (http://bansheemoon.com/about.html)
I often do my housework naked other than my armband with my iPhone attached and headphones. Mostly the bathrooms as I get carried away with all my anti-bacterial sprays, bleach etc that any clothes would get ruined and I often can't be bothered to dig out any anything old. I need one of those belts that workmen wear for their tools for my sprays and cloths which could double as a loin cloth.
Will you do me a favour? Nip over to the local Job Centre tomorrow morning and ask if there are any Window Cleaning vacancies... I might just be tempted. I'll bring my spare workbelt and help you squeeze into it when you're in the bathroom... size 48" waist be OK?
I think you're softening. You've dropped the word 'mass'.
The pathologist doesn't make ref to any of this. In fact he has always made it clear he is unable to confirm murder or suicide. He stated physiologically it would have been possible for SC to have walked around for a short while after the first shot although he didn't think this was the case due to lack of blood staining on her nightdress. The point I was endeavouring to make is that DS Jones said he thought the first shot would knock SC out but this is not what the pathologist said. Why would anyone believe DS Jones over the pathologist? The pathologist, Dr Vanezis, has an excellent track record:
http://www.petervanezis.com/index.html
http://www.petervanezis.com/high_profile_cases.html
It is not the responsibility of police officers to determine cause of death.
Dr Craig who attended the scene to formally certify the deaths made it quite clear he thought Sheila had taken her own life:
"38. At 8.10 a.m., Dr Craig attended the scene to formally certify the deaths. In cross-examination at the trial he said the deaths could have occurred at any time during the previous night. The appearance of Sheila Caffell's body suggested to him that the wounds had been inflicted by her own hand. In answer to the judge the witness made it clear this was not an opinion the jury should rely upon as a true indication that the injuries had been self-inflicted".
The pathologist, Dr Vanezis, made it quite clear he was unable to say one way or the other:
"46. From the pathological evidence alone, the pathologist could not say, one way or the other, whether Mrs Caffell had been murdered or had taken her own life".
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
If you prefer the opinion of DS Jones over Dr Craig and Dr Vanezis then that's up to you John. Having heard from DS Jones on the vid he doesn't fill me with confidence at all.
You need to bump up the rez of your avatar for the line underneath to make sense.
To be frank Holly I'm not in the least surprised since the pathologist was at a disadvantage to DS Jones. The pathologist never saw Sheila in situ in the farmhouse whilst Stan Jones did. When the pathologist first saw Sheila in the morgue her face and neck were smeared in blood caused by contact with the body bag. He mentions this in his later statement and was angry that he was not called to the farmhouse BEFORE the bodies were moved.
We have all seen the before and after photos as this has been discussed previously. The bottom line is that the photos don't lie in this particular case, Sheila never flinched after the first shot and that is certain. She fell back and was shot again as she lay on her back...she never moved.
When someone is shot in the neck the first response, assuming the victim is conscious, is to touch the searing wound thus spreading blood everywhere. This did not happen in Sheilas case as she was unconscious.
Question is, was she unconscious before or after the first shot?
The blood from the silencer was proven to be human and not from animals, see forensic expert Mark Websters report.
www.forensic-science.co.uk/bamber.html
Yes I agree but how can we eliminate the possibility of deliberate contamination?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6293.msg243911#msg243911
The bottom line for me John is that the pathologist has always maintained he is unable to determine murder or suicide. A pathologist's conclusions are largely formed by the autopsy carried out on a victim away from the SoC. Dr Craig certified the deaths at circa 8.10am, some 40 mins after the raid team entered, and right up to trial he was of the opinion SC had taken her own life.
I will be brutally honest John I was shocked when I heard DS Jones speak for the first time on the vid Adam kindly posted. His personal bearing and the way he generally presents is not what I would expect of a British police officer. I've never had any dealings with the police of any description other than getting pulled over for travelling at 35mph in a 30mph area. I always had in my mind that the police were professional akin to Dixon of Dock Green. Please contrast the police officers in Dixon of Dock Green with DS Jones on the vid and to a lesser degree PS Bews.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHooSqfVD6w
In the above episode they talk about tracing calls too and this was long before 1985.
I'm very worried about this. NB was right when he likened the police at Witham to Dad's Army. I've stored the vid Adam posted on my lappy and I'm going to make an appointment to discuss with my local MP and email Theresa May. Its not good enough. Citizens should be able to trust the police to appear and act professionally at all times.
The autopsy could never answer this particular question. Vanezis didn't see the entire picture so he was not in a position to say anything for sure. Anyone looking at Sheila lying there with not a scratch on her but with two neat bullet holes in her neck and with undisturbed blood trails trickling down her neck would be in no doubt...she never moved.
As for Dr Craig, he must have been taken in by the rifle lying on Sheilas body as Bamber hoped. A GP is not a criminologist and so could not be expected to give an opinion as one. He merely reported what he saw and that was a woman lying dead with two bullet holes in her neck and her hand resting on the offending weapon.
Da-dada-dada-dada-dada-da-da-daaaa... da-daaa-daaa-daaa...
... Evenin' all!... George Dixon 'ere.
Aaaah... that brings back happy memories. Saturday nights sat in front of a b&w TV and blazing coal fire eatin' me beans on toast, thinkin' all coppers were straight as a die.
If Jerry had only watched that, he would have thought three times before murdering his family.
George reminds me of Stan Jones... straight-talking bobby, solves crimes easily, top bloke.
But the rest talk awfully posh for police officers in 1973... "Jolly good show, what, what, what!"
... one even looks like an East End spiv. ?>)()<
... most of 'em good looking too. 8**8:/:
... and all with full heads of hair!!! 8(8-))
If SC's state at the soc was indicative of murder why did EP wait some 30 days to interview JB under caution and a further 20 plus days to arrest and charge him? Plus allow him to leave the country and return under his own steam. Dr Vanezis said all four officers present at the pm concluded they were dealing with 4 murders and a suicide. If they had any doubts why not discuss them with Dr Vanezis during the post mortem?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=206.0;attach=738
Initially DS Jones was the only dissenter. He was not some high flying police officer. At the time of the murders he was 45 yoa and only a DS. I would like to know about the entry requirements and recruitment practices at the time DS Jones was recruited.
I agree it doesn't appear SC moved but some sort of reflex action cannot be ruled out eg cadaveric spasm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaveric_spasm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaveric_spasm)
The rifle was a semi-auto so the slightest touch of the trigger would release another bullet. Dr Vanezis said he had experienced 4 or 5 suicides with two gunshot wounds.
"Straight-talking" are not words I would use to describe DS Jones.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6293.msg241604#msg241604 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6293.msg241604#msg241604)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6293.msg241677#msg241677 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6293.msg241677#msg241677)
The two bullets were fired at different angles with an obvious delay between them - the first, perpendicular to her neck after which the rifle would have dropped when she released her grip; the second, parallel to her body, thereby ruling out cadaveric spasm and pulling of the trigger immediately after the first shot.
Yes the two bullets were fired at different angles and the haemorrhaging indicates a delay of a few seconds between the two shots but I cant see that it wasn't possible for SC to have retained her grip on the trigger to fire a second shot albeit the rifle moved and the second shot fired at a different angle? See drowning victims found dead clutching grass, weeds and roots:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=732
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaveric_spasm
The bottom line is from a pathological perspective Dr Vanezis was unable to confirm murder or suicide.
The meaning of straight-talking is completely different from a slight speech impediment!
But he wasn't "straight-talking" he deliberately deceived and lied to JB during his police interviews:
Here he states the first wound was fatal and would have killed SC and that she didn't kill herself. Not true the pathologist has always made it clear he was unable to confirm murder or suicide. DS Jones, and the opinion of others, do not take precedence over the pathologist's.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1304
Here he states that none of JB's prints were found on the rifle. Not true - one was found:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1328
Pathology couldn't determine that question as it was a matter for the detectives aided by the forensic scientist.
A pathologist can only give an opinion on what is presented to him. Vanezis never saw Sheila in situ where she fell, had he done so his initial report would have been somewhat different.
It is very improbable that cadaveric spasm caused the second shot as it was obviously targeted to finish the job.
The placing of the murder weapon longitudinally along the body with one hand resting on the trigger guard is also an improbable scenario. We don't know if this was how the first police responders found it but in any event the rifle would never have ended up perched there in such a position.
He had the benefit of four police officers with him at the pm to brief him and all officers prior to the examination concluded 4 murders/1 suicide.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=206.0;attach=738
But he wasn't "straight-talking" he deliberately deceived and lied to JB during his police interviews:
Here he states the first wound was fatal and would have killed SC and that she didn't kill herself. Not true the pathologist has always made it clear he was unable to confirm murder or suicide. DS Jones, and the opinion of others, do not take precedence over the pathologist's.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1304 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1304)
Here he states that none of JB's prints were found on the rifle. Not true - one was found:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1328 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1328)
Did they all see Sheila lying on the floor in the bedroom?
Stan Jones also states that "at this moment in time" only one fingerprint of Sheila's was on the stock, so maybe the rifle hadn't been fully analysed yet and he isn't telling a porkies at all!
Blimey!.. this forum's red hot tonight... Miss Marple the Second's doing overtime! 8(*(
I agree it doesn't appear SC moved but some sort of reflex action cannot be ruled out eg cadaveric spasm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaveric_spasm
The rifle was a semi-auto so the slightest touch of the trigger would release another bullet. Dr Vanezis said he had experienced 4 or 5 suicides with two gunshot wounds.
If SC's state at the soc was indicative of murder why did EP wait some 30 days to interview JB under caution and a further 20 plus days to arrest and charge him? Plus allow him to leave the country and return under his own steam. Dr Vanezis said all four officers present at the pm concluded they were dealing with 4 murders and a suicide. If they had any doubts why not discuss them with Dr Vanezis during the post mortem?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=206.0;attach=738
Initially DS Jones was the only dissenter. He was not some high flying police officer. At the time of the murders he was 45 yoa and only a DS. I would like to know about the entry requirements and recruitment practices at the time DS Jones was recruited.
I think Essex Police were overwhelmed by the incident and were for the most part quite willing to go with Jeremy's story, at least until Julie Mugford spoke up and set them straight. It was then a case of salvaging the investigation despite much of the physical evidence having been burned by them in what was yet another CSI folly.
I think Essex Police were overwhelmed by the incident and were for the most part quite willing to go with Jeremy's story, at least until Julie Mugford spoke up and set them straight. It was then a case of salvaging the investigation despite much of the physical evidence having been burned by them in what was yet another CSI folly.
I thought the police were trained to deal with critical incidents? IMO the only aspect of the case that overwhelmed EP was the influence the relatives brought to bear on the investigation. For whatever reason(s) they appear to have been able to exert undue influence. JM was simply a pawn.
They were completely out of their depth not having dealt with any similiar case previously. DI Taff Jones' attitude to the murders was appalling, no wonder he was removed from it months later.
Also it appears that DCI Jones did not toodle off for a round of golf but attended a pre-arranged meeting with Chief Superintendant Albert Harris and Chelmsford Head Post Office:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=157.0;attach=108
I am as convinced as ever JB is the victim of a MoJ and confident his conviction will eventually be overturned.
The substantial evidence says differently Holly, I would have thought you had realised that by now and not let semantics get in the way?The "substantial evidence" amounted to the silencer and JM's testimony both of which were gathered by DS Jones days and weeks later and are surrounded by much controversy. Without this "substantial evidence" it's unlikely the CPS/DPP would have constructed a case against JB.
There isn't a single shred of evidence which supports Jeremy Bamber's claim of innocence and that is reality no matter how many authors write fanciful books on the subject. People would be better advised to donate their money to a needy cause instead of lining the pockets of people and publishers who want to get rich on the back of five murders including that of two young children.If the evidence is as strong as you are suggesting John it makes no sense to me that EP allowed JB to roam freely for weeks on end and leave the country. He wasn't even interviewed under caution until some 5 weeks after the tragedy.
The "substantial evidence" amounted to the silencer and JM's testimony both of which were gathered by DS Jones days and weeks later and are surrounded by much controversy. Without this "substantial evidence" it's unlikely the CPS/DPP would have constructed a case against JB.
If the evidence is as strong as you are suggesting John it makes no sense to me that EP allowed JB to roam freely for weeks on end and leave the country. He wasn't even interviewed under caution until some 5 weeks after the tragedy.
I guess one of the benefits of living in a democratic country with a free market economy is that authors pretty much have a free hand to write what they wish subject to the laws of the land re libel etc. Unlikely that any publisher would get involved in such a project if they didn't think there was a market for such books. Let consumers/readers vote with their purchases or not!
No Holly, the substantial evidence is all the forensics taken from the crime scene which rules Sheila out. Julie's statements and testimony was the icing on the cake and effectively sealed Jerry's fate.
Essex Police made a huge error in the beginning granted but they salvaged the situation in the end. As I stated earlier, the head of CID was not used to dealing with murders let alone five at once, he was overwhelmed and made basic errors. Thankfully, he was moved from the case and a more experienced officer saw it through to Jeremy's conviction.
Headline Publications thought they were onto a winner with the Summers and Swan book about Madeleine McCann and look what happened there.
www.amazon.co.uk/Looking-For-Madeleine-Anthony-Summers/dp/1472211618
So why wait some 5 weeks to interview JB under caution and a further 2 weeks or so to arrest and charge him if the case was clear cut? The evidence gathered at soc by EP was analysed in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy and the results made available weeks before JB's arrest. If the case pointed towards a guilty JB based on aspects such as SC's appearance, which were immediately visible at the soc to the likes of Chief Superintendent Albert Harris, why not take JB to the station immediately and interview him under caution and conduct a thorough search of Bourtree Cottage?
The case was far from clear cut Holly, maybe I didn't explain myself too well. I agree the first police on the scene were effectively directed by Jeremy Bamber down the four murders and a suicide road. Had I been one of the first responders I would have accepted what Jeremy was saying too, there was no reason to not believe him and that was how it played out for weeks. However, there were cracks in his perfect plan, DS Stan Jones was probably the first to see them on the very day after the murders but even he, although suspicious, was not totally convinced. That came later when Julie Mugford could not live with the knowledge any longer and started to speak, first to one of her flatmates and then to the police. It was a simple task then to look at all the evidence again and rule out Sheila.
The case was far from clear cut Holly, maybe I didn't explain myself too well. I agree the first police on the scene were effectively directed by Jeremy Bamber down the four murders and a suicide road. Had I been one of the first responders I would have accepted what Jeremy was saying too, there was no reason to not believe him and that was how it played out for weeks. However, there were cracks in his perfect plan, DS Stan Jones was probably the first to see them on the very day after the murders but even he, although suspicious, was not totally convinced. That came later when Julie Mugford could not live with the knowledge any longer and started to speak, first to one of her flatmates and then to the police. It was a simple task then to look at all the evidence again and rule out Sheila.
If it wasn't impaired by his heavy drinking whilst on duty. Oh and not forgetting breaking the law by drink driving.
By comparison Chief Supt George Albert Harris page 3:
http://www.essex.police.uk/museum/thelaw/n_8306lw.pdf (http://www.essex.police.uk/museum/thelaw/n_8306lw.pdf)
This constant belittling of Stan Jones does you no favours, Holly. Just because the man had a slight speech impediment and spoke in a staccato fashion, doesn't mean he hadn't got a sharp, perceptive brain capable of seeing through Jeremy Bamber's charade. Why on earth would he risk his job disagreeing with his superiors purely to gain promotion... a totally absurd suggestion. He even admitted going through hell and risked being ostracized because those with fixed minds refused to believe they might be wrong...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=26m29s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=26m29s)
He also says he prayed something would turn up to prove him right despite seconds before saying he knew JB was guilty. Interesting how DS Jones turned up the evidence that sealed JB's fate: silencer and JM's testimony. Obviously his prayers were answered 8(0(*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=26m29s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcTvqLk0MWU&feature=youtu.be&t=26m29s)
The police are trained to keep an open mind, not to be led by witnesses and let the evidence do the talking. Those present at the scene of crime would have seen it all over the years and ranged from PC's to Chief Superintendent with hundreds of years combined experience. DI Cook alone had 19 years experience as a fingerprint expert. Are you honestly expecting me to believe the likes of DS Jones over D/C Supt Harris and Dr Craig, medical doctor? Imo DS Jones does not present at all well in the video/OP Adam set up. At the age of 45 he was only a DS and never progressed beyond the rank of DI. DS Jones appears to have been the officer that formed close contact with the prosecution witnesses: spending time at Oak Farm drinking whisky with PE when he collected the silencer; spending hours with JM producing hundreds of WS's and providing a safe-house; chasing after BW when she went awol shortly before trial. Why?
- Genuinely believed JB guilty and thought he could see what others didn't?
- Was bought off by the relatives?
- Wanted to impress his superiors and was looking for promotion?
As far as I am concerned JM was a completely unreliable prosecution witness and was pressurised by DS Jones into providing the testimony she did.
What sort of woman, or man for than matter, puts 6 year old children to bed, reads them a bedtime story, and 5 days later identifies their bodies at a morgue knowing her boyfriend was responsible for their deaths (if you believe her testimony) but keeps quiet for a further month? In the intervening period she happily shares his life and bed!
The evidence you refer to didn't rule out SC. If it did the CCRC would not have referred the case to the CoA in 2001.
I daresay we "might" find out in two weeks time if there was anyshenanigansinternal subterfuge at police headquarters.
Noticed that DCC Ronald Stone's QPM award was also featured in the police newspaper - he took centre stage at the press conference after trial and had to defend their reputation regarding the sloppy investigation, but refused to criticize any of the officers involved.
I believe Stan Jones did ask for a shared bottle on one or two occasions, at Bourtree Cottage and Oak Farm. It appears that his method of operation was a softly-softly approach, trying to wheedle information out of people with a little lubrication. Who knows how much they drank? Might only have been just a glass or two.
As to the "hard b........" reference... he said that there was a reason for it? Toughen up, lad!
Holly, can I remind you that Stan Jones was the investigating officer and spent a lot of time with Jeremy and Julie commencing a matter of hours after the murders. He was extremely well placed to observe anything peculiar whereas the senior officers you refer to were merely managers.
You are totally wrong about Julie, she was a completely reliable witness and that is to her credit regardless of her previous crimes. She was under tremendous pressure granted but many a lesser person would have cracked put in her position. Julie is an intelligent woman as evidenced by her career in the Canadian Education Authority where she has risen to great heights. She knew that the only way out for her was to come clean and effectively spill the beans. It would have been made very clear to her, COOPERATE OR BE PROSECUTED.
I believe Julie had doubts about Jeremy's involvement at the beginning and that is why she volunteered to identify the children. Over the days and weeks which followed the murders she came to realise that the man she loved was indeed the monster she feared he might be but hoped all along she was wrong.
Since when is the CCRC the guardian of the truth? They aren't and never will be.
DS Jones was one of many investigating officers assigned to the WHF case. Peculiarities don't necessarily equate to guilt. I made reference to Ch Supt Harris as he was the most senior officer (I think) to observe the victims at soc and the overall soc. He rose to the rank of Ch Supt as he demonstrated his capabilities over and above his peers. First spending two years at the Met and then rising through the ranks within Pitsea CID reaching rank of Ch Supt in 1983 at age 50 after 27 years service. He observed all victims at soc with police surgeon Dr Craig. The pair were highly trained and experienced individuals. If the appearance of the victims and soc pointed away from SC I believe the pair would have picked up on this immediately. Neither noted anything untoward about JB's behaviour unlike DS Jones who questioned the way JB appeared to bend over and vomit when told news of the tragedy.
JM was never charged with OCP, distributing cannabis and cheque book fraud so I'm not really sure whether we can refer to them as crimes as such? In any event I have never made much of her "crimes", NoW deal or the fact JB dumped her as I think it's all largely irrelevant along with how she has chosen to lead her life post JB's trial. I think you're right she was pressurised into 'cooperating'. DS Jones appears to have conducted most of the interviews with JM alone. I have previously asked about the status of these interviews: assisting police or under caution? Also would it have been advisable for her to have received some legal advice or had a solicitor present during the interviews? Pity they were not recorded.
There was no need for JM to have any doubts about JB's involvement at the beginning; she is quite clear in her WS of 8th Sept that JB told her on 7th Aug that he arranged for MM to carry out the murders. Therefore she was fully aware when she identified the victims at the morgue that the man she loved was indeed a monster:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1112
It isn't. I was just pointing out if evidence existed showing SC was incapable of carrying out the murders and taking her own life the CCRC would not have referred the case to the CoA. The case was referred on the silencer alone.
As I have already stated, DS Jones spent most time investigating Jeremy Bamber, he was best place to offer an opinion as to his guilt or otherwise.
Certainly they were crimes committed by her, the fact that she was given immunity from prosecution is neither here nor there.
I don't think Julie was pressurised into cooperating but she was most definitely pressurised into telling the truth. What makes you think the interviews weren't recorded?
Being told something and believing it are two different things. I don't think she believed Jeremy since the whole notion was too dreadful to contemplate, unless of course you believe her involvement extended beyond that previously admitted.
The criminal cases review Commissions can only refer NEW evidence to the COA.
The CCRC never referred any other issues to the CoA as they were watertight.
Puglove in her last post referred to the claim that it was Sheila who fought with, bludgeoned and shot Nevile in the kitchen and pointed out that had she been able to do so (which I sincerely doubt for a moment) then she would have had marks and blood spatter on her and her clothing from the encounter.
Can you explain this Holly?
The CCRC never referred any other issues to the CoA as they were watertight.
Puglove in her last post referred to the claim that it was Sheila who fought with, bludgeoned and shot Nevile in the kitchen and pointed out that had she been able to do so (which I sincerely doubt for a moment) then she would have had marks and blood spatter on her and her clothing from the encounter.
Can you explain this Holly?
Ooops almost forgot the second question!
As I've pointed out on numerous occasions my interpretation of the pathology report is that NB was so badly injured upstairs he was incapable of putting up any sort of defence. I think he collapsed in the kitchen chair from the four gunshot wounds he sustained upstairs and when blows from the rifle rained down he was sadly defenceless. Meaning his assailant would not necessarily have sustained any injuries.
As the rifle and ammo used were low calibre/velocity I don't think the gunshot wounds would necessarily have resulted in spatter. I am unsure about NB's other injuries? All I can say, as I've said on many occasions, is that if it was all so obvious why did highly trained and experienced individuals who had the benefit of seeing all the victims in-situ overlook it? Why years later when Michael Turner QC, who represented JB at his CoA hearing, was asked if he thought JB innocent did he reply "Passionately"?
But that's not what the forensics show Holly, why do you ignore the evidence?
There was a struggle over the kitchen table, a struggle with the rifle as evidenced by the scattered china, the broken lampshade, the marks on the mantelpiece, the piece broken off from the rifle stock etc...
The spatter I was referring to resulted from being beaten by a blunt object, the rifle itself.
Are you so naive as to believe lawyers don't lie?
John we've been over this time and time again. You have your views and I have mine. Again many senior officers observed the soc and victims. If it was all so obvious why did so many miss this staring you in the face evidence?
If you wish to label me as naïve so be it.
What possible reason would Michael Turner QC have to lie? Why on earth would he go on record and say he believes passionately a mass murderer is innocent if he didn't genuinely believe this? Perhaps he is naïve too?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9716069/Devils-advocate-Michael-Turner-prepares-for-his-toughest-case.html
I base my views on the evidence and my comment on lawyers is based on personal experience of them.
What possible reason would Michael Turner QC have to lie? Why on earth would he go on record and say he believes passionately a mass murderer is innocent if he didn't genuinely believe this? Perhaps he is naïve too?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9716069/Devils-advocate-Michael-Turner-prepares-for-his-toughest-case.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9716069/Devils-advocate-Michael-Turner-prepares-for-his-toughest-case.html)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-145437/No-substance-Bamber-case-claims-says-QC.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-145437/No-substance-Bamber-case-claims-says-QC.html)
Yes I'm aware of the outcome and that JB lost his appeal but it still doesn't stop Michael Turner believing, personally, that JB is innocent.
You base your views on your interpretation of the evidence and I base mine on my interpretation 8((()*/
There are good and bad in all professions. Personally I think Michael Turner QC is a person/lawyer of high integrity?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-145437/No-substance-Bamber-case-claims-says-QC.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-145437/No-substance-Bamber-case-claims-says-QC.html)
Yes I'm aware of the outcome and that JB lost his appeal but it still doesn't stop Michael Turner believing, personally, that JB is innocent.
Not necessarily... he might have changed his mind by now.
Maybe but I doubt it. I think how one views the case is fairly static. There are a few exceptions of course eg Blue posters: April, Caroline and Susan who all argued strongly for some 2 years that JB was a MoJ and then all changed. Of course the legal profession need to defend or prosecute regardless of their own personal views but they will obviously have personal views which may differ from their professional view.
An advocates job is to represent his or her client regardless of their personal opinion.
Mr Temple, rejecting the allegations on the 11th day of the hearing before Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques in London, said that Bamber's counsel, Michael Turner QC, "was seeking to swim in an empty sea".
@)(++(* No change there then.
Well he wasn't going to say that he thought him guilty.
On the evidence Holly, can you point to anything, no matter how trivial, which in your opinion supports Jeremy's innocence?
Yes that's what I said but he or she will have their own personal views.
Which they will keep to themself. I take it you have noticed that barristers don't give interviews about their clients cases, that privilege is left to the lawyers.
It might be worth remembering what appeal court judges said about previous MoJ's:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3394.msg129016#msg129016
I don't know why you always relate the Bamber case to others when they have nothing in common.
Have you found this evidence yet proving Jeremy innocent?
Yet!
Have you found this evidence yet proving SC could not have been responsible?
Yes, loads of it, that's why I believe Jeremy guilty.
JB's legal team are preparing a new application for the CCRC:
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/ccrc-applications
God loves a trier @)(++(* ..or should that be a chancer???
JB's legal team are preparing a new application for the CCRC:
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/ccrc-applications
Does anyone know who is representing him now that Simon McKay has exited the scene?
Does anyone know who is representing him now that Simon McKay has exited the scene?
See 'legal' section sandwiched between Heidi Hawkins and Lorna Lake:
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/about (http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/about)
That's as much as I know.
They sound like the love interest in a Bond movie! 8**8:/: ... which reminds me, why don't you join the crew and post a mugshot then we can see how you compare?
I'm guessing this is the real you? &%+((£ ...
We might all be going home soon anyway ie if PH produces the smoking gun on Saturday as he has promised to do &%+((£
Thanks for the information Holly, I see none of them are mentioned by name which does not surprise me in the least given it is a load of bull.
(http://www.subdude-site.com/WebPages_Local/RefInfo/Computer/WebDev/WebGraphics_Decopics/AniGIFs/LivingThings_orTheirToons_orParts/Ani_Animals/Ani_OTHERanimals/bull_lickingMatador_430x338_ani.gif)
Possibly but I do recall Simon McKay received some personal attacks as a result of representing JB which I found quite sad as he was only doing his job (and acting pro bono). Any new solicitors may wish to keep a low profile to avoid a repeat. JB is going nowhere without overwhelming new evidence.
I'm not a member of the crew!
I chose the username Holly Goodhead as when I first joined Red (02/03/13) I was still posting on Blue as Naughty Nun and didn't want anyone to know I was posting here/spying hence Holly Goodhead 8)-))) However I guess our colouring and facial features are not dissimilar. In the 80's I was told repeatedly I was a dead ringer for Linda Lusardi 8**8:/: I still scrub up ok. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. If you're into blondes I ain't the gal for you! My ideal guys looks wise are Niall Ferguson (historian), Roy Keane (footballer). How do you compare? My Pete looks like Alex Deakin the BBC's weather man.
When I was on Blue I spent ages trying to upload a pic/avatar. NGB was going to help me but then he banned me (31/10/13) 8(8-)) I'm not sure his IT skills were that good anyway. I scanned a hard copy photo to my pc but I was unable to upload it to my avatar? And I don't want anyone in my real life knowing about my dirty secret ie an unhealthy interest in the Jeremy Bamber case 8()-000(
We might all be going home soon anyway ie if PH produces the smoking gun on Saturday as he has promised to do &%+((£
A couple of years ago, Pugsy sent me a photo of L.L. which she nicked from Gav's shed. It was too good to waste, so I pinned it up in the greenhouse to encourage my tomatoes and it sure made them swell and redden up... amongst other things!
Anything related to Gav usually disappears like a wilting violet before reappearing as something different so your lucky your strawberries didn't grow up as nettles.
@)(++(* 23 views and counting... people think your Lois Chiles, Holly!
As for me... think Blofeld with a smaller scar (after a burglar threw an ironing board through a window and it caught me on the forehead). 8(8-))
Strange that you mentioned your similarity to Linda Lusardi! A couple of years ago, Pugsy sent me a photo of L.L. which she nicked from Gav's shed. It was too good to waste, so I pinned it up in the greenhouse to encourage my tomatoes and it sure made them swell and redden up... amongst other things!
Anything related to Gav usually disappears like a wilting violet before reappearing as something different so your lucky your strawberries didn't grow up as nettles.
I noticed that @)(++(* So shallow, my posts never usually receive that much attention 8)><(
Aargh!! I've just noticed your little thingy, Holl. I won't pillory, pelt or punish you,you're my gay crush! I'll just tease, tweak and tickle you. 8)-)))
I was almost hoping PH was going to deliver 8**8:/: but it seems the 'smoking gun' is a letter from an old lag who served time with JB! Wonder if the letter was typed and postmarked Essex 8)-)))
That's the latest up-date from someone who obtained a copy of Deviant today and has skimmed it. I'll up-date further on the PH thread when I have further info.
Charles "Bouncer" Bronson of Monster Mansions - he advises any old lag who's desperate for support. 8((()*/
What better reason for the move to Wakefield? ?>)()<
Re: Charles Branson now known as Charles Salvador
Britain’s most notorious prisoner launches legal challenge to have parole hearing held in public
One of Britain’s most notorious prisoners has begun a legal action challenging the ban preventing parole hearings being held in public. Charles Salvador, previously known as Charles Bronson, has been in prison for most of the last 45 years and wants to waive his right to privacy and for his next parole hearing to be held in ‘the full public glare’.
Salvador’s legal team argues that the parole board rules’ blanket ban on public hearings is unlawful and, if successful, the challenge would force the government to change the regime. In particular, they argue that Parole Board Rules 2019, rule 15(3) requiring parole board hearings to be held in private offends the well-established principle of open justice as well as being in breach of the article six right to a fair and public hearing.
‘It is hoped that by providing Charles Salvador with the right to apply for a public parole hearing the public can gain a proper understanding of the parole process and it will push the secretary of state for justice to fully respect the independence of the Parole Board,’ comments his solicitor Dean Kingham of Swain and Co Solicitors.
The challenge is being brought by the same legal team, Dean Kingham together with barrister Matt Stanbury of Garden Court North, behind the recent challenge over concerns about the independence of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (the Gary Warner case – as reported on the Justice Gap here).
The government counters that open justice requirements are met by the possibility for a parole board to allow for observers and for a summary of a decision to be published. That falls ‘significantly short’ of what would be expected under the principles of open justice, the prisoner’s lawyers argue.
‘Charles Bronson’ became a fixture of the tabloid press over the years and is frequently referred to as ‘Britain’s most violent prison’. He now insists that he is a changed man. He changed his name in 2014 in tribute to the artist Salvador Dali.
‘I am sick of being behind closed doors and 20 foot walls,’ he says. ‘The public need to see and hear that I am no longer a violent man and I have proven it and will continue to.’
He is currently held at HMP Woodhill in a high security close supervision centre designed for the most disruptive and dangerous prisoners. He was sentenced to life in February 2000 after taking hostage a teacher at HMP Hull for 44 hours. In November 2018 he was acquitted at Leeds Crown Court of attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent to a governor at HMP Wakefield. He represented himself.
His case has been reviewed by the parole board six times since his minimum term expired in February 2003, most recently in November 2017. According to his legal team, Salvador has been progressing well at Woodhill and has been recommended for a move to Whitemoor which is viewed as ‘the last step before removal’.
However, the prisoner has clashed with the Ministry of Justice over problems with access to correspondence including wedding photos after he married the late actress Paula Williamson. The prison is currently photocopying all mail received as part of a clampdown on drugs like Spice being sprayed on to letters.
According to Dean Kingham, his client is ‘currently at the mercy of the secretary of state for justice’. ‘He is relying on the minister to progress him out of the close supervision centre and give him the ability to argue his risk of future violence has reduced,’ he continues. ‘Unfortunately, the actions of the secretary of state most recently suggests the he will be very difficult towards him.’
Salvador intends to use his wedding photographs in his art. ‘Mr. Salvador is extremely anti-drugs and drug use is not linked to his risk of violence,’ Kingham adds.
The 2019 parole board regime was introduced in the wake of the furore over the Parole Board’s decision to release serial sex offender John Worboys. The latest legal challenge cites the judicial review of the Worboy decision (R (DSD) v Parole Board [2019] QB 285) and Salvador’s lawyers argue that the regime does not contemplate cases where the prisoner waives their own privacy rights. They believe that there is considerable and legitimate public interest in better understanding how a prisoner could be locked up for 45 years as well as how the parole board takes decisions in his case.
A post-Worboys government review considered the possibility of some hearings being heard in public. It concluded that concerns over public access could ‘compromise the confidence of witnesses and panel members to be as open and candid as a closed hearing allows’ and that safety and privacy concerns might ‘undermine the ability of prisoners to resettle successfully and safely’.
https://www.thejusticegap.com/britains-most-notorious-prisoner-launches-legal-challenge-to-have-parole-hearing-held-in-public/
Re: Charles Branson now known as Charles Salvador
Britain’s most notorious prisoner launches legal challenge to have parole hearing held in public
One of Britain’s most notorious prisoners has begun a legal action challenging the ban preventing parole hearings being held in public. Charles Salvador, previously known as Charles Bronson, has been in prison for most of the last 45 years and wants to waive his right to privacy and for his next parole hearing to be held in ‘the full public glare’.
Salvador’s legal team argues that the parole board rules’ blanket ban on public hearings is unlawful and, if successful, the challenge would force the government to change the regime. In particular, they argue that Parole Board Rules 2019, rule 15(3) requiring parole board hearings to be held in private offends the well-established principle of open justice as well as being in breach of the article six right to a fair and public hearing.
‘It is hoped that by providing Charles Salvador with the right to apply for a public parole hearing the public can gain a proper understanding of the parole process and it will push the secretary of state for justice to fully respect the independence of the Parole Board,’ comments his solicitor Dean Kingham of Swain and Co Solicitors.
The challenge is being brought by the same legal team, Dean Kingham together with barrister Matt Stanbury of Garden Court North, behind the recent challenge over concerns about the independence of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (the Gary Warner case – as reported on the Justice Gap here).
The government counters that open justice requirements are met by the possibility for a parole board to allow for observers and for a summary of a decision to be published. That falls ‘significantly short’ of what would be expected under the principles of open justice, the prisoner’s lawyers argue.
‘Charles Bronson’ became a fixture of the tabloid press over the years and is frequently referred to as ‘Britain’s most violent prison’. He now insists that he is a changed man. He changed his name in 2014 in tribute to the artist Salvador Dali.
‘I am sick of being behind closed doors and 20 foot walls,’ he says. ‘The public need to see and hear that I am no longer a violent man and I have proven it and will continue to.’
He is currently held at HMP Woodhill in a high security close supervision centre designed for the most disruptive and dangerous prisoners. He was sentenced to life in February 2000 after taking hostage a teacher at HMP Hull for 44 hours. In November 2018 he was acquitted at Leeds Crown Court of attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent to a governor at HMP Wakefield. He represented himself.
His case has been reviewed by the parole board six times since his minimum term expired in February 2003, most recently in November 2017. According to his legal team, Salvador has been progressing well at Woodhill and has been recommended for a move to Whitemoor which is viewed as ‘the last step before removal’.
However, the prisoner has clashed with the Ministry of Justice over problems with access to correspondence including wedding photos after he married the late actress Paula Williamson. The prison is currently photocopying all mail received as part of a clampdown on drugs like Spice being sprayed on to letters.
According to Dean Kingham, his client is ‘currently at the mercy of the secretary of state for justice’. ‘He is relying on the minister to progress him out of the close supervision centre and give him the ability to argue his risk of future violence has reduced,’ he continues. ‘Unfortunately, the actions of the secretary of state most recently suggests the he will be very difficult towards him.’
Salvador intends to use his wedding photographs in his art. ‘Mr. Salvador is extremely anti-drugs and drug use is not linked to his risk of violence,’ Kingham adds.
The 2019 parole board regime was introduced in the wake of the furore over the Parole Board’s decision to release serial sex offender John Worboys. The latest legal challenge cites the judicial review of the Worboy decision (R (DSD) v Parole Board [2019] QB 285) and Salvador’s lawyers argue that the regime does not contemplate cases where the prisoner waives their own privacy rights. They believe that there is considerable and legitimate public interest in better understanding how a prisoner could be locked up for 45 years as well as how the parole board takes decisions in his case.
A post-Worboys government review considered the possibility of some hearings being heard in public. It concluded that concerns over public access could ‘compromise the confidence of witnesses and panel members to be as open and candid as a closed hearing allows’ and that safety and privacy concerns might ‘undermine the ability of prisoners to resettle successfully and safely’.
https://www.thejusticegap.com/britains-most-notorious-prisoner-launches-legal-challenge-to-have-parole-hearing-held-in-public/
I understand some 'pink' champagne was consumed at the Caribbean Cottage, Burnham on Crouch, post funeral. A young guy loses his family in tragic circumstances and post funeral he goes out with a few friends for something to eat/drink?
Two days after the funerals he makes a pass on Anji Greaves - what do you make of this Holly?
Bamber even talked to her about marriage
Westminster commission on miscarriages of justice looks at watchdog’s independence
The Westminster commission currently looking into the miscarriage of justice watchdog considered concerns over its independence from government. At the end of July, the Justice Gap reported on a legal action by behalf a prisoner who is arguing that the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was not sufficiently independent of the Ministry of Justice. Gary Warner, sentenced to 16 years in prison for his role in an armed robbery, is currently challenging the CCRC’s rejection of his case.You can read the story here.
Concerns over the watchdog’s lack of independence was raised by Baroness Stern in an evidence session of the all-party parliamentary group on miscarriages of justice. ‘I understand that MoJ officials went into the CCRC, analysed the whole way of working in detail, and recommended a lot of very profound changes that had to be implemented, that were not recommendations but had to be implemented,’ she said.
The Justice Gap has seen minutes from a meeting between civil servants and the commissioners in February 2018 (quoted by the Warner’s lawyers) in which a leading MoJ civil servant appeared to insist that the watchdog accept changes to terms of employment for staff and to the structure of its board.
Stern asked the Professor Carolyn Hoyle of Oxford University’s Centre for Criminology was it ‘possible for the CCRC to act as if it were an independent body in these circumstances?’ The academic had previously raised her own concerns about changes to the tenure of the CCRC’s commissioners. One of the ‘huge challenges going forward’ for the CCRC was the new commissioners’ remuneration packages which resulted in ‘a massive increase in part-time – and I don’t mean 50%, I mean often less than that – commissioners’, she had said.
The CCRC is required to have 11 commissioners under its founding statute and the agreement of three is needed to refer a case to the Court of Appeal. Ten years ago nearly all the watchdog’s 11 commissioners were on full-time contracts with salaries and pension schemes. Now all but one are employed on a minimum one-day-a-week contracts and paid a day rate.
Professors Carolyn Hoyle and Mai Sato new book Reasons to doubt: Wrongful Convictions and the CCRC featured new research drawing on analysis of 147 of the commission’s cases. Hoyle said that the CCRC’s independence was not in her research’s remit, but added it was ‘very difficult to be critical of government when government are paying for your organisation’. She called the commission ‘massively under-resourced… for many, many years’. ‘The number of part-time commissioners at the moment goes against being an efficient and a thorough organisation – I have no doubt about that. And that is partly an issue of how government has decided to pay Commissioners, and that includes pension, it includes working rates, et cetera.’
Professors Hoyle told the Westminster commission that the CCRC was ‘not a perfect organisation’. ‘It has more variability in its responses to cases than I think any of us would like to see,’ she said. ‘Certainly than applicants and their legal representatives would want to see.’ She called the Birmingham-based group ‘somewhat cautious’ in its referrals and ‘sometimes too slow and too ponderous’.
Dr Dennis Eady of Cardiff University’s innocence project pointed out that the CCRC’s referrals had plummeted over the last three years – from a 20-year average of over 30 to just 13 last year. Eady said that a referral rate of ‘about 1%’ of the total number of applications represented ‘a snowball’s chance in hell’. ‘There’s a greater need now for a Royal Commission than there was in 1991. Things have got so bad, and so serious,’ he said.
Dr Eady was concerned that the APPG might make ‘a few recommendations’ for the CCRC to be ‘a bit bolder’ as the House of Commons’ justice committee did in 2015. ‘There’s a danger that we might mess around on the periphery of things, which might make them better for a little while. But I think essentially, we’ve got to be more radical in the approach we take.’
‘We’ve lowered the standard of proof consistently, we’ve knocked out due process safeguards, we’ve become a much more convictionist kind of society. We’ve had moral panics around sex offences and joint enterprise. And that bar has got lower and lower and lower in terms of convicting people. At the other end, as we’ve heard, the Court of Appeal’s bar has got higher and higher and higher. And the CCRC is stuck between the rock and the hard place.’
Dr Dennis Eady
Dr Eady said it was time to reform the Court of Appeal and allow for the CCRC t have more power and the ability to quash convictions. ‘In some ways, the only way to deal with the Court of Appeal, I’m afraid, is to take some of their power away.’
Erwin James, editor of the prisoners newspaper Inside Time and a member of the all party parliamentary group, spoke of his own experience as a prisoner helping a fellow inmate who he was convinced was innocent. James himself discovered evidence that in his view ‘totally undermined’ the prosecution case but would not have been allowed in by the Court of Appeal because the CCRC judged that it would have taken the view it was not fresh evidence. A situation the journalist called ‘absurd’.
Prof Hoyle rejected criticisms that the CCRC was ‘not fit for purpose’. She said: ‘There are currently… maybe 480 people who are outside of prison who would otherwise be inside prison whose lives have been turned around, somewhat, because of the Commission’s work… and does a pretty thorough job of doing approximately 1400 applications a year, and making difficult decisions in those cases. So, it does a much better job than its predecessor, C3.’
https://www.thejusticegap.com/westminster-commission-on-miscarriages-of-justice-looks-at-watchdogs-independence/
Tru Benjamin
@tru68
“...one thing I did learn in prison is that there is no such thing as false hope - there is only hope.” Erwin James
@TheErwinJames
#JeremyBamber
#Innocent
#NoDisclosureNoJustice
8:52 AM · May 13, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
https://mobile.twitter.com/tru68/status/1260477941571555330
Westminster commission on miscarriages of justice looks at watchdog’s independence
https://www.thejusticegap.com/westminster-commission-on-miscarriages-of-justice-looks-at-watchdogs-independence/
Mark Newby says today he ‘was dleighted to contribute to this important work’
Have yet to read the ‘report’ published today but Cardiff innocence project also contributed apparently