The phone call

[steve_trousers]

What exactly is a stretch of credulity?

A stretch of the imagination

[Holly Goodhead]

A stretch of the imagination

What do you find incredulous about a phone call that can neither be proved nor disproved?

[Caroline]

Do you also reject the evidence that Nevill phoned the police at 03:26?

Absolutely and completely.

[steve_trousers]

Because it can and has been dismantled and disproved in a courtroom, for many reasons that we go over every other day, it seems.
Sheila has been comprehensively eliminated from being the culprit, for a start. And Jeremy himself eliminated the possibility of 3rd party involvement.

[Holly Goodhead]

Hi G-unit, Sorry I know you're asking Caroline the question but It is worth noting - if it was Nevill who called the police at 03:26, he didn't do so by dialling 999, he did so by leafing through the yellow pages looking for the local police stations number. At a time when Sheila had "gone crazy and got the gun".
Why not just dial 999? Because if Jeremy did make 2 calls he couldn't risk speaking to the same operator, who would likely notice it was the same voice as made the other call and casts further doubt on Nevill making the call.

The 03:26 timing is an anachronism which his supporters have pounced on, and suggested that perhaps Sheila hadn't actually "gone crazy and got the gun" yet. If not then why call the police?

I don't believe "supporters" all sing from the same hymn sheet no more than those who believe he's guilty do.

I don't believe NB called the police but if he did as a local magistrate he might well have known the numbers to
local police stations and not had to thumb thru directories as you claim. 

[G-Unit]

Hi G-unit, Sorry I know you're asking Caroline the question but It is worth noting - if it was Nevill who called the police at 03:26, he didn't do so by dialling 999, he did so by leafing through the yellow pages looking for the local police stations number. At a time when Sheila had "gone crazy and got the gun".
Why not just dial 999? Because if Jeremy did make 2 calls he couldn't risk speaking to the same operator, who would likely notice it was the same voice as made the other call and casts further doubt on Nevill making the call.

The 03:26 timing is an anachronism which his supporters have pounced on, and suggested that perhaps Sheila hadn't actually "gone crazy and got the gun" yet. If not then why call the police?

As an older person I remember knowing phone numbers off by heart. As a J.P. perhaps Nevill knew the number of the station.

There were two calls to the police and two different call logs though, were there?

[Caroline]

Hi G-unit, Sorry I know you're asking Caroline the question but It is worth noting - if it was Nevill who called the police at 03:26, he didn't do so by dialling 999, he did so by leafing through the yellow pages looking for the local police stations number. At a time when Sheila had "gone crazy and got the gun".
Why not just dial 999? Because if Jeremy did make 2 calls he couldn't risk speaking to the same operator, who would likely notice it was the same voice as made the other call and casts further doubt on Nevill making the call.

The 03:26 timing is an anachronism which his supporters have pounced on, and suggested that perhaps Sheila hadn't actually "gone crazy and got the gun" yet. If not then why call the police?

Not only that, neither West or Bonnett supported the call from Nevill, the very thing that would have supported Sheila being the murderer. The log is badly written but nothing more but the notion that Nevill called the police and they said nothing is just silly.

[G-Unit]

Absolutely and completely.

Sorry, but I'm new to this case. Would you mind telling me why you reject that document?

[Caroline]

As an older person I remember knowing phone numbers off by heart. As a J.P. perhaps Nevill knew the number of the station.

There were two calls to the police and two different call logs though, were there?

No, there was only Jeremy's call and he spoke to PC West, West relayed Jeremy's call to a civilian call handler (Malcolm Bonnett) who was responsible for detailing the log you posted above. His statement and his testimony state clearly that the call he received came from CD1990 (entered on the log) which is PC West's call sign.

[Caroline]

Sorry, but I'm new to this case. Would you mind telling me why you reject that document?

Hi, no worries - see above.

[Holly Goodhead]

Because it can and has been dismantled and disproved in a courtroom, for many reasons that we go over every other day, it seems.
Sheila has been comprehensively eliminated from being the culprit, for a start. And Jeremy himself eliminated the possibility of 3rd party involvement.

What has been dismantled and disproved in a courtroom? 

10/12 jurors found guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on what they heard during proceedings.  No one knows what weight jurors attributed to the various pieces of evidence and whether they may have heard some they totally rejected.

The trial was a sham imo and the appeals and CCRC apps since have been poorly managed and under resourced. 

I believe high quality forensics using 21st century science and tech along with competent and experienced lawyers who are able to dedicate the required time to the case will overturn the conviction.

[Holly Goodhead]

No, there was only Jeremy's call and he spoke to PC West, West relayed Jeremy's call to a civilian call handler (Malcolm Bonnett) who was responsible for detailing the log you posted above. His statement and his testimony state clearly that the call he received came from CD1990 (entered on the log) which is PC West's call sign.

Agreed.

[steve_trousers]

I don't believe "supporters" all sing from the same hymn sheet no more than those who believe he's guilty do.

I don't believe NB called the police but if he did as a local magistrate he might well have known the numbers to
local police stations and not had to thumb thru directories as you claim.

I think it's very convenient for that argument, to drop in the fact that he's a local magistrate. when you examine the role of a local magistrate it still doesn't point to him knowing the number of a police station off by heart any more than the average Joe. I agree with you there was no call from NB

[steve_trousers]

What has been dismantled and disproved in a courtroom? 

10/12 jurors found guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on what they heard during proceedings.  No one knows what weight jurors attributed to the various pieces of evidence and whether they may have heard some they totally rejected.

The trial was a sham imo and the appeals and CCRC apps since have been poorly managed and under resourced. 

I believe high quality forensics using 21st century science and tech along with competent and experienced lawyers who are able to dedicate the required time to the case will overturn the conviction.

The phone call was covered in some depth at the original trial, as one of the 3 key points put forward by the prosecution. The others being the blood/silencer and Ms Mugford's testimony. So we can rest assured that it was weighed and considered by the jury.

I can't agree with your description of her majesty versus Bamber as a "sham". I might agree that the silencer/blood evidence was questionable but there was nothing approaching shambolic about the rest of the trial.

As for your last sentence, competence and experienced lawyers won't touch him any more.

[Holly Goodhead]

The phone call was covered in some depth at the original trial, as one of the 3 key points put forward by the prosecution. The others being the blood/silencer and Ms Mugford's testimony. So we can rest assured that it was weighed and considered by the jury.

But we still can't be sure what weight, if any, jurors gave to those aspects.

Jurors questions related to the blood/silencer.

I can't agree with your description of her majesty versus Bamber as a "sham". I might agree that the silencer/blood evidence was questionable but there was nothing approaching shambolic about the rest of the trial.

So you don't think jurors should have been taken to WHF to see what the prosecution claimed in terms of who was shot where and how JB is supposed to have exited leaving the farmhouse apparently secured from within? 

As for your last sentence, competence and experienced lawyers won't touch him any more.

What evidence do you have to support the above assertion.