The ousting of Taff Jones:

[adam]

Jeremy's supporters often claim Taff Jones went to his grave knowing privileged information which showed Jeremy was innocent.

Taff believed in Bamber's innocence up until the day of his premature death. Being head of the investigation the other officers fell fell into line, although people like Stan Jones disagreed.

The relatives  believed it was Jeremy. But Taff dismissed them. Taff could not have been very convincing as the relatives did not give up.

Robert Boutflour went to Essex Police HQ at Chelmsford. Telling Peter Simpson his concerns. Peter Simpson agreed straight away to look at the case again. Sending CID over to assist the police. Headed by Jim Kinelly.

Despite Taff's belief Jeremy was innocent, he did the first interviews with Bamber. After some light probing Bamber did not confess. 'Julie must be telling lies' Taff said to Stan !

Peter Simpson got everyone together and asked every police officer in the room who they thought was responsible. Everyone said Bamber. Except Taff, although he had no evidence to change anyone's mind.

Taff was still allowed to continue interviewing Bamber.

Eventually Clarke and Stan Jones took over interviewing tasks. Taff being quietly removed from the case. The way he had tried to quietly remove Stan.

The ousting seems above board. Outside individuals being brought into the case and everyone following the evidence.  Taff may have been the corrupt one. Refusing to change stance, perhaps worried about his golf, repercussions from above and the chance Bamber would walk. As well as being too proud to admit his early mistake.

29

[Holly Goodhead]

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5616.msg199700#msg199700

I would imagine given all JB's surviving relatives put pressure on EP to reinvestigate and were convinced of JB's involvement it was quite powerful stuff.  However according to CC they knew nothing about the severity of SC's mental illness:

The Bambers were private people as stated in CC's book:

"One of the most striking things about that day, although not altogether surprising for me, was the fact that, the more I talked to June and Nevill's relations, the more I realised none of them actually knew anything had been seriously wrong with Bambs - not even June's sister Pam.  Many of them said that had they known, they would have been more than willing to help and share the burden.  Why hadn't I contacted them and told them all about it?  I couldn't believe what I was hearing and could only reply by saying that I didn't feel it had been my business to betray the Bamber's confidence.  They were very private people whose decisions I had to respect - whether right or wrong.  These people had no idea how much I'd need them as allies to convince June and Nevill of how strongly I felt Bamb's treatment should have been changed".

Perhaps sub-consciously they found the idea of wealth that had been in the Speakman dynasty for generations leaving and going to a non-blood family member unacceptable.

I assume with a name like Taff Jones he was a Welshman?  Perhaps he just didn't he see himself as part of the English establishment and protector of the English landowners as the other Essex/English born cops did and remained objective and undeterred by the relatives?

I don't think Taff had any privileged information which showed JB was innocent.

[adam]

EP got a lot of criticism after securing a guilty verdict at court. They bravely changed direction, around a month after the massacre.

Taff should take most of the criticism. He was leading it and dismissed the relatives and other officers. The direction was only changed after EP headquarters got involved.

[Holly Goodhead]

EP got a lot of criticism after securing a guilty verdict at court. They bravely changed direction, around a month after the massacre.

Taff should take most of the criticism. He was leading it and dismissed the relatives and other officers. The direction was only changed after EP headquarters got involved.

They might one day be in for a lot more criticism 

I don't think there was anything brave in what they did; they simply caved into pressure from the relatives and allowed them to dominate the direction of the investigation and effectively take over.  Who identified the supposed entry and exit point?  Who identified the mode of transport supposedly used to get JB to and from the soc/WHF?  Who 'found' the silencer supposedly complete with blood, paint and a hair on it?  Who said SC's coordination was so poor she couldn't bang beans on toast or pour a cup of tea?  Who said SC  would have no idea how to load and fire the rifle?  And if she had she would have damaged her nails/polish? etc, etc, etc...

DCI Jones was one of many police officers who believed SC was responsible along with Dr Craig and Dr Vanezis. 

See my post here re AE's WS confirming DCI Jones and DS Jones thought SC responsible along with a WS from DI Cook who also thought SC was responsible:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5616.msg199700#msg199700

As you are no doubt aware following on from the relatives 'concerns' Det Supt Ainsley instructed a case review.  This was led by Det Supt Kenneally.  On Friday 6th September 1985 a meeting was held to discuss the outcome.  Those present included:

Chief Constable Bunyard
ACC Simpson
Det Supt Ainsely
Det Supt Kenneally

CONCLUSION:  SC was responsible

The following thread, post #7 by NGB confirms that the above had been held under PII 

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2158.msg66504.html#msg66504

[adam]

AE and RB couldn't knock the skin off a rice pudding. Let alone get Taff to change his mind. Although I'm sure AE's eye fluttering would have buttered many parsnips.

EP HQ agreed to look at the case again after RB rang them. It was then that other officers said they believed Taff had been wrong.

[APRIL]

AE and RB couldn't knock the skin off a rice pudding. Let alone get Taff to change his mind. Although I'm sure AE's eye fluttering would have buttered many parsnips.

EP HQ agreed to look at the case again after RB rang them. It was then that other officers said they believed Taff had been wrong.

Unless you have intimate knowledge of both AE and RB you're really not qualified to make that assessment of them................unless, of course, you're repeating someone else's words.

[Holly Goodhead]

AE and RB couldn't knock the skin off a rice pudding. Let alone get Taff to change his mind. Although I'm sure AE's eye fluttering would have buttered many parsnips.

EP HQ agreed to look at the case again after RB rang them. It was then that other officers said they believed Taff had been wrong.

I think my posts above speak for themselves.  Have you sources for your "other officers said they believed Taff had been wrong"?

[guinness]

AE and RB couldn't knock the skin off a rice pudding. Let alone get Taff to change his mind. Although I'm sure AE's eye fluttering would have buttered many parsnips.

EP HQ agreed to look at the case again after RB rang them. It was then that other officers said they believed Taff had been wrong.

Sorry . what is your point here - one minute you are saying their arguments were in effectual - then you are saying one phone call did it? So which was it? And how come they did have so much influence in the end. ?

The blood on the silencer was discovered earlier -so why did it take until early sept to remove him from the case?

You are obviously extremely well read on the case so perhaps you could be a bit clearer about the point you are making?

[adam]

It is strange that the relatives met Taff but he refused to change stance. Yet Peter Simpson at EP HQ was just spoken to on the phone, and ordered the case to be investigated again.

Simpson was right to do this.

Taff was obviously wrong to not even agree to look at the case again. If the relatives can see things are not right, a senior police officer should.  Poor policing, stubbornness  and laziness.

[Holly Goodhead]

It is strange that the relatives met Taff but he refused to change stance. Yet Peter Simpson at EP HQ was just spoken to on the phone, and ordered the case to be investigated again.

Simpson was right to do this.

Taff was obviously wrong to not even agree to look at the case again. If the relatives can see things are not right, a senior police officer should. Poor policing, stubbornness  and laziness.

And the outcome of the re-investigation, instructed by ACC Simpson, supported DCI Jones' view that SC was responsible.

The relatives were amateur sleuths without remit not trained and experienced detectives with full remit.  The relatives knew nothing about the severity of SC's mental illness and none of them could tell the twins Daniel and Nicholas apart hence JM had to identify them at the morgue which perhaps gives an indication of how little time they had spent in the company of SC and the twins.

"Poor policing, laziness and stubbornness" or determination on the part of the relatives that the Speakman dynasty should remain intact and not be carved up with the Bambers' adopted son?

[adam]

And the outcome of the re-investigation, instructed by ACC Simpson, supported DCI Jones' view that SC was responsible.

The relatives were amateur sleuths without remit not trained and experienced detectives with full remit.  The relatives knew nothing about the severity of SC's mental illness and none of them could tell the twins Daniel and Nicholas apart hence JM had to identify them at the morgue which perhaps gives an indication of how little time they had spent in the company of SC and the twins.

"Poor policing, laziness and stubbornness" or determination on the part of the relatives that the Speakman dynasty should remain intact and not be carved up with the Bambers' adopted son?

Have you got a source saying Simpson thought Sheila was responsible ?

He ordered an immediate reinvestigation after speaking to RB on the phone. Later bringing everyone connected to the case into a room and asking for their view. They all said they believed Bamber responsible. Except Taff.

Taff was taken off the case, a change of direction took place and Bamber successfully prosecuted.

So not sure when Simpson said Sheila was responsible.

[adam]

After Julie approached the police, Bamber was brought in for questioning. Taff asking the questions.

After a few minutes of light questioning, Bamber did not admit to the massacre. 'Julie must be lying',  Taff said to everyone !

Good police work.

[adam]

The silencer evidence showed the blood was specific to Sheila. The rifle therefore too long for her to shoot herself. At the time no one disputed the blood evidence.

It was therefore impossible for Jeremy to be innocent. But Taff still believed this. Was this guy for real ?

[Holly Goodhead]

Have you got a source saying Simpson thought Sheila was responsible ?

He ordered an immediate reinvestigation after speaking to RB on the phone. Later bringing everyone connected to the case into a room and asking for their view. They all said they believed Bamber responsible. Except Taff.

Taff was taken off the case, a change of direction took place and Bamber successfully prosecuted.

So not sure when Simpson said Sheila was responsible.

As far as I am aware the outcome of the investigation and review instructed by ACC Simpson was that SC was responsible. 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5855.msg208866#msg208866

[Holly Goodhead]

After Julie approached the police, Bamber was brought in for questioning. Taff asking the questions.

After a few minutes of light questioning, Bamber did not admit to the massacre. 'Julie must be lying', Taff said to everyone !

Good police work.

Sounds reasonable and logical.