Could the Rettendon Two be a potential MoJ.

[Chud]

The poster on the other forum has responded by uploading the following map identifying the soc and the mobile cell sites for Wickford and Hockley.   Perhaps the poster would like to create a further map adding in the cell site Nicholls calls were routed through when he claims to have been in Meadow Street at Rettendon.  These calls were received through the Basildon cell site which is not even on the poster's map as it so far away!

I repeat:

18.44 Tate receives a call on his mobile via the Wickford cell site

18.59 Whomes made 2 calls to Nicholls routed through the Ingatestone and Hockely cell sites

18.59 Nicholls received 2 calls from Whomes routed through the Basildon cell site

Perhaps the poster would like to produce another map identifying the soc along with the 4 cell sites above so we can all be clear that they in no way shape or form are capable of pinpointing the whereabouts of the above at said times.  All that can be said is they were in areas covering many miles.

The supposed location of the Hockley transmitter on that diagram is around 1.8km away from where the tower was in 1995. 

[Holly Goodhead]

The supposed location of the Hockley transmitter on that diagram is around 1.8km away from where the tower was in 1995.

Thanks for that. 

I still think the police/prosecution cherry picked the data presented. 

At trial there was much speculation about the phone calls from the phone box at the Sorrel Horse phone box.  The prosecution claimed Steele made the calls who in turn claimed Nicholls made the calls    Steele and Nicholls both claimed they were miles away at the time and both received/made calls on mobiles around the same time.  Therefore an evaluation of the cell data might have had the potential to provide something meaningful. 

[Myster]

  ...

[Holly Goodhead]

The poster on the other forum has now created a further cell site map which includes the Basildon cell site.  Perhaps when he has a moment he can add in the cell site at Ingatestone.  This will show beyond any doubt that cell site analysis in this type of situation is absolutely meaningless. It does not in any way shape or form place the individuals in the right locations at the right time.  All it is capable of showing is that the individuals were in areas covering radius's of several miles.

If the justice system was concerned with the truth what needed to have happened is that all mobile calls made by the murdered trio, Nicholls, Steele and Whomes over the last 24 hours required analysing.  This would throw up far more meaningful data since Nicholls, Steele and Whomes were making and receiving mobile phone calls in different areas covering a much greater distance.   

[Holly Goodhead]

Another post from the poster on the other forum

 

Here is the Judges summing up on the testimony Nicholls gave in 1997.

"Then he turned the car into the track and again turned it round to face towards the road. He had head lights on and when he pulled in he did not see anything or anyone as he drove into the track and turned round. Once he had turned in almost immediately the back door on the passenger side opened and Jack got in. No light came on when Jack got into the back. Nicholls did not think the courtesy light came on if it was the rear door you opened and not the front door. He could not see what Jack was wearing then because it was dark. He could just see it was Jack. Nicholls could not remember who spoke the first words but Nicholls said, "Where's Mick?" Jack said, "He won't be long, he's dropped something."

After not very long, a couple of minutes at the most, Steele opened the front door and got in and this time the interior light came on. When the light came on Nicholls saw Jack Wholmes sitting in the twin seats at the back and saw his hands and that he was wearing surgical type gloves like a white colour. They were covered in speckles of something which he saw was red. At that point he did not recall any sign of a bag which Jack had taken with him. Nicholls saw Steele get in and as soon as Steele realised the light was on Steele told him to turn it off, so he was more busy trying to turn the light off, but it could be about the same time as Steele got the door shut that the light went off anyway.

Steele told him to pull away and he pulled away. Nicholls was not sure at that point that he realised after Mick spoke what had gone on. Mick said as they pulled off something along the lines of, "They won't f..k with us." Nicholls drew the conclusion that "they" had been killed, or someone had been killed. Nicholls just pulled out of the track, he was not looking where he was going and forced a car nearly to drive into them. Steele said, "For f..k's sake pull yourself together." Nicholls said at the time he was a bit shocked.

Mick started to hand a gun over to Jack in the back. Mick Steele was sitting next to Nicholls, but Nicholls was still driving but he just saw bits of the barrels."

In 1999 Darren Nicholls took part in a BBC inside story documentary where he gives the exact same story.

https://streamable.com/29bqw

Both versions are the same because they are based on memory and not lies.

My response

Where's the evidential value in the above? 

Nicholls was taken into custody on 13th May 1996 (having been stopped by police with a boot load of cannabis).  He was kept on remand until trial in a special 'supergrass' unit.  The trial started 1st Sep 1997.  He had 15 months to prepare.  Think of live plays which are repeated night after night by the same cast.  They are word perfect.  Why?  Practice makes perfect    And Nicholls wasn't a stupid man.  He was a trained BT engineer so someone of at least average intelligence. 

And from all that is known about Steele I very much doubt he was the sort of character that went around using foul language indiscriminately.  Imo this was added in for effect in an attempt to portray him as a brutish thug.  There's no evidence Steele/Whomes were ever aggressive/violent. 

The judge said the following:

During the case, the trial judge, Mr Justice Hidden, said in his summing up to the jury: "Nicholls is a convicted criminal who was engaged in drug abuse and the importation of drugs into this country.

"You must bear in mind it was in his own interest to become a prosecution witness... he hopes to get less time to serve."

Long before the Rettendon murders Nicholls was a police informant who worked with a handler, referred to in court as Detective Constable A.

DC A is suspended from duty pending a disciplinary hearing, but Mr Bowen has been refused permission to attend this hearing, to find out whether it impinges on his clients' convictions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/882425.stm

[Holly Goodhead]

A poster on another forum had this to say about the case:

Whomes denied having ever been in Rettendon when he was asked if he murdered Tate,Tucker and Rolfe.

The mobile evidence does not exonerate them at all. 

The expert concluded

"2.2.   Cell site analysis is not an exact process. However, although I could not disprove the Prosecution's view of events, the call detail records for Jack Whomes' 'phone and for Michael Steel's 'phone were, in my opinion more consistent with the explanations put forward by the Defendants than with the claims made by the Prosecution.
"
The explanations put forward by the defendants are Steele saying "No comment" and Whomes saying "I have never been to Rettendon". Clearly the expert is under the impression that the defence theory is actually Whomes explanation for his wearabouts that night. It is not.

He goes on to say

"2.3.   I was aware that it might be argued in Court that the measurements I had carried out, and the conclusions I had drawn had certain weaknesses.

2.3.1.   The Vodafone service might have changed between the time of the murder and my tests, to the extent that my tests were invalid."

My response

Whomes lived and worked in Suffolk why would he necessarily be familiar with the place names of small villages in Essex?  He claims he came down the A12 and A130 and then turned off into the Wheatsheaf pub.   As I said previously if he was in the area on drug related business he was hardly likely to fess up to being in the area.  No one knows what conversations took place between the police and Whomes and at what stage it was put to him he was in the frame for murder. 

Most will agree the conviction is underpinned by Nicholls' testimony who testified that when he received the 2 calls from Whomes at 18.59 he was in Meadow Lane, Rettendon.  Nicholls mobile phone was subscribed to Orange who had a cell site in Rettendon and yet the 2 calls were routed through the Basildon cell site:

1.8. I was less inclined to accept the assertion by Darren Nicholls that the service provided to his Orange 'phone in the car park of the Wheatsheaf public house was very poor. The Orange cell site at Rettendon is in line of sight and less than 2 kilometres distant from the Wheatsheaf public house. I would have expected a good service from the Orange network at that location. Furthermore Darren Nicholls claimed to have been in Meadow Road, Rettendon when he received the calls from Jack Whomes at 18:59. These calls were served by the Orange cell site at Basildon, which is not the closest site and not the site which I would have expected to provide best service to an Orange 'phone in Meadow Road.

Something else to take into account when considering how Whomes was handled by the police when first arrested and interviewed is that he was unable to read and write.  So if he was shown the mobile phone data and/or other material which required reading this would have been an impossible task. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-44237411

[Chud]

The poster on the other forum has now created a further cell site map which includes the Basildon cell site.  Perhaps when he has a moment he can add in the cell site at Ingatestone.  This will show beyond any doubt that cell site analysis in this type of situation is absolutely meaningless. It does not in any way shape or form place the individuals in the right locations at the right time.  All it is capable of showing is that the individuals were in areas covering radius's of several miles.

If the justice system was concerned with the truth what needed to have happened is that all mobile calls made by the murdered trio, Nicholls, Steele and Whomes over the last 24 hours required analysing.  This would throw up far more meaningful data since Nicholls, Steele and Whomes were making and receiving mobile phone calls in different areas covering a much greater distance.

To add to this, you need to have the terrain of the land mapped (3d) for this to be of any use in working out the probability of making a connection let alone pin pointing the location of the caller. As you've mentioned, at best it can only make an assumption that the caller is within the radius of the transmitting segment..

The attached article sums up how accurate this really is or not as the case may be.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140908/04435128452/turns-out-cell-phone-location-data-is-not-even-close-to-accurate-everyone-falls-it.shtml

[Holly Goodhead]

To add to this, you need to have the terrain of the land mapped (3d) for this to be of any use in working out the probability of making a connection let alone pin pointing the location of the caller. As you've mentioned, at best it can only make an assumption that the caller is within the radius of the transmitting segment..

The attached article sums up how accurate this really is or not as the case may be.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140908/04435128452/turns-out-cell-phone-location-data-is-not-even-close-to-accurate-everyone-falls-it.shtml

But it might have been more relevant to undermine (or support) Nicholls' overall testimony.  Nicholls claimed he was working around Heathrow until midday when he headed back to a pub in Rayne, Braintree and then between 5pm - 6pm met with Steele/Whomes at Marks Tey.  I believe Steele was at him home in Great Bentley during the day and then left around 5pm to travel to South Essex.  Whomes I believe was at work all day in Suffolk and at some point travelled to South Essex.  There's much speculation about these calls from phone boxes in Suffolk at the Sorrel Horse.  The prosecution claim they were made by Steele who in turn claims they were made by Nicholls.  Around the time these calls were made Nicholls/Steele made/received numerous mobile calls and there's probably many others we don't know about.  Calls made/received in schedules appear to be case related only.  The geographic distances involved are much greater so potentially could throw up relevant data.

Raine, Essex to Sorrel Horse pub, Barnham, Suffolk = 39.2 miles

Great Bentley, Essex to Sorrel Horse pub, Barnham, Suffolk = 26.0 miles

As opposed to:

Hockley to Rettendon = 7.1 miles

Ingatestone to Rettendon = 14.1 miles

Wickford to Rettendon = 3.9 miles

Basildon to Rettendon = 9.5 miles

I believe the other factor to take into account is the actual mobile provider.  EG in David Bristowe's report he states that Orange (who Nicholls subscribed to) had a cell site at Rettendon and that had Nicholls have been in Rettendon, as he claimed, he would have expected the call to come through this site as opposed to the Basildon site it was routed through.  I don't know which Mobile provider Tate subscribed to but Steele subscribed to BT-Cellnet and Whomes Vodafone.  It is clear from David Bristowe's report he did not analyse call data from the murdered trio nor did he physically examine any of the phones including those belonging to Nicholls, Steele and Whomes.  Post trial he was given access to Whomes phone which he claimed had been stored by Essex Police since his arrest.  Clearly defence experts needed access to all call data and the actual handsets which leads me to conclude there's something amiss here.  I don't understand why the defence did not insist on having the data/phones pre-trial?

[Holly Goodhead]

Another post from him over the way:

They are word perfect because its not something he is going to forget. But at least you admit there is no deviation in his account of that night. Also how did he know about the call from Sarah to Patrick? How did he know Patrick reacted to the gunshots like the SOC suggests with Patrick cowering in the corner? You can claim the police gave him that information but you will never prove it. Nicholls claims he overheard this from Whomes and Steele and there is nothing to contradict this.

Absolutely meaningless? It was just the other day you were claiming the cell site analysis exonerated the two and that the prosecution withheld the cell data from Patricks call because it would have showed him elsewhere.  Now its all "absolutely meaningless"

How do you know this didn't happen? Much like your assumption about Patrick Tate's 18:44 call you are probably wrong again. If you read the Judges summing up, Bristowe is not the only telephone expert that testified. They had experts from Cellnet, Vodaphone and Orange testify also. Unfortunately Bernard O'mahoney never posted their evidence on his website. He only uploaded Bristowe's statements. Probably for the same reason he only uploaded Darren Nicholls cross-examination and not his examination prior. He used to support Jack and Mick.

Are you aware that Bernard O'Mahoney took his website down after John Whomes (Jack Whomes Brother) admitted to Bernard that his brother was guilty? John Whomes denies this and its his word against Bernards. Considering Bernard O'Mahoney lost a lot of credibly by changing his mind after 20 years and he took his website down I am more inclined to believe Bernard O'Mahoney.

My response

Nicholls' police interviews/ws's were not word perfect eg the battery that morphed into a light bulb and 5pm that moved on to 6pm. 

You quoted a section from the judge's summing up which contained info such as he turned the car around, put the lights on and the interior lights came on/went off when doors opened/closed.  He saw the barrels.  Pray tell where the evidential value is here?  All he had to remember was that he turned the car around.   Who wouldn't have car lights on on 6th Dec UK at circa 7pm in the countryside?  Why wouldn't the interior lights go on and off when doors opened/closed.  How difficult to remember he had to say he saw the barrels!

I refuse to waste time going round in circles looking at Nicholls testimony when I know for a fact there's nothing of evidential value. 

How many more times do you need to be told that Sarah Saunders was good friends with Steele and his partner, Jackie Street.  They socialised together.  The murders took place on 6th Dec 1995.  Steele was not arrested until 13th May 1996.  Sarah Saunders would have discussed her last tel call with Tate with Steele and Jackie Street.  Steele more than likely discussed with Nicholls.  Did Nicholls, Steele, Jackie Street and Sarah Saunders attend Tate's funeral?  Did Nicholls, Steele and Whomes continue importing drugs post murders?

There's no expert evidence how Tate reacted when he was shot.  The expert said the shots were fired in quick succession and whether anyone heard "whimpering" would depend on the delay.  The fact Nicholls said x,y, z and you have convinced yourself this sound fits the soc means zero. 

I did not say the phone evidence exonerated Steele/Whomes.  I said it would seem to exonerate them which it does.  The expert could not rule out Steele being at the Halfway House and Whomes at Workhouse Lane but he thought it unlikely.  In his opinion the phone evidence supported their alibis.  As far as Nicholls was concerned in the experts opinion the phone evidence did not support his alibi.  I've seen how you review other cases where you refuse to accept expert opinion and I for one will not be wasting my time going round in circles with you.

Yes at trial representatives were called from the mobile providers.  How did this evidence differ from David Bristowe's?

Why am I going to be impresed with what O'Mahoney has to say about the case?  O'Mahoney: convict, violent thug, who was head doorman at a seedy nightclub in Essex whose one redeeming feature appears to be a modicum of writing ability which he has flogged for all its worth.   

Jack Whomes claims O'Mahoney misquoted him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqFvk6wPGuc

[Holly Goodhead]

PS To the poster over the way

Please provide the name and address of the husband and wife you refer to and the date they supplied the info.  Even if this recollection of events is correct and even if it relates to soc how does it implicate Steele/Whomes?

If you think the case is a no-brainer why are you bothering to comment on it? 

[Chud]

It is absolutely clear to anyone who has watched that film that John Whomes section at the end was edited to infer that jack was guilty, if you can't tell the difference between sarcasm in someones voice in the context of what is being said then I dunno?

[Chud]

The forensic evidence is clear that only one gun was used to fire the 7/8 cartridges... If Mick's gun (No 2) had fell apart after firing there would be evidence of this in different microscopic markings on the casing.. furthermore the forensic suggests although not 100% sure that the gun was a full length barrel. It is unlikely a weapon of this size would fit in a canvas plumbers bag as Nicholls states.

[Holly Goodhead]

It is absolutely clear to anyone who has watched that film that John Whomes section at the end was edited to infer that jack was guilty, if you can't tell the difference between sarcasm in someones voice in the context of what is being said then I dunno?

I haven't watched the film or read any of the books and that's unlikely to change.

I've looked at another case in-depth and come to the conclusion the only thing that's really important is expert testimony.   
 

[Holly Goodhead]

The forensic evidence is clear that only one gun was used to fire the 7/8 cartridges... If Mick's gun (No 2) had fell apart after firing there would be evidence of this in different microscopic markings on the casing.. furthermore the forensic suggests although not 100% sure that the gun was a full length barrel. It is unlikely a weapon of this size would fit in a canvas plumbers bag as Nicholls states.

I need to read John Burns evidence again as I'm not understanding the 7/8 cartridges with 7 gsw's. 

All the expert testimony points to 1 perp with 1 full length shotgun. 

Yes I thought that about the plumbers bag.

[Holly Goodhead]

The poster on the other forum has posted up the following image of what appears to be an old white Renault which he claims police found on property belonging to Whomes and Steele.  I wasn't aware that Whomes and Steele shared any jointly owned property? 

Afaik Nicholls claimed Whomes was driving a VW Passat and Steele was in his Toyota truck so no idea where a white Renault fits in?