Question about Nevill's watch

[Holly Goodhead]

Yes, the precision and detail is too accurate and intricate for it to be homemade, even by a fabulous artist/carpenter.

It’s clearly lies.

Either XX

Or Jeremy’s.

Very strange, indeed

I'm surprised your giving JB the benefit of the doubt! 

[Holly Goodhead]

Jeremy DID ask the police to burn the carpets and mattresses etc; he said he couldn’t look at them or go inside WHF unless they did.

It’s documented somewhere, and I will find it — in my time. Not yours. I don’t work for you. You’re not my boss, so stop giving orders.

Likewise, Sheila’s nails.p: I did indeed read (and hear) she had her nails manicured and polished near where she lived in Maida Vale, and near to the hairdressers she used.

I put it to you that not a single person here has read or seen anything about SC having her nails professionally manicured and polished in MV.  If I'm wrong others here will prove it.

Re destroyed items it was DS Jones who initiated this and asked JB to authorise but these items had no evidential value.  If you disagree please explain what evidence you think was lost.

[APRIL]

I put it to you that not a single person here has read or seen anything about SC having her nails professionally manicured and polished in MV.  If I'm wrong others here will prove it.

Re destroyed items it was DS Jones who initiated this and asked JB to authorise but these items had no evidential value.  If you disagree please explain what evidence you think was lost.

The most I can provide is the possibility of a friend doing them for her. It needs to be considered how she'd have afforded to get them done professionally.

[mrswah]

I put it to you that not a single person here has read or seen anything about SC having her nails professionally manicured and polished in MV.  If I'm wrong others here will prove it.

Re destroyed items it was DS Jones who initiated this and asked JB to authorise but these items had no evidential value.  If you disagree please explain what evidence you think was lost.

I haven't a clue who manicured Sheila's nails, or whether she did it herself.  However, I do agree that it wasn't JB's initiative to destroy items from the farm.

[Aunt Agatha]

Agatha claims the box is a minimum of 60 years old, and if it was made for her by her husband, it could be 100 years old...maybe more. Seems strange for a man to make a bos with Japanese characters, and so well-made too! It certainly doesn’t look handmade: it looks factory made.

To my eyes it looks brand new, and if Granny Speakman’s  husband made it for her, it would have been hugely sentimental to her and she most certainly would have used it as some time. That doesn’t look like it’s ever been used at all. And over time all things deteriorate if they’re left just sitting there...

Jeremy was given the box...

There was no Internet or anything at the time so he could do research like people do today.
If I was going to deliberately lie (as you're suggesting) I have access to the internet and certainly would have done my research.  Therefore, I have accepted everything upon which it was received... Based only on the info Jeremy knew at the time.
I never spent time asking about the box, where it came from, was it handmade or a purchased gift.   It looks very similar too the ones online and apart from the inside where the wires are attached for its musicality, that looks a bit rough.
So if Jeremy thought or believed as a child it's was made, then so be it. 

[Aunt Agatha]

It may also have been a belief he'd held onto from when he received it. Believing it had been made specially for him might have made him feel important.

It was never made for him!  Where do you get your info from?

[Aunt Agatha]

I agree Myster, now I've viewed the ones online I think it has been purchased, I had wondered that however I could not verify that and I know Jeremy couldn't either, he believed it was made. It's a very basic box, it's not a puzzle and opens quite easily.
The box has never been used, it retains the negatives inside and was put away like everything else he gave me.
I ve taken care of the items, as I would if anybody had asked me to care for something.

[Aunt Agatha]

Those pictures prove nothing, Agatha

That hair could be yours, or your son’s...anyone’s.

The length of that ponytail suggests it came from someone whose hair was down their back, and all the annual mugshots of Jeremy show him with very short  hair....

And fake watches do indeed have fake ingravings on the back: how else do you think people would be fooled into buying them?

I’ve been to Thailand/Malaysia/Turkey...all the places where they make fake watches and sell them for a tenner a piece. It’s run by drug traffickers and sex traffickers, but that’s going off-topic...

Nothing there supports your claims that any of that tat was given to you by Jeremy; not forgetting as a prisoner he’s not allowed to send ANY items through the post, nor give people anything, either. Neither would the police act as his couriers delivering a GUN to you!

This is a fairytale.

No wonder most of the sensible posters I’ve seen from way back have left this forum...

The hair is Jeremy's!
He had long hair at one time, halfway down his back.
Of course you're not going to see photos of this, he was in prison and we couldn't take cameras in without permission.

[Nicholas]

The hair is Jeremy's!
He had long hair at one time, halfway down his back.
Of course you're not going to see photos of this, he was in prison and we couldn't take cameras in without permission.

When the police handed you the ‘previously seized’ items did you have to sign a receipt to show you’d received them & if so do you still have a copy or did you throw it away?

[The General]

The hair is Jeremy's!
He had long hair at one time, halfway down his back.
Of course you're not going to see photos of this, he was in prison and we couldn't take cameras in without permission.

Of course you could verify all of this and put the naysayers in their place by simply posting a picture of one of the negatives from the box.

[Nicholas]

I ve taken care of the items, as I would if anybody had asked me to care for something.

I believe you are genuine in what you state Aunt Agatha but not sure if you are aware you’ve potentially (I say ‘potentially’ as I don’t believe Bamber’s case is going anywhere) created a problem for Bamber & his representatives as I’ve pointed out here

This creates problems for Bamber and his solicitor Mark Newby, especially given the fact he’s publicly claimed Bamber’s narrative has stayed the same. Aunt Agatha clearly states Bamber claimed to once believe ‘the silencer was used.’

And given Bamber is allegedly godparent to her children the problems get bigger - there will be a record of this

You know Bamber’s narrative has changed and I don’t believe you would lie about this fact

You stated here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358367.html#msg358367

“Based on what we knew at the beginning we believed the silencer was used........upon revelations he changed his mind.  When we last spoke he believed the silencer was not used”

[Aunt Agatha]

When the police handed you the ‘previously seized’ items did you have to sign a receipt to show you’d received them & if so do you still have a copy or did you throw it away?

I cannot recall.

[Aunt Agatha]

Of course you could verify all of this and put the naysayers in their place by simply posting a picture of one of the negatives from the box.

No chance!

[Nicholas]

I cannot recall.

It doesn’t matter. The police will have the records.

Though you did allude to there being paperwork in one of your previous posts - the post where you claimed Mike T publicised your home address (that post appears to have been removed?)

Mike tesco knows exactly what rifle was given to me. He found out on paperwork.  I suggest you ask him to clarify.

Again, if Mike T has ‘paperwork’ so will the police etc

[The General]

No chance!

Go on, use a benign one; maybe of rabbits in farmland, or something.