UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: Holly Goodhead on July 09, 2018, 05:54:30 PM
-
The words spoken by former detective superintendent Mick Gradwell to describe police officers damaging a soc and then restaging it in an attempt to make it look like it did originally and not disclosing such @ 8 mins in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPRd912xv9M
I would point out that this was in regard to SC's hand being moved by DI Cook to endable DC Bird to photograph a blood stain underneath her arm/hand. This was actually disclosed at trial.
However there's now significant evidence that the soc was interfered with on a much larger scale. It has recently come to my attention that A/PS Woodcock's wit stat states SC's head was slightly raised against NB's bedside cabinet:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=166.0;attach=251
A/PS Woodcock's wit stat is corroborated by testimony from forensic scientist Martyn Ismail:
518. To decide whether we considered that the interests of justice required that we heard Mr Ismail's evidence, we first had regard to the evidence that it was said that he could give. From the blood staining he concluded that following the second and fatal shot Sheila Caffell was lying almost flat on her back with her head propped against a bedside cabinet. For her then to slide to be found in the position depicted in the photographs would have required the downward force to be greater than the friction of her body against the floor. In his opinion this simply was not possible as there would only be the weight of the head providing the downward force. Therefore he concluded that an additional force would have been necessary. It could not have come from Sheila Caffell since the second shot would have been instantly fatal and thus she must have been moved by someone else, for example with her legs being pulled. He also considered that the weight and the friction between her skin and her nightdress was likely to have been less than the weight and friction between the nightdress and the carpet. Therefore, he would expect movement of the body within the nightdress rather than the body and clothing sliding together across the carpet. He pointed out that the photographs demonstrated this effect at the back of the nightdress with the nightdress staying rucked up in its original position. However the front of the nightdress had not demonstrated this effect. Accordingly Mr Ismail concluded that the nightdress had been pulled down after Sheila Caffell slid into her final position. Since on the evidence, she was dead by this stage, Mr Ismail concluded that some one else had arranged her nightdress.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
Points of interest:
- Mr Ismail was clearly unaware of A/PS Woodcock's wit stat. In the absence of such it appears JB staged the scene as portrayed in soc images.
- Since contributing to these forums the guilty camp have maintained the scene looked staged (by JB).
- Did the defence at trial and appeal have access to A/PS Woodcock's WS? If yes why didn't they pursue? If not, why not?
- Why did Michael Turner QC at 2002 appeal pursue claims that the kitchen soc was staged which was based on hearsay evidence ie testimony second hand from DI Cooke but not pursue the direct evidence from A/PS Woodcock?
- David1819 believes it would have been "insane" for MT QC to pursue this. I've no idea why other than it doesn't support David1819's ill thought out cranky theories.
- The CT bleat on about non-disclosure and yet it appears despite a team of at least 9 they have overlooked the above. Why request more docs if you're unable to read what you have?
- JB wanted me to join CT and stop posting on forums and yet had I done so my case knowledge would be near zero as its only through debating with others who hold opposing views that headway can be made eg the above with puglove.
- There's further evidence SC/soc was interfered with by way of expert testimony from blood stain analyst Prof MacDonnel. Also members of the raid team said SC looked different from their initial recollections along with rifle and bible in relation to her body.
-
Nothing to do with your post but why is the tag line knocking Croatia? I'm told its very nice there.
-
Nothing to do with your post but why is the tag line knocking Croatia? I'm told its very nice there.
It's stunningly beautiful.
-
Nothing to do with your post but why is the tag line knocking Croatia? I'm told its very nice there.
Just me being pathetic about England's forthcoming semi-final with Croatia!
I was hoping Croatia would lose to Russia as it's an easier country to take the P out of!
I did discover Croatia invented the tie as in round the neck tie. The country has a long history pre independence and Yugoslavia.
-
It's stunningly beautiful.
Yes I went to a place called Porec, pronounced Porridge, in the very early 80's on a family hol. We did the trip to Dubrovnik which was as you've described. We also did a day trip to Venice. If I recall correctly we coached it there and had some sort of hover craft trip back. En route the tour guide was going on about the ethnic problems eg Serbs, Croats etc. I recall my dad and his friend were very interested in it all and were convinced there would be problems and look what happened! Us kids just wanted to get to Venice to buy some cool gear!
The place seemed different to other countries I had visited and I could only put this down to the fact Croatia was then
part of the former Yugoslavia a communist country.
I bet KNGB was a frequent visitor!
-
The words spoken by former detective superintendent Mick Gradwell to describe police officers damaging a soc and then restaging it in an attempt to make it look like it did originally and not disclosing such @ 8 mins in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPRd912xv9M
I would point out that this was in regard to SC's hand being moved by DI Cook to endable DC Bird to photograph a blood stain underneath her arm/hand. This was actually disclosed at trial.
However there's now significant evidence that the soc was interfered with on a much larger scale. It has recently come to my attention that A/PS Woodcock's wit stat states SC's head was slightly raised against NB's bedside cabinet:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=166.0;attach=251
A/PS Woodcock's wit stat is corroborated by testimony from forensic scientist Martyn Ismail:
518. To decide whether we considered that the interests of justice required that we heard Mr Ismail's evidence, we first had regard to the evidence that it was said that he could give. From the blood staining he concluded that following the second and fatal shot Sheila Caffell was lying almost flat on her back with her head propped against a bedside cabinet. For her then to slide to be found in the position depicted in the photographs would have required the downward force to be greater than the friction of her body against the floor. In his opinion this simply was not possible as there would only be the weight of the head providing the downward force. Therefore he concluded that an additional force would have been necessary. It could not have come from Sheila Caffell since the second shot would have been instantly fatal and thus she must have been moved by someone else, for example with her legs being pulled. He also considered that the weight and the friction between her skin and her nightdress was likely to have been less than the weight and friction between the nightdress and the carpet. Therefore, he would expect movement of the body within the nightdress rather than the body and clothing sliding together across the carpet. He pointed out that the photographs demonstrated this effect at the back of the nightdress with the nightdress staying rucked up in its original position. However the front of the nightdress had not demonstrated this effect. Accordingly Mr Ismail concluded that the nightdress had been pulled down after Sheila Caffell slid into her final position. Since on the evidence, she was dead by this stage, Mr Ismail concluded that some one else had arranged her nightdress.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
Points of interest:
- Mr Ismail was clearly unaware of A/PS Woodcock's wit stat. In the absence of such it appears JB staged the scene as portrayed in soc images.
- Since contributing to these forums the guilty camp have maintained the scene looked staged (by JB).
- Did the defence at trial and appeal have access to A/PS Woodcock's WS? If yes why didn't they pursue? If not, why not?
- Why did Michael Turner QC at 2002 appeal pursue claims that the kitchen soc was staged which was based on hearsay evidence ie testimony second hand from DI Cooke but not pursue the direct evidence from A/PS Woodcock?
- David1819 believes it would have been "insane" for MT QC to pursue this. I've no idea why other than it doesn't support David1819's ill thought out cranky theories.
- The CT bleat on about non-disclosure and yet it appears despite a team of at least 9 they have overlooked the above. Why request more docs if you're unable to read what you have?
- JB wanted me to join CT and stop posting on forums and yet had I done so my case knowledge would be near zero as its only through debating with others who hold opposing views that headway can be made eg the above with puglove.
- There's further evidence SC/soc was interfered with by way of expert testimony from blood stain analyst Prof MacDonnel. Also members of the raid team said SC looked different from their initial recollections along with rifle and bible in relation to her body.
I see nothing sinister in what occurred. Her head was moved, her arm and the rifle were moved too but so what?
-
Thought it was just her lower arm that was moved after the first photo. To show a blood stain underneath her lower arm.
-
People and objects do get moved for all sorts of reasons at the scene of a crime, a fact of life I'm afraid.
-
People and objects do get moved for all sorts of reasons at the scene of a crime, a fact of life I'm afraid.
In the event of such happening are the police duty bound to document such?