Jeremy Bamber: Corruption by Key Police Officers?

Copyright Jeremy Bamber Campaign

Attrib: http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/corruption-revealed-in-private-reports.html

"As everyone who follows the case will know, during the past eighteen months I’ve been cross referencing every aspect of the evidence, hunting out all of the anomalies within the case documentation and I would like to thank everyone who has been helping me do all of this work. Between our team we have read, reviewed, examined and made an assessment of almost three and a half million pages of case material.  All the necessary work has been completed and we have the answers to all of the outstanding questions that remained after the last review of the evidence by the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

It was surprising and quite unexpected to have discovered the truth about police corruption in this case, which was extensively documented in the private notes and reports written by Former DCI Ainsley, DS Jones and DI Miller. 

Originally the only documents provided to the Defence were just signed witness statements and a transcript of their trial testimony. I was lucky enough to be given every possible piece of paperwork that related to every one of the investigations into the case that took place between 1985 and 2013 – although still excluding much of the original case number. We are still missing all sorts of documents and photographs, but the fact that Essex Police have withheld this list of materials says more about how corrupt they still are, than it does about the evidence that they think is still being completely concealed from us.

For example there is no witness statement from a forensic ‘Scenes of Crime’ police officer who arrived at White House Farm at 9:16am on the morning of the 7^th of August 1985. He entered the house and left the scene at 12:50 but Essex police have failed to tell the courts over the years that a police officer was stationed on Pages Lane recording details of everyone who arrived at the farm, their rank and the police station they were from (if they were police officers). The courts were also not told that two officers were tasked with listing every person, both police and civilian who entered the house between 07:35 and 09:58. All of these people were required to give elimination fingerprints and to give details about the rooms they entered, what they moved or touched and the reasons they entered the house that day.  

This particular forensic officer had been based at Chelmsford HQ and is now known to have been part of the team who forensically examined the house on the 7^th of August 1985. The simple fact that this officer made no statements and has left hardly any trace of his existence in the case, suggests that his presence was concealed for a reason – although what this reason was is unknown. The jury were entitled to know about his actions inside the house, including any evidence he gathered, his role that day and a statement of his actions and any further actions he carried out as a result of his work at the scene.

It was also a surprise to discover that various key witnesses, police and civilians, wrote out statements in draft form which were then altered and corrected with key material omitted which would have aided my Defence. For example one of my cousins and one of the scenes of crimes police officers wrote five different draft statements before the final copy was made. These particular statements are full of conflicting versions of events revealing how Essex Police created witnesses statements to tally with pieces of evidence they wanted to make significant in the case so that circumstances surrounding the evidence were ficticiously constructed.

It is not possible to go into closer detail about the evidence we now have about all of the above and many other issues, but had the Chief Crown Prosecutor known a fraction of this evidence then he would not have agreed to me being arrested and charged. Eventually every aspect of this case will be public including details about how the jury were misled into believing the house was not securely locked when they were presented with photographs taken after the initial SOCO photographing of the house aided with inaccurate evidence from police and my cousins.

It is only because former police officers kept their personal notes and files from being destroyed illegally in 1996 that we are able to piece together the information into the bigger picture. Some officers were not all bad, just stupid because we now have the proof of how the jury was completely misled by the police investigation in my case."

Jeremy

Jeremy Bamber: The Money Trail

 Copyright of "Jeremy Bamber Campaign."

 

 

 

Attrib: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YppVCocVbI

 

For the first time, the Jeremy Bamber campaign can detail the thread of money and finance that has bound together to imprison Jeremy, an innocent man, for the best part of the last 30 years. This comprehensive video highlights many details that have remained hidden until now. For further information on all the issues raised and the latest news on the case, go to the official Campaign websites at www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk and www.jeremybamber.org

Jeremy Bamber: Telephones at White House Farm

Copyright of "Jeremy Bamber Campaign."

 

 

There has recently been much discussion over the telephones at White House Farm. This was brought up at the 1986 Trial of Jeremy Bamber. Key witnesses made statements and gave testimony about the phones that were at the farm. Firstly there were usually three phones at White House Farm; a cream dial phone in the master bedroom; a blue digital dial one in the upstairs office; and a cordless phone which was kept in the kitchen. There was also another phone at the Farm that was a ‘fawn’ colour and it also had a digital key pad and it is unclear where this phone was usually kept although it was found in the kitchen under some magazines. There had been a thunderstorm which had caused damage to the phone system and an engineer called Mr Pike made a statement that he took away the cordless phone and that he did not leave a replacement. The farm secretary Mrs Wilson had been on holiday and was not entirely sure where the phones were moved to as a result of this storm. Nevertheless Mrs Jean Bouttell testified in court that the phones had gone wrong so many times in the past year that she described it as “musical phones” when asked in court simply because the phones were moved around so frequently by the Bamber Family. She said it was common practice for the cream phone from the bedroom to be moved down into the kitchen.   After the tragedies happened on the 7th of August 1985, Chief Supt Harris used the phone to call Assistant Chief Constable Simpson on that morning before SOCO carried out their search of the house but this was denied at the 2002 appeal, evidence released in 2004 now proves he did make this call using the cream telephone in the kitchen. When the police finished their SOCO investigations and handed the keys to the family, by the weekend of the 10th of August Ann Eaton and Jean Bouttell started cleaning the house. Additionally numbers of people had been in and around the house including, Basil Cock, Barbara Wilson, Robert Boutflour, Pamela Boutflour, Chris Nevill, David Boutflour, Karen Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter. On the 23rd of August Jeremy had been back to the farm, Barbara Wilson had commenced her duties as farm secretary reporting to Jeremy. Jean Bouttell had also commenced her regular cleaning duties. Jeremy had increased the wages of the farm workers during this time. And he asked Barbara Wilson to clear out many of the papers in the office for him. It was on this date that he asked Jean Bouttell to clear out other belongings in the house. As we all know after a family member has died we have to face the difficult task of removing their belongings from our lives and Jeremy was no different from any other person in facing the emotional and practical difficulties of doing this. Jean Bouttell testified that Jeremy had asked her to remove the pile of magazines in the kitchen and it was during this clear out that she found the fawn coloured phone. She said that she asked Jeremy what she should do with it and he replied that it was just a spare. When she later checked the phone some three weeks later at the request of the police she found that it was working. Barbara Wilson also states that she checked the phone and found it to be working. Neither of these witnesses stated that Jeremy had told them that the phone was broken. The police asked Jean to check the phone some three weeks later and she found it to be working. It has been suggested that Jeremy deliberately removed the phone from the bedroom that his father slept in so that he could not call the police when Jeremy allegedly broke into the house to kill the family. Firstly, Jeremy could not be responsible for the storm which had again damaged the telephone equipment and secondly is Jeremy expected to remember where each phone was at each moment when he didn’t even live in the house? Is it reasonable to expect Jeremy to know which phones were supposed to be where at this time? Is it not a reasonable assumption that if the Bamber’s phone was broken that one of them would take a phone from the upstairs bedroom and use it to replace the broken one? Particularly if, amongst the piles of untidy clutter littered throughout the house they didn’t know where the spare phone was. Considering the number of moves that the telephones had made during the last year which seems to have been at least two or three times up until the 7th of August is it not reasonable that Jeremy wouldn’t have spent his days thinking about where the phone was? Is it not reasonable to wonder at how many people had been in the house ‘looking for evidence’ long after the initial police SOCO search between the 7th of August and the 23rd of August? Is it not reasonable to assume that the ‘spare’ phone could have been moved at any time by anyone to its position under the magazines during Ann Eaton’s clean up of the farm house? The other area for concern is the amount of rumour which has emerged into the media since the trial of Jeremy Bamber. Barbara Wilson made no less than 14 statements to the police before Jeremy’s trial all dated 16.12.85, 05.10.85, 06.10.85, 11.10.85, 17.09.85, 19.09.85, 22.11.85, another on 05.10.85, and more on 08.11.85, 12.09.85, 16.11.85, 25.10.85, 26.11.85, and 27.09.85, 29.09.86. In more than one statement she even described Jeremy as "a likeable young man" and that she probably got on better with him than she did her own son. Out of all of these statements she never mentioned at any time that Nevill had told her that Jeremy had intended to kill him or anything which could be interpreted as such, it is my opinion that Nevill had no premonition whatsoever that he might die in the near future and Barbara Wilson didn't mention this at trial. It is only in her statement to  the City of London Police  on 28.06.91, six years later that she 'invents' (in my view) a 'premonition'. This invention was considered by the City of London police 'not to be suitable' for her final statement (I can't imagine why, and secondly it appears the police pick and choose the content of their statements) and details of this 'revelation' only appears in an officers report. I suggest that if Nevill Bamber had told an employee such a thing why did this employee not mention this at trial to assist in the conviction of Jeremy Bamber and why did she not go to the police with this ‘story’ on the 7th of August? This new 'invention' emerges creatively in the Roger Wilkes book and on various television programmes and we will leave you to make your own conclusions about why this story has been intensified for various forms of media.     Attrib: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/telephones For more information on Jeremy Bamber's innocence and evidence of this gross miscarriage of justice visit: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/Campaign-Hub

Joana Morais Blog: McCann Libel Case

9 October 2013 | Posted by Joana Morais

Attrib: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/goncalo-amarals-book-contained-nothing.html

1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

 

Gonçalo Amaral's book: Two members of Judiciary Police. Quote 'contained nothing new, nothing that it wasn't published before'

  

Gonçalo Amaral's book edition post McCann injunction, 'No axe can cut the roots of freedom, 

the Portuguese are going to read the forbidden book'

“Despite everything, until a certain moment in the investigation, the [McCann] family sustained and fed the abduction thesis. Nevertheless, at an uncertain date, the family suggested to consult a person that might, eventually, indicate the probable location of little Madeleine’s cadaver. This fact became inexplicable to the members of the investigation, given the fact that it was the family members themselves who raised the possibility of little Maddie’s death.”
in Process 201/07.0GALGS, volume XVII, page 2594

Gonçalo Amaral's book did not add “anything new”

Two members of the Judiciary Police have stated yesterday in court, that Gonçalo Amaral's book did not add anything new to what was already known regarding the process of the investigation of the English child, who disappeared in the Algarve, in May 2007. The statements of this two witnesses, Luís Neves and Ricardo Paiva, concur with Gonçalo Amaral's defence argument, which alleges that the book written by the former coordinator of the Judiciary Police “contained nothing new, nothing that it wasn't published before”.

Gonçalo Amaral is being tried at Lisbon's Civil Court after a complaint from the McCanns, who claim the book “has deeply affected the family” and seek 1,2 million euros for alleged defamation. Inspector Ricardo Paiva, who was directly involved in the investigation, considered that the book did not add “anything new”.

Luís Neves, who coordinated part of the investigation and was the then director of the Judiciary Police Organized Crime Unit, stated the same. The judge ended up by ironically saying that the book had “misleading advertising”, since the cover promised “revelations” about the case.

Jornal de Notícias, Paper Edition, page 10, October 9, 2013

Gonçalo Amaral's book may have “misleading advertising”, said the Judge
Trial - PJ Director admitted that initial thesis of Maddie's abduction was rushed

by Valentina Marcelino [Translation Astro/JM]

The Judge at the 1st Civil Court of Lisbon who is presiding the McCann couple's lawsuit against the former PJ inspector - who defends the thesis of the parents' responsibility in their daughter Madeleine's death - suggested that Gonçalo Amaral's book may have “misleading advertising”, because contrary to what is announced on its back cover it does not contain “unique revelations” about the case of the disappearance of the little girl in 2007, in Praia da Luz.

The magistrate's conclusion followed the statements of one of Amaral's defence witnesses that was heard in court yesterday, the PJ inspector Ricardo Paiva, who took part in the investigative team. He stated that 'The Truth of the Lie' did not contain any more information than what was in the files of the process that has been shelved in the mean time, and made public. Thus Gonçalo Amaral's defence seeks to devalue the impact of the accusations that are contained in the book on the McCann family and to empty the arguments that sustain Gerry and Kate McCann's request for 1.2 million as compensation over moral damages.

“What are the 'revelations' in the book?” the judge asked Ricardo Paiva. “There is nothing new compared with the inquiry”, the inspector replied. “But it says the contrary on the back cover, it says that there are 'unique revelations'. What are those?”, the magistrate insisted. “They may be unique to those who bought the book and didn't read the case files”, Ricardo Paiva suggested. Ironically, the judge concluded “Then it's misleading advertising!”.

The McCann couple's lawyers, on the other hand, have been trying to demonstrate that the book contains a lot more information than the criminal process, namely the author's final conclusion that the little girl died in the apartment, which is the motive of the moral damage that was caused to the family.

During yesterday's session, the director of the National Counter-Terrorism Unit (UNCT) testified for Gonçalo Amaral's defence and implied that the abduction theory, with which the investigation started right after the little girl's disappearance, may have been rushed. “When Dr Guilhermino Encarnação [former PJ director] held the first press conference and spoke about an abduction, we still didn't know whether it was one thing or another”, he said. According to Luís Neves, an abduction expert, at the time, the signs that usually support this type of crime, like “a ransom note”, were missing. The director of UNCT also recalled that it was Maddie's parents who, being first to admit that their daughter might be dead, ended up indirectly triggering the arrival in Portugal of the English dogs that detected cadaver odour in the apartment where Maddie disappeared from. And that was when Amaral's thesis started to gain strength.

BBC programme
SIC guarantees that they were not approached

SIC [Portuguese television network and media company, which runs several television channels] was not approached to broadcast BBC's Crimewatch program on the “Maddie case”, contrary to what the English press published. Next Monday, on 14 October, the English TV channel, BBC, that broadcasts Crimewatch, promises to show a reconstruction of Madeleine McCann's disappearance. The script is a result of Scotland Yard's investigation. The British press assured that Portuguese TV channels refused to broadcast it, however when questioned by DN, an official source from SIC guaranteed that they were never contacted. RTP and TVI did not reply up to the closure of this edition.

Diário de Notícias, Paper Edition, page 19, October 9, 2013

 

Jeremy Bamber; Pathologist's Views

Attrib: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/public-interest-immunity/psychopathy/pathologist-s-views

Dr Vanezis, the pathologist who examined the bodies had not detailed a time of death for any of the deceased in his report. He provided the police with statements written long after the post mortem, the first during September and others during November 1985 and May 1986 when he used his notes and scene photographs to assist him.  The Dickinson review then requested that he write an additional report post trial and the extracts below are taken from this report which appears to be much more candid and in favour of the Defence than his pre-trial statements. Regarding his initial examinations he stated:   “Sheila had suffered two gunshot wounds. I was a little concerned with this but in my experience, bearing in mind the low velocity of the weapon, whilst unusual, suicide with two shots does occur. I have experienced four or five in the past. In order to consider this a possibility, however, I must have been impressed by the information given to me as to position of the weapon, length of barrel and the ability of Sheila to reach the trigger. I had been told it was a semi-automatic weapon.  The result of my P.M. examination of Sheila was 'death due to gunshot wounds'. My examination did not reveal anything to contradict the suicide theory and I must say, although I could not from my examination, confirm murder or suicide”  The post mortem’s continued the following day and Dr Peter Vanezis further states:   “Having discussed the number of shots involved (24) I was told the magazine could hold at least eight cartridges. Sheila was a farmer's daughter and would have been used to firearms. I drew no serious consequence from the number of shots fired.”                                                       When DS Stan Jones later asked him some time later what he thought about it being a murder/suicide he wrote:   “Whilst respecting his views there was nothing impressive about what he said and certainly I cannot recall anything of evidential substance to the effect that Sheila could not have done it.”   Dr Vanezis continues:   “I then discussed the two possibilities : If it wasn't Sheila it had to be Jeremy. We went over the information and I expressed the views that Jeremy would have to be a nutter to have done what had occurred, in that he must have had such a warped state of mind to engineer it in the manner in which it was presented. This was almost too incredible to believe. Additionally, in order to stage manage Sheila she would probably need to be under the influence of drugs. I said that I would ascertain the results of the drug analysis with regard to that point before completing my report.”   The drug analysis came back negative, apart from the tests showing a reduced dose of Haloperidol a treatment for Schizophrenia, and a trace of Cannabis taken some four days earlier, Sheila had not been sedated. In support of Dr Vanezis views, Jeremy Bamber had no history violence, has never had any mental illness, and does not have any psychopathic traits in 27 different assessments. Sheila Caffell on the other hand, was delusional, volatile, suicidal and “could use physical aggression directed to property, herself or others” As detailed by her Psychologist, her boyfriend and other witnesses who gave police statements.  It is unclear why the views expressed by the pathologist shifted in this report which seems to suggest that he was later influenced by the information provided by police. He also described one of the bullet's in Sheila Caffell's body as "Fragmented" but Malcolm Fletcher the Ballistics expert for the prosecution describes it as whole which is how it was presented at trial. Read more about Sheila's X-Ray's and the fragmented bullet here. Dr Vanezis also stated that SOCO officers took hand swabs from both Sheila Caffell and Nevill Bamber but none of the SOCO officers admitted to taking swabs from Nevill. Later the hand swabs taken from Sheila Caffell were rejected by the lab, when they returned they bore a different exhibit reference number and only very low levels of lead were detected suggesting that Sheila had possibly handled the weapon but not fired it. This became key prosecution evidence. Why were the exhibit reference numbers for the swabs altered and what became of the hand swabs from Nevill Bamber which were never allocated an exhibit reference? Many of the key exhibits had altered reference numbers including the sound moderator and hacksaw blade.  Recent testimony from forensic ballistics expert Philip Boyes proves that gunshot reside which would have discharged onto Sheila Caffell's hands when she fired the gun was easily and simply wiped away on cloth or clothing without any need for washing. This meant that Sheila had very low levels of lead when her hands were tested.  The low levels of lead on Sheila's hands  is not a valid part of the prosecution's case and never was.  Professor Peter Vanezis is now a leading Home Office Pathologist.

Jeremy Bamber's blog Sept 2013

Attrib: http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/almost-year-29-another-milestone.html

"Almost Year 29, Another Milestone".

Almost year 29, another milestone and I wonder could this be ‘the year’ justice is served? Evidence, information used to establish facts in a legal investigation when the information is controlled, it’s possible to make facts from fiction. My case at trial was controlled to the point where every part of the prosecution’s case was fiction. For instance the jury were told that no more than twenty five people entered White House Farm on the 7^th of August 1985. DC Hammersley stated that he didn’t even see that many people enter the house. The truth is that at the very least forty-five people went into the house that day and DC Hammersley was not one of them. He never came to White House Farm on the 7^th of August; he says he did but it’s simply not true.

The fourth Scenes of Crime Officer at the house was DC Henderson, not DC Hammersley. Essex police and the CPS have kept that fact a secret, which might explain why DC Hammersley burst into tears during his interview with the City of London Police in 1991 when he blurted out “I didn’t find it”; (meaning the moderator) of course he didn't because he wasn’t even there that day and luckily for him and the Crown’s case The City of London Police were not aware of the switching of police officers who attended the scene. There are many other officers who attended the scene inside the house and did not make statements which suggests that their testimony was not what the police wanted it to be. We are now urging these retired officers to come forward and join the other witnesses who have contacted us.     

PS Bews has talked endlessly to the media during the last 28 years, so it came as a huge surprise to me to hear that he was involved in searching White House Farm and my house at Goldhanger. Oddly PS Bews makes no mention of this in any witness statements; in his pocket book; his trial testimony or during any of the many media interviews he has given. He carried out these searches with PC Myall and between them they seized about thirty exhibits which were also kept secret by Essex police; yet the prosecution exhibited some of these at trial stating that other police officers had seized them rather than admit that Bews and Myall had done so. It is not known why their involvement in the searches was kept secret but documents clearly prove their involvement. This information is the tip of the iceberg. We feel that putting this material into the public arena can do no harm. This proves many more witnesses perjured themselves at trial and perhaps the CPS will mention how Public Interest Immunity was misused to conceal evidence against me.

After 28 years of wrongful imprisonment, justice and freedom is long overdue. Thanks to all of my campaigners for your support I will see you very soon.

Jeremy

Posted 2 days ago by Jeremy Bamber

Jeremy Bamber: What did Essex Police really find at WHF...?

Attrib: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/what-really-happened Edits PAM

 

We can only guess at the truth of what happened while Jeremy Bamber was sitting in a police car on Pages Lane away from the crime scene but the evidence suggests the following sequence of events occurred.

 

1. Before the Firearms Group (FG) entered White House Farm (WHF) Collins and Delgado had looked through the kitchen window. Collins reports by radio that two bodies, one female (Sheila Caffell) and one male (Nevill Bamber) have been seen in the kitchen. Both appeared to be dead. 2. Collins, Delgado and others briefly enter the kitchen and confirm the two bodies by radio and telephone. They then continue to search the much of the downstairs and the back of the house upstairs. 3. At some point, Sheila recovers consciousness, and leaving the kitchen and through the main hallway she ascends the main staircase to the master bedroom and shoots herself with the rifle which WPC Jeapes and PC Brown had seen leaning against the window. 4. To conceal their incompetence, the FG officers, probably in collusion with Inspector Montgomery and PS Adams, decide to 'cover up' that Sheila Caffell had first been seen in the kitchen. At this stage, it was only a mild manipulation of the truth; she had, as they announced publicly, committed suicide upstairs, in the main bedroom.   5. Accordingly, Collins and Delgado omit from their statements any reference to looking through the kitchen window and seeing Sheila Caffell's body there; only one body, they say, that of Nevill Bamber, was in the kitchen and they first saw that after they had entered WHF.   6. All went well; the inquest ruled that Sheila Caffell had killed her parents and two sons and then committed suicide.   7. As August advanced, the police found themselves facing increasing difficulties. Jeremy Bamber's relatives, anxious over issues of inheritance, were determined to establish his guilt and began to demand a full murder investigation.  Detective Chief Inspector 'Taff' Jones knew that Jeremy was innocent but to explain why he was so sure meant he would have to admit that Sheila was alive when the police entered WHF and that the police had concealed this. He would also have been concerned that information about the contamination of the crime scene by more officers being drafted in for training exercises using the bodies in situ was going to become public, making a mockery of crime scene preservation and showing utter disrespect for Jeremy Bamber's dead family.   8. 'Taff' Jones is removed from heading the investigation. He is replaced by Ainsley, who had the reputation of being tough and ruthless. These qualities are required to prevent the police being exposed for concealing the truth about Sheila Caffell. Unfortunately DCI 'Taff' Jones later died in a DIY accident in his home.   i. First line of defence: all records of police radio and telephone communications indicating that Sheila was still alive when the police entered WHF to be withheld from the defence.   ii. Second line of defence: in case Jeremy's defence got wind of any of these radio or telephone messages, select the FG statements to mention mistaking Nevill Bamber for a woman. 9. At least eight or nine, perhaps a dozen or so, Essex Police officers know the truth about WHF and that Jeremy Bamber did not murder Sheila Caffell,  or his mother and father or his little nephews. We are told that Essex Police were frightened by Andrew Hunter’s revelations in the House of Commons in 2005 but they are more frightened of losing their police pensions or even imprisonment. One has 'come out' over an important detail (the issue of silencers) but will say no more. Another has allegedly confessed to a third party that he feels dreadful guilt about Jeremy's imprisonment.   All of the above is supported by documentary evidence.  For the full story and further documents in support of Jeremy Bamber's innocence visit http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/Campaign-Hub

Bamber's Rambles: NOT

No-one saw Jeremy Bamber walking or cycling or driving along any roads on the night of the White House Farm murders, so... in order to confuse the jury and to help secure a guilty verdict the following is one of the routes that Essex Police fantasised that Jeremy had walked and/or cycled.

   Essex Police were so desperate to implicate Jeremy in the murders that they said he phoned the police station from White House Farm, Tolleshunt D'arcy, pretending to be his father, then went back to his own home in Goldhanger and phoned the police from there to report his father's call to him.

Of course this was before the log (which Essex Police and the CPS said did not exist) appeared and which proved Nevill Bamber DID phone the police and that this was logged ten minutes or so before Jeremy's call.

 

 



The video clips do not do justice to the true nature of the terrain - it was impossible to cycle either side of the narrow track as the ground is extremely uneven with pot-holes and long grasses.  There's a six foot drop into the sea on one side and down a steep bank on the other - and of course Jeremy was supposed to have done this in the dark on a lady's cycle.

 

 

 

Start of the route - bottom of Pages Lane   

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cannot ascertain when playing field was erected - original route was by footpath only

Head Street is 0.2mls to the right at the end of the footpath