PoppyMeze

Thursday, 31 January 2013

Justice4Jeremy: If you are someone troubled...

 ...by your knowledge of the truth of what really happened, consider the words of Edmund Burke


'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing'

 
Jeremy has been imprisoned for 27 years.  He faces ending his days locked-up for a crime he did not, could not, have committed.  Jeremy has been deprived of choices the rest of us take for granted.  Family celebrations, relationships, marriage, travel; the freedom of feeling the sand between his toes on a Dorset beach, one of his favourite spots. How he would love to do the very things that we, who are free, often moan about; shopping, being a taxi-service for his children, commuting!  Jeremy has proven his innocence time and time again.  He has documented evidence but every attempt at presenting his case appears to have been blocked.  One can only question why...
                                                                
*      *      *
 


Attrib: Jeremy Bamber's Official Website: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/new-information
(edits by P.A.M)

Appeal for New Information.
Can You Help Jeremy Bamber to Freedom?               Last updated January 2013
 
Firearms Officers We are currently trying to trace police officers who were at the scene of White House Farm on the morning of the tragedy, we know there were at least 13 firearms officers who entered the house but did not make statements. Were you one of the officers who was there on the 7th of August? Can you help us with information about who entered the house and how the investigation was handled.

Other Police Officers, Uniform and CID

If you worked on the Jeremy Bamber Case and/or you entered White House Farm on the morning of the tragedy please contact us, even if you think you don't have any information which might help we would like to speak to you.

Civilian Telephone Radio Operators
Were you a radio operator monitoring the firearms officers movements as they broke into the house on the morning of the 7th of August?

B.T. Engineers
If you were a British Telecom Engineer who entered the house at any point during the 2 months before the
tragedy please contact us, you may think you don't have any information relating to the incident directly but we have questions we would like to ask.

Were you a friend of Sheila, Julie or any of the relatives in this case?
Do you have any information which you believe the Defence should know about in the interests of justice?

If you have already contacted us
We are anxious to trace two callers who have already provided information whom we know to be genuine informants, we are appealing for you to re-establish contact with either Simon McKay, Andrew Hunter or the Official Administration. All calls and emails will be treated in the strictest confidence and there is a possibility that you could be offered anonymity/immunity from prosecution if you make a statement.


Please help put right this injustice, Jeremy Bamber is an innocent man who has had his life stolen from him. For just a few moments of your time you will be giving Jeremy back some of his life.

Tuesday, 22 January 2013

Sally Roberts: Trial by media....


Sally was ridiculed and portrayed as an irresponsible, unstable parent; who was putting her son’s life at risk.
 
You may have already heard about Sally Roberts plea for the National Health Service to use ‘safer alternatives’ to treat her son (Neon’s) brain cancer. But this and many other important factors were never fully explained in the news or interviews reporting the case. Instead,
 
The truth is, Sally was not happy with the treatment (XRAY Radiation) being proposed, which could cause Neon long term damage or even premature death. Because of this, the NHS sought to control the situation by initiating a nationwide police hunt (unbeknown to Sally), to gain custody of her son and obtain a court order to force him to have the treatment. However, the NHS did not expect Sally to publicly challenge their decision. She struggled in Court because her initial lawyer was not equipped to handle the case, therefore Human Rights lawyer – Imran Khan came to her defence on the eleventh hour. The High Court gave Sally a seemingly impossible task to find an acceptable ‘alternative treatment’ proven suitable for childhood brain cancer, within a two week period. In a race against time and against all the odds, this determined and dedicated mother managed to uncover unprecedented evidence on a wide range of ‘safer, less-invasive and painless treatments’ that could not only save but also secure a better quality of life for Neon; yet all were rejected by the NHS and High Court. Sadly, against her wishes, the XRAY Radiation treatment commenced on Thursday 10 January 2013.
 
However, having contacted numerous Health Professionals (around the world) in the field of ‘orthodox and alternative cancer treatments’; Sally was supplied with a wealth of safe & effective treatments, which strengthened the case and left her even more determined to mount a second High Court appeal.
 
One treatment in particular called Proton Beam Therapy (carried out in America), is said to be a less aggressive form of Radiotherapy, non-invasive, painless and causes minimal damage to surrounding tissue. It is considered one of the most precise and advanced orthodox treatments for cancer available today. Yet to her complete surprise, two days before the NHS were due to start treatment, Sally learnt that Proton Beam Therapy was well known to the NHS, who not only funds it but also pays for patients ‘travel & accommodation’ to clinics around the world. Sally was never told, nor was it ever offered to Neon. She also learnt that the NHS was actively making sure the public is kept unaware of this less invasive treatment and service, primarily because it is more expensive than XRAY Radiation. However, this treatment is available not only in America but in China, France and Switzerland. Understandably, Sally would like Neon to receive the Proton Beam Therapy, which would also entail using a milder form of chemotherapy; as well as, alternative natural treatments – to give him a much better chance of long term survival and less overall damage. All in all, Sally was never against orthodox treatments, but simply wanted the opportunity to exercise her right to choose safer and more effective options.
 
It has gradually become clear to Sally that she has been caught in a web of procedures, rather than true unimpeded scientific assessment, of the potential benefits of these approaches… and feels she is fighting bureaucrats, instead of working alongside scientists to evaluate the best choice of treatments, which should produce the most favourable outcome for Neon.
 
Sally says -
“When cancer enters your life, you can never control what the outcome will be, but we should at least be able to control the amount of pain and suffering, especially where children are concerned. As with life, it is the journey and quality of life that is important. As a mother my responsibility is to shield my son from any immediate or potential harm; this is all I have tried to do… and will continue to do.  My ordeal, plus losing custody of Neon was absolutely devastating and unnecessary, however some good has come out of it. It made me have to question, if in 2 weeks whilst under extreme stress and no sleep, I was able to find a wide range of safer & less invasive cancer treatments, why didn’t the NHS and UK Oncologists, who have this information on file, not come forward or support my case? The answer can be found in the ‘1939 Cancer Act’, which even the Court tried to avoid addressing. But how can we successfully beat cancer, if this Act prevents proven safe and effective alternatives from being used, researched, explored, promoted or funded.  I would like to urge everyone to please read about this Act and the horrendous side-effects of XRAY Radiotherapy & Chemotherapy, then consider… what you would do, if you were in my position and Neon was your child?” 
 
In her lone quest, Sally uncovered a huge range of successful cancer treatments which uses *minimum levels of either radiotherapy & chemotherapy plus alternatives, or just alternatives, which she wants to make known to the general public, especially cancer sufferers. With cancer now at pandemic levels; effecting 1 in 2 people; this means the majority of us will face the same dilemma at least once in our lifetime. She also feels it is vital for people to understand, the crucial role the 1939 Cancer Act plays in preventing promising life-saving information reaching the public. The Act was passed solely for the purpose of supporting ‘scientific methodologies’ for experimental cancer drug-treatments and not for research into prevention of the disease. Therefore, the Act specifically prohibits and makes it illegal to promote or advertise any effective natural product or therapy proven to heal, prevent or control cancer. Consequently, only radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery or new trial-drugs are offered to UK sufferers.
 
Sally also learnt that prior to the Act, (73 years ago) cancer was considerably rare; affecting only 1 in 50 people… proving that science is no closer to finding ‘a cure’. Despite the reported huge advances in technology, scientific know-how, annual medical breakthroughs, plus enormous promotions and funds raised for cancer research, nothing has changed to-date, except for the escalation of the disease and increasing deaths. The 1939 Cancer Act ensures that most parents and sufferers are led to believe there is no other choice which is simply not true. Independent scientists, oncologists and doctors have confirmed that more people die from surgery, radiotherapy & chemotherapy than the cancer itself. These frightening facts strengthened her resolve to find the safest, best and most humane treatments for Neon.
 
No doubt Sally’s brave stance and love for Neon will be far reaching. Apart from creating greater public awareness, she will surely make a huge difference to cancer sufferers, by bringing to light safer treatments and encouraging integration within the general healthcare system.
 
Her experience, plus what she has learnt, opens up the Pandora’s Box on cancer in the Medical Institutions, Legal Establishments and the Media; questioning matters of transparency, accountability, vested interests, collusion and corruption.
 
SALLY ROBERTS HAS TWO WEEKS IN WHICH TO HELP NEON GET THE TREATMENT HE NEEDS:
Please donate whatever you can 

 
 

Saturday, 19 January 2013

Jeremy Bamber: My latest letter to MP John Whittingdale


Address provided



16 January 2013



John Whittingdale MP

House of Commons

London

SW1A 0AA



Dear Mr Whittingdale,


Re: Jeremy Bamber


I refer to your letter dated 14 January 2013. Whilst it is a fact that any conviction may only be overturned by the Court of Appeal it does not exclude any MP from bringing the concern before Parliament even to the extent of requesting intervention. You state that 'neither I nor Parliament has any influence over the matter' yet as I wrote in my previous letter to yourself, Andrew Hunter felt able to address Parliament regarding the injustice in Jeremy Bamber's case. You have also previously spoken about Jeremy Bamber in Parliament, in 2001, by asking a question in the House of Commons regarding whether Jeremy’s website should be allowed to exist. Both the above may be viewed as attempting to influence Parliament. Recently Parliamentary influence resulted in the money-guzzling Leveson Inquiry, held, in the main, as a result of media-attention-seeking celebs complaining when the same back-fired.
 

Through his access to files previously intended for PII and inadvertently sent to him, Jeremy Bamber can prove beyond doubt that he is innocent. There are hundreds of examples but a few here; no forensics implicating Jeremy in any part of the crime were found on the cycle he was supposed to have used as a getaway vehicle – photographs of the window from which he was supposed to have exited White House Farm show it was locked from the inside and photographs taken three weeks after the murders show flakes of red paint on the kitchen floor and scratches to the mantle which were not present in the original scene-of-crime photographs taken on the day of the murders. How did that happen? The silencer (sound moderator) was pivotal in convicting Jeremy, with the trial judge telling the jury they could convict him 'on the evidence of the silencer alone' but recently discovered photographs of the marks on Nevill Bamber's body show that they match more precisely the shape and dimensions of the gun muzzle and not the shape and dimensions of the silencer, yet the CCRC continue to deny the significance of these along with many other examples of tampering with evidence and refuse to refer back to the Court of Appeal. One can only question why? 
 

My motivation is not only that I believe Jeremy is innocent, but that this injustice could happen to me or one of mine or even one of yours. I once would have placed my faith in the integrity of our Criminal Justice System but over the years many cases of police corruption and cover-up have been exposed including Eddie Gilfoyle, Hillsborough, and more recently the Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell altercation.

 
Jeremy Bamber's conviction was brought about by a deliberate and successful attempt to pervert the course of justice at his trial and continues via, in my opinion, the collusion of some who have a vested interest in keeping the truth from being exposed.


Jeremy has over thirty lever-arch files in his cell, containing documents destined for PII. He has scrutinised thousands of them and has found hundreds of pieces of evidence showing how Essex Police and others perverted the course of justice. I have copies. Why would he spend twenty seven years trying to prove his innocence if it were not so? It cannot be an easy task. Jeremy has passed a lie detector test which was refused him until 2007 and had over twenty five tests for psychopathy, all negative. He can do no more – it is time for the guilty to be brought to justice and for justice to be seen to be done.


Jeremy's Campaign Team are not weirdos or crackpots or conspiracy junkies; they are intelligent, caring, informed and enlightened people and there are many more like them. Public support for Jeremy grows daily and I take comfort in the fact that when our politicians refuse to address corruption and injustice it is often public opinion which enforces change. Jeremy hangs on to his father's words, 'Don't worry Jeremy, the truth always comes out in the wash'.

I will keep you informed, at least I can say I tried and if-and-when the truth does come out, you can never say, you did not know.

 
Yours sincerely,





cc. Nick Clegg Deputy Prime Minister

 

Friday, 18 January 2013

Miscarriage of Justice: Eddie Gilfoyle's sister's impassioned speech...

on the corruption and police lies which led to her brother being unjustly imprisoned for 17 years.  Sue Caddick highlights the obscenity and the reality of the farcical workings of the UK Criminal Justice system. 

This could happen to anyone - it could happen to you..... 

Part One

Part two
 

Saturday, 12 January 2013

Jeremy Bamber: Daily Mail 2007. Worth another read:

Is Bambi's killer innocent?

by BOB WOFFINDEN
Last updated at 12:05 19 May 2007

A lie-detector test. A tell-tale trickle of blood. Twenty years after Jeremy Bamber was jailed for the brutal slaughter of his family, startling new evidence raises a deeply disturbing question
At about 3.30am on August 7, 1985, Jeremy Bamber called the police. "My father's just phoned me," he told them.
"He said: 'Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got a gun'."
That proved to be the start of one of the most remarkable criminal cases in English history - one that is still controversial today.
When police broke into the farmhouse owned by Bamber's parents, they found five people dead from multiple gunshot wounds.
According to all the first reports, Bamber's sister, Sheila - a model with psychiatric problems - had shot her six-year-old twin sons, her parents and then herself.
Scroll down for more...
Sheila CaffellWas Sheila 'Bambi' Caffel murdered by her adopted brother Jeremy Bamber?
The Mail's headline next day was: "Drugs probe after massacre by mother of twins."
Over the weeks, however, the story changed.
Relatives found a silencer, showing traces of blood, in the gun cupboard and took it to police. If it had been used in the shootings, then how could Sheila have put it back there afterwards? And how could she have shot herself twice?
Then, a month after the murders, Julie Mugford, Jeremy Bamber's former girlfriend, went to police and painted a deeply damaging picture of him, including the claim that he wanted to get rid of his relatives.
Bamber, who was then 24, was charged with murdering his family.
In October 1986, he was convicted of all five killings, becoming one of the most reviled men in Britain. Michael Howard, then Home Secretary, ruled that he should never be released.
Bamber, who is now 46, has served more than 20 years but from the start he has vehemently protested his innocence.
He claims to be buoyed by what his father used to say: "Don't worry, Jeremy, the truth always comes out in the wash."
Scroll down for more...
Jeremy BamberVictim or killer? Jeremy Bamber with then-girlfriend Julie Mugford
Last month, in Full Sutton prison near York, Bamber passed a lie-detector test. "Did you shoot your family?" he was asked.
"No," he replied.
Lie-detector tests have always been controversial; but if they are to be trusted, then Bamber is innocent.
Moreover, the Mail can reveal new evidence supporting his account. His solicitor has now asked the Home Office to release him immediately.
Nevill Bamber was a farmer and magistrate. He and his wife, June - both 61 when they died - married in 1949 and shortly afterwards took over White House Farm in the Essex village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy.
As they could not have children, they adopted Sheila and Jeremy (who were unrelated to each other) and privately educated them.
After college in Colchester, Jeremy spent some time in Australia and New Zealand before returning to work on his father's farm. He lived in the neighbouring village, Goldhanger, and in 1983 started a relationship with Julie Mugford, then a 19-year-old student at Goldsmith's College in London.
Sheila, who was 28 when she died, went to secretarial college, before working in London as a model, where she acquired the nickname Bambi. She married Colin Caffell in 1977, and their twin sons were born in 1979.
By that time, however, Shelia's mental health was poor. She and Colin divorced in 1982, and the following year she was admitted to a psychiatric hospital where she was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic.
In March 1985, a few months before the murders, she was described as "very disturbed" and "acutely ill" and was re-admitted, although she was released some weeks later.
Meanwhile, the twins lived with their father, though Sheila saw them regularly. On Sunday, August 4, Colin drove Sheila and the boys to Tolleshunt D'Arcy to spend a few days at the farm.
On Tuesday, August 6, according to Jeremy and another relative, Nevill and June suggested to Sheila that the twins should be put into foster homes.

Jeremy BamberJeremy Bamber lead by a police officer three years ago
When the farm secretary phoned that evening, she said Nevill was "very short" and thought she had interrupted an argument.
It was during that night, says Jeremy, that his father made his dramatic call. After phoning the police, Jeremy called Julie, before setting off for Tolleshunt D'Arcy. He arrived, he says, just two minutes after the police.
No one was allowed into the house. Even when the tactical firearms unit turned up at 5am, the police still waited outside.
Finally, four hours after Jeremy's urgent call, they burst into the house through the back door at 7.30am. They found five bodies. There had been 25 shots with a .22 Anschutz semi-automatic rifle, mostly at close range.
During the day, statements were taken from the main witnesses. Julie Mugford's supported Jeremy's.
At the time, the police were satisfied with the murder-and-suicide scenario. The original investigating officer, DCI 'Taff' Jones, has always believed this - as did the coroner.
Because the killer's identity was not in question, the house was not treated properly as a crime-scene; much forensic evidence was obliterated or never gathered. Bloodstained bedding and carpets were destroyed.
On August 10, relatives - Jeremy Bamber's cousins Ann Eaton and David Boutflour - found the silencer in the gun cupboard with what looked like a flake of dried blood on it. Though it was examined by police on August 13, they found nothing.
During the next month, Jeremy behaved neither sensitively nor prudently. There was a huge media presence at the funerals, where it was suggested that he was over-theatrical in his grief.
He certainly didn't otherwise appear grief-stricken. He had spent lavishly, flown to Amsterdam and even tried ( unsuccessfully) to sell soft-porn pictures of Sheila from her modelling days round Fleet Street for £100,000.
More than a month later, the silencer was examined again.
This time, a scientist found a speck of blood of the same type as Sheila's; he concluded that she must have been shot while the silencer was fitted to the rifle.
Apart from raising the question of who returned the silencer back to the cupboard, this discovery meant that it would have been impossible for Sheila to have killed herself because the gun would have been too long.
DCI Jones was removed from the case. (He died in a fall from a ladder at his home before the case went to trial.)
On September 3, Julie Mugford found out that Bamber had asked out another girl.
Furious, she threw an ornament box across the room and slapped him. He ended their relationship.
Four days later, she went to the police and told them a different story.
Bamber, she said, had shown no remorse; after the murders, he'd thrown money around and clearly enjoyed himself.
Furthermore, he'd talked to Julie before the killings about wanting to get rid of them all, speculating about the perfect murder.
On the night of the massacre, she said, Bamber rang to say: "It's tonight or never."
He added that he'd hired a hitman, called Matthew McDonald, for£2,000. She could prove he was dishonest because they'd burgled the family-owned caravan site together five months earlier.
At the eventual murder trial, Julie's evidence was vital to the prosecution case. The Crown argued that Bamber detested his parents for having sent him to boarding school, and resented Sheila's success and the allowances they made for her state of mind.
But his chief motive, said the prosecutor, was to inherit about£435,000 and 300 acres of land.
The rest of the case seemed cut and dried. Sheila would not have known how to use the gun, which would have had to be reloaded at least twice.
The silencer would have made the gun too long for her to point at herself, and she couldn't have returned it to the cupboard. There were no bloodstains on her body or her nightdress and no traces of firearms residue - except a bit of lead on her hands.
There was no documentary evidence - as there would be today - to back up Bamber's claims of the phone call he received from his father.
On October 18, 1986, ten of the 12 jurors returned a guilty verdict.

Jeremy BamberThe house where one of the most remarkable criminal cases in English history began
Sentencing Bamber to life, Mr Justice Drake described him as "warped, callous and evil".
With hindsight, the case against Bamber was thin. There was no evidence that he had travelled from his home to the farmhouse and back again in the early hours of the morning.
Nor was there forensic evidence linking him to the crimes, other than one of his fingerprints being on the gun. But he admitted using it previously to shoot rabbits and Sheila's fingerprint was also on it; as were those of the policeman who'd picked up the gun after the murders.
When the silencer was found, no one who handled it had worn gloves to try to retain the evidence.
However, there was a flake of blood inside, and the forensic expert who analysed it concluded that it came from Sheila - backspatter (a spray of blood from the victim) after she had been shot.
However, another expert, who also gave evidence for the Crown, said that the .22 Anschutz was unlikely to produce backspatter - and even less likely to when fitted with a silencer.
Major Freddy Mead, a firearms expert appearing for the defence, noted that there were no grounds for believing that the silencer had been used at all during the attacks.
No one could even be sure that the blood in the silencer was Sheila's. The blood tests available at that time were basic. All that could be done was blood grouping.
The prosecution later conceded that Sheila's blood group matched that of Robert Boutflour, Jeremy's uncle, who was present when the silencer was found.
Other scientists said that the flake could have been a mixture of Nevill's and June's blood. The jury had asked whether this was a possibility.
There was also blood on the barrel of the rifle; again, no one knows whose.
It would be invaluable to learn more about this evidence, using scientific techniques available today.
But this is impossible because Essex police destroyed many of the original trial exhibits, including all the blood-based samples, in February 1996.
Those responsible insisted they had not realised that the exhibits might be needed - yet ever since the conviction, this case had been a hot topic.
In February 1996, it was still under consideration by the Home Office and was one of the first to be transferred to the new Criminal Cases Review Commission, which said the destruction of scientific exhibits was "in breach of the force's own guidelines".
Bamber's lawyers have always believed that Nevill and June were shot in their bedroom. June struggled across it before collapsing, while Nevill, having been shot twice, managed to get downstairs to reach the telephone and call Jeremy.
He then struggled with his assailant, who beat him with the rifle butt before shooting him dead. The prosecution maintained that there were signs of a tussle, with furniture being overturned, which meant that Jeremy, not Sheila, must have been the attacker.
However, according to a document later released by City of London Police (which had been asked in 1991 by the Home Office to conduct an independent inquiry into Essex police's handling of the investigation), the officers knocked over chairs when they burst into the house.
Further, Sheila could have subdued Nevill; having been shot twice, he would have been weak.
Also, it was possible for Sheila to have shot herself twice. The first wound, to her throat, was fired from a distance of three inches but would not have killed her instantly; the second, fired with the barrel pressed against the skin, would have done.
But could Bamber have shot her?
There was no evidence that Sheila had resisted and Bamber would have needed to be underneath her, with her acquiescing, in order to fire the shots at the angle they entered the body.
In effect, he was convicted on the evidence of his own conductafter the shootings, as well as the word of one scientist and his former girlfriend.
Yet not only did her account contradict much of what she had originally stated; it was not supported in crucial ways. The alleged hitman, Matthew McDonald, who gave evidence at the trial, had a strong alibi.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the case to appeal in March 2001. The appeal began in October the following year.
By then, as much scientific testing as possible had been carried out.
The appeal court judges determined that June Bamber's DNA - but not necessarily Sheila's - was in the silencer. They added, however, that they believed there had been significant contamination of the samples and the results were meaningless.
Looking at the case as a whole, they concluded in December 2002 that "the deeper we have delved into the available evidence, the more likely it has seemed to us that the jury were right".
Bamber responded to the disappointment by changing his legal team.
Bamber's defence depends on whether Sheila was a viable suspect. Her family did not think she was capable of serious violence.
"Apart from the odd occasion when she has struck me in a temper," said her former husband, Colin Caffell, "she has, to my knowledge, never struck anyone."
However, Dr Hugh Ferguson, consultant psychiatrist at St Andrew's hospital in Northampton where she was treated, reported that she was "caught up with the idea that the Devil had taken her over and given her the power to project evil on to others, including her sons".
When she was discharged from hospital in September 1983, Ferguson wrote that she had thoughts that she was "capable of murdering her own children".
He made a "firm diagnosis" of schizophrenia, prescribing the antipsychotic drug Stelazine.
She was re-admitted in March 1985 and received injections of another anti-psychotic drug, Haloperidol.
The drug was found in her bloodstream when she died (as was cannabis).
As the appeal court judges said, "She had a psychotic illness requiring in-patient treatment. She had severe mood disturbances (schizophrenia) and she used cannabis and cocaine."
Learning of the killings, Dr Ferguson initially said that such violence was incongruous with his view of Sheila.
Yet, when told that it had been suggested that her children be taken into foster care, he said that this could have had "a catastrophic effect".
He added: "I would not have expected her to be passive about that."
Dr Ferguson said in his evidence that it would have transformed her image of her father from "a support and mentor into a hostile figure".
Instances of psychiatric patients murdering others and then themselves were almost unknown in 1985-6. But they have occurred with tragic regularity in the years since, particularly in the United States.
Bamber's current lawyer is the controversial Giovanni di Stefano. Born in Italy, di Stefano was raised in Northamptonshire and has built a practice in Italy and Britain. His clients have included Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic.
Di Stefano has found the previously lost statement of the first officer to enter the house, at 7.34am.
The officer stated: "(Sheila Caffell) had what appeared to be two bullet holes under her chin and blood leaking from both sides of her mouth down her cheeks."
This puts the case into a fresh light. If blood was still leaking from Sheila's wounds, then she had died relatively recently, and certainly long after the time that Bamber called the police.
It also fits with other evidence. That night, as police waited with Bamber at a safe distance from White House Farm, they said they saw someone moving through the house. That has always been known. Later, it was assumed they were mistaken. Perhaps they were right all along.
It could explain too why Sheila was not bloodied and had only traces of lead on her hands. She could have washed herself and changed before killing herself.
Professor Bernard Knight, a pathologist who gave evidence at the trial, said that those committing suicide would often engage beforehand in "ritualistic" cleaning.
One final aspect of the case that has never been given attention is - assuming Bamber was guilty - why would he have invented such a preposterous story about the phone call from his father?
It would have been simpler for him to go back to bed, make himself scarce and let it appear that there had been intruders.
The idea that he could invent a tale of a killing spree by a mentally disturbed woman to be lent credibility by further violent episodes over the following decade is hard to credit.
Following the lie-detector test, the case is now set more favourably for him than it has ever been.
Maybe the truth will still come out in the wash.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-455875/Is-Bambis-killer-innocent.html#ixzz2HlR9Oleq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Monday, 7 January 2013

Jeremy Bamber: PS Bews and PC Myall must own up...

 
To cover up....
 
The following is taken from the media pack on Jeremy Bamber's official website:        (edits in italics: Poppy Ann Miller)

3. Signs of life inside White House Farm:

 
a) PS Bews, PC Myall and Jeremy saw someone in the master bedroom at 04:00am. After the reconnaissance of the house and the sighting of someone in the master bedroom, all three ran back to the radio car, where PS Bews made a situation report to HQ over the radio asking for armed assistance.

At Jeremy's trial PS Bews denied that someone was seen in the master bedroom and has subsequently given press interviews and appeared on television repeating his claims that what he saw was a shadow or a trick of the light.

Essex Police have not disclosed a copy of this situation report, nor disclosed the audio recordings of all the radio messages from this incident which would have seemingly aided the prosecution.

b) Firearms officers tasked with specifically keeping watch on the master bedroom window state that at 07:00 am the curtains were closed. At 07:30 am a different police officer took over and reported that the curtains had been opened and the bedroom light was on. This person who had been seen by three people at 04:00am was likely the same person who closed the bedroom curtains prior to 07:00am, and opened them at some point between 07:00 and 07:30 am.

c) At the scene before police broke down the door two independent officers in different locations saw what they thought was a weapon in an upstairs bedroom window.
This weapon was not present when police broke in, any photographs taken of this room have not been disclosed to the Defence. 

All statements are supported with documentary evidence.

Visit:   http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/