Copyright ©Jeremy Bamber Campaign Edits PAM
Flawed though it was, the evidence surrounding the sound moderator - known as a silencer - was undoubtedly crucial in securing the conviction of Jeremy Bamber for the murders of five members of his family in 1985. Speaking to author Scott Lomax in a book on the case, Jeremy himself said "...it all comes back to the blood in the moderator."
Trial judge, Justice Drake had told the jury "...on the evidence of the silencer alone...", they may find Jeremy guilty, and indeed the jury themselves wrestled to get to grips with the issue and, at one stage, after their first deliberation to reach a verdict, they asked to hear again the evidence relating to it. Their verdict followed soon after, so one can be in no doubt that the issue was central to the decision made almost thirty years ago.
The jury had been concerned that Jeremy's relatives, who found the moderator, would benefit from his conviction, and asked the court a question in writing about their motive but were told that the relatives were wealthy in their own right, and had no interest in financial gain from Jeremy's conviction. Despite a wealth of evidence showing motive for the Boutflour's and Eaton's to lie in court, including the existence of documents showing a court battle between Jeremy's father and mother's families for the estate, the 2002 Appeal ruled that new evidence did not suggest that the 1986 court was lied to in any way, and that the jury were given the correct answer by Robert Boutflour. The courts have ignored any possible financial motive to plant evidence, including the secret land deal and the will of Jeremy's grandmother which had been changed after the tragedies making his aunt and uncle Boutflour wealthy in their own right. Since the 2002 Appeal, considerable information has come to light regarding the depravation of monies from the Bamber estate including accusations of theft against Peter Eaton by the Bamber's secretary Mrs Barbara Wilson which went un-investigated thus hampering the first appeal of Jeremy Bamber.
It has now been established that the 'silencer' in the case of Jeremy Bamber is nothing more than a complete red herring, probably thrown into the mix by those who financially benifited from Jeremy's conviction to muddy the waters. Only now, decades later, have we been able to unravel the issue completely and piece back together how its evidence was manipulated by police to aid their bid to secure Jeremy's conviction. The City of London Police Investigation (1991), Metropolitan Police Investigation (2001) and Criminal Cases Review Commission (2004-2012) have all ignored statements made in 1991 by the Forensic Scientists who worked on the sound moderator exhibit, who explicitly say that their original statements made to Essex Police had been altered without their knowledge. No action has been taken by either Political or Judicial authorities to address the very serious issue of Police fabricating key witness statements.
Our Case Quick Time video on The Moderator explains some of the issues surrounding the forensic examination, and highlights a comprehensive dossier of material supporting the truth. You will be able to see how the evidence presented at trial was not from one exhibit, but from as many as five moderators. Collected and examined at different times,
the exhibit evidence was effectively stitched together to form what was the cornerstone of the fabricated prosecution case against an innocent man. We know for sure that the moderator never played a part in the tragedies that unfolded at White House Farm.
For more on sound moderators watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0Id6L5TMIg
For more on corruption and cover-up visit
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/
Flawed though it was, the evidence surrounding the sound moderator - known as a silencer - was undoubtedly crucial in securing the conviction of Jeremy Bamber for the murders of five members of his family in 1985. Speaking to author Scott Lomax in a book on the case, Jeremy himself said "...it all comes back to the blood in the moderator."
Trial judge, Justice Drake had told the jury "...on the evidence of the silencer alone...", they may find Jeremy guilty, and indeed the jury themselves wrestled to get to grips with the issue and, at one stage, after their first deliberation to reach a verdict, they asked to hear again the evidence relating to it. Their verdict followed soon after, so one can be in no doubt that the issue was central to the decision made almost thirty years ago.
The jury had been concerned that Jeremy's relatives, who found the moderator, would benefit from his conviction, and asked the court a question in writing about their motive but were told that the relatives were wealthy in their own right, and had no interest in financial gain from Jeremy's conviction. Despite a wealth of evidence showing motive for the Boutflour's and Eaton's to lie in court, including the existence of documents showing a court battle between Jeremy's father and mother's families for the estate, the 2002 Appeal ruled that new evidence did not suggest that the 1986 court was lied to in any way, and that the jury were given the correct answer by Robert Boutflour. The courts have ignored any possible financial motive to plant evidence, including the secret land deal and the will of Jeremy's grandmother which had been changed after the tragedies making his aunt and uncle Boutflour wealthy in their own right. Since the 2002 Appeal, considerable information has come to light regarding the depravation of monies from the Bamber estate including accusations of theft against Peter Eaton by the Bamber's secretary Mrs Barbara Wilson which went un-investigated thus hampering the first appeal of Jeremy Bamber.
It has now been established that the 'silencer' in the case of Jeremy Bamber is nothing more than a complete red herring, probably thrown into the mix by those who financially benifited from Jeremy's conviction to muddy the waters. Only now, decades later, have we been able to unravel the issue completely and piece back together how its evidence was manipulated by police to aid their bid to secure Jeremy's conviction. The City of London Police Investigation (1991), Metropolitan Police Investigation (2001) and Criminal Cases Review Commission (2004-2012) have all ignored statements made in 1991 by the Forensic Scientists who worked on the sound moderator exhibit, who explicitly say that their original statements made to Essex Police had been altered without their knowledge. No action has been taken by either Political or Judicial authorities to address the very serious issue of Police fabricating key witness statements.
Our Case Quick Time video on The Moderator explains some of the issues surrounding the forensic examination, and highlights a comprehensive dossier of material supporting the truth. You will be able to see how the evidence presented at trial was not from one exhibit, but from as many as five moderators. Collected and examined at different times,
the exhibit evidence was effectively stitched together to form what was the cornerstone of the fabricated prosecution case against an innocent man. We know for sure that the moderator never played a part in the tragedies that unfolded at White House Farm.
For more on sound moderators watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0Id6L5TMIg
For more on corruption and cover-up visit
http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/
