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

No Offence Guest Blog: Prison and Privilege

            http://www.no-offence.org/showthread.php/6720-Prison-and-Privilege

by Poppy Ann Miller

Rather than questioning why so many of our prisons are inhabited by those from underprivileged backgrounds or with mental health and substance misuse issues and seek out appropriate interventions, I feel that society would often rather lock them away, along with the problem, thus by projecting its corporate 'badness' onto others, frees it from the responsibility of facing its own demons.

'Knowing your own darkness is the best method for dealing with the darknesses of other people'. Carl Jung.

Many of us, I am sure, have committed the occasional, minor, offence; taking stationery from the office, using the work mobile phone for private calls, fiddling mileage and time-sheets. We may justify this by claiming we are underpaid and undervalued, never-the-less it is still stealing and stealing is a crime. Well, only sometimes it seems. Look at the tax 'evasion' of the wealthy, the MP expenses and the recent 'General for hire' lobbying scandals. We are told these are not really crimes but just watch what happens when a struggling, self-employed plumber is caught trying to 'evade' tax. Or a woman in receipt of benefit doing a bit of 'cash-in-hand' so she can save for a family holiday. I am of the opinion that conveniently we categorise crime according to the status of the person, not the severity of the crime. Even Adam Smallbone, in the TV series 'Rev' who, as a vicar in a poor parish with a small stipend, feels justified in purchasing a non-essential piece of 'bling' at the cost of £900 with money he has taken from church funds. Is that criminal?

Having worked with young male offenders and in mental health communities for over twenty five years my experience has been that the vast majority of those who end-up, locked-up, are the poor and often, though not always, those who are the product of our 'care system'. Even those children and young people who have wonderful foster carers still have unaddressed needs which cannot be met with material possessions or persistent reassurances of love and support. Many act-out their anger and frustration through vandalism and drug and alcohol misuse which in turn often leads to crime. I would also say that the majority of those are incarcerated for petty crime due to the frequency, not the severity, of their actions. It becomes a vicious circle. I use the following case studies as an illustration.

Freddy: mental health issues; unemployed, criminal activity 'in trouble with the police' from early teens. At aged twenty-four Freddy was sentenced to four months in prison after breaking a window in his own flat on discovering his wife was having an affair, no other person was involved. He came out of prison angrier and with further criminal contacts.

Public attitude

Mike: aged eighteen; living rough, accused of rape. The girl's story had changed several times and when Mike said he did not do it we were inclined to believe him. He was placed on remand in a prison at least a one hundred and fifty mile round trip from his home. His parents both had mental health issues, did not drive, could not afford the rail fare so by the time I made my first visit Mike had been inside for over a month and had seen no familiar faces. It was clear he was angry and depressed. I was concerned he was suicidal, I told the duty warden, his reply, 'well he shouldn't have done it then.' Mike was inside for six months until his hearing by jury who took less than fifteen minutes to acquit him. Mike is free and on the outside but he's not free on the inside; he says that once you have been in prison, especially for rape, people think you are guilty but that you just 'got away with it'.

It concerns me that the prison warden, regardless of what his private thoughts may have been, felt free and able to voice his judgement on Mike, to me. It does not take much imagining to guess his attitude and how he may view and or treat others entrusted to his care.

The need to belong

Jack: physically abused by his father, a car mechanic. At aged four Jack was removed from his home and his older siblings and placed in the care of a local authority children's home,. From aged twelve Jack started breaking into then stealing cars but mainly due to the efforts of his excellent social worker was able to remain in his placement. Jack was fascinated by cars. Aged 22, he was living independently and as such no longer had the support of his social worker, he wanted to find his father who, as it turned out, was serving a prison sentence for assault. We often find that children defend the most abusive and violent parents. Jack's criminal activity continued and he was finally given a custodial sentence in the form of Community Service. On his non-attendance, because he had been working on his uncle’s car, so he said, he was imprisoned for three weeks over the Christmas period. We thought, why not just get him a car? Must be cheaper all round. So, we arranged for Jack to earn cash working on vehicles. Eventually with his savings plus some donations he was able to buy a car of his own. The last I heard he was engaged to be married and had not stolen again.

There was a link between Jack's need for cars and the need for his father's acceptance, despite his father's treatment and rejection of him. Once he was trusted to work on other people's vehicles, it seems he internalised that as acceptance and it became the catalyst for change. When a child, or an adult come to that, steals, it is often due to a need for attention or affection and a sense of belonging for which possessions can be an unconscious replacement.

Alan: persistent offender from early childhood; petty thieving and alcohol problems. Sexually abused by a paedophile ring from aged ten years. Aged fourteen, social workers removed him from his home and placed him in a unit for sex offenders as the only local option, and where he was sexually abused and assaulted. On discharge Alan continued criminal activity though through his advocate he was pursuing a claim against that local authority. Aged eighteen, whilst in a young offenders' institution he was gang-raped, resulting in his complete mental breakdown and psychosis. Alan was assessed and placed in a rehabilitation community for the mentally ill, only one of three in the country at the time. It closed through lack of funding when he had been there for six months and as he was settling down. I don't know where he is now.

Good coppers

I do not consider that I live in a deprived area but I know of men, aged thirty-plus who are homeless, sleeping in a 'mate's car', sometimes even a stranger's car or they find a way of getting locked-up just to get bed-and-board, even for one night. Derek was keen to tell me of the best places to sleep rough or park a car at night and of the good coppers who turn a blind eye or give him a hot drink.

Then there is the fear of finding your way in the world when all you have known are institutions. As Jo says, 'prison is the only place I feel safe', when asked why he is inside again.

It is so easy, upon release, to walk straight back into the only life you have ever known, especially when there's no-one to meet you at the gate or the only hope of accommodation is from the list of night shelters you are given as you are released. The government is now considering even removing the £45 cash they are given on discharge. It breaks my heart....

I have only ever worked in and around Essex and these are only a few examples of the dozens of stories I could relate. If this is happening in my local area how many times, I wonder, is it repeated throughout the UK?

 

Jeremy Bamber: Eddie Gilfoyle's sister speaks on Corruption of British Justice

Dozens maybe hundreds of UK citizens have experienced this nightmare which is why I campaign for justice for Jeremy Bamber and the exposure of corruption within UK Criminal Justice system.

More info at: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/

Jeremy Bamber: David Boutflour

Attrib:  http://jeremybamber.org/david-boutflour/

David Boutflour is the son of Robert and sister to Ann. He had told police in a statement that on the Saturday after the tragedy, the 10^th of August he found the sound moderator at White House Farm when he went there with Ann Eaton, curiously he doesn’t mention in his statement that his father was present but does say he was there in his court transcript:

“I went to a cupboard under the stairs in the den. I found a cardboard box which contained 12 bore cartridges and about 200/300 rounds of.22 ammunition all of which was low velocity ammunition. Also in the box was a sound moderator for a .22 rifle. I picked up the sound moderator and saw what I believe to be blood on it. Also there was red paint or something similar on it as well. There was one quite deep scratch which was bright and appeared to be new. There was a telescopic sight in its box, in the box as well. I took these items together with the other firearms to my sister’s house. I later informed the Police of the finding of the telescopic sight and sound moderator.”

In court he details how he had noticed paint in the knurl of the moderator which appeared to him to match the colour of the mantle surrounding the Aga. It was later during September that his sister Ann Eaton pointed out scratches to police officers and it was this evidence which was also key to the conviction of Jeremy because it was alleged that the moderator was on the rifle during an apparent fight in the kitchen between Nevill Bamber and his assailant. [1]

The Eaton’s and the Boutflour’s had consistently denied that Sheila would have had any knowledge of guns despite her attending shoots as a ‘beater’ she had never been seen firing a gun according to the family. Jeremy had already stated that Sheila had used an air rifle while out shooting with him. Jeremy had told his lawyers that David Boutflour had been shooting with Sheila Caffell and under cross examination David was pressed by Geoffrey Rivlin QC about a shooting holiday in Scotland here is an extract from his trial transcript:

 Q: As regards Sheila: Of course you knew Sheila, did you not?
A : I knew Sheila quite well. In later years, but when she was in her teenage years, when I was unmarried and near, I would often take her to the local village hop or party or dinner dance.
Q : Did you ever take her on a shooting holiday?
A: Jeremy Bamber with his father came on a shooting holiday, but I cannot honestly recollect Sheila coming on one.
Q : Do you remember an occasion when you went to Scotland on a shooting holiday with Sheila?”
A : I do not recollect a shooting holiday with Sheila, but I do recollect a shooting holiday with Nevill Bamber and his son Jeremy, and also my now wife Karen Boutflour.
Q: Are you saying you have never been to Scotland with Sheila and/or others on a shooting holiday?
A : I cannot recollect Sheila being on the shooting holiday you are referring to.
Q: Did you not go on a shooting holiday with Sheila and Jeremy Bamber being present?
A : My mind is somewhat blurred at this time. There may have been and occasion when Nevill Bamber and Jeremy . . . . but this must have been many years before that. 
Q : It may have been some years before. I cannot give you a date, do you understand but doing the best I can, may I suggest to you 1978/79 period, when you went on a shooting holiday with Sheila?
Mr Justice Drake: Where abouts are you putting?
Mr Rivlin: In Scoland
Mr Justice Drake: Just the two of them, it is suggested?
The Witness:  I think I can possibly explain this a little further. It is such a long time ago I am having a lot of trouble recollecting this but, having suddenly put me on the spot, I think I can remember occasions when I have taken members of the family up to Scotland, and I belonged to a shooting party of about eight members, which we invited a guest on one or the second occasion, and we would shoot on August 12^th – The Glorious Twelfth – and sometimes in September shooting on three days on each occasion.
Q: You understand I am not concerned to ask you about just any old holiday that you may have been on, however pleasant, but to ask you about a time when you took Sheila up with you, and there was such an occasion, was there not Mr Boutlfour?
Q: I have a feeling, now you have brought back the grey matter a little, Sheila may have come up with me on one occasion.
Q: Can you tell the court, did she do any shooting?”
A: It’s such a long time ago, I cannot recollect, but she certainly did not carry a gun. She may have fired a gun off in the party perhaps.
Q: She may have, but you cannot recollect?
A: I can recollect somebody firing a 12 bore off and putting it up to their shoulder, but I do not recollect whether it was Sheila or another lady.

 Peter Eaton details in his handwritten draft statements to the City of London Police in 1991 that he saw Sheila using a gun on a shooting holiday in Scotland, but this was crossed out with the word “NO” written over the top of it and did not appear in the final Statement to police. It now surfaces from the evidence presented here that there is some confusion over whether Sheila had actually been seen with a gun or not. [2]  Indeed, both David and Anthony had agreed in front of DCI Taff Jones that Sheila could have been capable of using the gun to kill the family,[3] perhaps this idea came from undisclosed events like the shooting party in Scotland.

David and the rest of the family knew little of Sheila’s mental health problems. For example when David was also asked about Sheila’s mental health he answered the following questions at the trial[4]:

Q: I would like to ask you this about Sheila: I think you knew precious little about Sheila’s mental history or history of mental disorder?
A: I can only record hearsay, and I have very little practical experience of her actual condition.
Q: There was very little talk about it in the family? About Sheila?
A: Mr and Mrs Bamber were particularly secretive about things of that nature.

 In 1991 David Boutflour told the City of London Police in his interviews that he “did not conclude that Jerry had done it, there was a grey area, and didn’t think he had gumption to do it.” He goes on to detail how his sister Ann and father Robert had formed the opinion that Jeremy had committed the murders. [5] Of course David Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter had already agreed together in front of DCI Jones that Sheila could have been capable of carrying out the shootings, this was direct dissent from the argument that Ann Eaton was trying to present. We already know that Ann Eaton had a lot more at stake than David and Anthony.[6] From the evidence presented here, one would conclude that Sheila had been seen with guns, and that she had been capable of carrying out the killings according to witnesses who used guns on a regular basis.

---

[1]  25^th September 1991 DI Cook Statement to COLP

[2] Undated, Draft Statement, P. Eaton

[3] 14^th August 1991, Statement to COLP, C.A Eaton

[4] David Boutflour Trial Transcript pg 37

[5] 19^th July 1991, Handwritten Interview, D Boutflour

[6] 1986 Dickinson Interview, P, Eaton

Justice4JeremyBamber: What Really Happened?

Stone walls do not a prison make, Nor iron bars a cage; Minds innocent and quiet take That for an hermitage; If I have freedom in my love, And in my soul am free, Angels alone that soar above, Enjoy such liberty.

Richard Lovelace (1618–1657

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

1.         Before The Firearms Group (TFG) entered White House Farm (WHF), Collins and Delgado looked through the kitchen window. Collins reports by radio that two bodies, one female, Shelia Caffell and one male, Nevil 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 much of the downstairs and the back of the house upstairs.

3.            At some point, Sheila Caffell 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, TFG 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, Nevill Bamber was found dead, in the kitchen - they first saw Nevill after they had entered WHF.

6.         All went well; the inquest ruled that Sheila Caffell had killed her parents and her two sons and then committed suicide.

7.         As August advanced, the police found themselves facing increasing difficulties. Jeremy Bamber's relatives were determined to establish his guilt and began to demand a full murder investigation. Detective Chief Inspector 'Taff Jones' knew that Jeremy Bamber was innocent but to explain why he was so sure he would have to admit that Sheila Caffell 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 delighted to be 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.

i. First line of defence: all records of police radio and telephone communications indicating that Sheila Caffell was still alive when the police entered WHF to be withheld from the defence.

ii. Second line of defence: in case Jeremy Bamber's defence got wind of any of these radio or telephone messages, select TFG statements to mention mistaking Nevill Bamber's body for a woman.

9. At least eight or nine, perhaps a dozen or so, Essex Police officers know the truth about White House Farm and that Jeremy Bamber did not murder Sheila Caffell and the rest of his family. We are told they 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 Bamber's imprisonment.

All of the above is supported by documented evidence.

Visit Jeremy Bamber's Campaign Team website to find out more of about this longest miscarriage of justice in the UK and the collusion between CPS and the criminal justice system: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/

Justice4JeremyBamber:A good get-a-way vehicle? Think Bike!

The Ladies Bicycle

At trial the prosecution had to overcome the problem that no-one saw anyone on the roads or paths that night who fitted Jeremy’s description.  Police accounted for every section of roads and paths, interviewing over 500 people in a determined effort to place Jeremy between the two houses.  Neighbours had seen Jeremy’s car outside his house all night. The investigation had been fruitless. This factor coupled with the absence of any evidence linking Jeremy to the scene the prosecution had to be more creative in their thinking. The Prosecution’s  case was that Jeremy Bamber had left his house in Head Street, Goldhanger and walked to White House Farm after 12pm to carry out the killings. In a fantastic story unsupported by evidence, he allegedly walked the route across farm land to White House Farm to murder his family. He broke into the house through a window (even though there was no evidence of a forced entry and the doors were locked and bolted from the inside). It is then alleged that after carrying out the killings he used his mothers bicycle to return to his home across farmland in the pitch black of night. The police forensically tested the bicycle and found there to be no blood or forensic evidence linking Jeremy to the crime in any way. The bicycle belonged to Jeremy's mother but had had been brought to Jeremy’s house for Julie Mugford to use so that she could cycle to the train station. A police officer gave evidence of timings between the two houses using farmland routes. The journeys were not replicated at night time as Jeremy Bamber is alleged to have done, neither were they carried out by a man of the same weight, height and build as Jeremy.   The accuracy of the tests is highly debatable.  Remember, Jeremy Bamber, nor anyone meeting his description was seen on any of the routes by anyone that night, his car remained at his house in Goldhanger until he drove to White House Farm to meet police. Extracts from the police officer’s statement. “With the aid of these maps I measured the distance, using a pedometer, from White House Farm to 9 Head Street, Goldhanger, via the farm track and sea wall.  This route measured 6,978 metres and at a brisk walk took 70 minutes to complete.  I subsequently cycled this route in 35 minutes. I then measured the distance, using a pedometer, from 9 Head Street, Goldhanger to Brook House Farm track at its junction with Maldon Road via Church Street and the B1026.  This route measured 2895 metres and at a brisk walk took 28 minutes to complete.  I subsequently cycled this route in 10 minutes. I then measured the distance, using a pedometer, from Brook House Farm Track at its junction with Maldon Road to White House Farm via B1026 and B1023.  This route measured 3290 metres and at a brisk walk took 30 minutes to complete.  I subsequently cycled this route in 12 minutes. I then measured the distance, with a pedometer, from White House Farm to Maldon Road via Brook House Farm track.  This route measured 1629 metres and at a brisk walk took 17 minutes to complete.  This track is well maintained, clearly defined, and easily negotiable by foot, cycle or motor vehicle.  I subsequently cycled this route in 6 minutes. There are footpaths marked on the Ordnance Survey map which seem to link White House Farm and Goldhanger in a direct manner via Joyces Farm and Lauriston Farm.  However I have attempted to negotiate these footpaths but without success.  The paths go directly across ploughed fields or cultivated crops or peter out on the banks of small streams and irrigation canals. In my opinion the shortest practicable route between White House Farm and Goldhanger without using main roads is via the sea wall. However, the shortest and quickest practicable route between White House Farm and Goldhanger by foot, cycle or motor vehicle is by using Brook House Farm track and the B1026.  This route is 1661 metres less than going through Tolleshunt D'Arcy.” The routes detailed here mostly involve going on a road, and yet no one saw anything. The footpaths away from the road were not negotiable. The sea wall is a narrow route with a drop into water on one side. Is it realistic to believe that Jeremy Bamber mounted a ladies bicycle and cycled across routes that were partly overgrown and he did all this in the pitch black in a matter of minutes? Jeremy Bamber detailed television programmes that he watched before he went to sleep and these were accurate, the police checked his video tapes to see if he had recorded them and watched them later but there were no such recordings made by Jeremy Bamber and that’s because he watched the T.V programmes just as he said and went to sleep where he stayed until his father called him. The story of a bicycle journey across farmland is a ridiculous and exaggerated story invented by the prosecution, fed to them by the suggestions of Robert Boutflour and Ann Eaton who benefitted from Jeremy’s conviction. Evidence which alleged that someone other than Sheila had carried out the killings was found by his relatives. To find out more read Jeremy’s interview with The Times here.

Copper+Lawrence killer's father+police='corrupt relationship'

By:Michael Gillard , Laurie Flynn Tuesday 06 March 2012
http://paper.li/thelawmap/1325247377

The failure of the original hunt for the killers of Stephen Lawrence will come under fresh scrutiny today following the emergence of secret Scotland Yard files which reveal police concerns about one of the officers involved in the inquiry.

The police intelligence reports, obtained by The Independent, outline extensive allegations of corruption against John Davidson, a lead detective investigating the racist murder. The files can be made public following the convictions in January, 19 years after the event, of Gary Dobson, 36, and David Norris, 35.
It can also be revealed that details of the officer's alleged criminality were held back from the public and the Lawrence family's legal team.
The Lawrence family last night demanded that the Metropolitan Police explain why it never showed them the files or revealed their existence. Doreen Lawrence said: "Had we known even a scintilla of this in the last 18 years, we would have been shouting it from the rafters."
The Lawrence family has long suspected that corruption played a part in the Met's failure to arrest Dobson, Norris and three other members of a white gang, despite dozens of people coming forward to name them within days of the 1993 fatal stabbing in south-east London. There have been numerous Met internal inquiries and an inquiry by the police watchdog. But vital facts relevant to the Lawrence case have not been made public. The evidence gathered by The Independent reveals that:
* A key investigator in the original botched hunt for the killers was corrupt and engaged in extensive criminal enterprise, according to the secret Met files. Detective Sergeant John Davidson, who interviewed key Lawrence suspects and witnesses within days of the stabbing, was a "major player" in a ring of bent detectives "operating as a professional organised crime syndicate", according to previously unpublished intelligence reports.
* Davidson had corrupt relations with informants, dealt in Class A drugs and "would deal in all aspects of criminality when the opportunities presented themselves", according to the files written by senior anti-corruption officers.
* Davidson is alleged to have admitted that officers had a corrupt relationship with Clifford Norris, the gangster father of murderer David Norris. A police supergrass recently gave evidence under oath at the Old Bailey that Davidson had told him bent cops "looked after old man Norris".
* Anti-corruption officers were aware of the alleged link with Norris during the 1998 Macpherson inquiry, according to new testimony from the former Crown prosecutor on the case, but an internal Met legal memo suggests that the force feared the claim would get out while it was being sued by the Lawrence family.
* John Yates, the former Met Assistant Commissioner who led the investigation into Davidson and his colleagues, can be revealed to have prepared testimony for police corruption proceedings last year, unrelated to Davidson, confirming that "there was a huge appetite to prosecute John Davidson, who we considered then and still do now to have been a major corrupt player of that era".
Davidson never faced criminal charges and was allowed to retire on ill health grounds to run a bar on the Spanish island of Menorca after prosecutors decided there was a lack of corroborating evidence. The detective denies being corrupt, describing the allegations as "devastating and false".
These intelligence files and the previously unreported evidence from recent police corruption proceedings raise serious questions for the Met about whether the Macpherson inquiry – which in 1999 found the force to be "institutionally racist" – was shown the full extent of the allegations against Davidson.
Macpherson found that incompetence, rather than corruption, was to blame for the failure to catch any of the killers, and no officer faced serious disciplinary measures over their role in an investigation whose shortcomings provoked a transformation in British policing which many feel is incomplete.
Lingering suspicions remain that extraordinary lapses – such as the two-week delay before any of the suspects were arrested – cannot be put down to mere procedural shortcomings. At least three of Stephen Lawrence's killers remain at large.
Imran Khan, Doreen Lawrence's solicitor, said: "Doreen Lawrence said after the verdicts that they had achieved only partial justice and wanted the police to pursue the other individuals who were involved. We want the Metropolitan Police – and those who are in a position to do so – to conduct a full inquiry into the allegations The Independent has raised. If there was corruption, the Metropolitan Police needs to uncover it and deal with it, so that those who were under its influence are now free to do and say what they want to say."
"We don't know if there are such witnesses but it still leaves a potential opening. We can't rely on forensic evidence and we now have to look to other lines of inquiry. This is a legitimate and credible line of inquiry. It's important for the family that those leads are followed that could result in prosecution of those who are still at large."
Last night, a member of the Macpherson inquiry's advisory panel confirmed it had suspected that corruption played a role in the failure of the original police investigation and that not all information available had been handed over by the Met. Dr Richard Stone said: "There was a whole lot we were not told. If this is true, it confirms suspicions we had during the inquiry that seemed very likely with David Norris's father around."


Inside the Met's corruption files
Davidson, a hard-bitten cop who began his career as a constable in Glasgow, arrived at the Lawrence investigation within 36 hours of the stabbing.
He dealt with a key informant who had just identified David Norris and others as suspects for the murder– and whose informant file was lost during the murder investigation. Davidson also arrested and interviewed Gary Dobson and carried out the interview of another suspect, Luke Knight.
In the subsequent Macpherson report into the bungled murder inquiry Davidson was strongly criticised as "self-willed and abrasive" and offering "undoubtedly unsatisfactory" evidence. However the inquiry panel concluded: "We are not convinced that DS Davidson positively tried to thwart the effectiveness of the investigation."
But files from "Operation Russia" – the investigation by the Met's anti-corruption unit into bent officers in south London in 1998 – show that detectives believed that John Davidson had long been corrupt, and lend weight to the calls for him to now be questioned.
In 1994, with no one charged with the murder of Stephen Lawrence, Davidson had transferred to the South-East Regional Crime Squad (Sercs) in East Dulwich, London, where corruption with informants was endemic. A group of detectives there was already the target of a secret Met anti-corruption unit known as the Ghost Squad. A new anti-corruption squad was formed in January 1998, CIB3.
Then-Detective Superintendent John Yates, a senior CIB3 officer, targeted Davidson as one of 14 "core nominals" – detectives whose "criminality is extensive and, in essence, amounts to police officers operating as a professional organised crime syndicate", he explained in the case file.
Yates wrote to his superiors in blunt terms in October that year about the evidence he had found against Davidson: "It is now apparent that during his time at East Dulwich Davidson developed a corrupt informant/handler relationship. Their main commodity was Class A drugs, predominantly cocaine, however, Davidson and his informant would deal in all aspects of criminality when the opportunities presented themselves."
This eye-wateringly direct assessment was written at one of the most politically perilous moments in the history of the Met. The Macpherson inquiry was about to finish hearing evidence and begin writing its report.
Yates, the future head of Britain's counter-terrorism policing, seems to have been aware of the wider significance of the evidence he held on Davidson. In a note to senior officers, also written in October 1998, he set out a list of "Difficulties/threats" posed by his investigation into police corruption. One of the "threats" bullet points read: "Lawrence Enquiry [sic] – exposure of ex DS Davidson as a corrupt officer."
The Met did tell the Macpherson inquiry in September 1998 about Operation Russia's interest in Davidson, but said the corruption allegations it was investigating had no connection to the Lawrence murder. The Inquiry asked to be kept fully informed about developments. The Met this week declined to say whether it had shared Yates's October 1998 reports with Sir William Macpherson.
There was one officer however itching to tell Sir William about Davidson – but the Macpherson inquiry would never hear from him.


The police supergrass – and his new evidence under oath
Detective Sergeant Neil Putnam, a colleague of Davidson at East Dulwich and a member of the corrupt cabal, was arrested by Met anti-corruption officers in July 1998, in the middle of the Macpherson inquiry. He immediately agreed to turn "supergrass" against his former comrades.
Putnam said he was "fed up with the lies to cover the lies to cover the lies".
Over a period of four months between July and October 1998, while Macpherson continued to take evidence at his inquiry, Putnam detailed the scale and nature of the corruption that had consumed the East Dulwich branch of the regional crime squad. This included three specific acts of dishonesty he claimed to have carried out with his sergeant Davidson and an informant they managed together: the disposal of stolen watches, handling stolen electrical equipment, and the theft of cocaine from a drug dealer.
Putnam insists he made another, more serious allegation against Davidson: that Davidson had one day casually admitted to him that he was in a corrupt relationship with Clifford Norris – the drug dealing father of David, who murdered Stephen Lawrence.
Putnam has now expanded on this allegation under oath for the first time, during new corruption proceedings at the Old Bailey against other officers from the same crime squad.
Putnam, a born-again Christian who was jailed for his own corruption offences in 1998, told the court four months ago that when he and Davidson had been alone in the office one Sunday, he had asked Davidson about the Lawrence case.
He said: "We were talking and I turned round and said that I felt that it was obvious that the boys were guilty, so obvious something's wrong. And then John suddenly came out with the fact that he'd been dealing with, his exact words were, 'old man Norris'.
"Now I knew that one of the boys was Norris and old man Norris is the dad. John said that he'd given them information. John wasn't precise as to what the information was and John said they'd looked after him, those were the exact words 'they'd looked after him' and then, that there'd been 'a real little earner out of it' and I knew exactly what he meant by 'a real little earner' and it meant that they'd received cash, received money."
Putnam told the court he had known immediately the implication of what his colleague was telling him: "The person we were talking about was Clifford Norris and no one else." He added that he was troubled by the revelation, saying: "I didn't want to know any more. You didn't push the question, it was the culture we were in."
The supergrass told the Old Bailey that he had provided this information to his CIB3 debriefers in the summer of 1998 and they had written the details down in a notebook. Given that his revelations were being made at the height of the Macpherson hearings, where Davidson had already appeared, Putnam said he had been assured this information would be passed to the inquiry and he would be called to give evidence. The call never came.
Putnam told the court that he believed his evidence was "brushed under the table" because the allegation would "blow apart" the Met.
Asked why he was now giving evidence, he replied: "I said it to the police and they did nothing about it. As far as I'm concerned they hid it away, they didn't want it to come out." Putnam had never given evidence under oath about the Lawrence allegation and risked returning to prison for perjury if he was now lying at the Old Bailey.
The officers in charge of debriefing Putnam also gave evidence under oath and denied he had mentioned corrupt links in the Lawrence case. The Met produced five notebooks, which it said covered the entire period of Putnam's debrief and contained no trace of the claim. Putnam believes at least 15 notebooks were used to record his evidence and he was "absolutely certain" the Norris claim was recorded, telling the court: "It was written down."
The Met has admitted mistakes in the way it debriefed the supergrass – specifically that the initial debriefings were not tape-recorded.
Ever since the allegations about Davidson having a corrupt relationship with Clifford Norris became public, Scotland Yard "sources" have tried to downplay Putnam's credibility as a witness. But senior figures at the Yard in fact privately enthused about Putnam's credibility, Met documents now show.
Police intelligence files show that John Yates told his superiors categorically in 1998: "Putnam's value as a witness to the Crown cannot be over-esti
mated. In spite of his criminality he will present as a credible witness thoroughly contrite about what he has done and the shame that this will bring upon him, his family and the MPS [MetropolitanPolice Service]. This has been a consistent thread throughout his debrief."
The same police intelligence report shows that Yates regarded Putnam as "an unremarkable figure – a follower rather than a leader, a grass eater rather than a meat eater, a man desperate to show he was one of the boys – a trait that led him into a spiral of heavy drinking, debt and thus vulnerable to corruption."
Putnam's estranged former wife Gail also gave evidence for the first time, under oath at the Old Bailey, supporting his explosive claims. She told the court that Putnam had confided in her while he was a supergrass that "evidence was withheld for some time because [Davidson] was linked to the father of one of the suspects." She said she was "incensed" the information had not come out before.
Putnam has aired some of his claims about corruption previously – notably in the controversial 2006 Panorama titled "The Boys Who Killed Stephen Lawrence", which broadcast claims that the original Lawrence inquiry was tainted by corruption. But his evidence in October was the first time he has put forward the allegations under oath.
Even then, the Met's position is that its one-time star witness Putnam was not lying but simply "mistaken". The supergrass, however, has received significant support from an unlikely official source, revealed here for the first time.


Crown prosecutor's testimony on 'corrupt' officer
In July 1998, Martin Polaine was a highly regarded CPS barrister in charge of reviewing the case file on the Lawrence murder when he was recruited to a new hand-picked team of prosecutors with the highest security clearance to analyse the Met's secret intelligence on corruption.
Polaine was trusted by anti-corruption bosses and put in charge of reviewing evidence obtained by Operation Russia to see if it was capable of being used in prosecutions against officers, including Davidson.
Describing how he had been regularly updated by CIB3 officers about the debriefing of Putnam, the former Crown prosecutor told the Old Bailey at recent corruption proceedings: "I have a recollection I was told by someone in CIB3 of a link between Clifford Norris and Davidson."
He told the court that when this information was passed to him in late 1998 it was considered "of great significance" and added: "It stuck in my mind ... I recall not being surprised when it was more recently reported that Neil Putnam was speaking of the link."
Polaine's evidence raises the question of whether some of the allegations against Davidson were not made public to prevent further damage to Scotland Yard's reputation at the time of the Macpherson inquiry.
The nightmare scenario for the Met was that Davidson would be found to have thwarted the Lawrence murder investigation. It can now also be revealed that David Hamilton, the Met's head of legal affairs at the time, submitted a witness statement to the recent police corruption proceedings also recalling that there had been "a suspicion of an association or contact between Davidson and the Norris family".
This appears to support a legal memo Hamilton wrote in August 2000 outlining the Met's reluctance to disclose intelligence it held on Davidson – at a time when the force was facing a civil damages claim from the Lawrence family.
Hamilton, then the Met's most senior lawyer, wrote in 2000: "Disclosures relevant to Davidson's contact with the Norris family could have an adverse effect on the Commissioner's position in the ongoing High Court action by Mr and Mrs Lawrence.
"Part of their claim is based on misfeasance in public office and alleges wrongdoing in relation to dealings between police and the Norris family."
The Lawrences were eventually paid more than £300,000 by the Met in an out-of-court settlement.
When approached by The Independent, Polaine – who was disbarred in 2010 as a barrister for "far-reaching errors" in his advice to a Yates-led anti-corruption inquiry in the Cayman Islands – stood by his evidence in court, and declined to comment further.
Last night, Richard Stone, a member of the Macpherson inquiry, described this latest evidence from Polaine and Hamilton as "very disturbing".


Clifford Norris
In 2006, the Lawrence family asked the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to investigate Putnam's claims to Panorama that the Met failed to disclose to the Macpherson inquiry what he had told them of a Davidson-Norris link. The police watchdog said it could not find evidence for Putnam's Panorama allegations. The IPCC concluded that Polaine, Putnam and Hamilton had confused Clifford Norris with a different crime squad informant coincidentally called David Norris. But the latter Norris had been murdered in 1991, two years before Stephen Lawrence, and all three witnesses insist there was no confusion.
Davidson declined to meet with the IPCC investigators who were looking into the alleged link to Clifford Norris. The former detective could not be reached via his lawyers or the Police Federation to comment on the latest revelations but he has previously issued a statement strongly denying he was guilty of corruption.
Davidson said: "The first and only time I came into contact with Clifford Norris was in 1994 when, whilst leading an arrest team, I arrested him for offences including firearms and drugs. He was subsequently charged and convicted in relation to these offences. Other than in relation to this arrest, I have had no dealings either directly or indirectly with Clifford Norris.
"I am not corrupt. I did not hamper in any way the investigation into the death of Stephen Lawrence. I am not 'a friend' of, nor did I know, Clifford Norris other than that mentioned above. I would stress the only time I dealt with Clifford Norris was after I had stopped working on the Lawrence investigation."
The former detective also criticised Yates for saying he was corrupt: "I am also very concerned that ... Yates thought it appropriate to condemn me as a corrupt officer."
Clifford Norris meanwhile has denied paying police officers or knowing Davidson. The Macpherson inquiry did hear that a different officer, David Coles, was seen meeting Norris in the late 1980s and receiving a carrier bag containing unknown items. Approached by The Independent recently at his flat above a hardware shop in a seedy area of Ashford, Kent, Clifford Norris said "Fuck off", and slammed the door.


A police force 'in denial'
Scotland Yard now acknowledges that it knew of corruption within Davidson's unit before he was allowed to give evidence to the Macpherson inquiry, and that it subsequently found evidence of Davidson's own corruption – but says it could not find evidence of Davidson having thwarted the Stephen Lawrence murder inquiry.
A spokesman for the Met said: "While there was intelligence of potential corruption within the South East Regional Crime Squad (East Dulwich) no individuals were identified as suspects until Operation Russia began in the spring of 1998. It was not until the arrest of ex-DC Neil Putnam in July 1998 that specific allegations relating to ex-DS John Davidson emerged."
The Met was asked if it had disclosed to Macpherson Yates's belief that Davidson was a key player in a gang of officers "operating as a professional organised crime syndicate".
A Met spokesman replied that the Yard had informed Macpherson of the broader investigation: "We were at a very early stage of the investigation and the allegations were un-corroborated and did not relate to Stephen's murder. However we recognised the significance of Davidson as a witness to the Inquiry and therefore informed them of the investigation."
The Met spokesman added: "Ex-DS John Davidson was subject to an in-depth corruption investigation, during which there was never any evidence of Davidson being involved in corrupt activity within the Stephen Lawrence inquiry or doing anything to thwart that investigation. Had we had such information it would have been determinedly pursued.
"The corruption investigation revealed much intelligence and some evidence of Davidson, and others being involved in corrupt activities, but their actions were unconnected to the investigation into Stephen's death.
"We do not consider that any new or significant information has emerged ... since the IPCC reached their conclusions in 2007. Should any substantive information arise relating to alleged corruption in the original Stephen Lawrence murder investigation it would be seriously considered."
Asked why its own head of legal affairs from 1998, David Hamilton, said in his witness statement to the recent corruption proceedings at the Old Bailey that there had been a "suspicion of an association or contact between Davidson and the Norris family", the Met spokesman replied only: "Inquiries by the MPS and the IPCC have found no evidence of a link between ex-DS John Davidson and the Norris family."
A spokeswoman for the IPCC said: "We are aware of Mr Putnam's claims and were aware of them during our investigation. We are also aware of Mr Polaine's comment ... There is nothing which would change our findings or cause us to look into this matter again – they provide no more to substantiate Mr Putnam's claims than the information we previously had.
"The material in this case is now archived but we have no reason to believe that any Operation Russia material was withheld from the IPCC or the Macpherson inquiry. We were provided with full access to the material. We have no reason to believe that the Macpherson inquiry was not fully aware of allegations involving DS Davidson.

Jeremy Bamber-Eaton Fraud-Police Dispensation (letter to IPCC)

ADDRESS

10 February 2012

Case Manager Mr.......
Independent Police Complaints Commission

90 High Holborn

London

WC1V 6BH

Dear Mr.......

Re:              Jeremy Bamber Case number: ............

I write regarding the delay in police action over allegations of fraud against Peter Eaton.  Peter Eaton was a key prosecution witness who handed the police the only evidence which convicted Jeremy Bamber - the sound moderator.  I respectfully request the following be investigated with some urgency:

Why serious allegations regarding fraud were not addressed by the police until fifteen months after they were made:-

Barbara Wilson, the farm secretary, had approached Essex Police making serious allegations of fraud against the farm designate manager Peter Eaton.  Documents sent to the IPCC and Essex Police by Jeremy Bamber show that the fraud squad did not address these and detail that the allegations were deliberately deferred and delayed for fifteen months until after the first appeal of Jeremy Bamber.  I have sight of a document which might indicate that the reason for this was because an investigation would have impugned the credibility of a key prosecution witness; thus aiding Jeremy Bamber’s appeal.  This further deprived the Bamber estate of monies; Jeremy Bamber owned part of N & J Bamber.

I believe that Essex Police has requested a dispensation for the officers involved because more than twelve months have elapsed since the alleged misconduct.  This makes a mockery of any justice system especially as any ‘ordinary’ citizen would be held accountable, regardless of the duration of time since the alleged offence.  Highlighted currently in relation to an alleged traffic offence by a member of parliament which occurred nearly ten years ago.

A dispensation surely is not an appropriate action considering the seriousness of this misconduct which keeps a man wrongly imprisoned for over twenty six years, even after the fact of the misconduct is known.  In the present climate particularly; justice needs to be seen to be done and a thorough investigation carried out by an external police force would seem the only way to at least give credence to the enormity of the situation.

Please find enclosed documents providing further details of the nature of the allegations against Peter Eaton and subsequent action.

Yours sincerely,     (signed)                                                                           Enc.                                                                           

                                                                                    

McCanns WikiLeaks Cofina Media (translation)

It was the proper English policy that found tests to incriminate the McCann couple as responsible for the disappearance of the Madeleine child, in the night of 3 of May of 2007, in the Beach of the Light, Algarve, disclosed to this monday the WikiLeaks.

The information appeared in a confidence of the ambassador of the United kingdom in Lisbon, Alexander W. Ellis, to its homologous one of the United States, Alfred Hoffman - and, according to this last one, " Ellis did not enter in more details on caso" , in one it talks between the two that it will have occurred in September of this year. " was limited; to admit that it had been the policy of its country to get provas" on the guilt of Kate and Gerry - being for perceiving if the same ones if the dogs arrest with the fact to be British that will have farejado odor the corpse and the blood in the apartment and the car rented by the McCann in the Algarve. Of any form, the ambassador of U.S.A. counts, in a confidential forwarding, that its homologous one asked for secrecy to it absolute, affirming that he had questions in relation to the case that would have to be kept in secret for the governments British and Portuguese.

Justice4Jeremy. New evidence of innocence

For twenty six years Jeremy Bamber has been fighting for justice, his freedom and to clear his name, having been falsely accused and imprisoned for the murder of his family.  Jeremy has always maintained his innocence.  New evidence shown here, which was known by the prosecution but denied to Jeremy in his trial and Appeals, supports his claims.

Police responsible for Sheila's death (Part 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EDp_tqUysI&feature=player_embedded#!

London Riots

On Thursday 8 August 2011 in Tottenham London

Mark Duggan was shot dead by

British police.

On Friday 9 August 2011 Mark Duggan’s family and friends, upset and angry at the behaviour of the police, held a peaceful protest.

Few could have failed to have seen something in the media of the looting, violence and arson which followed in many areas of London; escalating and spreading to other parts of the UK.  Seemingly mindless destruction of local businesses as well as some private and government properties. 

Members of the general public became fearful of entering streets which only hours before had been places of work and recreation.  Nobody seemed exempt, even journalists reporting the events were attacked and equipment smashed or stolen.  Many of us would have watched the heartbreaking image on TV of the injured young person robbed by those whom he believed to be helping him.

Emotions ran high, anger and revenge flooded social websites.  Members of the public and various organisations gave their point of view and ways of reform.  ‘Give the police more powers.’  ‘It’s the parents.’  ‘Must be a reaction to the ‘cuts’.’  ‘They are, the under privileged’ and an expression which could be right out of George Orwell’s 1984, ‘It’s The Underclass’.

Police stated it was ‘copycat’ behaviour and an element of that appears to be proven, judging by the ‘status’ of some of those arrested for looting.  I doubt whether the looters themselves could give a definitive explanation of the motivation for their actions.

Various questions are posed.  How long has this been brewing?  Where was the government?  Current and previous.  How did this gang-culture youth develop?  Who knew about it?  Local councilors, social workers, police officers, teachers, GP’s - parents?

Though we in the UK have never experienced such blatant, collusive, violent behaviour to such a degree on our streets, we have had more than our share of football hooliganism and look at our lager-lout reputation worldwide.  It certainly highlights our audacity in presuming we know what is best for other nations’ problems when we do not resolve our own.

Yes, I think it is a result of all the above and maybe, initially, ‘it is the parents’.  Our family code informs our view of the world until we gain insight.

'Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.' St. Francis Xavier

But we can only use the tools we possess.  I feel it unfair and unhelpful simply to make harsh judgments on those who have not been provided with them or even been told where to look.  Many of these young people have not been encouraged to study or plan for future employment, apart from the other culture of truancy inhibiting them from academic achievement.

Punishment alone will not suffice. David Cameron refers to a 'sick society'; I trust he will realise that we are all culpable.  In group dynamics every person present plays a part, even if that is in keeping silent.

'The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.' Edmund Burke

Love and acceptance is the soil for the development of a stable, confident, human being.  The child who knows it is loved and valued does not question his or her worthiness and abilities.  An emotionally damaged child cannot learn, with the obvious repercussions. 

Poverty of circumstance, yes but poverty of spirit, however we define that, is one of the biggest barriers to self-actualisation and progression; educationally and socially.  We all need to be welcomed into this world, and encouraged to contribute to it.

Statistics show that much of the gang-culture in UK Urban areas ferments mainly in families with absent fathers; this includes those who remain in the family home but are never around to adequately 'father' their children. And of course these men are often products of similar circumstances. Though I would not highlight this as the only reason for social breakdown; fathers are needed.  Their role in family is to provide challenge for their children; to teach about risk-taking and responsibility in a loving environment with clear limitations and consequences.  Many of these families consist of people who have had no paid employment for generations; what example is that?  If any child, male or female, does not receive these tools for life, then how can they foster them in their own children?  If this is the case then it is for our society to ensure our parliamentary system takes on that responsibility where it can. 

There is an encroaching unfair hierarchy in Britain. 


When certain groups of people referred to as ‘the underclass’ take what is not theirs, invade others' property and deprive them of their hard earned cash, we call them Ferrell rats, evil.  We call for their blood. Take their homes! Stop their benefits!  We have to punish them for daring to go where they do not belong.

Do we think that this 'underclass' does not notice when the government allows the prosperous to rip-off their fellow citizens, as in bankers for example?  When the poorest, the so-called 'working classes' are made to pay for the irresponsibility of the elite?  Do we think they did not notice that after the furore of the politician’s expenses scandal, when so many were involved that so few were convicted and most were let off with a slap on the wrist?  Do we think that OUR poor who live in our urban areas with no jobs, no education and no hope of them; did not notice who was involved in, and who got away with what, during the 'phone-hacking' scandal.  A hypocritical Cameron; a man who has no idea of what it means to have to do without, or struggle to make ends meet, who due to money and influence had the best education, and prospects; who instead of being grateful for his privileged position and vow to use his power to help the less privileged, is so eager to point the finger and him in bed with Murdoch and Co.

Corruption is swept under-the-carpet when it suits, usually by men in suits; experts in how to get away with 'blue murder'.  Instead of confronting this criminal behaviour we turn-a-blind-eye, lick our wounds, somehow feeling justified at having been avenged in that two lads go to prison because they texted about a riot which did not happen.

'If we keep doing what we’re doing – we’ll keep getting what we’ve got.' David Thornburg


'Perfect Storm' The England Riots August 2011 Mini Documentary

The most populous urban areas in the UK

Greater London Urban Area

• West Midlands Urban Area

• Greater Manchester Urban Area

• West Yorkshire Urban Area

• Greater Glasgow

• Tyneside

• Liverpool Urban Area

• Nottingham Urban Area

• Sheffield Urban Area

• Bristol Urban Area.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/fom2005/03_fopm_urbanareas.pdf