The Bucks Row Project part 2

[Elamarna]

Bucks Row Project part 2 post 19 - Press

[Elamarna]

Bucks Row Project part 2 post 18b - Baxter





The first thing to mention when looking at Coroner Baxter is that some of his comments appear in other tables and not here and I shall be referring back to those.

Baxter appears to be constantly frustrated by the responses of both some Witnesses and Police.

Lets start by examining his comments with regards to the undressing of the body and the clothing:

He asks specifically who removed the clothing and who authorized such in Reports 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6.
The responses he receives are those of men denying giving instructions and taking no responsibility for events. (Reports: 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6).

This one should point out is odd, in that Helson says he was present when the clothing was removed and one assumes he gave the instruction. (Helson Table, Reports: 1, 4, 9 & 12.).
It is also odd that on the 17th Spratling, changes his account of what happened (Spratling Table, Reports: 8, 9 & 11 compared to Police Table Reports 1 & 3 ).

However Baxter appears to just accept all this changing of story with out any comment.
He is not so interested in who gave instruction, (Reports: 5 & 6) but that someone should have recorded the removal. His main aim is to determine the condition and position of clothing (Reports: 3, 4, 5 & 6); And why the men who did the undressing are not present and that they should be.(Reports 1 & 2).

This can also be seen by again looking at the Spratling Tables (http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.p...&postcount=122
) :

“Officials should have been present to record condition of clothing. (Reports: 2, 3, 11 &15).
Needs to know position of clothing. (Reports: 8, 9, 14 & 15).
The condition of the clothing is important. ( Reports:10,12,15)
Baxter says that the men who removed the clothing need to be present, Report 5.”

This is only solved to a degree when Abberline suggests sending for the clothing.

Baxter’s comments on the Mortuary attendants are very telling,

He dismisses Mann, due to his supposed epilepsy, a sign of thinking at the time, more than of Baxter himself and his final comment directed to the police after the questioning of the two attendants:

“we cannot do more”

showing his frustration with not just the inconsistent testimony of the witnesses but of the police as well. (Mortuary Table Report 3) .


He also has a great deal of frustration with the Slaughter man Tomkins, firstly over if women came to the yard at times (Slaughter House Men Table, Reports 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15 & 16); and later over who was in Bucks row when he arrived (Slaughter House Men Table,Reports 2, 5, 6, 8, 14 & 16.).

There appears to be an ongoing battle between Tomkins and Baxter to get clear answers, it has been pointed out that they may have met previously at the inquest into Tomkins father, and this may have had an effect on the exchange, nevertheless it is clear by the end of the testimony Baxter is again frustrated.
He appears to again be frustrated when questioning Spratling over why not all the local residents had been questioned some 2.5 weeks after the murder (Police Table, Reports 1 & 3), and that Spratling was more concerned with finding the weapon than the presence of blood

"You are looking for the weapon and I am looking for the blood," said the Coroner rather sharply.

(Police Table, Report 3).


Baxter’s final summing up is interesting.

Firstly he says the time of discover can be fixed to close to 3.45am because of:
“so much independent data “ (Reports 7,8 , 9, 10 & 13).

This by definition surely cannot mean it is based on the timing of just one man, but on the combined timings of several. That would seem to favour the timings of the 3 police constables over that of Robert Paul.

He also says that the presence of Slaughter men working near by may have helped the killer leave the scene without being suspected due to such often having blood on them (Reports: 7,8,10 & 11).
He discusses all the recent murders , Smith, Tabram, Chapman and Nichols, and says there are some similarities between all, but there are distinct differences between the first two victims and the last two (7,8,10,11,13),who are very similar, that both may have been stunned by blows to the face,
and may have been committed by same man. (Reports: 7,8,9,10,11,12 & 13).

He comments that no residents heard any disturbance and yet the murder occurred where the body was found.

He also takes what is a clear position on the wounds and disagrees with the comments of Llewellyn (Reports 7,8,10, 11 & 12), it is argued that he is not a Medic, and that the View of Llewellyn should be final here, however it is not as clear as some argue, and this we will look at in far greater detail in Part 3.

One final point that must not be missed, while examining Lechmere on the 3rd questions are asked as to the nature of the exchange between Lechmere, Paul and Mizen. The answer is a disagreement; yet on the 17th when Paul is questioned and gives his testimony, any such similar question to clarify the situation is missing. This strongly suggests that a conclusion as been reached, possibly in private about what was said, and that Paul’s testimony was not needed.

[Elamarna]

Bucks Row Project part 2 post 18a - Baxter

[Elamarna]

Bucks Row Project part 2 post 18 - Baxter

[Herlock Sholmes]

After the last three days, we might (just might) have a competitive series

Looks like I spoke too soon. The Windies are making a fight of it. We need to score 400 to be in with a shout I think. Moeen Ali can make up for dropping the easiest catch ever by making a big score

[kjab3112]

After the last three days, we might (just might) have a competitive series

[Herlock Sholmes]

Agree and it is sad. But it's due to pig headedNess by mainly admin there.
Looking at good things from it. I remember how we were humiliated by one of the greatest teams for years. Even then strange selections. Daniel and Clarke left out for Croft (fine bowler but not in the class of the other two.)

Steve

They wouldn't say no to having Wayne Daniel and Sylvester Clarke in their side right now. Likewise a Richards, Greenidge or Lloyd etc. It still seems strange say 'this Windies side has a pretty tame bowling attack!' Internal politics have had a big effect on Windies cricket (it's even impacted the Aussies). Gayle's playing in the one-dayers apparently. At least we have Anderson's 500 wickets to look forward to even if we don't have a very competitive series.

[Elamarna]

It will probably be all over by Sunday Steve! Poorest looking Windies side I've seen I think?

Agree and it is sad. But it's due to pig headedNess by mainly admin there.
Looking at good things from it. I remember how we were humiliated by one of the greatest teams for years. Even then strange selections. Daniel and Clarke left out for Croft (fine bowler but not in the class of the other two.)

Steve

[Herlock Sholmes]

Probably won't post the last two section until after Bank Holiday Monday.
Test match starts tomorrow, so one needs to get ones priorities correct..

All the best


Steve

It will probably be all over by Sunday Steve! Poorest looking Windies side I've seen I think?

[Elamarna]

update

Probably won't post the last two section until after Bank Holiday Monday.
Test match starts tomorrow, so one needs to get ones priorities correct..

All the best


Steve

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Would you agree that none of the official police reports appear to support PC Mizen's version of events.

They don't even mention it. Airbrushed out.

Of course could be a report I have not seen. This is not 100% comprehensive, but includes a lot none the less.


Steve

[John G]

Thank you John and Trevor.


Steve

Hi Steve,

Would you agree that none of the official police reports appear to support PC Mizen's version of events.

[Elamarna]

Thank you John and Trevor.


Steve

[John G]

I agree with Trevor. Excellent and comprehensive work, Steve.

[Trevor Marriott]

Just two section still to be posted in part 2.

Baxter and The Press.


Steve

Steve
You have done and excellent job, and what you have shown so far goes to confirm what I have stated from day one, and that is that both the inquest testimony, and newspaper articles are unsafe to totally rely on with regards to all the inquests, and that the many ambiguities, which arose during these inquests and the testimony given by witnesses were never bottomed out at the time, and perhaps should have been.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk