It’s true that Nick Milbank caveated the conversations he had with Heidi Blake (‘it was a long time ago’ etc) but he comes across in the recordings as perfectly lucid and consistent. And these recordings make it crystal clear he knew exactly who he was talking to when Blake spoke with him. So Essex Police’s statement that he’d been hoodwinked in some way is evidently utter nonsense.
One thing he was especially certain of is that the statement attributed to him in 2002, that basically torpedoed his earlier claim to have answered a call from inside the house while Bamber was standing outside of it, had nothing to do with him. But following the article’s publication and after a chat with Essex Police (and he was still an employee of the force at the time, so we can imagine how that went down) he apparently changed his mind - how strange!
Of course, no one should have expected better than this from our boys in blue - but the CCRC plumbed new depths with their handling of this new evidence. After being told by the New Yorker that the magazine wouldn’t share with them its source material, the CCRC could’ve got off their backsides and interviewed Milbank themselves - but instead, they let Essex Police do it then took the force at their word. It’s quite astonishing.
Surely the main point regarding Milbank and the possible phone call is that if he’d been monitoring the line for around 90 minutes and had heard nothing (none of the sounds and movements he told Blake he might’ve heard), then wouldn’t Milbank have made for an important witness for the prosecution? His testimony would’ve supported the prosecution’s case that everyone inside of the house at that point was dead, having been killed by Bamber. So why was his existence apparently hidden for so long? You’d have thought this line of thinking might’ve occurred to the CCRC too, but evidently not.
The CCRC also discounted other statements made to Blake by others involved in this case, without apparently speaking to these individuals themselves. One can only speculate as to why!
One thing he was especially certain of is that the statement attributed to him in 2002, that basically torpedoed his earlier claim to have answered a call from inside the house while Bamber was standing outside of it, had nothing to do with him. But following the article’s publication and after a chat with Essex Police (and he was still an employee of the force at the time, so we can imagine how that went down) he apparently changed his mind - how strange!
Of course, no one should have expected better than this from our boys in blue - but the CCRC plumbed new depths with their handling of this new evidence. After being told by the New Yorker that the magazine wouldn’t share with them its source material, the CCRC could’ve got off their backsides and interviewed Milbank themselves - but instead, they let Essex Police do it then took the force at their word. It’s quite astonishing.
Surely the main point regarding Milbank and the possible phone call is that if he’d been monitoring the line for around 90 minutes and had heard nothing (none of the sounds and movements he told Blake he might’ve heard), then wouldn’t Milbank have made for an important witness for the prosecution? His testimony would’ve supported the prosecution’s case that everyone inside of the house at that point was dead, having been killed by Bamber. So why was his existence apparently hidden for so long? You’d have thought this line of thinking might’ve occurred to the CCRC too, but evidently not.
The CCRC also discounted other statements made to Blake by others involved in this case, without apparently speaking to these individuals themselves. One can only speculate as to why!
