Part Five: Ignored Pleas and Jacket Find
The police know that the first 48 hours the "critical hours" are the most important as it's where most evidence/forensics are collected before any contamination from fibres and outside sources like the environment etc.
Witness statements are the same, as events are fresh in the mind even when intoxicated their more likely to remember events clearly rather than months down the line when they can be swayed by others opinions and media exposure.
Missing people are more likely to be found within that time frame as anytime after that are they rarely found alive.
The first 48 hours into Ambrose's death had the police ignoring any information given to them by his mother regarding what had happened to her son as she obtained information about the morning in question.
His Mothers Pleas!
It's around 8:30 am on Saturday the 24th Jan 2015 and Ambrose's mum gets a knock at the door it's a "friend" of his and he's come to ask her has she seen "Ambrose" as he hasn't "seen or heard" from him since earlier that morning and proceeds to explain events that occurred at the Fox and the car crashing.
Immeditly she knows something's not right as it's unlike him to not contact her after something of that nature and he is to have his children that weekend.
His mother rings round everyone she knows who may of heard from him or places he may go after crashing his car but he's know-where.
The hospital's are contacted and he's not in any of them.
She contacts the police, explains what she's been told but is told it hasn't "reached the missing persons time frame"
She asks to go to the crash scene and on arrival finds a wheel and a number plate belonging to her sons car and the railings are dented.
She contacts the police again explains what she has found and again is told the same thing the "Missing persons time frame" hadn't been reached but they process a report of the phone call and information.
The times you see below are later then the original phones calls throughout the day which started from 8:30 am till late into the night.
She searches the surrounding areas including the marshes but finds nothing that shows Ambrose has been or is there, the search goes on well into the night while searching for her missing son with no police support the police arrive at her house around 9 pm asking for something with "Ambrose's DNA on it" even though he hasn't even gone down as a missing person yet.
The police obtain this toothbrush from a property Ambrose never resided and he had never used it but it went down as his.
This toothbrush is the one handed over by the family, this would be when they asked for the tracksuit instead they were handed back his real toothbrush.
It was admitted that the toothbrush was a fake and used to distract the police as they thought he was in "hiding" Stewart Hill knowing the toothbrush was fake still handed over the fake for testing but what sort of findings would have come back it was brand new the one they used was never used by anyone apart from the brick wall it was "scuffed" against to make it look used!
So what was the point of using that one when he also knew the real one that would have come back with findings ie his DNA was sitting at Colindale Police Station in that evidence bag but was never used just like the tracksuit!
In the early hours on Sunday morning he is reported missing and goes down as "low risk" (again the times you see below are later then the original missing report time) throughout that day the same process is repeated and nothing is found and the police continue to ignore anything she has to say regarding her son the risk says at "low".
A real toothbrush belonging to Ambrose aswell as a tracksuit was handed into Colindale police station on the Monday by his family before they continued to search for him.
Rebecca Bird the police officer on call had spoken to his mother regarding her son on the Saturday morning, she was told to contact Ms Bird again for further assistance if there were any to which she tried but could never get hold of her again until the Monday when they met in person.
It was later denied on oath at the inquest "she had ever spoken to her before the Monday morning" but then there was never anything presented to prove otherwise either no logs nothing was presented to prove she wasn't on duty like she stated.
During this search a jacket and footprints are found in a field close to the alleyway that runs down by the power-station and the police are called and finally attend.
Jacket and Footprints!
So just before four in the afternoon on the Monday over 50 hours after Ambrose first went missing footprints and a jacket are found by a group of his friends as they helped search for him.
The footprints are found close to the "Pymmes Brook" and the jacket in the "field" over by the alleyway.
So one of his friends finds the jacket and informs the police.
One of these people would also remove a "bus ticket" dated the 1/1/2015 from one the "pockets" and stash it somewhere in the marshes to which he would have to retrieve it and hand it to the family.
So at 15:59 the police are sure there are footprints leading into the river and appear to match the shoe Ambrose was wearing.... You see it there in plain English.
Only an hour passes and at 16:59 the shoe after some sort of research now doesn't belong to him and there are now only "indentations" and not "actual footprints" with "visible threads" so what was the point of searching online for a shoe where the sole print wasn't even visible just a pair of foot markings in gravel but there are no other footprints so it suggests whoever those footprints belong to logically went into the Pymmes Brook as if not there would be more "indentations" as they either went left or turned back but there were only those two untouched for over 50 hours.
There were no photos ever taken of the area we are talking about ie footprints leading into the river from the jacket which shows there were footprints in the grass, climbing the fence etc etc and there were also footprints down the alleyway the brown marks you see on this picture.
So how did they come to the conclusion those were "footprints" firstly? Can see why they said "indentations" but they have the motion in like a skating stance right foot then onto the left like a zig zag but the alleyway is a straight line why are the "indentations" zig zagging and not in one line and why do they just stop when there were other footprints found further down where are the prints in between those two sets.
There is none apart from what you see on that picture they never took one picture of the prints coming from the jacket nor by the brook.
So to conduct research into the shoe which is basic evidence the police know that to identify a shoe marking there has to be a logo or pattern on the sole "Footwear Sole Impression" basically "indentations" in the gravel so if they had actually made a casting ie a plaster cast "Recovery Of Footwear Impression Evidence" of the "indentations" then when the body was found the shoe may or may not have matched "Footwear Trace Evidence" but NO the police yet again didn't follow basic protocol.
So the jacket was found "cold" though it had been sitting out in the rain and freezing cold for over 50 hours.
We conducted an experiment on a jacket over a 50 hour period leaving it out in the rain, it would also start to dry within that same period.
So as you saw the jacket had become damp in areas as it sat out for over 50 hours, the jacket found on the Monday in the rain hadn't even picked up the water from the floor because the grass was wet as he was meant to have dropped it on the Saturday Morning but the jacket was only described as being "cold" when found "cold" though it had been sitting in a field for over 50 hours in the rain and cold and it was cold that weekend but it's not wet, it's not even damp it's simply "cold".
So how did this jacket even get there?
According to the police after the jacket and footprints were found and with the location of the "abandoned BMW" the police think he jumped from the car, he took a jacket from the boot (but left his mobile) ran down that alleyway, got to the bottom by the Brooke turned back going through that gap between the trees and dropped the jacket.
Here is what we are talking about the last clip is the clip near the brook where the footprints were found in the gravel beside it.
So that was the first part of this "foot journey" Ambrose was meant to have run that morning.
The only other ways out from there is turn back and go through the gap to where the jacket is found and head out that way or back down to Watermead Way or follow the alleyway down passed the Brooke and back up to Leeside Road.
So unless the jacket was thrown over the fences or planted then they went by the Brooke ie the footprints they went through the gap and down towards the river taking the left out over the Pymmmes Brooke and then where he was meant to have gone from there is anyone's guess as there are three paths that could have been taken.
So if he crossed the Brook he would have come to three different paths but which one would have been taken?
The most logical path would be right down towards the river (is the one we had taken wasn't by choice we just followed it round as we followed the path on the real run we did)
Would you go left back towards the area you just came from probably not as the whole purpose of leaving the car was to invade police as he would of known they would have been called leaving his car in the middle of the road smashed up.
Possibly go straight ahead do either left or right towards the river but you still can't access where the body was found which we will cover in part six along with the first search and latter searches.
Drawing conclusion on this whoever those footprints belonged to planted that jacket as there would have been more "indentations", in the gravel, the jacket would have been either drenched,wet or at least dampish as it was sitting out there for over 50 hours untouched in the rain, in a field soaking up water not only the rain but it's close a river which wets the area in the early morning (and we've been there mid July early morning the air was wet damping the ground).
How can a jacket be out there that long and it was just "cold"?
It clearly wasn't out there that long not with those environmental factors on the morning in question.
