Photograph of D. I. Ronald Cook. Is He At The Crime Scene?

Started by Erik Narramore, January 29, 2022, 08:14:13 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Erik Narramore

I'm curious about the image of D I. Ron Cook leaning out of a window.  It looks like it is taken at a crime scene somewhere.

Is it at White House Farm?  If so, I'm just wondering why he, or any other police officer, would be photographed at this or any crime scene?  It seems like a curious thing.  Are the police in the habit of photographing themselves when at work?

Who took the photograph and why and with what equipment, and on whose authorisation?  Did that person provide a statement of truth?

What exactly is Ron Cook doing in the photograph?  What is he looking at or for?  Why would he be looking out of that particular window?  Why is it of interest to him?  Or is he walking through a door and just stooping?

Is the photograph a close-up of a larger image?  If so, if we were to look at the fuller image, would we see Ron Cook wandering around a sensitive crime scene without wearing gloves?  Is Ron Cook holding something?  If so, what?

Were other similar photographs taken of Ron Cook and other police officers at the scene?  If so, where are these photographs?

Are such photographs situated in the forensic files and if so, what is the name of that file or album and has it been disclosed?
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

I'm reasonably sure it's Ronald Cook.  The photograph is circulated around quite a lot and it's referred to as him and it resembles him when you compare it to other photographs that are officially supposed to be him.  Now I think about it, I believe the man had a slight stoop and you can see it in the picture above.

As for where it's from, that's partly the point of the thread.  For research purposes, I have a copy of Murder Casebook 7 and the above picture is in it on page 223, and there is a short italised comment above it confirming it's Ronald Cook.

The description states:

"Detective Inspector Ronald Cook (below) was the scene-of-crime office at White House Farm.  His forensic tests were widely criticized [sic], but misleading clues had been laid."

The photograph is black and white, like this one, and has the same focal point (assuming it's a close-up of a larger image, which I suspect it must be).  It's credited to the Anglia Press Agency.

My questions still stand.  I suspect the photographer was somebody from the local press, but I'd be interested to know.  The significance of it is fairly obvious.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

What I'm getting at is:

(i). It seems odd (at least to me) that a police officer is photographed at a crime scene.  (I realise that they can be photographed incidentally, but why would he be photographed in that way?).

(ii). Let's say it's a press photographer who has done it.  Then who was it and what other photographs did he take?  And where are those photographs?

(iii). If it was a police officer who took it, then why?  And similar questions: who and where?

(iv). Did this person take pictures inside the farmhouse?

(v). Is the photo above of Ron Cook part of a larger photo, and if so, where is it and what does it show him doing?
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

One possibility is that there are more photographs somewhere, maybe in private hands.  It doesn't mean they've been hidden or withheld intentionally or deliberately, it could quite plausibly be that they've just never been looked at.  I really don't know.  There could be negatives that were never developed, there could be photos somewhere that at the time didn't seem very significant and were forgotten about, etc., etc., etc., etc., and so on.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams