• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Jeremy Bamber

Samson said:
David Bain did 15 years for appearing to have staged his father's suicide as the culmination of a quintuple homicide. In fact it was a quadruple homicide suicide, now hang on, what do we have here? Even The Atheist sees the parallels, but we disagree on who was firing the gun in the Bain case. (Robin Bain did it, murder suicide).
Click to expand...

Mate, you have a Baino thread, can you please keep it there.

Also, you're still wrong.
 
Desert Fox said:
My understanding is that he has generally shown himself to be a reasonable inmate (cannot blame any inmate for trying to fight to get out). In fact, his activity reminds me of Jason Baldwin of the WM3. No psychological evaluation has shown any evidence of being a sociopath / psychopath either.
Click to expand...

MikeG said:
Does anyone attach any weight to decades long protestations of innocence?

I do, to an extent. Our system apparently requires an acceptance of guilt as part of parole, and therefore refusing to accept your guilt leads necessarily to additional time in prison. (This is a problem which needs reviewing, but I have no suggestions.) Before Michael Howard extended Bamber's tariff to whole-life, he was serving life sentences with a tariff of 25 years. This meant that he would have been eligible to apply for parole after 25 years (4 years ago). However, protesting his innocence throughout that period removed his parole chances.

I understand that now he has a whole-life tariff his campaign is just something he does without any cost to himself, but previously, it did have a cost (the loss of possible parole). Obviously that cost has to be weighed against the potential benefit of being found innocent and released early.....but nonetheless, there was a cost to Bamber in continuing to protest his innocence.

I don't follow these things closely. Are there many cases of people protesting their innocence and thus losing the right to parole who were actually guilty all along? There are many tragic cases of the innocent who protested for years and stayed in prison way longer than they otherwise would, but is there much history of the converse?
Click to expand...

If you are relying on this sort of tosh then I can bring up all the gossip about him down under, his involvement in drugs, rumours of money trouble etc etc. None of this junk has any weight IMO.
 
anglolawyer said:
If you are relying on this sort of tosh then I can bring up all the gossip about him down under, his involvement in drugs, rumours of money trouble etc etc. None of this junk has any weight IMO.
Click to expand...

Not relying on it, of course, but troubled by it a little. These last few days have moved me much more pro-guilt than I was. I'm just rehearsing some of the reasons why I previously had thought there may be the possibility of a miscarriage.

Unlike you, as I explained there is a reason why I give this just a little weight. Or, at least......gave it a little weight. A cost-free campaign now is just an irrelevance, but it wasn't ten years ago.
 
MikeG said:
Not relying on it, of course, but troubled by it a little. These last few days have moved me much more pro-guilt than I was. I'm just rehearsing some of the reasons why I previously had thought there may be the possibility of a miscarriage.

Unlike you, as I explained there is a reason why I give this just a little weight. Or, at least......gave it a little weight. A cost-free campaign now is just an irrelevance, but it wasn't ten years ago.
Click to expand...

A lot of rumours have circulated about the case, for instance that the police saw two bodies when looking through the window or that Nevill called the police - but they don't survive a review of the documents. This Court of Appeal judgment of 2002 addresses quite a few of them and is worth a read if you can find the time.

His latest gambit involves expert evidence that proves the moderator was not on the rifle when it was fired. The CCRC refused to take that to appeal and Bamber challenged the refusal in Judicial Review proceedings. He lost thst challenge in 2012. Unfortunately, we don't get to see the full grounds on which the CCRC declined to act but they are referred to in the judgment.

Something that tells against him for me, given that we are now discussing fairly weak points, is his apparent reticence in putting trial transcripts online. There is very little there, in contrast to other cases, and almost nothing on his supporters' web-site. I sense some control-freakery as well as a reluctance to allow the weaknesses in his case to get an airing. One thing that would be fascinating to read, for example, is his cross examination at trial. Did he call Julie then the police or was it the other way round? Neither makes any sense at all. Did June really let him have her bike for Julie's use? Did Julie ever actually use it? Why didn't he call 999? Why did he drive so slowly to the farm?
 
anglolawyer said:
If you are relying on this sort of tosh then I can bring up all the gossip about him down under, his involvement in drugs, rumours of money trouble etc etc. None of this junk has any weight IMO.
Click to expand...

I think if he was as bad as some people describe him, it certain that he could not get along in prison even.

Now, this case is a tough one where unlike the AM/RS case, it is much harder to argue for innocence although I believe he is innocent. The cops hosed this cases something fierce however.
 
The Atheist said:
Mate, you have a Baino thread, can you please keep it there.

Also, you're still wrong.
Click to expand...
I regard it as extremely useful to look at similar cases. And I am right, forensically and legally. It was looking at all the cases in these forums that shows difficult murder strategies mean the cops probably have it wrong. I am undecided about this Bamber case though. But thanks for helping with forum discipline.
 
anglolawyer said:
.......Why did he drive so slowly to the farm?
Click to expand...

If guilty, he clearly drove slowly to make sure the police were there to witness his arrival. If innocent, then it's either a lie or sloppy note-keeping by the police who say they passed him, or he wanted the police to be there first in case he got shot at by a nutter with a rifle.
 
MikeG said:
If guilty, he clearly drove slowly to make sure the police were there to witness his arrival. If innocent, then it's either a lie or sloppy note-keeping by the police who say they passed him, or he wanted the police to be there first in case he got shot at by a nutter with a rifle.
Click to expand...

Well it certainly isn't a police lie because Bamber accepted in interview that he drove slowly. Either in interview or at trial he claimed to have been concerned that the phone call may have been a ruse to lure him into a trap.
 
Desert Fox said:
I think if he was as bad as some people describe him, it certain that he could not get along in prison even.

Now, this case is a tough one where unlike the AM/RS case, it is much harder to argue for innocence although I believe he is innocent. The cops hosed this cases something fierce however.
Click to expand...

Seriously? I'm not sure how well he has got on TBH. He has been violently assaulted at least once. I suspect that being at the centre of a decades-old controversy provides him with a form of solace and stimulation most prisoners lack. I read elsewhere detailed discusion of whether he is a psychopath and about a lie detector test. It's all pap that leads nowhere. The solution, if there is one, is in what emerged from the botched enquiry and the trial.
 
anglolawyer said:
Well it certainly isn't a police lie because Bamber accepted in interview that he drove slowly. Either in interview or at trial he claimed to have been concerned that the phone call may have been a ruse to lure him into a trap.
Click to expand...

There is a podcaster in the skeptical who was recently released from US Federal Prison on a charge of wire fraud. He admits that he committed the crime in question. However the FBI kept notes on what he said. Later he was allowed to read them and they conveyed nothing like what he stated.

I really do wish we had audio tapes of what he actually said.
 
Desert Fox said:
There is a podcaster in the skeptical who was recently released from US Federal Prison on a charge of wire fraud. He admits that he committed the crime in question. However the FBI kept notes on what he said. Later he was allowed to read them and they conveyed nothing like what he stated.

I really do wish we had audio tapes of what he actually said.
Click to expand...

I can practically vouch for the reliability of his police notes of interview in this case. As I have explained elsewhere, the practise at the time (when I was myself a criminal law practitioner) was for questions and answers to be written down longhand and for the accused to sign each page at the end of the interview. Bamber was interviewed under caution with his solicitor present and, as far as I know, has not challenged the admissibility of the statements he made.
 
anglolawyer said:
Seriously? I'm not sure how well he has got on TBH. He has been violently assaulted at least once. I suspect that being at the centre of a decades-old controversy provides him with a form of solace and stimulation most prisoners lack. I read elsewhere detailed discusion of whether he is a psychopath and about a lie detector test. It's all pap that leads nowhere. The solution, if there is one, is in what emerged from the botched enquiry and the trial.
Click to expand...

Jason Baldwin was assaulted in prison as well. Few people consider him to be a psychopath / sociopath. There are a few on the pro guilt side but they are a fringe.

The argument was meant as a minor point however.

I had a thought about this case and many others. Maybe others have long considered this but it sank in. They did not investigate the case to see if he was actually guilty or if he was innocent. They investigated to see if they could build a case against him. Any contrary evidence was ignored or discard.

I have a couple of thoughts about the crime itself. If you are trying to stage the killing of your family, would you do it as a murder-suicide? Until learning about this case, I don't know if the idea of staging one would even occur to me. I almost certainly would try to stage it as a home invasion. You would not have to get Shelia to cooperate but just shoot her. You would not have to mess around with fake phone calls either. Real home invasions are relatively common and staged home invasions are not unknown.

Also, Jeremy would be in battle mode if he was killing his family. Being able to change gears both to stage the phone call and to try to make Shelia's death look like a suicide would be close to impossible,
 
anglolawyer said:
I can practically vouch for the reliability of his police notes of interview in this case. As I have explained elsewhere, the practise at the time (when I was myself a criminal law practitioner) was for questions and answers to be written down longhand and for the accused to sign each page at the end of the interview. Bamber was interviewed under caution with his solicitor present and, as far as I know, has not challenged the admissibility of the statements he made.
Click to expand...

I am not so much concerned with him wanting the police to get there first. I note that the police did not barge into the house either. The actual reasoning behind it is the issue. Might have even used the word trap but (assuming he is innocent), just was likely scared.
 
Desert Fox said:
I have a couple of thoughts about the crime itself. If you are trying to stage the killing of your family, would you do it as a murder-suicide? Until learning about this case, I don't know if the idea of staging one would even occur to me. I almost certainly would try to stage it as a home invasion. You would not have to get Shelia to cooperate but just shoot her. You would not have to mess around with fake phone calls either. Real home invasions are relatively common and staged home invasions are not unknown.
Click to expand...

I probably would, because if you can do it successfully the case is immediately closed and there's no need for further investigation. If you stage a home invasion, the police would be looking for the perpetrator, interviewing all the neighbours about suspicious movements on the night, so Jeremy would have to be very sure no-one saw him.
Incidentally do you have figures for the number of UK home invasions where an entire family was killed in the last 40 years? I don't, but suspect it is in the low single figures.
 
Guybrush Threepwood said:
I probably would, because if you can do it successfully the case is immediately closed and there's no need for further investigation. If you stage a home invasion, the police would be looking for the perpetrator, interviewing all the neighbours about suspicious movements on the night, so Jeremy would have to be very sure no-one saw him.
Incidentally do you have figures for the number of UK home invasions where an entire family was killed in the last 40 years? I don't, but suspect it is in the low single figures.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of hype so hard to find actual information. The hype though makes it actually more likely that one would stage it.
 
Desert Fox said:
........ I almost certainly would try to stage it as a home invasion. You would not have to get Shelia to cooperate but just shoot her. You would not have to mess around with fake phone calls either. Real home invasions are relatively common and staged home invasions are not unknown.
.......
Click to expand...

In Britain? No, they aren't. Really.

The obvious reason why he wouldn't do this is that suspicion in these cases always starts with people known to the family, and people who stand to benefit from the deaths. JB would have been a suspect under both criteria, and so would have needed a cast-iron alibi, which would have put him entirely at the mercy of someone else.
 
MikeG said:
In Britain? No, they aren't. Really.

The obvious reason why he wouldn't do this is that suspicion in these cases always starts with people known to the family, and people who stand to benefit from the deaths. JB would have been a suspect under both criteria, and so would have needed a cast-iron alibi, which would have put him entirely at the mercy of someone else.
Click to expand...

You have to figure that it is almost impossible to get a murder / suicide right.

Most people who fake home invasions do not believe they will be caught at it either.
 
anglolawyer said:
He didn't get it right. So he satisfied your rule. He came close, though.
Click to expand...

Umm, I am not trying to play games here. He has to expect that he can actually get Shelia to go along with his plan?

He also has to actually do everything right with regards to calls after having been in a major fight?
 
AL is agreeing with you, DF, that it is almost impossible to stage a murder/ suicide and get away with it. Bamber came close, but he didn't get away with it.....(if he is guilty, that is, which I am becoming increasingly sure of).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom