• 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

Agatha said:
Have you ever heard of a staged crime scene?

Or perhaps you surmise that after the first shot to Ms Caffell's neck, she took the time to bleed on the Bible found on her body, then shut the Bible, then reopen it and arrange it on herself. After her death she magically cleaned her blood from the rifle barrel (the last shot was a contact wound so blood would have been blown back into the barrel), and deposited her blood into the moderator before replacing it in the gun cupboard. Despite being dead, she slid from an almost flat position with her head propped up on a bedside cabinet to being fully laid down, rucking up her nightdress in the process but then pulling only the front of her nightdress down, leaving it rucked up at the back.
Click to expand...
Agatha:
It is a fascinating case due to everything that has followed the obvious fact, Sheila shot her family then herself. Where to begin?
Is Julie Mugford with her brazen and articulate tissue of lies in court to blame, or the authority figures that threatened to ruin her life if she gave the wrong answers?
Does Carol Ann Lee truly believe that a man would hand her everything including his endless interviews and actually have conducted this ghostly exercise of intruding and eluding?
She seems to have been captured by this remarkable hoax, god forgive her.
 
Agatha said:
Have you ever heard of a staged crime scene?

Or perhaps you surmise that after the first shot to Ms Caffell's neck, she took the time to bleed on the Bible found on her body, then shut the Bible, then reopen it and arrange it on herself. After her death she magically cleaned her blood from the rifle barrel (the last shot was a contact wound so blood would have been blown back into the barrel), and deposited her blood into the moderator before replacing it in the gun cupboard. Despite being dead, she slid from an almost flat position with her head propped up on a bedside cabinet to being fully laid down, rucking up her nightdress in the process but then pulling only the front of her nightdress down, leaving it rucked up at the back.
Click to expand...

Don't forget Sheila's feet. Completely clean: no sign of having stepped in blood or the shattered glass all over the kitchen floor.

Even the phone off the hook was staged. None of Neville's boodstains on it at all.
 
Vixen said:
Don't forget Sheila's feet. Completely clean: no sign of having stepped in blood or the shattered glass all over the kitchen floor.

Even the phone off the hook was staged. None of Neville's boodstains on it at all.
Click to expand...

Did you not read my reply at 320?

PS: There was no "shattered glass all over the kitchen floor" and any call that was made was prior to getting shot.
 
Essexman:

"If you wish to argue that a .22lr rifle is powerful enough to create blood drawback and Jeremy committed the crime with silencer attached there is a big problem with that argument. Reason being one of the twins suffered three contact wounds, yet none of his blood grouping was found in the baffles of the silencer."

Before you quote Di Maio you should be aware that in a recently peer reviewed paper by Di Maio and 2 other authors that examined a suicide with a .22 rifle with a silencer attached, blood was found in the rifle barrel. Furthermore, subsequent firings of a rifle after a contact shot remove or destroy drawn back material. So both your points are wrong. You appear to look for information that supports your point of view without looking further. You may not be interested in the above because it doesn't fit your narrative, and then there is a further point you make which is also wrong - abrasion patterns do occur in close contact shots where a silencer is involved. 3 points out 3 incorrect, indicates you've little idea of what you are talking about. The problem really is because you are incorrect other people reading what you say are misinformed by your opinions, meaning that the narrative is actually fictional and not at all helpful.
 
Fixit said:
Before you quote Di Maio you should be aware that in a recently peer reviewed paper by Di Maio and 2 other authors that examined a suicide with a .22 rifle with a silencer attached, blood was found in the rifle barrel. Furthermore, subsequent firings of a rifle after a contact shot remove or destroy drawn back material. So both your points are wrong. You appear to look for information that supports your point of view without looking further. You may not be interested in the above because it doesn't fit your narrative,
Click to expand...


On the contrary. Can you please upload this recently peer reviewed paper by Di Maio so I can read it?

PS: If it only mentions one case it does not contradict the results of Di Maios previous conclusions, involving 150 suicide cases via a rifle that show a wide percentage for both blood present and blood absent.

Fixit said:
then there is a further point you make which is also wrong - abrasion patterns do occur in close contact shots where a silencer is involved.
Click to expand...


I never said abrasion patterns do no occur with a silencer attached. I am well aware that silencers create them.
 
Last edited:
Essexman said:
On the contrary. Can you please upload this recently peer reviewed paper by Di Maio so I can read it?

PS: If it only mentions one case it does not contradict the results of Di Maios previous conclusions, involving 150 suicide cases via a rifle that show a wide percentage for both blood present and blood absent.




I never said abrasion patterns do no occur with a silencer attached. I am well aware that silencers create them.
Click to expand...

Here's the name of the paper and the authors:

Homicide or Suicide? Gunshot Wound Interpretation:
A Bayesian Approach
Rowena Cave, BSc(Hons),* Vincent J. DiMaio, MD,Þ and D. Kimberley Molina, MDÞ

If you have any arguments with DiMaio, Molina, Cave or the those that peer reviewed the paper take it up with them, rather than try to convince other posters that you are right and the scientists are wrong. Also to back up your claims using other wound details that you now admit are also present after contact suicides wounds using a rifle with a silencer is deliberately misleading. It undermines whatever you have written about the case, and I don't really see how you can put that back together. But good luck and watch out for further misinterpretations because there is always someone around to make the lie of them.
 
Essexman said:
If the sound moderator is authentic then Jeremy is guilty, Problem is this was "discovered" by his cousins several days afterwards and they stood to inherit the family fortune if Jeremy was convicted. Its suspiciously too convenient whatever way you look at it.

Even some people who believe Jeremy is guilty think the cousins planted residual blood from the crime scene into the sound moderator. its very possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, it doesn't overcome all the other difficulties in the Crown's case, it is much like the 'golden bullet' evidence, or miraculous finds that solve a case which formerly had little substance. You will see in the DiMaio report that a 'left hand temple shot', a low percentage indication of a right handed person committing suicide is in the data, but it is supported by other data of suicide. That is the case here imo with the silencer.
 
Fixit said:
Here's the name of the paper and the authors:

Homicide or Suicide? Gunshot Wound Interpretation:
A Bayesian Approach
Rowena Cave, BSc(Hons),* Vincent J. DiMaio, MD,Þ and D. Kimberley Molina, MDÞ

If you have any arguments with DiMaio, Molina, Cave or the those that peer reviewed the paper take it up with them, rather than try to convince other posters that you are right and the scientists are wrong.
Click to expand...

I have just searched through the PDF of that paper. No mention of silencers or suppressors.

Fixit said:
Also to back up your claims using other wound details that you now admit are also present after contact suicides wounds using a rifle with a silencer is deliberately misleading. It undermines whatever you have written about the case, and I don't really see how you can put that back together. But good luck and watch out for further misinterpretations because there is always someone around to make the lie of them.
Click to expand...

I never contradicted myself in the first place you simply misinterpret or misunderstand what I am saying.

But to clarify on the abrasion/muzzle patterns

Below is a suicide under the chin with a surpressor (only one I could find) the blood has been cleared but you can see the marks it has left

sm1.jpg


The muzzle marks show that what is being played out bellow cannot have taken place
sm2.jpg

sm3.jpg



https://youtu.be/VeLsEeE0zTI?t=1m32s
 
Sorry for that Essexman. You are completely right the case I referred to does not mention a silencer. However, it is one of NZ's most significant Miscarriages of Justice. The example is:

'Bayesian ApplicationVCase Examples
Shot to the Head
A case was presented where a person has died of a rifle
shot.'

This was the alleged murder of Robin Bain by his son David. Of course I had forgotten that the silencer in that case (a home made silencer that was attached with a hose clip) was found on the rifle near the body of Robin is not mentioned in the study. The shot was claimed to have been from a distance, Robin kneeling praying and David hiding behind a curtain to an alcove poking the rifle silently through the curtain and firing the shot. As you will have seen the probability of murder was higher than suicide because it was a left hand temple shot. However there were other problems difficult to overcome, soot and stippling around the wound indicating contact shot, a greater soot spread to one side of the wound where the tight angle contact was reduced, a slightly upward trajectory (meaning David would have had to be lying down to achieve the trajectory,) blood inside the barrel which had travelled through the silencer (induction). I've always thought a close contact murder shot would have resulted in blood in the Bamber rifle, of course not everyone agrees with that for various reasons.

Yes I have seen the photos of Phillip Boyce's experiment earlier using a dead pig, I think it was he that did a similar test for the Bain defence.
 
Fixit said:
Sorry for that Essexman. You are completely right the case I referred to does not mention a silencer. However, it is one of NZ's most significant Miscarriages of Justice. The example is:

'Bayesian ApplicationVCase Examples
Shot to the Head
A case was presented where a person has died of a rifle
shot.'

This was the alleged murder of Robin Bain by his son David. Of course I had forgotten that the silencer in that case (a home made silencer that was attached with a hose clip) was found on the rifle near the body of Robin is not mentioned in the study. The shot was claimed to have been from a distance, Robin kneeling praying and David hiding behind a curtain to an alcove poking the rifle silently through the curtain and firing the shot. As you will have seen the probability of murder was higher than suicide because it was a left hand temple shot. However there were other problems difficult to overcome, soot and stippling around the wound indicating contact shot, a greater soot spread to one side of the wound where the tight angle contact was reduced, a slightly upward trajectory (meaning David would have had to be lying down to achieve the trajectory,) blood inside the barrel which had travelled through the silencer (induction). I've always thought a close contact murder shot would have resulted in blood in the Bamber rifle, of course not everyone agrees with that for various reasons.

Yes I have seen the photos of Phillip Boyce's experiment earlier using a dead pig, I think it was he that did a similar test for the Bain defence.
Click to expand...

If Robin was holding the gun at a vertical position, gravity may have played a role in blood going down the silencer.

Plus it was a shot to the head, contrary to Sheila being shot in the neck/chin


"It is well known that gunshot wounding can produce fine droplets of blood spattered in a forward direction.
Under certain circumstances blood droplets can also be propelled backwards in a direction against the line of fire.
Although the phenomenon of back spatter of blood is most commonly seen in contact gunshot wounds of the
head "Stephens, B. and Allen, T., "Back Spatter of Blood from Gunshot Wounds—Observations and Experimental Simulation," Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 28, No. 2, 1983, pp. 437-439,
 
The main factor for Robin's blood entering the rifle was the velocity of the shot and no exit wound, so no where for the blood and brain to exhaust other than through the wound. If you can get any videos (I had some but deleted them when the Bamber case looked to be going no where, and I got busy with something else) slow motion bullet impact you will see spatter. In Bain it rose over a metre onto a curtain of a alcove. Then there is the draw back, with the vacuum draws the nearest air/debris/blood back into the rifle - instantaneously.

Going on Bain to look at Bamber, softer tissue for sure but a main artery nicked so certainly spatter. The question is however, if the silencer was in fact on the rifle there's an argument that there should have also been blood in the barrel.The we go to broken 'forensic safety chain' with the silencer, the number of searches for and so on - something if a Bayes calculation was/could be established, would indicate imo the improbability of the silencer having been on the rifle at that time. Number 1 point why use a silencer anyway. In Robin's case it was already attached to the rifle. There was no silence at WHF that night/morning that is for sure.
 
Bump.
As Sampson has attempted to drag the case of convicted murderer Bamber into another thread.
Samson said:
This thread is about the new prime minister and the team he has gathered around him. And what they are doing now, and their records. The woman was in favour of the death penalty, which if applied to Bamber would be one of those rare cases of executing an innocent man.
Some but not all deem that unacceptable.
This looks a thoroughly evil administration to me, but I don't need to suffer the consequences.
Click to expand...
 
catsmate said:
Bump.
As Sampson has attempted to drag the case of convicted murderer Bamber into another thread.
Click to expand...
The imprisonment of Jeremy Bamber is the worst act of the British judiciary in modern times.
There is proof by Holly Goodhead and debated by Charlie Wilkes on IA. Saying you have a close interest in the case is irrelevant, it was a definitive case of murder suicide, in which the suicider misaligned the rifle for the first shot and was able to figure in time how to blow her brains out.
 
This has been a very good thread. [Snip] An excellent potential scenario was developed here that points to Bamber's innocence that was never heard by a Jury. Whatever side of the fence one takes on this case the forensics, the understanding of the forensics has changed as science has moved on - giving Bamber a defence that wasn't appreciated earlier. He deserves to have his case tested again in more modern times. I see one post above that relies on hearsay of what Jeremy's father is suppose to have said about his fear that Jeremy might kill him. That isn't evidence just a biased statement to influence a Jury. No one that thinks Bamber is quilty should object to the case being tested again in Court. As I've written before this case was used to 'explain' how David Bain was guilty - yet he was found not guilty at a retrial for a number of reasons, possibly the primary 1 being beyond reasonable doubt established as to his father having committed suicide.

Edited by Kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rule 12
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Catsmate bumped the thread from elsewhere because he claims a close interest.
I am waiting for his narrative that explains the trajectories of the bullets through the various dead people.
As I pointed out, Holly on IA has given an exhaustive account that shows it could never be Bamber with the gun, so he is innocent.
 
Fixit said:
I see one post above that relies on hearsay of what Jeremy's father is suppose to have said about his fear that Jeremy might kill him. That isn't evidence just a biased statement to influence a Jury.
Edited by Kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rule 12
Click to expand...

This is what Barbra Wilson (the farm secretary) claimed in a 2014 documentary. She made no mentions of it in her 1985 statements and neither mentioned it in any other earlier documentary she appeared in.

Hardly something that would hold up under cross examination even if hearsay was allowed.
 
Essexman said:
This is what Barbra Wilson (the farm secretary) claimed in a 2014 documentary. She made no mentions of it in her 1985 statements and neither mentioned it in any other earlier documentary she appeared in.

Hardly something that would hold up under cross examination even if hearsay was allowed.
Click to expand...
What she did mention I repost from previously, a transcript

"The N and J Bamber company solicitor Mr Wilson had made Peter Eaton a director of the company without Jeremy's consent. Jeremy had simply believed that Peter Eaton was acting as a manager after the tragedies. Further to this in 1987, the company secretary, Barbara Wilson, approached the police and reported a string of fraudulent activity allegedly carried out by Peter Eaton. This included the following
1. Disposal of farm machinery
2. Sale of a combine harvester.
3. Theft of monies
4. Excessive expenditure
5. Obtaining of discounts using the Bamber company
6. Obtaining of goods being paid for by the Bamber company
7. Using manpower from the estate on his own land
8. Stealing a tractor engine
9. Selling off cattle from the Bamber farm
10. Sale of Jeremy's car and keeping the funds.
Essex police failed to investigate the claims until after the first appeal of Jeremy, as this would ensure that the integrity of a key prosecution witness was not brought into question. It is unclear whether the allegations relate to the time before Jeremy Bamber was taken into police custody."


She must have forgotten after 27 years that the whole family were ratbags, and this includes current resident Anne Eaton.
 
Samson said:
What she did mention I repost from previously, a transcript

"The N and J Bamber company solicitor Mr Wilson had made Peter Eaton a director of the company without Jeremy's consent. Jeremy had simply believed that Peter Eaton was acting as a manager after the tragedies. Further to this in 1987, the company secretary, Barbara Wilson, approached the police and reported a string of fraudulent activity allegedly carried out by Peter Eaton. This included the following
1. Disposal of farm machinery
2. Sale of a combine harvester.
3. Theft of monies
4. Excessive expenditure
5. Obtaining of discounts using the Bamber company
6. Obtaining of goods being paid for by the Bamber company
7. Using manpower from the estate on his own land
8. Stealing a tractor engine
9. Selling off cattle from the Bamber farm
10. Sale of Jeremy's car and keeping the funds.
Essex police failed to investigate the claims until after the first appeal of Jeremy, as this would ensure that the integrity of a key prosecution witness was not brought into question. It is unclear whether the allegations relate to the time before Jeremy Bamber was taken into police custody."


She must have forgotten after 27 years that the whole family were ratbags, and this includes current resident Anne Eaton.
Click to expand...

This is what Jeremy wrote in 2003 when he tried to claim back half his grandmothers estate.

"I brought this Civil Case in the High Court against my relatives as I was unaware until a couple of years ago that my grandmother had left me 50% of her Estate in her original Will, but changed it shortly before her death to exclude me and leave everything to my Aunt, Pamela Boutflour. This was completely out of character for my grandmother as she had always been scrupulously fair, sharing everything equally between her family and would not have altered her Will without undue influence. There are lots of second and third cousins in the Maldon area who could verify that grandmother had always been fair and honest. The Civil Case shows clearly how the changing of the Will came about and how family members lied about who inherited what in order to mislead the jury at my trial and worse still, at one point even implied that I had also died along with the rest of my family, when they informed my grandmother of the tragedy.

This case is not about the money as I cannot spend any of it anyway until I clear my name and am released from prison. It is about honesty and justice for my grandmother and me and to show that key witnesses at my criminal trial lied to the jury about their true motives for giving the evidence they did against me.

It must be remembered that the defendants in this case are the very same people who gave the sound moderator to the police, discovered scratched and insecure windows at White House Farm, found a bicycle at my house, discovered scratch marks on some paintwork; who in fact found the only evidence that came to be used against me after 42 police officers had already searched everything and yet had not found any of these incriminating things."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom