Jeremy Bamber

[Vixen]

"Recent twin studies show persuasive evidence that both genetic and environmental factors contribute to antisocial behaviour. However the genetic evidence indicates that there is no single gene, or even a small number of genes, that predict an increased risk of antisocial behaviour.Nov 9, 2017"

Fortunately the Court won't speculate if Jeremy achieves a new appeal. On the face of it he has strong evidence as to the probability of a 2nd call - so his account becomes more credible. There is also fresh forensic evidence, or I should say freshly understood.

When police make accusations about staged crime scenes in cases of false convictions it is to explain evidence pointing away from an accused. The falsely accused get blamed in every way possible - just like you and a rogue criminal gene you imagined.

You could say the converse, that the dead woman is falsely accused of the murder by Bamber defenders for having had mental health issues, which had no correlation to the likelihood of being a murderer, who would kill her own two eight-year old twins and her adopted parents, and then kill herself. It is possible she suffered severe depression that might have unbalanced her in such a manner. However, AIUI the issues surrounding the silencer tends to rule out suicide by Sheila Cafell.

 

[Samson]

You could say the converse, that the dead woman is falsely accused of the murder by Bamber defenders for having had mental health issues, which had no correlation to the likelihood of being a murderer, who would kill her own two eight-year old twins and her adopted parents, and then kill herself. It is possible she suffered severe depression that might have unbalanced her in such a manner. However, AIUI the issues surrounding the silencer tends to rule out suicide by Sheila Cafell.

This is an unusual case, the scratches under the mantle piece allegedly by a silencer in a struggle are not possible in a struggle. Police crime scene photos on the day show an umblemished underside to the mantlepiece.
As Sherlock Holmes would say eliminate the imposssible, whatever is left no matter how unlikely is the solution.
This is that the mantlepiece was deliberately scratched with the silencer in the days after, almost certainly by family members who knew that Jeremy Bamber had them over a barrel and their tenure on the land was over. No pun intended.

 

[Fixit]

You could say the converse, that the dead woman is falsely accused of the murder by Bamber defenders for having had mental health issues, which had no correlation to the likelihood of being a murderer, who would kill her own two eight-year old twins and her adopted parents, and then kill herself. It is possible she suffered severe depression that might have unbalanced her in such a manner. However, AIUI the issues surrounding the silencer tends to rule out suicide by Sheila Cafell.

No, the point is what the new evidence presents. It fits together with Jeremy's account, the 2nd phone call the Judge told the Jury to ignore. I put the previous evidence and the new evidence from the article in continuity to show it's a complete defense the Jury did not hear.

"Bamber had argued two calls were made to police on the night of the murders, one from himself and another from his father, but the prosecution at his trial had alleged there was only one which was made by Bamber at 3.26am from the scene."

"His legal team argue it shows Bamber could not have made a 3.26am call from the farm and returned to his home 3.5 miles away in Goldhanger to make the second call, the Daily Mirror reported."

"The new note is said to refer to a call, timed at "approximately 3.37am", from Bamber."

"The jury at his Chelmsford Crown Court trial were directed to disregard Bamber's claims that he had called police from his home."

The solicitors have said it is a complex case. Part of that complexity is the forensics, including hopefully the trajectory of the shots which killed Nevill - all of which adds to the weight that a fresh Jury could attach to proof from the files that there was a 2nd call.

Essex police well understood that a 2nd call was not helpful to the case so the details of it got lost. If Jeremy knew there was no 2nd call he would not have claimed so. Unfortunately for him police 'lost it' to damage his credibility on that issue and therefore enhanced the case against him.

From what I recall about the case from a lot of reading around 4 years ago according to my notes, the evidence is weak, particularly around the 'secret' silencer, the wounds to Nevill, June and Sheila. These details of a potential recorded 2nd call - just like Jeremy said, weaken it further. It will be great if this case is given a full analysis again - as science has jumped forward in its understanding of forensics. It also comes back to me that first shot to Sheila was not immediately fatal according to a forensic pathologists and would not have prevented her shooting herself again.

 

[Vixen]

No, the point is what the new evidence presents. It fits together with Jeremy's account, the 2nd phone call the Judge told the Jury to ignore. I put the previous evidence and the new evidence from the article in continuity to show it's a complete defense the Jury did not hear.

"Bamber had argued two calls were made to police on the night of the murders, one from himself and another from his father, but the prosecution at his trial had alleged there was only one which was made by Bamber at 3.26am from the scene."

"His legal team argue it shows Bamber could not have made a 3.26am call from the farm and returned to his home 3.5 miles away in Goldhanger to make the second call, the Daily Mirror reported."

"The new note is said to refer to a call, timed at "approximately 3.37am", from Bamber."

"The jury at his Chelmsford Crown Court trial were directed to disregard Bamber's claims that he had called police from his home."

The solicitors have said it is a complex case. Part of that complexity is the forensics, including hopefully the trajectory of the shots which killed Nevill - all of which adds to the weight that a fresh Jury could attach to proof from the files that there was a 2nd call.

Essex police well understood that a 2nd call was not helpful to the case so the details of it got lost. If Jeremy knew there was no 2nd call he would not have claimed so. Unfortunately for him police 'lost it' to damage his credibility on that issue and therefore enhanced the case against him.

From what I recall about the case from a lot of reading around 4 years ago according to my notes, the evidence is weak, particularly around the 'secret' silencer, the wounds to Nevill, June and Sheila. These details of a potential recorded 2nd call - just like Jeremy said, weaken it further. It will be great if this case is given a full analysis again - as science has jumped forward in its understanding of forensics. It also comes back to me that first shot to Sheila was not immediately fatal according to a forensic pathologists and would not have prevented her shooting herself again.

"approximately 3.37am" tends to suggest whoever wrote it did not have a watch, hence the estimate.

 

[zooterkin]

"Bamber had argued two calls were made to police on the night of the murders, one from himself and another from his father, but the prosecution at his trial had alleged there was only one which was made by Bamber at 3.26am from the scene."

"His legal team argue it shows Bamber could not have made a 3.26am call from the farm and returned to his home 3.5 miles away in Goldhanger to make the second call, the Daily Mirror reported."

What’s the reason that he couldn’t have travelled three and a half miles in (approximately) 11 minutes?

 

[LondonJohn]

What’s the reason that he couldn’t have travelled three and a half miles in (approximately) 11 minutes?

And that's precisely what Bamber obviously did do.

He reasoned that if, as the very last thing he did after the murders, he placed a call to his own house from the farm - which he'd claim was his father calling him in a panic - then immediately left and cycled at highest speed back to his house before immediately calling the police upon his arrival home, he could blur the lines and make it seem difficult for him to have done things in this manner. And he'd thus have reasoned that if he could pull that trick off, it would - in and of itself - tend to strongly support his version of events (i.e. that he was contacted by his father in panic in the middle of the night saying that Sheila was going to kill them all, and that this in turn prompted him to call the police).

Of course, one of the (many) elephants in the room here is quite why Bamber - assuming for a moment that one believed his version of events - waited those 11-odd minutes within his house before calling the police. If your father called you in a panic to say your sister was going crazy with a rifle and trying to kill everyone in the house, I'd say you'd call 999 immediately the call with your father terminated. Why on Earth, in that scenario, would you effectively do nothing for those 11 minutes before alerting the authorities? And what's more, I believe that when Bamber did call the police, he phoned the local station and not the emergency 999 number.


Look: this case has become a little opaque because of the low quality of the police response on the night and their subsequent investigation. But there's still more than enough reliable evidence, taken as a whole, to safely convict Bamber BARD.

 

[Planigale]

"approximately 3.37am" tends to suggest whoever wrote it did not have a watch, hence the estimate.

It may also mean that they only recorded hours and minutes and not seconds. Therefore it would be inaccurate to say it was 03:37:00 exactly. It might be 03:36:31 to 03:37:29 or 03:37:00 to 03:37:59 depending on local practice.

 

[Samson]

And that's precisely what Bamber obviously did do.

He reasoned that if, as the very last thing he did after the murders, he placed a call to his own house from the farm - which he'd claim was his father calling him in a panic - then immediately left and cycled at highest speed back to his house before immediately calling the police upon his arrival home, he could blur the lines and make it seem difficult for him to have done things in this manner. And he'd thus have reasoned that if he could pull that trick off, it would - in and of itself - tend to strongly support his version of events (i.e. that he was contacted by his father in panic in the middle of the night saying that Sheila was going to kill them all, and that this in turn prompted him to call the police).

Of course, one of the (many) elephants in the room here is quite why Bamber - assuming for a moment that one believed his version of events - waited those 11-odd minutes within his house before calling the police. If your father called you in a panic to say your sister was going crazy with a rifle and trying to kill everyone in the house, I'd say you'd call 999 immediately the call with your father terminated. Why on Earth, in that scenario, would you effectively do nothing for those 11 minutes before alerting the authorities? And what's more, I believe that when Bamber did call the police, he phoned the local station and not the emergency 999 number.


Look: this case has become a little opaque because of the low quality of the police response on the night and their subsequent investigation. But there's still more than enough reliable evidence, taken as a whole, to safely convict Bamber BARD.

Except he wasn't there. MikeG made a brave attempt at constructing how Neville received 8 bullets from Jeremy and in that process proved conclusively that it was impossible. Holly Goodhead on the other hand has deconstructed the trajectories and bullet casings conclusively showing it was Sheila. But judges are far too obsessed with law to use common sense. The case is a 32 year obscenity.

 

[zooterkin]

And that's precisely what Bamber obviously did do.

He reasoned that if, as the very last thing he did after the murders, he placed a call to his own house from the farm - which he'd claim was his father calling him in a panic - then immediately left and cycled at highest speed back to his house before immediately calling the police upon his arrival home.

Weren't both calls to the police?

 

[Fixit]

"approximately 3.37am" tends to suggest whoever wrote it did not have a watch, hence the estimate.

Or equally, did have a watch but did not record the exact time. However, it's the 2nd call where formerly, apart from Jeremy - there was said to be only one.

 

[Fixit]

What’s the reason that he couldn’t have travelled three and a half miles in (approximately) 11 minutes?

Don't remember at the moment sorry. Possibly without a car because there was mentioned made of a bike but Jeremy when arriving after police was in a car. One of the buffs will recall the details.

 

[Fixit]

And that's precisely what Bamber obviously did do.

He reasoned that if, as the very last thing he did after the murders, he placed a call to his own house from the farm - which he'd claim was his father calling him in a panic - then immediately left and cycled at highest speed back to his house before immediately calling the police upon his arrival home, he could blur the lines and make it seem difficult for him to have done things in this manner. And he'd thus have reasoned that if he could pull that trick off, it would - in and of itself - tend to strongly support his version of events (i.e. that he was contacted by his father in panic in the middle of the night saying that Sheila was going to kill them all, and that this in turn prompted him to call the police).

Of course, one of the (many) elephants in the room here is quite why Bamber - assuming for a moment that one believed his version of events - waited those 11-odd minutes within his house before calling the police. If your father called you in a panic to say your sister was going crazy with a rifle and trying to kill everyone in the house, I'd say you'd call 999 immediately the call with your father terminated. Why on Earth, in that scenario, would you effectively do nothing for those 11 minutes before alerting the authorities? And what's more, I believe that when Bamber did call the police, he phoned the local station and not the emergency 999 number.


Look: this case has become a little opaque because of the low quality of the police response on the night and their subsequent investigation. But there's still more than enough reliable evidence, taken as a whole, to safely convict Bamber BARD.

2 things there. A call in the small hours may not elicit a sharply thought out response. On reflection what he may have first dismissed may have made reconsider. I can't speculate on how many calls are made to local police stations in those time rather than to the emergency number. But overall there was no evidence of a 2nd call, apart from Jeremy's claim - and now there is.

 

[Fixit]

Except he wasn't there. MikeG made a brave attempt at constructing how Neville received 8 bullets from Jeremy and in that process proved conclusively that it was impossible. Holly Goodhead on the other hand has deconstructed the trajectories and bullet casings conclusively showing it was Sheila. But judges are far too obsessed with law to use common sense. The case is a 32 year obscenity.

You're a little confused about that conversation as to the stairs, go back and read.

 

[zooterkin]

Don't remember at the moment sorry. Possibly without a car because there was mentioned made of a bike but Jeremy when arriving after police was in a car. One of the buffs will recall the details.

Depends on the roads, but an average of 20mph is not impossible on a bike, especially if fueled by adrenaline.

 

[Fixit]

Depends on the roads, but an average of 20mph is not impossible on a bike, especially if fueled by adrenaline.

That shouldn't be an issue for the Court. The issue is whether the evidence of a 2nd call denied by the Crown, and in fact the Court, would be material to a Jury. That it was denied by the Crown, and there were instructions from the Court to ignore it, is in favor of Jeremy. Then there is the fresh purchase on the forensics, including trajectory of rifle shots and a very plausible reason that the scratch said to be caused by the rifle being swung at Nevill in the kitchen could not have happened, another discovery a few years ago.

It will be very good for this case to have a robust review again.

 

[Samson]

You're a little confused about that conversation as to the stairs, go back and read.

No need to go back and read because this is what happened, I have no doubt I have posted before.
Sheila Caffel retired to bed and found her period had begun.
She went downstairs and made a noise with water, buckets, and a tampon applicator was found in the living room.
Neville came downstairs to confirm the noise was not intruders, and the argument about the care of the twins was reignited.
Jeremy had left the gun loaded in the kitchen, it was seized by Sheila, Neville dialed Jeremy saying Sheila has gone crazy with the gun.
Sheila shot June in bed 5 times so Neville ascended the stairs, Sheila swivelled on the landing and shot Neville twice in the mouth, he turned and fled down the stairs was shot in the shoulder and elbow, finally collapsing in the coal scuttle. Sheila reloaded and shot him four times, returned upstairs to find June had managed to move towards the door, she shot her three more times. The twins slept through. She figured all was lost and they should be despatched and reloaded and shot them multiple times.
Then she washed herself, eventually the police surrounded, and when all was lost she tried to shoot herself leaning against the bedside cabinet, but the angle was wrong and she shot herself through the neck nowhere near the brain. She realigned and shot herself through the brain.

That is what happened.

Then the relatives orchestrated the mantelpiece scratches, they were desperate because the ne'er do well was in control of the farm.
Of course he was not a ne'er do well, he was harvesting grain all day and trying to shoot rabbits later.

 

[zooterkin]

That shouldn't be an issue for the Court.

No, I wasn't implying it was a factor in whether there were grounds for an appeal, it was a more basic question about the case, as it's not one I've really read much about before.

 

[LondonJohn]

Weren't both calls to the police?

I thought the first (alleged) call was from the farmhouse to Bamber's house. This was the pretext for Bamber to become concerned and to then call the police. Otherwise, how would he have known (per his version of events) that "Sheila was going berserk"? And how/why would Bamber have called the police at all that night, if he hadn't "found out" about what was happening at the farm? The police didn't call Bamber - he called them.

I think Bamber may well have thought about, and discounted, the idea of doing the shootings then just going quickly home and doing absolutely nothing until the next morning, whereupon, on the pretext of trundling over to the farm on a routine daytime casual visit, he would come upon the bloody scene. And I think he may have discounted that option on the grounds that this would be a more reasonable suspect, whereas if he called the police in "panic" and "concern" on the night he reasoned (IMO) that the police would probably never suspect that the true killer would have acted in that way.

IIRC there was also the matter of the phone being off the hook in the farmhouse, and Bamber telling police that his father either dropped the phone or had it knocked out of his hand, and after a while Bamber terminated the call at his end. But (again, if the above is correct) analogue residential lines at that time were controlled by the caller. If the caller neglected to terminate the call, the line to the called party stayed open, and there was nothing that the called party could do about it. The called party could not get a dial tone - they would have stayed connected to the calling party.

So if Bamber's version of events in respect of his father's phone call was to be believed, he should not have been able to make another outgoing call to the police 11-12 minutes later. What I think actually happened was that after placing the call to his own house from within the farmhouse (after having finished the murders, and on his way out), he put the phone handset back down onto the base (thus closing the line), but then thought it might look more authentic and dramatic if the phone were hanging off the hook, as if his father had had the phone knocked from his hand in a struggle.

Of course it's possible that, if that was what actually occurred (and presuming for a moment that Sheila was indeed the killer) that Sheila - having knocked the phone from her (much bigger and stronger...) father's hand, had had the wherewithall to depress the hook on the base unit with her hand in order to terminate the call and close the line. But then again, Bamber's version has his mentally-unstable sister going berserk in the house. Would someone in such a state really have been thinking clearly enough to depress the hook (while still not replacing the handset onto the base unit)?

 

[Vixen]

No need to go back and read because this is what happened, I have no doubt I have posted before.
Sheila Caffel retired to bed and found her period had begun.
She went downstairs and made a noise with water, buckets, and a tampon applicator was found in the living room.
Neville came downstairs to confirm the noise was not intruders, and the argument about the care of the twins was reignited.
Jeremy had left the gun loaded in the kitchen, it was seized by Sheila, Neville dialed Jeremy saying Sheila has gone crazy with the gun.
Sheila shot June in bed 5 times so Neville ascended the stairs, Sheila swivelled on the landing and shot Neville twice in the mouth, he turned and fled down the stairs was shot in the shoulder and elbow, finally collapsing in the coal scuttle. Sheila reloaded and shot him four times, returned upstairs to find June had managed to move towards the door, she shot her three more times. The twins slept through. She figured all was lost and they should be despatched and reloaded and shot them multiple times.
Then she washed herself, eventually the police surrounded, and when all was lost she tried to shoot herself leaning against the bedside cabinet, but the angle was wrong and she shot herself through the neck nowhere near the brain. She realigned and shot herself through the brain.

That is what happened.

Then the relatives orchestrated the mantelpiece scratches, they were desperate because the ne'er do well was in control of the farm.
Of course he was not a ne'er do well, he was harvesting grain all day and trying to shoot rabbits later.

That's convenient. Having arrived at a scene of murder and mayhem, the relatives said to each other, 'Looks like Jezza is going to inherit the farm now both the parents are slain. Oh, no. I know, let's put a scratch on the mantlepiece and pin the murders on Jez. I never did like him anyway.'

 

[zooterkin]

I thought the first (alleged) call was from the farmhouse to Bamber's house. This was the pretext for Bamber to become concerned and to then call the police. Otherwise, how would he have known (per his version of events) that "Sheila was going berserk"? And how/why would Bamber have called the police at all that night, if he hadn't "found out" about what was happening at the farm? The police didn't call Bamber - he called them.

I was going on what the newspaper article that Fixit referred to said, though they may have been confused, too.

"Bamber had argued two calls were made to police on the night of the murders, one from himself and another from his father, but the prosecution at his trial had alleged there was only one which was made by Bamber at 3.26am from the scene."

"His legal team argue it shows Bamber could not have made a 3.26am call from the farm and returned to his home 3.5 miles away in Goldhanger to make the second call, the Daily Mirror reported."