Jeremy Bamber

[TomG]

So no evidence for your assertions. Again.

The problem is that WHF wasn't treated as a typical crime-scene at first. Carpets were ripped up, matresses were burned and the kitchen was scrubbed clean by the cops. So it's clear that potential evidence was destroyed or lost. By the time Jeremy was charged with the murders WHF had dramatically changed. So with little evidence to go on what do we have left.

Carol Anne Lee does a good job of assessing the personalities of both Jeremy and Sheila prior to the murders in her book. Both are neck and neck in delinquency stakes; however, I think Sheila gets the nod as the killer. I think the argument about the twins prior to the killings was significant. IMO Sheila shot the twins first with the thought that if She wasn't going to have them, then nobody was going to have them. The scenario unfolded from there.

Although I think that the evidence for the innocence of JB is compelling I think the appeal will fail and he won't be released. He will die in prison.

Hoots

 

[catsmate]

Hint:

This is in the genre
locked room murder mystery.

Yours to solve.

Nope. You're the one propounding the alternate narrative, you get to detail it.

 

[catsmate]

The problem is that WHF wasn't treated as a typical crime-scene at first. Carpets were ripped up, matresses were burned and the kitchen was scrubbed clean by the cops. So it's clear that potential evidence was destroyed or lost. By the time Jeremy was charged with the murders WHF had dramatically changed. So with little evidence to go on what do we have left.

While the scene wasn't properly preserved or managed your assertion that there is "little evidence to go on" is untrue.

Carol Anne Lee does a good job of assessing the personalities of both Jeremy and Sheila prior to the murders in her book. Both are neck and neck in delinquency stakes;

Is this based on Lee's book? Because it's utter nonsense. She outlines an excellent case against Bamber.

however, I think Sheila gets the nod as the killer.

That's your opinion.

I think the argument about the twins prior to the killings was significant.

The one Bamber provoked?

IMO Sheila shot the twins first with the thought that if She wasn't going to have them, then nobody was going to have them. The scenario unfolded from there.

Again opinion and one that's not really supported by the evidence.

Although I think that the evidence for the innocence of JB is compelling

I think the appeal will fail and he won't be released. He will die in prison.

Good.

 

[Samson]

In answer to both posts, the shootings happened in this order.

1. June Bamber
2. Neville Bamber
3. June Bamber finished off.
4. The twins.
5. Sheila Caffel.

 

[TomG]

While the scene wasn't properly preserved or managed your assertion that there is "little evidence to go on" is untrue.

What hard evidence is there to implicate JB in the murders?

Is this based on Lee's book? Because it's utter nonsense. She outlines an excellent case against Bamber.

She presents a solid case as much against Sheila as there is for JB right up until the actual day of the murders.

That's your opinion.

I think its sound enough. You didn't do much to disprove it.

The one Bamber provoked?

What's the evidence for that?

Again opinion and one that's not really supported by the evidence.

What's the evidence to the contrary?

Your smiley doesn't disprove anything

Good

It's only good if you think that miscarriages of justice are great fun. I tend to think that justice isn't the main issue in this case.

 

[Essexman]

What hard evidence is there to implicate JB in the murders?



She presents a solid case as much against Sheila as there is for JB right up until the actual day of the murders.



I think its sound enough. You didn't do much to disprove it.



What's the evidence for that?



What's the evidence to the contrary?



Your smiley doesn't disprove anything



It's only good if you think that miscarriages of justice are great fun. I tend to think that justice isn't the main issue in this case.

Looks like you won't be getting any answers.

 

[TomG]

Complicity from Sheila?

Apparently Sheila's bed had not been slept in. So after JB had bribed the dogs not to bark while he allegedly climbed through the bathroom window, he would have almost certainly encountered Sheila at some stage. Why didn't Sheila run about screaming that there was an intruder? Why didn't she protect her children? There must have been some complicity from Sheila for events to transpire the way they did, IF JB was the killer.

Hoots

 

[Andy_Ross]

Apparently Sheila's bed had not been slept in. So after JB had bribed the dogs not to bark while he allegedly climbed through the bathroom window, he would have almost certainly encountered Sheila at some stage. Why didn't Sheila run about screaming that there was an intruder? Why didn't she protect her children? There must have been some complicity from Sheila for events to transpire the way they did, IF JB was the killer.

Hoots

Maybe there was, then he double crossed her and killed her anyway.

Why would the dogs bark if they know him?

Why would she scream if she knows him?

 

[TomG]

Maybe there was, then he double crossed her and killed her anyway.

Why would the dogs bark if they know him?

Why would she scream if she knows him?

Maybe this, maybe that, maybe the other? The bottom line is that the family were killed by a sequence of actual events, not "maybes". So I'd expect that by this time anyone asserting the guilt of JB would have it worked out by now.

Dogs tend to know a persons habits, that's when they don't bark. If JB was going to carry out the crime by stealth then it had to be guaranteed that both dogs didn't bark. You'd have to argue that JB habitually entered the bathroom window by stealth on a regular basis in the middle of the night for the dogs to be guaranteed not to bark. Remember, if the normally yappy Crispy is alerted then JB is at a huge disadvantage since he may not get the gun first.

If Sheila wasn't sleeping she may have heard someone entering the bathroom window. How would she know that it was JB until she saw him? When she did finally encounter JB what happens next?

How would JB know if the gun was going to be where he left it? There are children present at WHF so what if either June or Sheila had put the gun out of harms way from the twins? Now JB is in a position where his plan is stymied. If that's the case, what is plan B? These are things that JB would have had to consider on his way to commit the murders.

Hoots

 

[Samson]

Maybe there was, then he double crossed her and killed her anyway. Why would the dogs bark if they know him?

Why would she scream if she knows him?

Which speaks to the complicity in idiocy the guilter community require to prolong this judicial hoax.

 

[Samson]

Maybe this, maybe that, maybe the other? The bottom line is that the family were killed by a sequence of actual events, not "maybes". So I'd expect that by this time anyone asserting the guilt of JB would have it worked out by now.

Dogs tend to know a persons habits, that's when they don't bark. If JB was going to carry out the crime by stealth then it had to be guaranteed that both dogs didn't bark. You'd have to argue that JB habitually entered the bathroom window by stealth on a regular basis in the middle of the night for the dogs to be guaranteed not to bark. Remember, if the normally yappy Crispy is alerted then JB is at a huge disadvantage since he may not get the gun first.

If Sheila wasn't sleeping she may have heard someone entering the bathroom window. How would she know that it was JB until she saw him? When she did finally encounter JB what happens next?

How would JB know if the gun was going to be where he left it? There are children present at WHF so what if either June or Sheila had put the gun out of harms way from the twins? Now JB is in a position where his plan is stymied. If that's the case, what is plan B? These are things that JB would have had to consider on his way to commit the murders.

Hoots

The owner of the ridiculous Bamber red forum solves the Sheila problem by saying he used farm chemicals to sedate her.
This of course leaves no trace for the autopsy.

 

[TomG]

The owner of the ridiculous Bamber red forum solves the Sheila problem by saying he used farm chemicals to sedate her.
This of course leaves no trace for the autopsy.

It sounds like a narrative of convenience when nothing factual exists. We have the fact that Sheila's bed had not been slept in. If that's the case she may have been downstairs in the kitchen or living room. If that's the case she would have had the light on. Would JB have been so stupid or audacious that he didn't even bother to do a quick reconnoitre of the building to make sure all lights were out?

WHF was an isolated farm with little or no external noises. If JB had entered through the bathroom window he would more than likely have been heard by Sheila. If so, what was the ensuing conversation?

The convenient alternative would be for Sheila to be in an upstairs room, in the dark with her fingers in her ears...Right? Oh, and the dogs conveniently didn't bark either.

Hoots

 

[Samson]

It sounds like a narrative of convenience when nothing factual exists. We have the fact that Sheila's bed had not been slept in. If that's the case she may have been downstairs in the kitchen or living room. If that's the case she would have had the light on. Would JB have been so stupid or audacious that he didn't even bother to do a quick reconnoitre of the building to make sure all lights were out?

WHF was an isolated farm with little or no external noises. If JB had entered through the bathroom window he would more than likely have been heard by Sheila. If so, what was the ensuing conversation?

The convenient alternative would be for Sheila to be in an upstairs room, in the dark with her fingers in her ears...Right? Oh, and the dogs conveniently didn't bark either.

Hoots

Your signature line works perfectly in this case.

 

[Fixit]

Tom G. Just a comment about the inquiry. It might seem bad today but for the times it was probably consistent. One factor you have overlooked is that it was treated as a murder/suicide until the family started to produce its own mysterious evidence. Then I think it was "oh whoops" for a police trying to change the facts pointing toward murder. The new facts are the most inconsistent with the crime scene and early searches which is another clue. I hope that point is made at the CCRC because it is hard to refute.

 

[TomG]

A Convenient conviction?

Tom G. Just a comment about the inquiry. It might seem bad today but for the times it was probably consistent. One factor you have overlooked is that it was treated as a murder/suicide until the family started to produce its own mysterious evidence. Then I think it was "oh whoops" for a police trying to change the facts pointing toward murder. The new facts are the most inconsistent with the crime scene and early searches which is another clue. I hope that point is made at the CCRC because it is hard to refute.

It runs deeper than that as far as I'm concerned especially on an psychological level. Looks who's set to benefit if JB is convicted of the murder of his family. First off the hook is the farming community and the relatives. They get to keep WHF and and that land that may well be have sold from under their feet. Mugford's teaching career is saved from potential ruin by cheque book fraud and other charges if she plays ball with the law. The GP who halved Sheila's haloperidol can breathe again. Colin Caffell is saved from a lifetime of potential guilt for abandoning his vulnerable wife. The cops themselves are saved from a potentially harmful investigation into their handling of the events where lives were lost that might have been saved. Well...They were all conveniently dead anyway your honor. Now the tricky situation of Sheila's one GSW becoming two is JB's responsibility not the cops. Phew! That's a relief.

JB is now in prison and no longer around to make trouble for everyone. That's convenient for a lot of people. Good upstanding pillars of the community are spared while the cuckoo pays the price. The individuals who turned against JB and conspired against him may have thought they were morally doing the right thing collectively for the greater good. VERY convenient.

Hoots

 

[Nessie]

There is an active Jeremy Bamber twitter account (@Bambertweets), that serves to remind the police, prosecutors and his relatives about the evidence that at least suggests his conviction is unsafe.

 

[Garrison]

There is an active Jeremy Bamber twitter account (@Bambertweets), that serves to remind the police, prosecutors and his relatives about the evidence that at least suggests his conviction is unsafe.

Well that should be easily reduced to 280 characters...

 

[catsmate]

Well that should be easily reduced to 280 characters...

Amazing how the people supporting Bamber's claims soon head off into the sunset of giant conspiracies of his relatives.

 

[Samson]

Amazing how the people supporting Bamber's claims soon head off into the sunset of giant conspiracies of his relatives.

Forget Bamber's claims.
It is hard to be omniscient from a cage.

 

[llwyd]

What makes me bit queasy about this case is that it's so easy for debators to go for stereotyping the mentally ill. It should not be forgotten that they are not more violent than the general population and that murderous behaviour is just as rare with them (and with the added factor of truly diminished responsibility). It's very easy to accuse and demonize Sheila. If she did this awful act, it really was an awful, sad tragedy.

This said I think the conviction is unsafe. Bamber might have done it (and he is not a very likeable character) but the police simply screwed up this case and there is plenty of reasonable doubt.