Jeremy Bamber

[Samson]

Jeremy Bamber must die in jail unless the case is enlivened. What better way than a plethora of critical thinkers here to engage?
I will post no links, because everyone should use the internet for their own research.
I think he is innocent, and if so, he should be released.

 

[Aepervius]

Jeremy Bamber must die in jail unless the case is enlivened. What better way than a plethora of critical thinkers here to engage?
I will post no links, because everyone should use the internet for their own research.
I think he is innocent, and if so, he should be released.

If you do not make the effort to tell us why you think he is innocent, then why should we spend hard earned free time to check your pet theory ? There are thousand of people pretending to be innocent, unless you tell us why we should have a better look at him, why should we ? After all you also held some of the death condemned bali 9 to be innocent too.

 

[Samson]

cent
If you do not make the effort to tell us why you think he is innocent, then why should we spend hard earned free time to check your pet theory ? There are thousand of people pretending to be innocent, unless you tell us why we should have a better look at him, why should we ? After all you also held some of the death condemned bali 9 to be innocent too.

No, they were guilty. Jane Mary Veloso is innocent from the same batch, but different case. She will be spared.
Jeremy Bamber seems innocent because the crime theory required him to prevail on his adopted sister to assume suicidal pose after a very violent slaughter of all her family members.

 

[Aepervius]

No, they were guilty. Jane Mary Veloso is innocent from the same batch, but different case. She will be spared.
Jeremy Bamber seems innocent because the crime theory required him to prevail on his adopted sister to assume suicidal pose after a very violent slaughter of all her family members.

People have done worst with only machete. Unless something far more solid is posted, I'll take the judiciary side. Just sayin'. See for example the doubt sowed in the other thread about a death penalty case with very dubious police action and plea deal.

 

[Samson]

People have done worst with only machete. Unless something far more solid is posted, I'll take the judiciary side. Just sayin'. See for example the doubt sowed in the other thread about a death penalty case with very dubious police action and plea deal.

Aepervius, Jeremy Bamber had to be sure he could kill his family, including Bambi's two children, and stage her suicide.
Let us imagine for a minute, one bullet whose trajectory was completely inconsistent with suicide by the psychopathic woman who had just been told by her adoptive parents that she was unfit to care for her children, and that they should be cared for by others.
No trajectory was discovered. How amazing. Jeremy Bamber supposedly got it just right, that the two bullet wounds she sustained were consistent with self inflicted harm.

 

[Aepervius]

Aepervius, Jeremy Bamber had to be sure he could kill his family, including Bambi's two children, and stage her suicide.
Let us imagine for a minute, one bullet whose trajectory was completely inconsistent with suicide by the psychopathic woman who had just been told by her adoptive parents that she was unfit to care for her children, and that they should be cared for by others.
No trajectory was discovered. How amazing. Jeremy Bamber supposedly got it just right, that the two bullet wounds she sustained were consistent with self inflicted harm.

You are arguing by incredulity. That is not a good argument.

Having a quick look at the wiki, I see that a bloody silencer was found in a drawer later. That is inconsistent with somebody trying to suicide. There is also serious doubt with other elements. That is enough for me. Because those are not doubt of incredulity, but rather standfast evidence.

I am sorry, but there is not much for his defense, if it all, except incredulity and that is not a good argument.

 

[Samson]

You are arguing by incredulity. That is not a good argument.

Having a quick look at the wiki, I see that a bloody silencer was found in a drawer later. That is inconsistent with somebody trying to suicide. There is also serious doubt with other elements. That is enough for me. Because those are not doubt of incredulity, but rather standfast evidence.

I am sorry, but there is not much for his defense, if it all, except incredulity and that is not a good argument.

It is not incredulity but a well worn pathway to wrongful conviction. The silencer was discovered by the inheritors, long after the crime scene was abandoned. But Anglolawyer is on the case. He may agree with you. I am incredulous that Sheila Bamber could be persuaded to pose for suicide after her family was killed.

Incredulous

 

[catsmate]

Jeremy Bamber must die in jail unless the case is enlivened.

Yes. Good.

What better way than a plethora of critical thinkers here to engage?

Many, many ways.

I will post no links, because everyone should use the internet for their own research.

I think he is innocent, and if so, he should be released.

Why?

 

[catsmate]

It is not incredulity but a well worn pathway to wrongful conviction. The silencer was discovered by the inheritors, long after the crime scene was abandoned. But Anglolawyer is on the case. He may agree with you. I am incredulous that Sheila Bamber could be persuaded to pose for suicide after her family was killed.

He's guilty. Reasons:
1. The non-existent phone call Bamber claimed to have received.
2. The lack of traces on Sheila's body and clothes consistent with repeatedly loading and firing the .22 rifle. Or indeed indicative of any violent actions.
3. The utterly ludicrous set of events necessary for Sheila to be guilty; she'd have had to mount the silencer in order to carry out the killings, the unmount it before killing herself (shooting herself twice) and put it away, while leaving only one identifiable fingerprint on the rifle.
4. It appears unlikely that Sheila (a small and lightly built woman under the influence of haloperidol) would have been able to carry out the violent assault on her physically fit and far larger father.
5. There is only the unsupported word of Bamber that Sheila had any experience with firearms, no supporting evidence or witnesses have ever been produced. Thus it's highly unlikely she could have carried out the assault which would have required multiple, rapid, reloads of the rifle.
6. There is no evidence to support Bamber's account of his actions that night, no-one saw him cycle to the farm, there was no trace on his clothing of him being in a fight.
7. The re-positioning of the phones in the farmhouse is interesting; the handset that was normally on Nevill Bamber’s bedside table had been removed from that room and substituted for the kitchen phone, which was hidden downstairs.
8. Bamber had a strong motive, in fact two. Hatred of his adoptive mother and a desire for money. Remember he'd carried out a burglery a few months earlier and wanted his parents' money. If Sheila had acted out of psychotic rage this wouldn't have happened, it does fit well with the scenario of a pre-planned murder for gain by Bamber.
8a. Nevill Bamber had earlier confided in Barbara Wilson (the farm secretary) that he suspected Jeremy was planning to kill him.

 

[Samson]

He's guilty. Reasons:
1. The non-existent phone call Bamber claimed to have received.
2. The lack of traces on Sheila's body and clothes consistent with repeatedly loading and firing the .22 rifle. Or indeed indicative of any violent actions.
3. The utterly ludicrous set of events necessary for Sheila to be guilty; she'd have had to mount the silencer in order to carry out the killings, the unmount it before killing herself (shooting herself twice) and put it away, while leaving only one identifiable fingerprint on the rifle.
4. It appears unlikely that Sheila (a small and lightly built woman under the influence of haloperidol) would have been able to carry out the violent assault on her physically fit and far larger father.
5. There is only the unsupported word of Bamber that Sheila had any experience with firearms, no supporting evidence or witnesses have ever been produced. Thus it's highly unlikely she could have carried out the assault which would have required multiple, rapid, reloads of the rifle.
6. There is no evidence to support Bamber's account of his actions that night, no-one saw him cycle to the farm, there was no trace on his clothing of him being in a fight.
7. The re-positioning of the phones in the farmhouse is interesting; the handset that was normally on Nevill Bamber’s bedside table had been removed from that room and substituted for the kitchen phone, which was hidden downstairs.
8. Bamber had a strong motive, in fact two. Hatred of his adoptive mother and a desire for money. Remember he'd carried out a burglery a few months earlier and wanted his parents' money. If Sheila had acted out of psychotic rage this wouldn't have happened, it does fit well with the scenario of a pre-planned murder for gain by Bamber.
8a. Nevill Bamber had earlier confided in Barbara Wilson (the farm secretary) that he suspected Jeremy was planning to kill him.

These are all intriguing points, particularly 8a.
Can you flesh this out, because if factual, it is problematic.

How interesting that
1. Sheila Bamber came to stay the weekend with her kids, and was told she was an unfit mother.
2. Jeremy Bamber had murderous intentions towards his father.

In a case as parallel as I can imagine, 23 year old David Bain was accused of killing his mother, two sisters and brother, before successfully staging the suicide of his father.

The father did it.

David Bain was supposed to have concocted a plan with no chance of success in the real world. Hell, killing one person and getting away with it is hard, but five? Jeremy Bamber's plan was worse. He had to kill everyone then stage a suicide where there was no wiggle room for failure. One bullet angle inconsistent with suicide meant the plan failed, and there was a very violent fracas before he persuaded his sister to obediently be killed.
I don't buy it, because there is a far more logical alternative crime scene.
Just like the Bain family case.

 

[catsmate]

These are all intriguing points, particularly 8a.
Can you flesh this out, because if factual, it is problematic.

It's in her statements to police which weren't admitted at the time as they fell under the hearsay rule. Perhaps you should "use the internet for [your] own research".

How interesting that
1. Sheila Bamber came to stay the weekend with her kids, and was told she was an unfit mother.

She had mental problems and was being treated for them.
She wasn't told on that occasion that "she was an unfit mother" as the letter to her adoptive father from her ex-husband wasn't sent at that time.
Further I suggest you address the evidence from the medical professionals, who were treating her, and from her ex-husband, that she wasn't likely to have engaged in murderous violence, especially towards her father and children.

2. Jeremy Bamber had murderous intentions towards his father.

He hated his adoptive parents, confessed to his then girlfriend and wanted money (hence his earlier criminality)

In a case as parallel as I can imagine, 23 year old David Bain was accused of killing his mother, two sisters and brother, before successfully staging the suicide of his father.

Instead of invoking supposed parallels why not deal with the mass of evidence of Bamber's guilt?

The father did it.

Right...
You clearly know nothing about the case if you can make such a ridiculous assertion.

David Bain was supposed to have concocted a plan with no chance of success in the real world. Hell, killing one person and getting away with it is hard, but five?

Utterly irrelevant. Why not deal with the case you brought up?

Jeremy Bamber's plan was worse. He had to kill everyone then stage a suicide where there was no wiggle room for failure.

Yep and he didn't do a very good job. Most of the investigating officers saw straight through his attempt. As did the court and the appeals courts.

One bullet angle inconsistent with suicide meant the plan failed, and there was a very violent fracas before he persuaded his sister to obediently be killed.

Again study the case before engaging in silly hyperbole.

I don't buy it, because there is a far more logical alternative crime scene.
Just like the Bain family case.

Again with the irrelevant parallels, you seem rather obsessed. And what exactly is your "far more logical alternative"?

I note Samson that you haven't addressed any of the following points:
1. The phony phone call.
2. The lack of forensic evidence on Sheila's clothes, or on her fathers'.
3. The matter of the moving telephones. This especially mitigates against your apparent belief in Nevill's guilt.

Nor have you elucidated a timeline that explains the events of that night or a motive for Nevill to murder his wide, daughter and grandchildren, nor why Bamber then told police his sister was the killer.

 

[MikeG]

Well, at last!

I'm glad you lot have finally got around to this drama. I've taken an interest in it for years, without coming to any sort of conclusion. The reason for my interest is that this happened in a village near me, and the pub-talk has always been that he is innocent. There was a BBC documentary many years ago in which police incompetence, "lost" evidence, scene of crime photos which didn't tally with police statements, and so on, were aired. At the very least, even if Jeremy Bamber is guilty, the police come out of the story fairly badly, it seems.

Now......get to it, and don't bicker. I'm watching with interest.

 

[catsmate]

Well, at last!

I'm glad you lot have finally got around to this drama. I've taken an interest in it for years, without coming to any sort of conclusion. The reason for my interest is that this happened in a village near me, and the pub-talk has always been that he is innocent. There was a BBC documentary many years ago in which police incompetence, "lost" evidence, scene of crime photos which didn't tally with police statements, and so on, were aired. At the very least, even if Jeremy Bamber is guilty, the police come out of the story fairly badly, it seems.

Now......get to it, and don't bicker. I'm watching with interest.

I've also had a long term interest in the case. And I agree that the investigation was poorly managed, mainly down to Bamber being a charismatic psychopath and the utter incompetence of DCI Jones. However the case against Bamber is quite solid and has withstood several appeal attempts and a number of media investigations.
I'm waiting for Sampson to address any of my earlier points or create a cohesive alternative explanation.

 

[MikeG]

Catsmate.....perhaps you would comment on the report of Peter Sutherst, a forensic photographic expert, who concluded that a number of scenes of crimes photos showed that some of the evidence given at the trial, particularly about scratches on the mantlepiece, was false (by comparing police photos on the day with photos taken weeks and months later), and that the scratches appeared to have been made later? Also with regard to evidence that Sheila's body had been moved by police officers, and then re-arranged for photos.

 

[Desert Fox]

I love the arguments which try to make Shelia completely incompetent to handle a .22 rifle.

 

[Samson]

It's in her statements to police which weren't admitted at the time as they fell under the hearsay rule. Perhaps you should "use the internet for [your] own research".


She had mental problems and was being treated for them.
She wasn't told on that occasion that "she was an unfit mother" as the letter to her adoptive father from her ex-husband wasn't sent at that time.
Further I suggest you address the evidence from the medical professionals, who were treating her, and from her ex-husband, that she wasn't likely to have engaged in murderous violence, especially towards her father and children.


He hated his adoptive parents, confessed to his then girlfriend and wanted money (hence his earlier criminality)


Instead of invoking supposed parallels why not deal with the mass of evidence of Bamber's guilt?


Right...
You clearly know nothing about the case if you can make such a ridiculous assertion.


Utterly irrelevant. Why not deal with the case you brought up?


Yep and he didn't do a very good job. Most of the investigating officers saw straight through his attempt. As did the court and the appeals courts.


Again study the case before engaging in silly hyperbole.


Again with the irrelevant parallels, you seem rather obsessed. And what exactly is your "far more logical alternative"?

I note Samson that you haven't addressed any of the following points:
1. The phony phone call.
2. The lack of forensic evidence on Sheila's clothes, or on her fathers'.
3. The matter of the moving telephones. This especially mitigates against your apparent belief in Nevill's guilt.

Nor have you elucidated a timeline that explains the events of that night or a motive for Nevill to murder his wide, daughter and grandchildren, nor why Bamber then told police his sister was the killer.

I said Robin Bain killed his family, not Neville Bamber. I am not introducing any left field theory. I have just read Julie Mugford's statement, it is very long and detailed, and I am not so sure of Bamber's innocence. Mainly because it would make her the most vindictive jilted lover in history.
The problem remains however. What was Sheila doing while Bamber was on the alleged murderous rampage? If she was sleeping then there is some chance the plot worked, but if she awoke, how did he persuade her to pose for suicide?

Here is the statement

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=284.0

 

[Desert Fox]

I said Robin Bain killed his family, not Neville Bamber. I am not introducing any left field theory. I have just read Julie Mugford's statement, it is very long and detailed, and I am not so sure of Bamber's innocence. Mainly because it would make her the most vindictive jilted lover in history.
The problem remains however. What was Sheila doing while Bamber was on the alleged murderous rampage? If she was sleeping then there is some chance the plot worked, but if she awoke, how did he persuade her to pose for suicide?

Here is the statement

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=284.0

I have been hoping to try to avoid what witnesses say and figure out what can be gleamed from the crime scene. I would really like to find as neutral a source as possible on what the crime scene actually displayed and what can be found out from the bodies.

For example, if Shelia died hours after the others (as there appears to be some indications), it does not matter at all what Mugford said.

People who listen to the Norfolk Four confess are often prejudiced by their confessions but the simple thing is that the crime scene indicates a lone attacker.

 

[Samson]

I have been hoping to try to avoid what witnesses say and figure out what can be gleamed from the crime scene. I would really like to find as neutral a source as possible on what the crime scene actually displayed and what can be found out from the bodies.

For example, if Shelia died hours after the others (as there appears to be some indications), it does not matter at all what Mugford said.

People who listen to the Norfolk Four confess are often prejudiced by their confessions but the simple thing is that the crime scene indicates a lone attacker.

I agree generally. I see irreconcilable features describing the events as suggested must have occurred with either suspect.
This is a real brain teaser, and a concensus might emerge here if enough shoulders drive the wheel.

 

[catsmate]

Catsmate.....perhaps you would comment on the report of Peter Sutherst, a forensic photographic expert, who concluded that a number of scenes of crimes photos showed that some of the evidence given at the trial, particularly about scratches on the mantlepiece, was false (by comparing police photos on the day with photos taken weeks and months later), and that the scratches appeared to have been made later? Also with regard to evidence that Sheila's body had been moved by police officers, and then re-arranged for photos.

Sutherst's conclusions are rather over-emphesised; firstly the details of the silencer scratches, while damning, is only one element of the case against Bamber. There is no doubt the investigation, especially the performance of DCI Jones, was poor.

I note that Sutherst was utterly unable to convince the CCRC five years ago.

I love the arguments which try to make Shelia completely incompetent to handle a .22 rifle.

Has anyone made such a claim? Certainly no-one claiming she was guilty has shown how she could have handed the rifle so competently (and leaving no traces on her skin or clothes) as to kill her parents in the manner indicated, nor how she battered her father to death despite the disparity in physical size.

 

[catsmate]

I said Robin Bain killed his family, not Neville Bamber.

Then I suggest you post more clearly and refrain from dragging in other, irrelevant, cases. If you want to discuss the Bain case start a thread on it.

I am not introducing any left field theory. I have just read Julie Mugford's statement, it is very long and detailed, and I am not so sure of Bamber's innocence. Mainly because it would make her the most vindictive jilted lover in history.

Yes.

The problem remains however. What was Sheila doing while Bamber was on the alleged murderous rampage?

Asleep.

If she was sleeping then there is some chance the plot worked, but if she awoke, how did he persuade her to pose for suicide?

I suggest you look into the evidence for Bamber's planning of the massacre, i.e. his selection of a night when his nephews (and obstructions to his inheritance) would be present and conversions with Colin and Nevill regarding Sheila and her medication.
I suspect if she'd been awake Bamber would have threatened her children.

Here is the statement
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=284.0

Yes, I've seen it. It reinforces Bamber's preparation and planning for the murders, and his premeditated attempt to incriminate Sheila.

I agree generally. I see irreconcilable features describing the events as suggested must have occurred with either suspect.
This is a real brain teaser, and a concensus might emerge here if enough shoulders drive the wheel.

Not really. The faked phone call is immensely suspicious, the lack of belief in Sheila's capacity for violence towards her father and children and Bamber's lies regarding Sheila's familiarity with firearms; all-in-all they point to one conclusion, that Jeremy Bamber murdered five people primarily motivated by financial gain.

 

[Desert Fox]

I note that Sutherst was utterly unable to convince the CCRC five years ago.

That is called an argument from authority. There are plenty of cases where you have an innocent defendant and the courts rejects every item of evidence.

Has anyone made such a claim? Certainly no-one claiming she was guilty has shown how she could have handed the rifle so competently (and leaving no traces on her skin or clothes) as to kill her parents in the manner indicated, nor how she battered her father to death despite the disparity in physical size.

If were to think for half a moment, you would realize that your arguments can be explained with a few moments of thoughts.
1. A child can handle a 22 just fine. There is about zero recoil. She lived a farmer's household and likely had experience with firearms anyway.
2. I just went to the range and shot my .22 pistol. The weapon leaves minimal residue. A rifle will be even cleaner. Besides, most people may not be religious on the forum but I am sure they have heard of Pontius Pilate. According to one of the bible stories, what did he do after condemning Jesus?
3. People do not fight back real well after having several bullets in them.

 

[catsmate]

That is called an argument from authority. There are plenty of cases where you have an innocent defendant and the courts rejects every item of evidence.

It'd help if the defense released the full details of his testimony.

Andy Laws, another Imagery Analyst, quite comprehensively demolished Sutherst's testimony; showing that the pictures were taken at too great a distance to show the scratches or paint flecks. Hence it was a simple matter for the courts to dismiss because of the circumstances.
Even Bamber's lawyers dropped the Sutherst material from their second CCRC application.

Certainly Sutherst's testimony is rather overblown; the oft quoted remark about the silencer scratches not being present in the crime scene photos was explained by him not using the close-up images but rather the larger area pictures of the Aga. The pictures of the scratches, which Bamber's apologists were so enthused about, weren't taken until a later examination of the scene when their significance was realised.

If were to think for half a moment, you would realize that your arguments can be explained with a few moments of thoughts.
1. A child can handle a 22 just fine. There is about zero recoil. She lived a farmer's household and likely had experience with firearms anyway.

Yet no-one can ever recall her handling a firearm. Ever. When it comes to firearms culture the UK is nothing like the USA.
Further Sheila would have had to reload at least twice, under immense pressure.

2. I just went to the range and shot my .22 pistol. The weapon leaves minimal residue. A rifle will be even cleaner.

But still leaves residue, even if you can't see it (that's why there are tests). She (supposedly) fired 25 shots remember.

Besides, most people may not be religious on the forum but I am sure they have heard of Pontius Pilate. According to one of the bible stories, what did he do after condemning Jesus?

Please don't try an lecture me, it merely exposes your ignorance. Washing does not reliably eliminate even powder residue. Further there was no trace of it on her clothes, except in the immediate vicinity of the entry wounds.
And just why would Sheila have bothered to wash if she'd just killed four people and planned to kill herself?

3. People do not fight back real well after having several bullets in them.

Yet he also took several severe blows (including a fractured skull) and made it from his bedroom downstairs. After being beaten he was shot four times in the head, which Dr. Vanezis listed as the fatal injury.
And Sheila supposedly did this without sustaining any injury herself.

 

[Desert Fox]

Let us start with the GSR
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNGSR.html
Delay in obtaining residues, movement, or washing of the body prior to autopsy will diminish or destroy gunshot residues. (Molina et al, 2007) A rapid loss in numbers of GSR particles occurs from 1 to 3 hours post firearm discharge, though maximum recovery times of 1 to 48 hours have been reported. (Dalby et al, 2010)

This is detecting GSR with modern (well, at least 2007) not slapdash 1985 level detection methods.

So it appears as if you were definitely wrong that washing cannot eliminate GSR.

1. A .22 rifle leaves minimal GSR in many cases.
2. She may have washed her hands
3. Over three hours had gone by since the gun had been fired

 

[catsmate]

Let us start with the GSR
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNGSR.html
Delay in obtaining residues, movement, or washing of the body prior to autopsy will diminish or destroy gunshot residues. (Molina et al, 2007) A rapid loss in numbers of GSR particles occurs from 1 to 3 hours post firearm discharge, though maximum recovery times of 1 to 48 hours have been reported. (Dalby et al, 2010)

This is detecting GSR with modern (well, at least 2007) not slapdash 1985 level detection methods.

So it appears as if you were definitely wrong that washing cannot eliminate GSR.

1. A .22 rifle leaves minimal GSR in many cases.
2. She may have washed her hands
3. Over three hours had gone by since the gun had been fired

None of which answers why she'd have done so (and not changed her clothes which were also residue free).

Also the primary detection method for powder particles is microscopic so please don't throw around terms like "slapdash 1985 level detection methods" merely because your opinions require there to be no residue.

Finally remember that your theory requires Sheila to fire two shots after washing her hands (the two that killed her); yet there still was no powder residue on her hands.....

It's almost as if someone else did all the shooting.

 

[Desert Fox]

None of which answers why she'd have done so (and not changed her clothes which were also residue free).

Also the primary detection method for powder particles is microscopic so please don't throw around terms like "slapdash 1985 level detection methods" merely because your opinions require there to be no residue.

Finally remember that your theory requires Sheila to fire two shots after washing her hands (the two that killed her); yet there still was no powder residue on her hands.....

It's almost as if someone else did all the shooting.

Congratulations, you just demonstrated Moving the Goalposts.

The articles argued that simply time or movement can destroy gunshot residue which would already be minimal from a .22 rifle.

By the way, a standard .22 LR has only 1.25 grains or something like .08 grams of powder using modern smokeless powders. It is minuscule and if they were using subsonic, it would probably be less.

 

[anglolawyer]

Well, I'm lining up with Catsmate. Guilty. As I'm already discussing this in two other places I'm not sure I want to get too involved here. My position is highly provisional as there is much I don't know about the case but essentially:

1 I believe Julie Mugford, and
2 I completely fail to buy the three phone calls:
(a) Nevill to Bamber
(b) Bamber to Julie, and
(c) Bamber to the cops

(c) and (b) may be in the wrong order but that's Bamber's fault as he contradicted himself about who he called first.

That said, the case was submerged beneath an all but impenetrable blanker of police incompetence certainly and perhaps, as some argue, corruption, so getting to the bottom of it is far from easy.

MikeG - can we have more of the local gossip please.

 

[Desert Fox]

Well, I'm lining up with Catsmate. Guilty. As I'm already discussing this in two other places I'm not sure I want to get too involved here. My position is highly provisional as there is much I don't know about the case but essentially:

1 I believe Julie Mugford, and
2 I completely fail to buy the three phone calls:
(a) Nevill to Bamber
(b) Bamber to Julie, and
(c) Bamber to the cops

(c) and (b) may be in the wrong order but that's Bamber's fault as he contradicted himself about who he called first.

That said, the case was submerged beneath an all but impenetrable blanker of police incompetence certainly and perhaps, as some argue, corruption, so getting to the bottom of it is far from easy.

MikeG - can we have more of the local gossip please.

I kind of want to divorce myself from what anybody said and only look at what the crime scene tells us. As far as I can tell, there is at least nothing about the crime scene that indicates that Shelia could not have done this.

There was a similar issue with the Norfolk Four. Every indication was that the rape and murder was committed by a single individual but nobody could get over the confessions.

Even if Bamber is guilty, Catmate's reasons that I have read are basically just bad. I consider getting the right conclusions for the wrong reasons pretty much useless.

 

[anglolawyer]

I kind of want to divorce myself from what anybody said and only look at what the crime scene tells us. As far as I can tell, there is at least nothing about the crime scene that indicates that Shelia could not have done this.

There was a similar issue with the Norfolk Four. Every indication was that the rape and murder was committed by a single individual but nobody could get over the confessions.

Even if Bamber is guilty, Catmate's reasons that I have read are basically just bad.

Well, sorry, but you can't do this however much you want to. She is a key witness. Without her the case hardly stands up. Essex police certainly were not going to take it further until she came forth. In that sense, she is analogous to the bodies bobbing up out of SF Bay in the Scott Peterson case. She completely changes the landscape and her evidence must be weighed.

Still, if you find something in the crime scene that makes it impossible for Bamber to be the culprit, then you win. No one has come with anything yet.

 

[Desert Fox]

Well, sorry, but you can't do this however much you want to. She is a key witness. Without her the case hardly stands up. Essex police certainly were not going to take it further until she came forth. In that sense, she is analogous to the bodies bobbing up out of SF Bay in the Scott Peterson case. She completely changes the landscape and her evidence must be weighed.

Still, if you find something in the crime scene that makes it impossible for Bamber to be the culprit, then you win. No one has come with anything yet.

I understand your argument but it seems as if you are accepting that there is nothing that indicates that Shelia could not have committed the crime.

One of my biggest pet peeve is when you run against people who argue that she could not have done it.

One item which is hard to explain is that as a gun owner (of a .22), there are many dynamics of the crime scene which indicate that Shelia is far more likely to be the solo shooter.

 

[MikeG]

........nor how she battered her father to death despite the disparity in physical size.

Her father was shot (from memory) 4 times, including a number of times in the head and neck. I'm not sure that "battered her father to death" is a fair reflection of the actuality.

 

[MikeG]

.........One item which is hard to explain is that as a gun owner (of a .22), there are many dynamics of the crime scene which indicate that Shelia is far more likely to be the solo shooter.

You may have been short of time with this posting, perhaps, but elucidating those "dynamics of the crime scene" implicating Sheila is something of a prerequisite for having your ideas on the matter discussed further, I'd have thought.

 

[MikeG]

.....MikeG - can we have more of the local gossip please.

Well, hot at the moment is the local farmer's wife who appears to be having an affair with her head stablegirl. Apparently they were seen emerging............oh sorry, you meant about the Bamber case......

The pub discussions on the matter don't stand up to much scrutiny, even in the pub. Mainly to do with how troubled Sheila was.........that she couldn't take care of herself, let alone her kids. Jeremy Bamber seems to be universally disliked, mainly as being arrogant, but this doesn't seem to stand in the way of people saying he's been stitched up (there an element of critical thinking even in local pubs, sometimes!). Lots of people seem to get excited by the police log of the 'phone calls, which seem to support JB's version of the events and, it's said, weren't available as evidence in his trial. The general consensus, if there is such a thing, is that all his appeals have been dismissed because the judiciary ("the establishment") close ranks in these circumstances, and don't want to make fellow judges look bad. So, as well as critical thinking, pubs can be hot-beds of conspiracy.

 

[Desert Fox]

You may have been short of time with this posting, perhaps, but elucidating those "dynamics of the crime scene" implicating Sheila is something of a prerequisite for having your ideas on the matter discussed further, I'd have thought.

It was meant as a relatively quick response to Anglo.

One problem is that everything is about as clear as mud when it comes to this case.

First off, there were other weapons in the house. If I am trying to kill people, I am not using a .22. I have read that there were at least shotguns in the house. Might have been a 410 but still better than a .22. The 410 loaded with slug is about equal to the .45 ACP (my favorite round) in muzzle energy.

Getting back to a .22, it is a chancy weapon. You have to hit somebody perfectly to kill somebody. Neville is by far the biggest threat. I likely would unload on him until he goes down and then put one to the center of the skull to be sure.

Whomever did the shooting seemed to fire a few shots and Neville and then a few shots at June. It looks more like somebody going crazy not a deliberate act.

I speculate that there was an argument with Shelia having the rifle. June and Neville tried to talk to Shelia in order to calm her down. Somewhere, everything went crazy.

There are also elements of strange ritual. I took my .22 pistol to the range and shot off 100 rounds. I put my hand on front of the barrel and it was barely even warm. I think the weapon almost had to have been manually heated up such as putting it on a stove. Every indication is that his injuries were not constant with the moderator not being on the weapon either.

 

[MikeG]

It was meant as a relatively quick response to Anglo.

One problem is that everything is about as clear as mud when it comes to this case.

First off, there were other weapons in the house. If I am trying to kill people, I am not using a .22. I have read that there were at least shotguns in the house. Might have been a 410 but still better than a .22. The 410 loaded with slug is about equal to the .45 ACP (my favorite round) in muzzle energy.

Getting back to a .22, it is a chancy weapon. You have to hit somebody perfectly to kill somebody. Neville is by far the biggest threat. I likely would unload on him until he goes down and then put one to the center of the skull to be sure.

Whomever did the shooting seemed to fire a few shots and Neville and then a few shots at June. It looks more like somebody going crazy not a deliberate act.

I speculate that there was an argument with Shelia having the rifle. June and Neville tried to talk to Shelia in order to calm her down. Somewhere, everything went crazy.

There are also elements of strange ritual. I took my .22 pistol to the range and shot off 100 rounds. I put my hand on front of the barrel and it was barely even warm. I think the weapon almost had to have been manually heated up such as putting it on a stove. Every indication is that his injuries were not constant with the moderator not being on the weapon either.

I know nothing much about guns.....but couldn't the reason for choosing the .22 be that it had a silencer and a magazine? Whereas with a shotgun, one shot and everyone in the house is awake. Two shots and you're re-loading.

 

[anglolawyer]

Well, hot at the moment is the local farmer's wife who appears to be having an affair with her head stablegirl. Apparently they were seen emerging............oh sorry, you meant about the Bamber case......

The pub discussions on the matter don't stand up to much scrutiny, even in the pub. Mainly to do with how troubled Sheila was.........that she couldn't take care of herself, let alone her kids. Jeremy Bamber seems to be universally disliked, mainly as being arrogant, but this doesn't seem to stand in the way of people saying he's been stitched up (there an element of critical thinking even in local pubs, sometimes!). Lots of people seem to get excited by the police log of the 'phone calls, which seem to support JB's version of the events and, it's said, weren't available as evidence in his trial. The general consensus, if there is such a thing, is that all his appeals have been dismissed because the judiciary ("the establishment") close ranks in these circumstances, and don't want to make fellow judges look bad. So, as well as critical thinking, pubs can be hot-beds of conspiracy.

Well, that's still pretty interesting (the farmers wife and the stable girl especially!)

The records of the telephone calls seem to be a blind alley. The innocenters would have you believe Nevill got through to the cops but they seem to be misreading the documents and in the process invoking an extensive and puzzling conspiracy. It would certainly exonerate Bamber if this call could be shown to have been made, but I don't buy it.

As for the establishment cover up, I see two main areas of interest:

(1) the utter shambles of the enquiry may have led some to be tempted to twist the evidence against Bamber to ensure his conviction and cover up police mistakes, and

(2) the dealings, if any, between Julie Mugford and the DPP in order to secure her evidence.

Both are fertile avenues of enquiry, for sure, but neither requires Bamber to be innocent as some kind of opposite pole.

Keep your eyes and ears open down there willya?

 

[MikeG]

It would certainly exonerate Bamber if this call could be shown to have been made, but I don't buy it.

Isn't it ridiculous that something as easy as the police properly recording a phone conversation could lead to the difference between a whole life tariff and freedom?

As for the establishment cover up, I see two main areas of interest:

(1) the utter shambles of the enquiry may have led some to be tempted to twist the evidence against Bamber to ensure his conviction and cover up police mistakes, and

Indeed. Frankly, if I were to analyse my fence-sitting position, I would say I leant towards this being the most likely summary.

(2) the dealings, if any, between Julie Mugford and the DPP in order to secure her evidence.

Both are fertile avenues of enquiry, for sure, but neither requires Bamber to be innocent as some kind of opposite pole.

Very true. I doubt the DPP kept proper records of such dealings, but if they did, they would certainly be interesting.

Keep your eyes and ears open down there willya?

Especially with regard to the farmer's wife and her stable girl, I presume?

 

[The Atheist]

In a case as parallel as I can imagine, 23 year old David Bain was accused of killing his mother, two sisters and brother, before successfully staging the suicide of his father.

The father did it.

In your opinion, which is 100% incorrect in my view, and while the thread's about Bamber, there is an eerie coincidence with the Bain case:

2. The lack of traces on Sheila's body and clothes consistent with repeatedly loading and firing the .22 rifle. Or indeed indicative of any violent actions.

Just like Baino.

Do you specialise in cases where the murderer is actually guilty?

Seems to me catsmate has this one nailed:

3. The utterly ludicrous set of events necessary for Sheila to be guilty; she'd have had to mount the silencer in order to carry out the killings, the unmount it before killing herself (shooting herself twice) and put it away, while leaving only one identifiable fingerprint on the rifle.
4. It appears unlikely that Sheila (a small and lightly built woman under the influence of haloperidol) would have been able to carry out the violent assault on her physically fit and far larger father.
5. There is only the unsupported word of Bamber that Sheila had any experience with firearms, no supporting evidence or witnesses have ever been produced. Thus it's highly unlikely she could have carried out the assault which would have required multiple, rapid, reloads of the rifle.
6. There is no evidence to support Bamber's account of his actions that night, no-one saw him cycle to the farm, there was no trace on his clothing of him being in a fight.
7. The re-positioning of the phones in the farmhouse is interesting; the handset that was normally on Nevill Bamber’s bedside table had been removed from that room and substituted for the kitchen phone, which was hidden downstairs.
8. Bamber had a strong motive, in fact two. Hatred of his adoptive mother and a desire for money. Remember he'd carried out a burglery a few months earlier and wanted his parents' money. If Sheila had acted out of psychotic rage this wouldn't have happened, it does fit well with the scenario of a pre-planned murder for gain by Bamber.
8a. Nevill Bamber had earlier confided in Barbara Wilson (the farm secretary) that he suspected Jeremy was planning to kill him.

And you think only 8a is problematic?

 

[Desert Fox]

I know nothing much about guns.....but couldn't the reason for choosing the .22 be that it had a silencer and a magazine? Whereas with a shotgun, one shot and everyone in the house is awake. Two shots and you're re-loading.

Most 410 shotguns I know of are pump action so you have enough rounds to take everybody down.

I also however got into the mindset if all I had was a .22 to commit the crime.

 

[MikeG]

Most 410 shotguns I know of are pump action so you have enough rounds to take everybody down.

I also however got into the mindset if all I had was a .22 to commit the crime.

One thing I do know about shotguns is that most farmers here have double-barrelled breech-loading shotguns. In fact, I have never seen or heard of any other type in the area, and I've lived in the countryside all my life.

 

[Desert Fox]

One thing I do know about shotguns is that most farmers here have double-barrelled breech-loading shotguns. In fact, I have never seen or heard of any other type in the area, and I've lived in the countryside all my life.

Might I ask what the most common use of shotguns are in the UK countryside?
Mostly, this is just curiosity.

Otherwise, what about what I argued if I was using a .22 rifle. Neville was hurt, he would not have moved fast. Shelia, if she were crazed, might allow him to escape initially but do you thing Jeremy would?