The New Zealand friend now lives on Waiheke Island and lied like a flatfish about Jeremy Bamber.Ditto.
The New Zealand friend now lives on Waiheke Island and lied like a flatfish about Jeremy Bamber.Ditto.
Ditto.
This is exactly not wild unsupported speculation.
Holly Goodhead is an admin on the Bamber red forum and did heavy lifting to prove with bullet casings , trajectories precisely how Sheila Caffel killed her family.
Link, please?
And yet neither you nor anyone else have actually provided, or demonstrated the existence of, your claimed reconstruction showing, as you claim, "precisely how Sheila Caffel killed her family".This was delivered in close detail on Injustice Anywhere forum over hundreds of posts.
The forum has disappeared but owned by Bruce Fisher who is a member here.
People who claim Bamber did this crime are a mob of tiresome idiots and should deliver their reconstruction.
And yet neither you nor anyone else have actually provided, or demonstrated the existence of, your claimed reconstruction showing, as you claim, "precisely how Sheila Caffel killed her family".
FFS you can't even manage to spell the poor woman's name correctly.
So no evidence for your assertions. Again.Mass killer and poor woman. Driven by drugs and madness and the fatal belief that a christian mother can tend to the family without screwing the odds.
The scratch under the mantle is alleged to have occured accidentally during a struggle between Bamber and his father.Watched the Channel 5 "White House Farm Murders: The New Evidence".
The police log entry about movement in the house, whilst Bamber was with the police outside. The other log entry about where the bodies were when the armed police entered. The search log entry showing no trace of a silencer in the cupboard. The DNA results for the silencer. The mark on the red fireplace that does not show in the initial crime scene photos. The two calls to the police by Bamber and his father.
If all of that had been disclosed to the jury during the trial, there is no way they would have convicted Bamber.
Watched the Channel 5 "White House Farm Murders: The New Evidence".
The police log entry about movement in the house, whilst Bamber was with the police outside. The other log entry about where the bodies were when the armed police entered. The search log entry showing no trace of a silencer in the cupboard. The DNA results for the silencer. The mark on the red fireplace that does not show in the initial crime scene photos. The two calls to the police by Bamber and his father.
If all of that had been disclosed to the jury during the trial, there is no way they would have convicted Bamber.
Watched the Channel 5 "White House Farm Murders: The New Evidence".
The police log entry about movement in the house, whilst Bamber was with the police outside. The other log entry about where the bodies were when the armed police entered. The search log entry showing no trace of a silencer in the cupboard. The DNA results for the silencer. The mark on the red fireplace that does not show in the initial crime scene photos. The two calls to the police by Bamber and his father.
If all of that had been disclosed to the jury during the trial, there is no way they would have convicted Bamber.
this has all been done to death in the thread already.
I gotta say your contribution to the thread so far is not up to snuff dear fellow.and round we go again.
Where it stops, no-one knows....and round we go again.
Where it stops, no-one knows....
Well, when Bamber dies in prison there will be a minor halt, but I'm sure his fanboys won't allow that to stop them.
and round we go again.
Always the same.It's clear you have nothing to add. Try solitaire.
Always the same.
Ignore the evidence.
So no evidence for your assertions. Again.
![]()
Hint:
This is in the genre
locked room murder mystery.
Yours to solve.
While the scene wasn't properly preserved or managed your assertion that there is "little evidence to go on" is untrue.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.
Is this based on Lee's book? Because it's utter nonsense. She outlines an excellent case against Bamber.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;
That's your opinion.however, I think Sheila gets the nod as the killer.
The one Bamber provoked?I think the argument about the twins prior to the killings was significant.
Again opinion and one that's not really supported by the evidence.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
Good.I think the appeal will fail and he won't be released. He will die in prison.
While the scene wasn't properly preserved or managed your assertion that there is "little evidence to go on" is untrue.
Is this based on Lee's book? Because it's utter nonsense. She outlines an excellent case against Bamber.
That's your opinion.
The one Bamber provoked?
Again opinion and one that's not really supported by the evidence.
Good
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.
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?
Which speaks to the complicity in idiocy the guilter community require to prolong this judicial hoax.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?
The owner of the ridiculous Bamber red forum solves the Sheila problem by saying he used farm chemicals to sedate her.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.
Your signature line works perfectly in this case.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
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.
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...
Forget Bamber's claims.
Amazing how the people supporting Bamber's claims soon head off into the sunset of giant conspiracies of his relatives.![]()