catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Jeremy Bamber
- Thread starter Samson
- Start date
What concerns me about the withheld evidence is how it happened. The protocol about such disputed evidence is for it to be judged at least by the Court with both sides having made submissions. There is a difference between inadmissible evidence and evidence which ought to be known by both sides and the Court, not just simply kept hidden instead. The courts have got something very wrong here.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,196
I know for sure in Scotland, and I think it is similar in England and Wales, that since Bamber was convicted, disclosure has been become far more prevalent. I wonder if Bamber would have been convicted if he was tried now and far more evidence was disclosed.
That's a very interesting question. From the details I remember without the peril of firing up an old computer the immunity from prosecution for the girlfriend was highly suspect and would doubtfully hold water today. An aggressive disclosure that could be made now could possibly deter a prosecution especially around the phone calls and the possibility of Sheila being alive when the house was surrounded. I don't recall the details of the pathologists arrival but that would be critically examined for TOD comparison between the bodies, finally the reconstructions, including in particular the trajectories of the various shots could have resulted in a finding of murder suicide.
In short, smart investigators - no charges.
A case such as Bamber doesn't have a barrel load of problems following a proper investigation. Amateur cops, willfully blind Courts being selective of evidence and a CCRC with a lack of forensic imagination = Bamber case.
I'm learning about these cases, secure the area and only allow in the specialist examiners. My interest in this case arose from blow back into rifle barrels from contact or close contact shots only to find the investigation was botched in a number of ways and public opinion was captured by incorrect information.
I'm puzzled by the fact that some reference to the 'new' grounds of appeal (including police phone logs) seem to be things that I've heard before. I'm sure that that I saw a documentary on the case some time ago that mentioned police phone logs and an additional entry, but I may be confusing two issues. Movement being seen after the police arrived was mentioned before. Is this a case of new evidence to support formerly rejected grounds for appeal?
That's what I gather. Meaning new in terms of evidence before any hearing or tribunal rather than publicised.
Occam gets the crime scene to 5.
Bamber is an impossible intrusion on this simple crime scene.
Sheila saw the cops.
They saw her.
No way out.
She shot herself.
Last edited:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
So, having been shot twice in the mouth, Neville was then able to ring up the police. And Sheila was happy for her twin boys to witness her shooting their Nan and Grandpa.
No.
Sheila took the gun Jeremy had left loaded.
Upstairs and Neville phoned Jeremy in Goldhanger.
On hearing Sheila shooting June he dropped the phone, mounted the stairs and was shot by Sheila as she swivelled on the landing.
There were 11,000 posts on IA forum that perfectly analysed this simple sequence.
On the subject of the twins it was around 3 am.
The deepest sleep and for their eternal rest they never woke.
Sheila drilled their skulls repeatedly in an act of kindness.
They had no knowledge ever.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
And you know this from sitting across the world in New Zealand 11,800 miles away, how?
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
In addition to this being patronising nonsense, of the same type as promulgated by every conspiracy nut around, you don't seem to understand what this word actually means.
Edited by Agatha:
Edited to remove personalisation
There is no evidence that Nevil was in the master bedroom at any point during the shootings, but rather evidence that he was downstairs in the lounge. Running into gunfire in the bedroom while possible, is unlikely, it requires any shots made there to have missed, but there is no evidence of either wounds to Nevil, or bullets removed from the floor, ceiling, walls etc. If a man Nevil's size ran at Sheila holding a rifle he had every opportunity to grab it, instinct would prevail, where it would also in turning away from gunfire on the stairs.
I have no idea if this sort of scenario is in the CCRC application but the information supplied in the link indicates Jeremy was outside the house at the point that someone was still alive inside it. It appears he is supported by the phone records finally gained under discovery. If true that reassembles most arguments and the trajectory of the wound from behind into one of Nevil's shoulders (if I have that correct after some 5-6 years away from the case) completes what would be a Miscarriage of Justice.
I clearly remember that the first wound to Sheila being said by Knight (I think it was) as not causing immediate incapacitation. There could be suggestions there may not necessarily have been blow back from the second wound but it escapes me now if it were possible or not though. From memory I believe an artery was was clipped. If anyone has access to that report it's a must read.
None of us should be afraid of being wrong but certainly in this sort of case be very careful in considering if we are right or not.
Last edited by a moderator:
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
These new "phone records" - and correct me if I'm wrong here - are actually to do with contemporaneous handwritten police log books, right?
If that's correct, then a) I doubt (to the point of near-certainty) that anything which is genuinely new (wrt previous CCRC submissions) comes anywhere close to constituting grounds for appeal - remember, an appeal will only be granted leave (let alone actually granted) if the new evidence is considered to be of sufficient gravity that, had it been available at the time of the original trial, it might reasonably have resulted in the outcome of that trial having been an acquittal).
And over and above that, handwritten contemporaneous police logs are (very obviously) fallible. There's simply no way that the CCRC - let alone the Court of Appeal - will consider a single unsubstantiated, uncorroborated, unverifiable/unfalsifiable and "uninterrogatable" line or two scribbled down by a police officer in the midst of the situation to be of sufficient weight or gravity as to justify an appeal.
Regardless of whether or not I consider Bamber to have committed the murders (and I think that the summation of the evidence indicates that he did), there doesn't appear to me to be anything coming to light which would give rise to Bamber being granted leave to appeal. On top of everything else, the CCRC will pay due heed to the fact that we are now some 35 years since Bamber's conviction. After such a long period of time, and after so many unsuccessful appeal applications in the intervening period, I suspect that the CCRC would want to see something pretty high on the "bombshell" scale: credible and reliable evidence which, in and of itself, drives a coach and horses through any notion of Bamber's guilt. And I simply don't think that will - or can - happen.
If that's correct, then a) I doubt (to the point of near-certainty) that anything which is genuinely new (wrt previous CCRC submissions) comes anywhere close to constituting grounds for appeal - remember, an appeal will only be granted leave (let alone actually granted) if the new evidence is considered to be of sufficient gravity that, had it been available at the time of the original trial, it might reasonably have resulted in the outcome of that trial having been an acquittal).
And over and above that, handwritten contemporaneous police logs are (very obviously) fallible. There's simply no way that the CCRC - let alone the Court of Appeal - will consider a single unsubstantiated, uncorroborated, unverifiable/unfalsifiable and "uninterrogatable" line or two scribbled down by a police officer in the midst of the situation to be of sufficient weight or gravity as to justify an appeal.
Regardless of whether or not I consider Bamber to have committed the murders (and I think that the summation of the evidence indicates that he did), there doesn't appear to me to be anything coming to light which would give rise to Bamber being granted leave to appeal. On top of everything else, the CCRC will pay due heed to the fact that we are now some 35 years since Bamber's conviction. After such a long period of time, and after so many unsuccessful appeal applications in the intervening period, I suspect that the CCRC would want to see something pretty high on the "bombshell" scale: credible and reliable evidence which, in and of itself, drives a coach and horses through any notion of Bamber's guilt. And I simply don't think that will - or can - happen.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
Here's the thing though: let's suppose for one moment that Sheila Caffell shot herself (last in the order of events, obviously) after having murdered everyone else.
Now, if she shot herself, then (as we all know) she must necessarily have shot herself without the sound modifier (silencer) on the rifle, for two reasons: firstly, the modifier was not attached to the rifle as it lay across her body; and secondly, she couldn't have reached the trigger if the rifle had had the modifier attached.
So we know that - in the "Sheila did it" scenario - that she shot herself with no modifier on the rifle.
But....
Even with no modifier attached, she could only just have managed to reach the trigger with her hand, given the position of the two entry wounds.
Which means that the end of the rifle's barrel would have been either pressed hard up against her chin when the shots were fired, or only a matter of a couple of cm away.
Yet.... zero evidence of powder burns or tattooing were found anywhere around her entry wounds. And that would be inconceivable from such a close-up shot from a .22 rifle with no modifier attached.
Oh, and we also have the (inconvenient, for Jeremy) trial evidence that there was no powder residue anywhere on Sheila's hands, arms or nightdress: extremely unlikely at best, impossible at worst, for someone who'd just fired numerous rounds from a breech-loading rifle, reloading midway through.
Oh and we have the further (inconvenient, for Jeremy) trial evidence from the pathologist that the blood flow patterns on Caffell were not consistent with her lying face up when the shots were fired, but rather that she was very probably in a seated or semi-seated position when the shots were fired.
No dice on the "Sheila did it" front, I'm afraid. And given that she was the only other conceivable suspect, that leaves just one person.......
Oh very funny coming from you.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
