Author Topic: The relatives passing information to Julie:  (Read 541 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #45 on: September 28, 2020, 03:15:PM »
The Eatons were so hard-up that they had approached Nevill in buying their land which they would have then bought it back when things looked up. They couldn't approach RWB because he was in the same boat as they were which is why he was forever tapping grannie.
A " hiatus " until they found a way around it----in the shape of blaming JB for the murders. How convenient was that ?


Actually, it's more likely to mean that their immediate funds were tied up elsewhere. Why would they choose to pay interest to a commercial lender when the Bank of Family was available?  Perhaps you have evidence of their reasons for not approaching RWB? One possibility is that he wouldn't have approved what they were doing, which, of itself doesn't make it wrong, only lacking in parental approval.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44231
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #46 on: September 28, 2020, 03:53:PM »

Actually, it's more likely to mean that their immediate funds were tied up elsewhere. Why would they choose to pay interest to a commercial lender when the Bank of Family was available?  Perhaps you have evidence of their reasons for not approaching RWB? One possibility is that he wouldn't have approved what they were doing, which, of itself doesn't make it wrong, only lacking in parental approval.




Asset rich and cash poor. I wonder how many find themselves in this situation----but freely admit it ?
They obviously couldn't approach the bank or would have done and they didn't approach RWB because he didn't have the readies which is why he kept going to grannie.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #47 on: September 28, 2020, 04:15:PM »



Asset rich and cash poor. I wonder how many find themselves in this situation----but freely admit it ?
They obviously couldn't approach the bank or would have done and they didn't approach RWB because he didn't have the readies which is why he kept going to grannie.

None of which comes anywhere close to bankruptcy, the breadline, or pecuniary embarrassment. As for "couldn't approach the bank"? Why on earth would they consider it. I don't know of any business families who distribute funds between themselves, who would go to a bank first and saddle themselves with high interest rates. Grannie would probably have been appalled at the thought!!!

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44231
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #48 on: September 28, 2020, 04:21:PM »
None of which comes anywhere close to bankruptcy, the breadline, or pecuniary embarrassment. As for "couldn't approach the bank"? Why on earth would they consider it. I don't know of any business families who distribute funds between themselves, who would go to a bank first and saddle themselves with high interest rates. Grannie would probably have been appalled at the thought!!!





Grannie would have been more appalled if she'd known the truth !

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #49 on: September 28, 2020, 04:45:PM »




Grannie would have been more appalled if she'd known the truth !


It might be shocking to you, but I'm willing to bet that it's the way they'd done business for generations. The families concerned were all well cushioned enough for funds to be bounced around between them when necessary. The Grannie in question was no pushover, for all that. She was a straight talking, God fearing woman who lived by the Bible's teachings. She may not have been popular with some -feared, but respected, probably. Your truth may not have been the same as hers...................
« Last Edit: September 28, 2020, 05:08:PM by Jane »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44231
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #50 on: September 28, 2020, 05:27:PM »

It might be shocking to you, but I'm willing to bet that it's the way they'd done business for generations. The families concerned were all well cushioned enough for funds to be bounced around between them when necessary. The Grannie in question was no pushover, for all that. She was a straight talking, God fearing woman who lived by the Bible's teachings. She may not have been popular with some -feared, but respected, probably. Your truth may not have been the same as hers...................






As the saying goes--there's no sentiment in business which separates my truth from theirs straightaway.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44231
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #51 on: September 28, 2020, 05:32:PM »
Digressing---while I've been posting, in between times I've washed and peeled apples that were picked off a tree yesterday, sliced them into a Pyrex dish, made some crumble, cooked it and have eaten two helpings. Who can't multi-task ?  ;D ;D ;D ;D Delish !

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #52 on: September 28, 2020, 05:43:PM »
..............which causes me to wonder what her truth may have been. Austere and intimidating she might have been to many, but I suspect her family had an excellent counselor in her. I think she may have been the one person they knew they could trust with 'stuff' they couldn't share with anyone else, and what they told her, they could be confident would remain with her. It takes me back to what she said -or more what she didn't say- when told of the tragedy. She never asked about Jeremy. She did, however, claim it to be the Devil at work, so I'm wondering did June take any concerns she might have had, regarding Jeremy -AND Sheila- to her mother?

Now, I know it's constantly being said how much June adored Jeremy, but I can find no evidence of her ever saying such to friends of her own generation, and it seems entirely out of keeping with her personality for her to share this sort of information with the younger generation. It was more her style, because neither of her children gave her an easy ride, to say nothing.............except, perhaps, to her mother. I believe it's entirely feasible that she'd have offloaded any concerns -however dark- to the old lady, MAYBE even admitting her mother could have been right about her adopting and how it hadn't been the success she'd hoped for............

................There remains then, surely, the possibility that other family members may have taken their concerns, regarding Jeremy, the farm, his part in it, THEIR future, to her?


Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #53 on: September 28, 2020, 05:44:PM »
Digressing---while I've been posting, in between times I've washed and peeled apples that were picked off a tree yesterday, sliced them into a Pyrex dish, made some crumble, cooked it and have eaten two helpings. Who can't multi-task ?  ;D ;D ;D ;D Delish !


I bet it was. Mine's in the freezer :( :( :(

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12908
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #54 on: September 28, 2020, 06:30:PM »
..............which causes me to wonder what her truth may have been. Austere and intimidating she might have been to many, but I suspect her family had an excellent counselor in her. I think she may have been the one person they knew they could trust with 'stuff' they couldn't share with anyone else, and what they told her, they could be confident would remain with her. It takes me back to what she said -or more what she didn't say- when told of the tragedy. She never asked about Jeremy. She did, however, claim it to be the Devil at work, so I'm wondering did June take any concerns she might have had, regarding Jeremy -AND Sheila- to her mother?

Now, I know it's constantly being said how much June adored Jeremy, but I can find no evidence of her ever saying such to friends of her own generation, and it seems entirely out of keeping with her personality for her to share this sort of information with the younger generation. It was more her style, because neither of her children gave her an easy ride, to say nothing.............except, perhaps, to her mother. I believe it's entirely feasible that she'd have offloaded any concerns -however dark- to the old lady, MAYBE even admitting her mother could have been right about her adopting and how it hadn't been the success she'd hoped for............

................There remains then, surely, the possibility that other family members may have taken their concerns, regarding Jeremy, the farm, his part in it, THEIR future, to her?
I'm not sure I see Mabel Speakman in the counsellor mould somehow Jane. Shrewd businesswoman yes, godfearing, moral, but warm and playing the confidante role I'm not so sure. A disciplinarian whom Sheila looked up to on the occasions their past crossed, far more respected by her than the respect she had for her own mother. Leslie Speakman we are told in CAL's book managed six farms, so I assume he was a workaholic who didn't involve himself in familial problems on a par with Nevill. We are told June was "distraught" on her father's death in 1975: could it be it's the age-old story of Daddy's girl? Remember June had a further breakdown in 1982 so I assume by that time she really did feel alone.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #55 on: September 28, 2020, 06:48:PM »
I'm not sure I see Mabel Speakman in the counsellor mould somehow Jane. Shrewd businesswoman yes, godfearing, moral, but warm and playing the confidante role I'm not so sure. A disciplinarian whom Sheila looked up to on the occasions their past crossed, far more respected by her than the respect she had for her own mother. Leslie Speakman we are told in CAL's book managed six farms, so I assume he was a workaholic who didn't involve himself in familial problems on a par with Nevill. We are told June was "distraught" on her father's death in 1975: could it be it's the age-old story of Daddy's girl? Remember June had a further breakdown in 1982 so I assume by that time she really did feel alone.

Steve, I don't think I implied warmth!! That's not a description I'd have used of her. As much as anything, it was about her just being there, certainly latterly. She seems to have managed her world very well. My friend, a vicar's wife, was the only surgery nurse she allowed into her home, and the girl who delivered meals and little treats cooked by her mother in law, always went in fear of her. I have no idea if she worked hard at cultivating that reputation, or whether it came naturally.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12908
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #56 on: September 28, 2020, 08:02:PM »
Steve, I don't think I implied warmth!! That's not a description I'd have used of her. As much as anything, it was about her just being there, certainly latterly. She seems to have managed her world very well. My friend, a vicar's wife, was the only surgery nurse she allowed into her home, and the girl who delivered meals and little treats cooked by her mother in law, always went in fear of her. I have no idea if she worked hard at cultivating that reputation, or whether it came naturally.
In relation to June it brought back this thread: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9437.0.html

I think the stiff upper lip came into play, which was natural to Nevill but not to June. How she must have suffered internally! Did she confide in her friend Agnes Lowe? I doubt we will ever know the full story of June's torment.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49065
Re: The relatives passing information to Julie:
« Reply #57 on: October 01, 2020, 11:34:PM »
Supporters need to confirm there was a police lead Industrial Frame. It is surprising only Lookout believes this as it is an easy way to explain the incriminating evidence.

Everyone will agree Julie could got so much exclusive detailed  information from the relatives or newspapers.

No  that's correct Lookout, she got all the encouragement from DS Jones, who was not originally privy to information regarding the suspected times of her imaginary death  and the truth surrounding the circumstances of how she lost her life on the main bedroom floor at precisely 9.13am, that morning. It is with 100% certainty that Jeremy could not have shot her dead  or that he thought he was clever enough to fool  everybody into thinking or believe that she had committed suicide - that rumour was created by Essex police who were / are responsible for her death. I am not suggesting that the police officers who were/are responsible for shooting her not once, but Who are responsible twice, once downstairs in the kitchen when firearm officers forced there way into the main kitchen. PS Woodcocks original 15 page witness statement was created (7th August 1985), which by a month later had to be edited/altered to take out any evidence that Sheila was still very much alive inside the farmhouse when armed police forced open the farmhouse door. Sheila was not only still alive at that stage (let's say PS Woodcocks gun fired the neck shot she sustained at around, or just before 7.36am on that morning, I can assure everyone that she hadn't died, and did not, until precisely 9.13am, as a result of a loaded rifle being presented to her body once it had been lifted from on op of her parents bed. The real truth stands out like a shining beacon of reasoning...

Please pay attention to what I am about to tell you all - the bullet which first wounded Sheila Caffell downstairs in the kitchen (exhibit PV/20) was a piece of ammunition belonging to Essex police firearm units stach of ammumitions in their armrries. It fragmented upon impact as it entered the side of her neck into a multitude of variously sized fragmented pieces (this is confirmed by the pathologist  Peter Venezis who removed almost all of the bullets fragment from inside her neck However, when Jeremy Bamber fell under suspicion  the Crowns non qualified ballistics so called expert  proclaimed exhibit PV/20 to be a WHOLE BULLET. Cops switched the original crime scene ammo' with a more recently test fired piece of .22 ammunition - in their haste to try and save face, they came up with a shit theory that Sheila couldn't have shot herself dead on the main bedroom floor, because with the silencer having been fitted to the end of the rifles gun barrel  that the overall length of the gun would almost certainly been too long, to enable he to shoot herself dead, not once, but twice there on the main bedroom floor..

Cops were able to say such things because they urgently needed 6o displace responsibility upon, or towards themselves...
« Last Edit: October 01, 2020, 11:39:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...