Author Topic: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin  (Read 293 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2020, 06:15:PM »
Pam and RWB knew that Sheila and the children were there. AP possibly knew via JB when AP paid a visit the weekend before.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2020, 06:35:PM »
Pam and RWB knew that Sheila and the children were there. AP possibly knew via JB when AP paid a visit the weekend before.


Are you sure? I didn't think Pam knew until June told her during the phone call. Ann -unless we're going to insist she's lying, and can't be proved- certainly didn't know. Any knowledge of her impending visit would most likely have come from Jeremy.

Offline Robittybob1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2020, 06:49:PM »
Do you believe the relative and Sheila pre planned it. Or that Sheila rang the relative mid massacre?
It could be more than that too.  Premassacre there was June, Nevill, and Sheila who could have asked someone for advice.  There seemed reports of people ringing the farm earlier and around 10:00 PM.

Jeremy also could have been setting/preparing the scene.  He had already left the gun out and ammunition nearby.  All you'd need to do is to discuss the custody argument with someone who would be sympathetic towards  Sheila's situation.  Someone must have been keen to take over where Collin left off.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2020, 07:03:PM »
It could be more than that too.  Premassacre there was June, Nevill, and Sheila who could have asked someone for advice.  There seemed reports of people ringing the farm earlier and around 10:00 PM.

Jeremy also could have been setting/preparing the scene.  He had already left the gun out and ammunition nearby.  All you'd need to do is to discuss the custody argument with someone who would be sympathetic towards  Sheila's situation.  Someone must have been keen to take over where Collin left off.


The farm secretary rang earlier in the evening. Later on, June's sister, Pam, rang. It was during this call that June expressed concern for Sheila, but no more, I think, than asking Pam "See what you think". There is no proof that any sort of custody argument happened.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #19 on: September 30, 2020, 07:53:PM »

Are you sure? I didn't think Pam knew until June told her during the phone call. Ann -unless we're going to insist she's lying, and can't be proved- certainly didn't know. Any knowledge of her impending visit would most likely have come from Jeremy.




There'd been a pre-arranged visit, a sort of meeting arranged with June and Pam next day as June wanted to tell Pam how worried she was with Sheila's behaviour. I'd go as far as to say that Sheila had listened in to that call and heard part of the conversation.
As I'd said, JB could well have told AP when he stayed there.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2020, 08:21:PM »



There'd been a pre-arranged visit, a sort of meeting arranged with June and Pam next day as June wanted to tell Pam how worried she was with Sheila's behaviour. I'd go as far as to say that Sheila had listened in to that call and heard part of the conversation.
As I'd said, JB could well have told AP when he stayed there.

Lookout, I got the impression it was all rather ad hoc. as in, had Pam not phoned, June wouldn't have called her. That why I suggested her concern regarding Sheila's behaviour was on a "See what you think" basis. I'm not certain what June thought could transpire as Sheila was due to go home on the Thursday, the day after the meeting with Pam.
I agree that Jeremy could have told AP, in passing, that Sheila would be visiting, but it begs the question why would AP turn up to finish what he didn't know Sheila was going to start, and what was his motive?

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12975
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #21 on: September 30, 2020, 09:28:PM »
Hi Mike

We spoke yesterday about my thoughts on the Bamber case.

I will document it here so you can publish it.


Firstly let me make it clear that Bamber did shoot Sheila, that was the first shot. He was either telling her to kill herself with maybe the promise he would do that once she had and they could all be together in heaven, only Bamber knows that.


The second shot I believe was accidental and administered from a police office.

We know the police log states “There are the bodies of one male and one female in and on the kitchen floor”. That was noted before the officers entered the kitchen area and were making their observations from outside of the building, through a window.


We all know that Sheila’s body is shown to be upstairs in the police photographs, so we have to ask ourselves “ How has that happened?


Hers a few ideas I have thought about.


Firstly Bamber did believe Sheila was dead when he left the farmhouse after everyone had been murdered. He either shot her and the others and was satisfied it was safe to leave because on his return he felt everyone inside the farmhouse was dead. What he didn’t bank on was maybe Sheila was just rendered unconscious, and at what point I’m not sure, maybe after the police had entered the farmhouse and were searching it at the time, she gained consciousness. She made her way upstairs for some reason and because of the situation, heightened senses by the police, she was accidentally shot again. Or she made her way upstairs and then passed out on the bedroom floor again. At some point the police were checking to see if she could have shot herself and laid the gun, which they thought she had used to kill the others, on her and the trigger was pulled by accident and that shot killed her. Again I don’t think the police should be made accountable if that happened because again the police were in a very distressing situation and they were still looking at every possibility that the murder was still some where in the farm house.


Either way , the second shot killed her and that’s why I believe there is pooling of blood upon Sheila where it is and the blooded fingerprint upon her neck because I think the police put her into the recovery position after she had been shot the second time.


Yes I understand why people think Bambers case should be overturned because of what the judge told the jury, “ if you find him guilty of Sheila’s death then you must find him guilty of the other four deaths”.


This seems to be the point everyone refers to however, we all know that any judge has the discretion to make any ruling he wants and he obviously took that stance when the guilty verdict came back from the jury.


In my opinion, and that’s all it is, Bamber got into Sheila’s head and convinced her to kill the whole family. He either was there when all the killings took place or when Sheila was shot , Definitely, he had to be.


I believe he was there more so because of the way Neville was positioned on the kitchen floor. He was placed in that position to humiliate him because someone thought he deserved to be humiliated for something, but I really don’t think Sheila could have done that.


If a hit man had been hired to commit these anus crimes there is no way he would have hung around to place Neville in that position. We all see programmes of true crimes and hit men don’t work that way. It was someone who was confident they wouldn’t be disturbed and I’m my opinion it was Bamber.


My opinion, Bamber should never be released, regardless of whether someone comes up with the notion that the judge wasn’t entitled to make a decision at his discretion in this case.


Under no circumstances should the ex-girlfriend have been listened to either in this case, other than her saying Bamber had told her he was going to commit this terrible crime what proof was there? Is there? No way should her evidence have been allowed in.


If one day this case is resolved and any of the above proves to be right, I still don’t think any police officer should be prosecuted in these circumstances because of the nature of the search and the carnage they found inside that farmhouse.


Anyway let me know what your readers think.


We will speak again one day about this matter.


Thanks


Nanny Pumpkin.

Xx
Yes heinous crimes indeed.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #22 on: September 30, 2020, 09:41:PM »
Yes heinous crimes indeed.


Steve, I thought "anus crimes" was a suitably base description.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #23 on: September 30, 2020, 09:48:PM »
Lookout, I got the impression it was all rather ad hoc. as in, had Pam not phoned, June wouldn't have called her. That why I suggested her concern regarding Sheila's behaviour was on a "See what you think" basis. I'm not certain what June thought could transpire as Sheila was due to go home on the Thursday, the day after the meeting with Pam.
I agree that Jeremy could have told AP, in passing, that Sheila would be visiting, but it begs the question why would AP turn up to finish what he didn't know Sheila was going to start, and what was his motive?






Unbeknown to anyone something could have happened at the farmhouse during the day that prompted June to speak to Pam and to want to see each other next day. In fact the invitation was to go to Pam's for tea with Sheila and the twins.
AP wouldn't have had a motive, especially as he'd left his rifle with prints at WHF, literally a smoking gun, so it wouldn't have been him.

 

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2020, 10:03:PM »





Unbeknown to anyone something could have happened at the farmhouse during the day that prompted June to speak to Pam and to want to see each other next day. In fact the invitation was to go to Pam's for tea with Sheila and the twins.
AP wouldn't have had a motive, especially as he'd left his rifle with prints at WHF, literally a smoking gun, so it wouldn't have been him.

 


But for the wording of the conversation, such could be feasible, but Pam rang June and there was nothing in their conversation to indicate an earlier call from June to Pam -and SURELY Pam would have said had that been the case- even the fact of the invitation being to tea, rather than to lunch, suggests a more ad hoc call. If a third person was involved, I'm afraid it takes us back to the information regarding Sheila's visit coming from Jeremy.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44256
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #25 on: September 30, 2020, 10:12:PM »

Steve, I thought "anus crimes" was a suitably base description.





I couldn't help laughing at that, oh dear. Then I thought, yes, the case itself was all my backside.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #26 on: September 30, 2020, 10:27:PM »




I couldn't help laughing at that, oh dear. Then I thought, yes, the case itself was all my backside.

  :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

Offline Robittybob1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #27 on: October 01, 2020, 01:32:AM »

But for the wording of the conversation, such could be feasible, but Pam rang June and there was nothing in their conversation to indicate an earlier call from June to Pam -and SURELY Pam would have said had that been the case- even the fact of the invitation being to tea, rather than to lunch, suggests a more ad hoc call. If a third person was involved, I'm afraid it takes us back to the information regarding Sheila's visit coming from Jeremy.
There are so many possibilities and so few people left to tell what happened that night.  Jane when you say "and SURELY Pam would have said had that been the case", it just goes to show you don't really know.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #28 on: October 01, 2020, 08:38:AM »
There are so many possibilities and so few people left to tell what happened that night.  Jane when you say "and SURELY Pam would have said had that been the case", it just goes to show you don't really know.


You're correct. I can't possibly 'know', as none of us can ever 'know' what was the real relationship between the two sisters. However, there are clues in what she said to June and what June said to her, and perhaps more in what she/they didn't say. I'm not going off at wild tangents, creating impossible scenarios, many of which are just opportunities to say the family were all liars.

It was accepted, at least momentarily, that Sheila had been the culprit. So why would Pam have failed to mention an earlier phone call in which June expressed fears about Sheila's mental state. Had such occurred, it could only have served to support the belief in her culpability.

Offline Robittybob1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
Re: CORRESPONDENCE- Nanny Pumpkin
« Reply #29 on: October 01, 2020, 09:08:AM »

You're correct. I can't possibly 'know', as none of us can ever 'know' what was the real relationship between the two sisters. However, there are clues in what she said to June and what June said to her, and perhaps more in what she/they didn't say. I'm not going off at wild tangents, creating impossible scenarios, many of which are just opportunities to say the family were all liars.

It was accepted, at least momentarily, that Sheila had been the culprit. So why would Pam have failed to mention an earlier phone call in which June expressed fears about Sheila's mental state. Had such occurred, it could only have served to support the belief in her culpability.
I'm no expert, and I knew that when you said Pam and June were sisters.   
So there was blood shared between then, well, who knows what secrets would be hidden behind the thickness of blood.
"So why would Pam have failed to mention an earlier phone call in which June expressed fears about Sheila's mental state."  Well that would take June to first see the fragility of 'Sheila's mental state'.

From the little bit I know about June is that she was a bit over the top, in her ways.  Was it her way or the no-way highway?
This song expresses what I was trying to say: https://youtu.be/dG5xv6h-mpw
"Gabriela Gun?íková - MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY - Original Song by Ken Tamplin"
« Last Edit: October 01, 2020, 09:17:AM by Robittybob1 »