Letters written to her natural mother, by Sheila Caffell (latest on 24/07/1985).

[mike tesko]

Letters written to her natural mother, by Sheila Caffell (latest on 24/07/1985)...

[mike tesko]

Sheila wrote to her natural mother weeks before her death, but the contents have never been revealed to Jeremy or those representing his interests...

[Alias]

Sheila was a sweet little girl who was placed in a terrible family - along with Jeremy, a little abandoned boy.
Those two little ones, without their birth parents, were placed in an unloving home with a highly unstable mother.
At least Sheila´s birth-mother had a desire to get to know her biological daughter. That is sweet actually, cudos to her!
Jeremy´s parents? Who gave him up and then later had more children together and now say they want nothing to do with him - like a piece of trash. And have no desire to ever see him. DAMN them! I am so mad at Jeremy´s biological parents! DAMN THEM!
This is not how it works, Jeremy´s parents!

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

This is so frustrating and why I get so annoyed! How can so much evidence be proved to exist but yet be withheld and please don't quote that ppi rubbish to me because I am sure that can not justify everything.

[Alias]

Sorry, I haven´t been around for a while, but it is clear to me that Sheila did the killings. So much led up to it. Her thinking her sons were the Devil and capable of having sex with her, the sudden reduction of her medicine, Haloperidol (look it up), her whole history of violence because of mental illness. Some people think that a lovely young woman couln´t  do a thing like that.
I challenge you. Look into her past, look into her history. I can understand that it is easier for Colin Caffell, her ex-huband, to put the blame on Jeremy. But that is to avoid responsibility for leaving his sons with a highly unstable mother. To be cruel, I could say, if Colin had truly cared for his sons, he would never have let them out of his car, ever. A mother wouldn´t have left her children with an unstable father, would she? Turned upside down, would a mother willingly leave her children in the care of a man with a similar history of violence as Sheila had? I know I wouldn´t!

[smiffy]

Colin must alos have known something about June's mental health issues and heard worrying things from Sheila about her as well as witnessing some of her behaviour in direct contact. Additionally he would not have been totally unware of his son's opinons of June.
Again this should have been an additional area of concern as well as serious questions marks hanging over Sheila and her condition.

[HMEssex]

Colin must alos have known something about June's mental health issues and heard worrying things from Sheila about her as well as witnessing some of her behaviour in direct contact. Additionally he would not have been totally unware of his son's opinons of June.
Again this should have been an additional area of concern as well as serious questions marks hanging over Sheila and her condition.

This is all true.  However, 'hindsight is a wonderful thing'.

I don't suppose Colin in his worst nightmares would have envisaged such a terrible tragedy - who would?

He must have thought the twins would be safe, especially with their grandfather present, which is why he took them all to the farm, as he knew Sheila couldn't cope on her own.

It all comes down to 'if only'.

[Hartley]

This is so frustrating and why I get so annoyed! How can so much evidence be proved to exist but yet be withheld and please don't quote that ppi rubbish to me because I am sure that can not justify everything.

Hang about, I've only just seen this, but what has been withheld?

Sheila's biological mother is interviewed in 2002 and has some letters sent by Sheila some 17 years ago, so what?

Is it being suggested that Essex Police knew about these letters and stopped them from being disclosed? If Sheila's mother still had them in Canada in 2002 then how would EP have even known about them.

Unless I'm missing something here (which if I am I apologise), but this is the exact sort of s*** that I have been vocal against for months. You are being lied to and misled, why would these letters have been disclosed, EP likely didn't even know the existed.

What's more, is I don't understand why other people can't see it, it's like I'm in a parallel universe or something. 

[Newbury1]

Hang about, I've only just seen this, but what has been withheld?

Sheila's biological mother is interviewed in 2002 and has some letters sent by Sheila some 17 years ago, so what?

Is it being suggested that Essex Police knew about these letters and stopped them from being disclosed? If Sheila's mother still had them in Canada in 2002 then how would EP have even known about them.

Unless I'm missing something here (which if I am I apologise), but this is the exact sort of s*** that I have been vocal against for months. You are being lied to and misled, why would these letters have been disclosed, EP likely didn't even know the existed.

What's more, is I don't understand why other people can't see it, it's like I'm in a parallel universe or something. 

Hartley, you are not alone (cue X files (not Z files) music)

As I have said before there is a lot of spin, elaboration and outright missrepresentations on this Forum (it is the nature of the beast). 

I, for one, do not believe all I read (or hear)!

If all the so called evidence, or opinion, was so clear, irrefutable and truthful JB would have been out ages ago.

I believe there are aspects to this case that are debatable on a Forum, but that's all - its the legal guys that will, or will not, sort this. No matter how anyone looks at it, the decision on this case (right or wrong) was made in 1986. 

I put the disclosure of all documents/photos/ videos etc. being held back (if they exist) first.

If the full disclosure leads to JB's release then so be it. If it doesn't then so be it.

[Hartley]

Hartley, you are not alone (cue X files (not Z files) music)

As I have said before there is a lot of spin, elaboration and outright missrepresentations on this Formum (it is the nature of the beast). 

I, for one, do not believe all I read (or hear)!

If all the so called evidence, or opinion, was so clear, irrefutable and truthful JB would have been out ages ago.

I believe there are aspects to this case that are debatable on a Forum, but that's all - its the legal guys that will, or will not, sort this. No matter how anyone looks at it, the decision on this case (right or wrong) was made in 1986. 

I put the disclosure of all documents/photos/ videos etc. being held back (if they exist) first.

If the full disclosure leads to JB's release then so be it. If it doesn't then so be it.

I very much agree with what you have posted.

[ngb1066]

I very much agree with what you have posted.

I agree also.

[grahameb]

I agree also.

I'm not sure that we can expect Jeremy to be that philosophical?

[Newbury1]

I'm not sure that we can expect Jeremy to be that philosophical?

Well I guess that's just tough. I'm not debating what JB's thinks, I am debating the system as that is what will release him and what he is up against.

If everything, paperwork, photo's, videos, lies etc., have all been declared, presented, exposed, reviewed, and double checked, and there is still nothing to release him, he won't be released.

Anything that EP has destroyed (as crass as that is) obviously cannot be brought back, just like the lives lost that night!

[andrea]

You have said what i have been thinking for a while Nick.

[ngb1066]

I'm not sure that we can expect Jeremy to be that philosophical?

I understand the point you are making Mike.  I am sure Jeremy will never give up his fight to overturn his convictions. 

Jeremy's position is that he believes the material he has now will be sufficient to secure an appeal and win that appeal.  I do not know whether he is right on that, but I tend to take a cautious approach.  If there is no referral I believe the focus should be on securing the release of all withheld evidence.  There is a reason why the prosecution have doggedly resisted releasing this information and my belief is that much of it will be very helpful to the defence.  In the light of full disclosure I believe a fresh application would be possible, drawing together in a single submission document all of the factors (many of them in isolation not in themselves conclusive) which taken as a whole render the convictions unsafe.  The stark reality is that if in the light of full disclosure, and a proper reconsideration of the entire evidence in the light of that, an appeal is not successful that will effectively be the end of the road for Jeremy.  The only way forward then would be if startling new evidence came to light, for example a former police officer breaking ranks.

I emphasise that this is not the current view of Jeremy.  He believes he has enough already to prove that he did not commit the murders.