See point 14) that I have been highlighting for some time now
# Case for Conviction
1) Jeremy Bamber was the last living person to see them all alive - making him a prime suspect (EP were clearly duped by JB’s set up that night).
2) JB had the MEANS (Semi auto .22 Anschutz Rifle / Bullets), MOTIVE (Greed) and OPPORTUNITY (All members of the relevant family were under one roof that night).
3) Bambers story about leaving the gun out with a full magazine the night before is simply staging the scene to set up Sheila (why would you load the magazine to full if you were just taking pot shots at rabbits that would flee on the first /second shot).
4) There was no call from Bambers father at c. 3am on the morning of the 7 August 1985. Bamber is attempting to use this story to create an alibi. Why would a fairly heathy 6’ 4’’ farmer call his son (3 miles away) at c. 3 am in the morning asking him to help when Nevill, if not shot, could have dealt with Sheila himself, or if shot, the priority would be to tackle the shooter head on or flee! Nevill would not have left his loved ones, being under threat, to make a call on a fixed land line, with a slow revolving dial, to someone who may not answer the phone (after a previous long day working in the fields) if there was a crazed person threatening the family with a loaded gun. There is no proof a call was made by Nevill Bamber to Jeremy or the police, and there never will be as the alleged call to Jeremy was never made!
5) The head shots are a giveaway. The shots are effectively execution style and even though Nevill was moving around the house not one of the 25 shots fired missed its target.
6) The fight between Nevill and his attacker points to Nevills assailant being a person of good physical strength.
7) No gun shot residue found on Sheila’s hands
After the murders Jeremy’s attitude and demeanor was strange to say the least.
9) Loading the magazine a further two times would have been difficult for a person gone berserk, but not so for a more calculated killer.
10) Sheila having two gunshot wounds to the neck? If Sheila was so efficient at killing the other 4 with gunshots to the head why would she then shoot herself in the neck so inefficiently that she had to shoot herself again!
11) Why were the telescopic sights (which are difficult to align) removed (by JB?) from the gun just prior to the murders. This was so that the gun was easier to handle in the confined space of the house, and who needs telescopic sights when shooting at near point blank range.
12) There is reference to the house on the ground floor being all locked up from the inside; however bedroom windows on the first floor were open. The whole house was therefore not totally secure. The downstairs window allegedly used by JB and banged shut by JB exiting WHF is quite feasible.
13) There is still Julie Mugfords testimony for the prosecution (no matter what one thinks about her).
14) There is the dubious silencer issue, but why did Rivlin not undermine the silencer evidence by pointing out to the jury how it had been found and tampered with by the relatives?
Book - Forensics for Dummies - copyright 2004 (USA) - Keeping the chain of custody intact - page 45
Without a continuous record showing that the evidence has been kept safe and secure from the crime scene to the lab and ultimately the courtroom, evidence may be rendered inadmissible in court. ANY defense attorney worth his or her salt would rightly question the authenticity and integrity of any evidence for which outside contamination cannot be ruled out. That’s why every person who handled the evidence must be accounted for and recorded as a link in the unbroken chain of custody, from crime scene to courtroom.
What was Rivlin playing at!!? - okay it may have been 1985/86, but it wasn’t the Middle Ages - and the above comes from a book titled …”for dummies”.
15) JB’s defence - Rivlin not only failed to undermine the silencer issue that even a “dummy” could do, but was the first to actually coin the term “trick of the light” when cross examining Bews over the alleged movement at the farm house window, giving Bews the ability to simply agree with JB’s defence. I am not convinced that JB’s defence actually thought him innocent, and I have neither read nor seen very little from Rivlin (in a retired capacity) still supporting JB’s bid for freedom!!