Jeremy Bamber Forum
OTHER HIGH PROFILE CASES => Other high profile cases => Topic started by: Adam on March 08, 2018, 06:34:PM
-
Don't know if there is already a thread on this. It is a famous & controversial case.
Jenkins was convicted, failed an appeal, then was successful in another appeal. Juries at two retrials couldn't reach verdicts & 9 years after the murder, Jenkins was aquited. His compensation request was refused.
Unlike the Rachel Nickel case, no alternative suspects have emerged or been convicted.
-
there have been alternative suspects put forward the police don't want investigate them the m25 rapist was put forward as a suspect.
-
there have been alternative suspects put forward the police don't want investigate them the m25 rapist was put forward as a suspect.
Billie Jo wasn't sexually assaulted.
Seems like a classic case of stroppy teenager reluctantly or refusing to do a job, upsetting a step father who had a temper.
The step father picked up an available tent peg & hit Billie Jo 5 times. Not meaning to kill her. Once he had denied it to the police, he wasn't going to retract.
-
Billie Jo wasn't sexually assaulted.
Seems like a classic case of stroppy teenager reluctantly or refusing to do a job, upsetting a step father who had a temper.
The step father picked up an available tent peg & hit Billie Jo 5 times. Not meaning to kill her. Once he had denied it to the police, he wasn't going to retract.
hes been sugrested as suspect I'm not sure why but it has been.
-
It would be the strangest frenzid attack by a stranger I have ever heard of.
Someone with no weapon breaking into a back garden in daylight. Not knowing who else was in the house. Luckily finding and picking up an available weapon in the garden & spending a few seconds hitting Billie Jo 5 times. Then exiting.
Circumstantial evidence put Jenkins in the frame. Being the last person to see her alive, when he was alone long enough with her to committ the murder.
Jenkins was very determined & after 9 years became a free man. Inconclusivly as two new juries failed to reach a verdict. Bamber is just as determined but there is simply too much incriminating evidence.
-
It would be the strangest frenzid attack by a stranger I have ever heard of.
Someone with no weapon breaking into a back garden in daylight. Not knowing who else was in the house. Luckily finding and picking up an available weapon in the garden & spending a few seconds hitting Billie Jo 5 times. Then exiting.
Circumstantial evidence put Jenkins in the frame. Being the last person to see her alive, when he was alone long enough with her to committ the murder.
Jenkins was very determined & after 9 years became a free man. Inconclusivly as two new juries failed to reach a verdict. Bamber is just as determined but there is simply too much incriminating evidence.
Pin it on Bellfield? He seems to be in the frame for a lot these days.
-
Don't know if there is already a thread on this. It is a famous & controversial case.
Jenkins was convicted, failed an appeal, then was successful in another appeal. Juries at two retrials couldn't reach verdicts & 9 years after the murder, Jenkins was aquited. His compensation request was refused.
Unlike the Rachel Nickel case, no alternative suspects have emerged or been convicted.
There is but it's always good to have a fresh perspective. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,407.15.html
-
it could easy be proved ethere by retesting the tent peg funny they wont do that.
-
it could easy be proved ethere by retesting the tent peg funny they wont do that.
I thought the forensic evidence pointed to Jenkins as the killer. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/billie-jo-jenkins-mum-calls-9819018
-
The tent peg would only have Billie Jo's blood on it. Jenkin's finger prints would be on it, but he lived there.
The forensic evidence was Billie Jo's blood on Jenkins clothes. Jenkins saying it got there after he found Billie Jo dead.
In the two hung jury decisions, I can only assume the jury were instructed to make a decision based just on the forensic evidence. Rather than circumstantial evidence, Jenkin's violent temper & strange behaviour on the day & the almost 0% chance it was a random stranger.
-
The tent peg would only have Billie Jo's blood on it. Jenkin's finger prints would be on it, but he lived there.
The forensic evidence was Billie Jo's blood on Jenkins clothes. Jenkins saying it got there after he found Billie Jo dead.
In the two hung jury decisions, I can only assume the jury were instructed to make a decision based just on the forensic evidence. Rather than circumstantial evidence, Jenkin's violent temper & strange behaviour on the day & the almost 0% chance it was a random stranger.
but they could find out if somebody elses prints were on it.
it could possibly have dna on it.
-
but they could find out if somebody elses prints were on it.
it could possibly have dna on it.
If a random stranger had killed Billie Jo, his fingerprints would certainly be on the tent peg. As he would be the last person to pick it up.
Doubtful an outside killer wore gloves as it was a spur of the moment killing which took a few seconds. The killer not planning to kill anyone as he didn't have any of his own weapons.
The only other likely people to pick up the tent peg in the weeks preceeding the killing, would be the house occupants.
I have never read anything about unidentified fingerprints on the tent peg. If there were, then they haven't matched any of the other suspects. A no win situation for Jenkins.
-
If a random stranger had killed Billie Jo, his fingerprints would certainly be on the tent peg. As he would be the last person to pick it up.
Doubtful an outside killer wore gloves as it was a spur of the moment killing which took a few seconds. The killer not planning to kill anyone as he didn't have any of his own weapons.
The only other likely people to pick up the tent peg in the weeks preceeding the killing, would be the house occupants.
I have never read anything about unidentified fingerprints on the tent peg. If there were, then they haven't matched any of the other suspects. A no win situation for Jenkins.
well they would knowif tested the tent peg.
-
well they would knowif tested the tent peg.
I'm sure they did. It was possible to check for finger prints & DNA while the case was ongoing between 1997 - 2006.
Whatever the results, it would be in Jenkins interests to keep it quiet. I suspect there were no unidentified finger prints or DNA on the tent peg.
-
I'm sure they did. It was possible to check for finger prints & DNA while the case was ongoing between 1997 - 2006.
Whatever the results, it would be in Jenkins interests to keep it quiet. I suspect there were no unidentified finger prints or DNA on the tent peg.
no where near as advanced as the testing there is today
and as its official an unsolved murder I cant thin of any reason not to.
-
If a random stranger had killed Billie Jo, . . .
There was another suspect, but he was so ill that the police weren't able to interview him. His name seems not to have been released, but there's speculation that he's since died. The police claimed he couldn't have been there, but they never explained how they made that conclusion. That suspect's history indicated he could well have been the killer. There's already a thread about the case here (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,407.0.html), but I don't think it mentions this suspect.
-
There was another suspect, but he was so ill that the police weren't able to interview him. His name seems not to have been released, but there's speculation that he's since died. The police claimed he couldn't have been there, but they never explained how they made that conclusion. That suspect's history indicated he could well have been the killer. There's already a thread about the case here (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,407.0.html), but I don't think it mentions this suspect.
are yes there was an article on the police questioning him before they cantered on Jenkins.
-
well billy joes family seem t think it was the m25 rapist.
https://t.co/kd459jQ9d4
-
well billy joes family seem t think it was the m25 rapist.
https://t.co/kd459jQ9d4
But Billie-Jo wasn't raped. It would seem an extraordinary coincidence if it was him. Look at Sion Jenkins' guarded interview with Trevor McDonald, which speaks volumes.
https://youtu.be/oeU-8LHzRhA
-
It seems the random stranger not only saw Billie Jo painting, but also spotted the tent peg.
He entered the back garden & picked up the tent peg. Then spent around 5 seconds hitting Billie Jo 5 times before running away as quickly as he entered. Without leaving any finger prints.
Unless the random stranger just saw Billie Jo & only started looking for a suitable weapon upon entering the back garden. It was lucky there was a tent peg available.
Strangest crazed killing I've ever heard of.
-
But Billie-Jo wasn't raped. It would seem an extraordinary coincidence if it was him. Look at Sion Jenkins' guarded interview with Trevor McDonald, which speaks volumes.
https://youtu.be/oeU-8LHzRhA
well her family must have a reason to think it.
maybe he was going to rape her but she fought back and he ended up killing her instead.
-
I could never fully make up my mind about Jenkins. Everyone has their own way of appearing innocent.
I can't in all honesty say yay or nay,except err on the side of caution either way.
-
I could never fully make up my mind about Jenkins. Everyone has their own way of appearing innocent.
I can't in all honesty say yay or nay,except err on the side of caution either way.
they have never properly what a pece of bin liner was doing up her nose i cant see why jenkins would of done that.
-
they have never properly what a pece of bin liner was doing up her nose i cant see why jenkins would of done that.
That's right. The blood spots which were also found on his clothing baffled me too as they wouldn't/shouldn't have appeared as bloodspots if he'd held the girl close to him ? More smudged bloodstains than bloodspots which either indicate blood which has dripped onto you from a height or because you were in close contact of someone being bashed with a blunt instrument.
-
That's right. The blood spots which were also found on his clothing baffled me too as they wouldn't/shouldn't have appeared as bloodspots if he'd held the girl close to him ? More smudged bloodstains than bloodspots which either indicate blood which has dripped onto you from a height or because you were in close contact of someone being bashed with a blunt instrument.
and he only had 5 minutes to have done it if that.
-
Once Jenkins had murdered Billie Jo & calmed down, he had to go straight out into the car where his children were waiting.
He couldn't try to save her once he realised what he had done. That would mean telling the children to come back into the house & implicating himself.
He can't try to save her without telling the children, sooner or later they will come back into the house of their own accord & see Jenkins with a battered Billie Jo. Which again implicates Jenkins.
It's doubtful he considered trying to save her. Her injuries were too bad & an alive Billie Jo would implcate Jenkins.
So Jenkins went straight to the car & drove the wrong way to a DIY store with no money or cards. To buy White Spirits which wasn't needed as there was already White Spirits in the house.
-
buthis aprently the only man who can fly into a rage without saying anything.
who as ive heard of a silent rage.
-
this man has also been mentioned as a suuspect im not sure why.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-18861198?SThisFB&fbclid=IwAR3blkhLSVCH84fCkVcUmRbsXvAcRUT3VxqHVvS13AhGTrENCBfkgdV2SlAhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-18861198?SThisFB&fbclid=IwAR3blkhLSVCH84fCkVcUmRbsXvAcRUT3VxqHVvS13AhGTrENCBfkgdV2SlA
-
I wouldn't look further than Sion Jenkins himself: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/sion-jenkins-saw-who-killed-2155743
-
well police have onlygot to retest the tent peg to prove it one way or the other.
although he was formally aquitedher can be tried agian
im guessing tepolice know it wasnt jenkins they justdont want to admit it.
-
The Billie Jo case on TV right now
-
Police who failed to solve Billie-Jo Jenkins murder say they are STILL haunted by case as new DNA tests revive hopes that 13-year-old's killer will finally be brought to justice 25 years on
* Police who first investigated Billie-Jo's death say 'thought we failed is too much'
* Schoolgirl was found in a pool of blood after being bludgeoned with a tent peg
* Foster father Sion Jenkins found guilty of murder but later cleared after appeals
Detectives who hunted for the murderer of Billie-Jo Jenkins say they are haunted by never catching her killer, admitting 'The thought that we’ve actually failed' is 'too much to think about'.
Billie Jo was battered to death with an iron tent peg in February 1997 in the back garden of her Hastings home in East Sussex.
Her foster father Sion Jenkins was found guilty of her murder and spent six years in prison before being acquitted in 2006 following two retrials.
Currently DNA and blood tests are being reinvestigated after police ordered a forensic review of the evidence.
But the officers who originally investigated Billie-Jo's murder have now spoken of their agony of never finding her killer.
DS Anne Capon, the first detective on the scene, said: 'I think we tried our best, I hate to think we failed Billie-Jo, because she’s what it’s all about.
'The thought that we’ve actually failed her because we haven’t done the job we could have done is too much to think about really.'
DS Anne Capon, the first detective on the crimescene, said: 'I think we tried our best'
Speaking tonight on Channel 5 documentary Who Killed Billie-Jo, PC Steve Hutt adds: 'Billie-Jo was a 13-year-old kid who lost her life. I wanted somebody to be actually held accountable for that crime.
'For me it would be a great thing for me to see Sussex Police, crack on, reinvestigate, dust off those files and actually put it before the public so they can make a really well-informed decision based on the information that is there.'
Mr Jenkins was originally convicted of murdering Billie-Jo in 1998 and failed with an appeal a year later.
But following a two-year review by the Criminal Cases Review Commission, his case was eventually brought back to the Court of Appeal in 2003 and a year later his conviction was quashed and he was released on bail ahead of a retrial, which ended with the jury unable to reach a verdict.
As reported by MailOnline, her aunt Margaret Costner demanded police look into Imiela's whereabouts during the crime after claiming there were 'similarities' between her death and his other crimes.
Retired officer Jeremy Paine said he hoped that the case would one day be solved and justice done.
He tells the programme: "what we mustn't forget in all of this, there was a young girl who lived in the east end of London who was having a tricky time and was brought down to hastings to ostensibly a happy family, a vibrant family, to be given opportunities and have a better life.
'I wouldn't want us to go away from talking about this case, without thinking about Billie-Jo, because her life was cut short and she would have been well in her 30s now and she's missed out on all of those opportunities.
'It was a tragic, traumatic, hideous violent end to her life.'
The documentary includes the 999 call from Mr Jenkins in which he says: “My daughter’s fallen or she’s got head injuries. There’s blood everywhere.”
Prosecutors said the spatters were the result of Jenkins hitting Billie-Jo, but his defence team insisted they were a fine spray of her breath after he found her dying.
Officers will now re-examine the spots and assess whether they contain bone fragments, in addition to conducting new DNA tests on other pieces of evidence.
'We are carrying out a forensic review of material to establish whether or not scientific advances can provide new lines of inquiry,' Sussex Police said.
Who Killed Billie-Jo?, Channel 5, tonight at 9pm
-
Just for a start the family liaison officer and the narrative fed to the wife
Unsafe blood evidence
Failing of the police to properly investigate the other suspect
Best documentary I have seen in a very long time
-
In my opinion, the only case that has similarities with Bamber is David Bain.
-
In my opinion, the only case that has similarities with Bamber is David Bain.
Did you watch the Documentary
-
Does this not ring a bell with the Bamber case
Billie Jo case
25 February 1997
Lois Jenkins spent two hours with police officers. The police decided to tell her about the spots of blood found on her husband’s clothing, and convinced her that he must be the murderer.
The police pocket book entry reads I told them to feed into Mum
Its no wonder the Julie Mugford notes have been witheld
-
Again, as in the Bamber case police and the public went all out to blame " the last man standing ". Shocking !
-
Did you see the Documentary Lookout it was brilliant. The father didn’t seem to be very nice man but that didn’t make him a murderer. I think the police completely messed up by not investigating the other suspect
Lazy policework
-
Thought it was a good doc. Two hours long so went into a bit of detail.
Obviously a straight forward case of Jenkins losing his dangerous temper with Billie Jo.
-
Thought it was a good doc. Two hours long so went into a bit of detail.
Obviously a straight forward case of Jenkins losing his dangerous temper with Billie Jo.
[/b][/color]
That OBVIOUS case has cost everyone 10 million pounds in legal bills
-
Did you see the Documentary Lookout it was brilliant. The father didn’t seem to be very nice man but that didn’t make him a murderer. I think the police completely messed up by not investigating the other suspect
Lazy policework
No I didn't see it Jackie but do remember the case itself. It's interesting that you have two innocent men, Sion and Jeremy both displaying their innocence in entirely different ways. One with a fierce temper and the other one calm and collected yet it doesn't mean a thing where murder is concerned.
-
No I didn't see it Jackie but do remember the case itself. It's interesting that you have two innocent men, Sion and Jeremy both displaying their innocence in entirely different ways. One with a fierce temper and the other one calm and collected yet it doesn't mean a thing where murder is concerned.
Jenkins was found guilty by unaminous decision.
Juries failed to reach a verdict at two further trials. He was denied compensation.
-
At least Bamber had an alternative suspect - Sheila.
Jenkins claims an unknown man climbed onto his porch in daylight, not knowing if others were in the house. Then killed Billie Jo & left.
The killer who has never been found, did this in the 10 minute period Jenkins & his daughters were driving to buy White Spirits, although Jenkins had no money on him.
-
At least Bamber had an alternative suspect - Sheila.
Jenkins claims an unknown man climbed onto his porch in daylight, not knowing if others were in the house. Then killed Billie Jo & left.
The killer who has never been found, did this in the 10 minute period Jenkins & his daughters were driving to buy White Spirits, although Jenkins had no money on him.
As it was at the back of the house, assume the murderer had to climb over the back garden fence first. Did Billie Jo not see or hear him?
Bit of a coincidence, the mysterious murderer was in the area & spotted Billie Jo during the 10 minutes Jenkins & his daughters were not at home.
-
As it was at the back of the house, assume the murderer had to climb over the back garden fence first. Did Billie Jo not see or hear him?
Bit of a coincidence, the mysterious murderer was in the area & spotted Billie Jo during the 10 minutes Jenkins & his daughters were not at home.
The mysterious murderer would not be staking out the property. A family lived there. Not a single woman.
Robert Napper used to stake out properties in areas where he would not be seen - lots of trees & bushes along the Green Chain Walk. Jenkins house was in a residential area.
-
As it was at the back of the house, assume the murderer had to climb over the back garden fence first. Did Billie Jo not see or hear him?
Bit of a coincidence, the mysterious murderer was in the area & spotted Billie Jo during the 10 minutes Jenkins & his daughters were not at home.
If it was not Sion Jenkings, then its most probable that her attacker knew her. It was not random.
-
I think it was Jenkins. It was his temper
-
Media smears featured in both cases----Jeremy and Sion.
However, as in JB's case, evidence was shonky. In Billie-Joe's case, the paramedics noticed two muddy footprints on her legs. The evidence couldn't be taken further because photo's weren't taken in time before her body was removed. The prints hadn't belonged to Sion because he had different treads beneath his shoes as well as there not having been any mud on them.
Also the window of time was insufficient for Sion to have committed any crime that particular afternoon.
-
If it was not Sion Jenkings, then its most probable that her attacker knew her. It was not random.
David have a look at the documentary its 2 hours and really well put together. It unbelievable how the 2 nd suspect was not investigated. He was a complete weirdo who had and obsession with plastic. When Billie Jo was found she had plastic pushed right up inside her nostril and when they arrested the guy he had plastic everywhere on him
-
David have a look at the documentary its 2 hours and really well put together. It unbelievable how the 2 nd suspect was not investigated. He was a complete weirdo who had and obsession with plastic. When Billie Jo was found she had plastic pushed right up inside her nostril and when they arrested the guy he had plastic everywhere on him
Ah yes,I remember that .
-
Bellfield was on his murdering spree around that time too.
-
I can also say that Sion Jenkins is 100% innocent too.
-
David have a look at the documentary its 2 hours and really well put together. It unbelievable how the 2 nd suspect was not investigated. He was a complete weirdo who had and obsession with plastic. When Billie Jo was found she had plastic pushed right up inside her nostril and when they arrested the guy he had plastic everywhere on him
That was the only bit that surprised me. The man saying it was a member of an innocence organisation. So would have to see an official source.
Still massive bad luck for Jenkins. A killer struck in a 10 minute time period. Jenkins was in the house alone with Billie Jo just beforehand.
-
Thought it was a good doc. Two hours long so went into a bit of detail.
Obviously a straight forward case of Jenkins losing his dangerous temper with Billie Jo.
I agree Adam, though I haven't seen the documentary. Strangely enough I know professional people who say Sion Jenkins would have been trained to be cool under pressure and believe him innocent.
-
I can also say that Sion Jenkins is 100% innocent too.
There are some interestng observations here: http://www.unsolved-murders.co.uk/murder-content.php?key=17&termRef=Billie-Jo%20Jenkins
-
I agree Adam, though I haven't seen the documentary. Strangely enough I know professional people who say Sion Jenkins would have been trained to be cool under pressure and believe him innocent.
After the event he was cool. Went straight outside & took a long drive to get some white spirits. To give a killer a time frame.
To become quite successful he was quite clever. Just had a big temper. As his wife & daughters have said.
What age was Billie Jo fostered?
-
After the event he was cool. Went straight outside & took a long drive to get some white spirits. To give a killer a time frame.
To become quite successful he was quite clever. Just had a big temper. As his wife & daughters have said.
What age was Billie Jo fostered?
The Jenkins family had been fostering her since 1993 and she was born on 29 March 1983, so that would make her 10 years old when she became part of the family.
-
Never met any 13 year olds who liked painting for their parents.
Seems Jenkins & Billie Jo were in a bad mood. Jenkins may have told her off & Billie Jo answered back. As 13 year olds do.
Jenkins may have intially gone to physically slap her a few times & Billie Jo fought back. Things escalated quickly.
-
The Jenkins family had been fostering her since 1993 and she was born on 29 March 1983, so that would make her 10 years old when she became part of the family.
So 10 years old.
There may not have been much of a connection. Although I'm sure Jenkins & his wife tried.
Bamber didn't have much of a connection & he was adopted at 6 weeks!
-
So 10 years old.
There may not have been much of a connection. Although I'm sure Jenkins & his wife tried.
Bamber didn't have much of a connection & he was adopted at 6 weeks!
The Jenkins family looked after her for almost four years, which is a fair amount of time. However they did miss her formative years.
-
There had been reports in previous weeks that violence/ burglary and strangers were in the area so the Jenkins' had security lighting fitted not long before the child was murdered, but ironically the tragedy happened in the daytime----by an opportunist who saw his chance while the girl was there, though I think her sisters were also present at the house too as they'd appeared when Sion found the body.
It does seem strange to me that both parents went out with a view to making purchases, but both Lois and Sion who were out at different times forgot to take their money with them ? so were to-ing and fro-ing at separate times.
Lois wrote a book but it was never published.
-
I have watched the documentary now. I wonder who "Mr B" is?
-
I have watched the documentary now. I wonder who "Mr B" is?
The only suspect. But was ruled out.
-
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi-g8a3zfj1AhWSX8AKHRimBJoQFnoECBIQAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.homepage-link.to%2Fjustice%2FJenkins%2Findex.htm&usg=AOvVaw2YpRcoSULDKr4iE7ozvZR8
Here is the COA transcript.
-
The only suspect. But was ruled out.
I'm not convinced he was ruled out, regardless of what someone said on the show. Sion has no reason to stick plastic up her nose, but this guy seems to.
-
I'm not convinced he was ruled out, regardless of what someone said on the show. Sion has no reason to stick plastic up her nose, but this guy seems to.
There was a plastic bag, part of which was up her left nostril.
----------
Never heard of a killers fetish or calling card being sticking bits of a plastic bag up a nostril.
Would have to see a picture.
-
There was a plastic bag, part of which was up her left nostril.
----------
Never heard of a killers fetish or calling card being sticking bits of a plastic bag up a nostril.
Would have to see a picture.
https://www.justiceforsionjenkins.org.uk/mrb.html (https://www.justiceforsionjenkins.org.uk/mrb.html)
-
I'm not convinced he was ruled out, regardless of what someone said on the show. Sion has no reason to stick plastic up her nose, but this guy seems to.
That’s what I thought. What did you think of the documentary. I thought it really well put together
-
I'm not convinced he was ruled out, regardless of what someone said on the show. Sion has no reason to stick plastic up her nose, but this guy seems to.
Well the documentary says he was. If he wasn't he would have been charged
Too much circumstantial & forensic evidence against Jenkins. Together with witnesses regarding his violent tendancies.
But 10 years later he managed to bring up enough to get two juries to not be able to reach a decision.
-
Well the documentary says he was. If he wasn't he would have been charged
One person in the documentary said he was. Just like one person in the documentary said Sion is innocent.
Documentaries like this are mostly people interviewed and telling their opinions. You have to work things out for yourself.
-
Too much circumstantial & forensic evidence against Jenkins. Together with witnesses regarding his violent tendancies.
The forensic evidence is a small amount of blood on him that is consistent with his statement that blood exhaled out her nose and mouth when he tried to help her.
If he was guilty he would have put his top in the wash and cleaned himself up. Not keep the clothes on and take his kids to a nearby shop. It makes no sense.
The "circumstantial evidence" is grasping at straws frankly.
-
That’s what I thought. What did you think of the documentary. I thought it really well put together
Id give it 8/10.
-
The forensic evidence is a small amount of blood on him that is consistent with his statement that blood exhaled out her nose and mouth when he tried to help her.
If he was guilty he would have put his top in the wash and cleaned himself up. Not keep the clothes on and take his kids to a nearby shop. It makes no sense.
The "circumstantial evidence" is grasping at straws frankly.
I wonder if Sion Jenkins knew of this Mr. X walking around the area and used him as a cover? As far as your sentence which I have highlighted in bold is concerned the evidence has moved on: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/billie-jo-murder-trial-what-the-jury-577789
-
Here is the Channel 5 documentary. https://www.channel5.com/show/who-killed-billie-jo
-
One person in the documentary said he was. Just like one person in the documentary said Sion is innocent.
Documentaries like this are mostly people interviewed and telling their opinions. You have to work things out for yourself.
One person involved. How many do you want, 20?
-
I wonder if Sion Jenkins knew of this Mr. X walking around the area and used him as a cover? As far as your sentence which I have highlighted in bold is concerned the evidence has moved on: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/billie-jo-murder-trial-what-the-jury-577789
Were there other violent daylight murders of teenage girls in back gardens in the area at the time?
-
The forensic evidence is a small amount of blood on him that is consistent with his statement that blood exhaled out her nose and mouth when he tried to help her.
If he was guilty he would have put his top in the wash and cleaned himself up. Not keep the clothes on and take his kids to a nearby shop. It makes no sense.
The "circumstantial evidence" is grasping at straws frankly.
The circumstantial evidence is very strong. Together with his wife & children saying he could be very violent.
The forensic evidence is very strong. Resulting in a unaminous verdict. But fair play, he got a release 10 years later.
-
The circumstantial evidence is very strong. Together with his wife & children saying he could be very violent.
The forensic evidence is very strong. Resulting in a unaminous verdict. But fair play, he got a release 10 years later.
I suppose with the abolition of the double jeopardy law he could be rearrested at any time.
-
I suppose with the abolition of the double jeopardy law he could be rearrested at any time.
You should watch the documentary and then comment.
There was a lot of feeding the wife false information.
The must have had an ok marriage going on to have 4 children and then fostering
The wife was a social worker so would have known how to walk away from her marriage taking the children with her
Listening to all the evidence I am surprised the father was found guilty
-
You should watch the documentary and then comment.
There was a lot of feeding the wife false information.
The must have had an ok marriage going on to have 4 children and then fostering
The wife was a social worker so would have known how to walk away from her marriage taking the children with her
Listening to all the evidence I am surprised the father was found guilty
I watched it this morning Jackie and posted a link at #41. The mother may have parroted some stuff to the children she got from the Family Liaison Officer, but she had her own experiences of cruelty from her husband and it's my belief that she stayed together for so long for the sake of the family unit. What do you make of him kicking Billie Jo's damaged ankle in France? Don't you have any doubts?
-
Think there should be some sort of judicial review or public inquiry into the way evidence is handled. Should be made an offence to withhold any evidence. The Police must be under legal obligation to release any and all evidence relevant to both the Prosecution and the Defence.
All evidence regardless of how late it is uncovered must be made available to the P & D. No judge should have any legal standing to dismiss evidence under any circumstances. Dealing with justice here...not time related justice.
Think if I was on a jury and I subsequently found out that some evidence had been withheld I would be extremely angry. The whole set up is undermining justice.
-
It was the type of murder that Bellfield would have carried out especially the way in which the other two schoolgirls ( and more ) were murdered----Millie and Meg. Iron tent pegs were just as lethal as the hammer which he'd used. The man was a serial killer whose victims probably go back to the early 90's, some unsolved. His murders were prolific.
-
During the last 2 years " Lost evidence has collapsed 6,000 cases including alleged killers and rapists " as quoted in the Mirror today.
" Crime expert fears that 12,000 prosecutions have failed in the past two years because pieces of evidence that could convict sex attackers and killers is missing " What's new ??
" Forensic documentation, expert statements and digital records were among evidence to go missing ".
Crime expert Prof. Carole McCartney has done research into evidence being lost.
Prof. McCartney believes the evidence crisis results in people being wrongly convicted and the real culprits walking free.
-
I watched it this morning Jackie and posted a link at #41. The mother may have parroted some stuff to the children she got from the Family Liaison Officer, but she had her own experiences of cruelty from her husband and it's my belief that she stayed together for so long for the sake of the family unit. What do you make of him kicking Billie Jo's damaged ankle in France? Don't you have any doubts?
Steve you cannot think it’s not possible the other suspect couldn’t be guilty
Shoddy police work which has cost 10 million pounds.
It obviously police were ‘feeding’ Julie and the relatives.
This seems common practice which happened with Carol Ann Lee being given exclusive material not available to Jeremy’s defence team
-
Jeremy spent time in the Nick with this guy and after conversations together Jeremy believed he was guilty.
-
Jeremy spent time in the Nick with this guy and after conversations together Jeremy believed he was guilty.
That's interesting AA. Maybe because he had a certain manner about him, as not all those who have violent tendencies are murderers, nor those who are quick to show aggression.
He must have gone through all the usual tests and questions to have become a foster carer, otherwise neither he nor his wife would have been accepted.
-
That's interesting AA. Maybe because he had a certain manner about him, as not all those who have violent tendencies are murderers, nor those who are quick to show aggression.
He must have gone through all the usual tests and questions to have become a foster carer, otherwise neither he nor his wife would have been accepted.
I cannot recall what was said back then. We discussed after they spoke together. All I remember now is Jeremy not liking him, the guy wanting to befriend but Jeremy didn’t believe his story and chose to not converse much more afterwards. The guy was then moved out to another prison.
-
I cannot recall what was said back then. We discussed after they spoke together. All I remember now is Jeremy not liking him, the guy wanting to befriend but Jeremy didn’t believe his story and chose to not converse much more afterwards. The guy was then moved out to another prison.
I could imagine Sion being quite arrogant and forthright in an aggressive sort of way because he himself had been blamed for something he hadn't done. People act differently in such circumstances.
-
Jeremy spent time in the Nick with this guy and after conversations together Jeremy believed he was guilty.
I can't be the only person here who finds that ironic, on several levels.
-
Just for a start the family liaison officer and the narrative fed to the wife
Unsafe blood evidence
Failing of the police to properly investigate the other suspect
Best documentary I have seen in a very long time
A common thread to both cases is the theme of non-natural parenting, but each case touches on it in different ways.
An underlying theme in the Bamber case is the precarity of the parental bond in an adoptive family where the elective parents are somewhat inept in the role, a problem compounded in this case by the gap of understanding between two apparently respectable War generation parents and their late baby boomer children, whose formative years were the 1970s and early 1980s. I say 'apparently respectable' in reference to the parents because we don't know for sure what went on within those farmhouse walls, and as matters stand in law, one child entrusted to them ended up severely mentally-ill, the other is serving a whole life order at HMP Wakefield for mass murder. Something went on inside that farmhouse.
In the Jenkins case, there was never any question that Mr Jenkins (now Dr. Jenkins - he has gained a PhD) would have a meaningful parental bond with his charge. That wasn't per se the issue. He and Lois were the foster parents of a teenage girl, not adoptive parents of infants, as in the Bamber case. The Bambers were meant to be near-substitutes for the natural parents; the Jenkinses were merely guardians of Billie-Jo until she reached adulthood.
Accounts suggest Billie-Jo was a handful. She had come from a very troubled upbringing in east London.
Whatever the truth of the allegations against Siôn, it must have been slightly galling to have to listen to the loutish screeching and shouting of the natural parents from the public gallery when they had let her down so badly and put her in that position in the first place. She had to be fostered out because her mother, Diane (whose surname changed with the weather, she was married so many times) was imprisoned for credit card fraud, and her father, Bill Jenkins, was in and out of prison so often they should have reserved a cell for him. The extended family, some of whom also made their views loudly known, would not look after her when she needed them. None of them were in a position to cast aspersions given that their own neglect of Billie-Jo was relevant to the circumstances that led to her death. Moreover, Billie-Jo herself had voted with her feet: she was adamant about not returning to them when she had the chance and enthusiastically embraced the opportunity of a move to Hastings with the Jenkinses.
Siôn says in his book that when it became clear they would have problems with Billie-Jo, he sought advice from her aunt, Margaret Coster, but she was of no help. This same Margaret Coster was one of two women who assaulted him outside court after his formal acquittal.
In Jeremy's case, he was practically discarded by the Marshams, who now - conveniently for them - don't want to know him. Perhaps you can't blame them, but they allowed his adoption to a woman who had mental health problems, even if they were not aware of those issues at the time. Similarly, Sheila was adopted out of the Jay/Webb family for no proper reason.
In both the Bamber and Jenkins cases, we should stop to consider the damage done by these natural parents who failed in their basic responsibilities, then quickly sought to absolve themselves of blame but no doubt carried guilty consciences.
That, for me, is one of the parallels between the two cases.
Another is the involvement of a female witness of dubious credibility. In the case of Julie Mugford, the issues are obvious. In the case of Lois Jenkins, she was a social worker and registered nurse, thus apparently respectable, but it's clear that she sought to blacken Siôn Jenkins' character with muddled allegations that had to be open to question given that she was in a responsible social work role herself.
-
A good and understandable view Gascoigne, something that will sadly hit our screens in the future as more and more children are finding themselves in situations of misplacements within family settings.
-
A common thread to both cases is the theme of non-natural parenting, but each case touches on it in different ways.
An underlying theme in the Bamber case is the precarity of the parental bond in an adoptive family where the elective parents are somewhat inept in the role, a problem compounded in this case by the gap of understanding between two apparently respectable War generation parents and their late baby boomer children, whose formative years were the 1970s and early 1980s. I say 'apparently respectable' in reference to the parents because we don't know for sure what went on within those farmhouse walls, and as matters stand in law, one child entrusted to them ended up severely mentally-ill, the other is serving a whole life order at HMP Wakefield for mass murder. Something went on inside that farmhouse.
In the Jenkins case, there was never any question that Mr Jenkins (now Dr. Jenkins - he has gained a PhD) would have a meaningful parental bond with his charge. That wasn't per se the issue. He and Lois were the foster parents of a teenage girl, not adoptive parents of infants, as in the Bamber case. The Bambers were meant to be near-substitutes for the natural parents; the Jenkinses were merely guardians of Billie-Jo until she reached adulthood.
Accounts suggest Billie-Jo was a handful. She had come from a very troubled upbringing in east London.
Whatever the truth of the allegations against Siôn, it must have been slightly galling to have to listen to the loutish screeching and shouting of the natural parents from the public gallery when they had let her down so badly and put her in that position in the first place. She had to be fostered out because her mother, Diane (whose surname changed with the weather, she was married so many times) was imprisoned for credit card fraud, and her father, Bill Jenkins, was in and out of prison so often they should have reserved a cell for him. The extended family, some of whom also made their views loudly known, would not look after her when she needed them. None of them were in a position to cast aspersions given that their own neglect of Billie-Jo was relevant to the circumstances that led to her death. Moreover, Billie-Jo herself had voted with her feet: she was adamant about not returning to them when she had the chance and enthusiastically embraced the opportunity of a move to Hastings with the Jenkinses.
Siôn says in his book that when it became clear they would have problems with Billie-Jo, he sought advice from her aunt, Margaret Coster, but she was of no help. This same Margaret Coster was one of two women who assaulted him outside court after his formal acquittal.
In Jeremy's case, he was practically discarded by the Marshams, who now - conveniently for them - don't want to know him. Perhaps you can't blame them, but they allowed his adoption to a woman who had mental health problems, even if they were not aware of those issues at the time. Similarly, Sheila was adopted out of the Jay/Webb family for no proper reason.
In both the Bamber and Jenkins cases, we should stop to consider the damage done by these natural parents who failed in their basic responsibilities, then quickly sought to absolve themselves of blame but no doubt carried guilty consciences.
That, for me, is one of the parallels between the two cases.
Another is the involvement of a female witness of dubious credibility. In the case of Julie Mugford, the issues are obvious. In the case of Lois Jenkins, she was a social worker and registered nurse, thus apparently respectable, but it's clear that she sought to blacken Siôn Jenkins' character with muddled allegations that had to be open to question given that she was in a responsible social work role herself.
I would say your post is spot on. I wondered were you involved in the Billie Jo case?
I find it incredible how many people are in prison on a life sentence when the police have clearly not investigated properly because there was never enough evidence to convict beyond reasonable doubt
-
In many cases the care-givers to children should be scrutinised, inc. any medical reports !
-
A common thread to both cases is the theme of non-natural parenting, but each case touches on it in different ways.
An underlying theme in the Bamber case is the precarity of the parental bond in an adoptive family where the elective parents are somewhat inept in the role, a problem compounded in this case by the gap of understanding between two apparently respectable War generation parents and their late baby boomer children, whose formative years were the 1970s and early 1980s. I say 'apparently respectable' in reference to the parents because we don't know for sure what went on within those farmhouse walls, and as matters stand in law, one child entrusted to them ended up severely mentally-ill, the other is serving a whole life order at HMP Wakefield for mass murder. Something went on inside that farmhouse.
In the Jenkins case, there was never any question that Mr Jenkins (now Dr. Jenkins - he has gained a PhD) would have a meaningful parental bond with his charge. That wasn't per se the issue. He and Lois were the foster parents of a teenage girl, not adoptive parents of infants, as in the Bamber case. The Bambers were meant to be near-substitutes for the natural parents; the Jenkinses were merely guardians of Billie-Jo until she reached adulthood.
Accounts suggest Billie-Jo was a handful. She had come from a very troubled upbringing in east London.
Whatever the truth of the allegations against Siôn, it must have been slightly galling to have to listen to the loutish screeching and shouting of the natural parents from the public gallery when they had let her down so badly and put her in that position in the first place. She had to be fostered out because her mother, Diane (whose surname changed with the weather, she was married so many times) was imprisoned for credit card fraud, and her father, Bill Jenkins, was in and out of prison so often they should have reserved a cell for him. The extended family, some of whom also made their views loudly known, would not look after her when she needed them. None of them were in a position to cast aspersions given that their own neglect of Billie-Jo was relevant to the circumstances that led to her death. Moreover, Billie-Jo herself had voted with her feet: she was adamant about not returning to them when she had the chance and enthusiastically embraced the opportunity of a move to Hastings with the Jenkinses.
Siôn says in his book that when it became clear they would have problems with Billie-Jo, he sought advice from her aunt, Margaret Coster, but she was of no help. This same Margaret Coster was one of two women who assaulted him outside court after his formal acquittal.
In Jeremy's case, he was practically discarded by the Marshams, who now - conveniently for them - don't want to know him. Perhaps you can't blame them, but they allowed his adoption to a woman who had mental health problems, even if they were not aware of those issues at the time. Similarly, Sheila was adopted out of the Jay/Webb family for no proper reason.
In both the Bamber and Jenkins cases, we should stop to consider the damage done by these natural parents who failed in their basic responsibilities, then quickly sought to absolve themselves of blame but no doubt carried guilty consciences.
That, for me, is one of the parallels between the two cases.
Another is the involvement of a female witness of dubious credibility. In the case of Julie Mugford, the issues are obvious. In the case of Lois Jenkins, she was a social worker and registered nurse, thus apparently respectable, but it's clear that she sought to blacken Siôn Jenkins' character with muddled allegations that had to be open to question given that she was in a responsible social work role herself.
Unfortunately, when a child is given into foster care, the biological families have the right, should they so wish, to maintain contact with the child. When a child is given up for adoption -that's GIVEN UP- the biological family relinquishes all contact with the child. This is made clear to them at the time of adoption. This was how it was until relatively recent times.
You besmirch the Marshams when you accuse them of "practically discarding" JB. They'd have had the choice of having him fostered and maintaining contact, or handing him over for adoption and cutting all ties with him. For whatever reason, they chose the latter. I doubt they'd have been told any more than my own biological mother was told, ie good and suitable parents had been found. They most certainly wouldn't have had access to any psych or medical reports.
I can't begin to imagine how the Marshams -now married with two more children- would have felt. I can't begin to imagine how JB's siblings would have felt -not all biological families are keen to know the child who was adopted out- but I can't think that they wouldn't have been curious. In fairness to them, I suspect they may have come to the conclusion that whatever they did would be considered wrong by some, so they may simply have done what they believed was best for them.
-
A common thread to both cases is the theme of non-natural parenting, but each case touches on it in different ways.
An underlying theme in the Bamber case is the precarity of the parental bond in an adoptive family where the elective parents are somewhat inept in the role, a problem compounded in this case by the gap of understanding between two apparently respectable War generation parents and their late baby boomer children, whose formative years were the 1970s and early 1980s. I say 'apparently respectable' in reference to the parents because we don't know for sure what went on within those farmhouse walls, and as matters stand in law, one child entrusted to them ended up severely mentally-ill, the other is serving a whole life order at HMP Wakefield for mass murder. Something went on inside that farmhouse.
In the Jenkins case, there was never any question that Mr Jenkins (now Dr. Jenkins - he has gained a PhD) would have a meaningful parental bond with his charge. That wasn't per se the issue. He and Lois were the foster parents of a teenage girl, not adoptive parents of infants, as in the Bamber case. The Bambers were meant to be near-substitutes for the natural parents; the Jenkinses were merely guardians of Billie-Jo until she reached adulthood.
Accounts suggest Billie-Jo was a handful. She had come from a very troubled upbringing in east London.
Whatever the truth of the allegations against Siôn, it must have been slightly galling to have to listen to the loutish screeching and shouting of the natural parents from the public gallery when they had let her down so badly and put her in that position in the first place. She had to be fostered out because her mother, Diane (whose surname changed with the weather, she was married so many times) was imprisoned for credit card fraud, and her father, Bill Jenkins, was in and out of prison so often they should have reserved a cell for him. The extended family, some of whom also made their views loudly known, would not look after her when she needed them. None of them were in a position to cast aspersions given that their own neglect of Billie-Jo was relevant to the circumstances that led to her death. Moreover, Billie-Jo herself had voted with her feet: she was adamant about not returning to them when she had the chance and enthusiastically embraced the opportunity of a move to Hastings with the Jenkinses.
Siôn says in his book that when it became clear they would have problems with Billie-Jo, he sought advice from her aunt, Margaret Coster, but she was of no help. This same Margaret Coster was one of two women who assaulted him outside court after his formal acquittal.
In Jeremy's case, he was practically discarded by the Marshams, who now - conveniently for them - don't want to know him. Perhaps you can't blame them, but they allowed his adoption to a woman who had mental health problems, even if they were not aware of those issues at the time. Similarly, Sheila was adopted out of the Jay/Webb family for no proper reason.
In both the Bamber and Jenkins cases, we should stop to consider the damage done by these natural parents who failed in their basic responsibilities, then quickly sought to absolve themselves of blame but no doubt carried guilty consciences.
That, for me, is one of the parallels between the two cases.
Another is the involvement of a female witness of dubious credibility. In the case of Julie Mugford, the issues are obvious. In the case of Lois Jenkins, she was a social worker and registered nurse, thus apparently respectable, but it's clear that she sought to blacken Siôn Jenkins' character with muddled allegations that had to be open to question given that she was in a responsible social work role herself.
You argue the case well Gascoigne, but stress the shortcomings of everyone save the perpetrator, shortcomings which pale into insignificance when one reflects on Billie-Jo's fate. It's strange that Christianity is also a link between the two cases on which you don't pick up: the first is the hypocrite who uses the Church to his own advantage when it suits, the second whom I genuinely believe wanted the best for her daughter but was torn between God's anger and wrath of the Old Testament and the Love Thy Neighbour and forgiveness philosophy of the New.
Julie was nineteen when she met Bamber; Lois at the time of the murder was twice that age. She knew full well what her husband was like from personal experience, and would have heard tales from Bille-Jo such as the ankle incident in France, testified by an independent witness with no ulterior motive in bringing Sion Jenkins down.
-
No idea if SJ is guilty or not but there was apparently a mentally ill person roaming around who had a thing about plastic bags. When this person was picked up by the police and searched he had plastic bags, or pieces of, stuffed down his underpants.
A neighbour apparently found pieces of plastic bag deep inside BJ's nostrils. What was the neighbour doing interfering with the victim? If this is true surely it points away from SJ?
Others placed the mentally ill person 15 minutes away (car, foot?) at the time of the murder. Not sure how anyone could be that certain?
Apparently the Jenkins had extra security installed in the weeks leading up to the murder as they felt vulnerable. Also the house next door was boarded up.
-
Could some of these threads possibly be merged: https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9261.0.html
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11116.0.html
-
Could some of these threads possibly be merged: https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9261.0.html
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11116.0.html
Done.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/jun/15/ukcrime.laurasmith
-
As a comparison it would be interesting to see the outcome of a forensic examination of Denise Franklin's clothes. DF was a near neighbour who SJ called to assist. She removed the plastic bag from BJ's nostril.
24. Denise Franklin and the ambulance men described the position of the deceased as being prone, flat on the patio, with the left hand side of her face on the floor facing the garden. There was a plastic bag, part of which was up her left nostril. Denise Franklin had removed that plug before the ambulance team arrived and blood poured out.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/Jenkins/index.htm
The mentally ill man who was in the vicinity at the time of the murder and had a thing about plastic bags was taken into police custody a couple of days later. I understand his clothes were forensically examined but nothing incriminating was found. Obviously he could have changed his clothes over the 2 day period.
-
Done.
Thanks.
-
The tent peg would only have Billie Jo's blood on it. Jenkin's finger prints would be on it, but he lived there.
The forensic evidence was Billie Jo's blood on Jenkins clothes. Jenkins saying it got there after he found Billie Jo dead.
In the two hung jury decisions, I can only assume the jury were instructed to make a decision based just on the forensic evidence. Rather than circumstantial evidence, Jenkin's violent temper & strange behaviour on the day & the almost 0% chance it was a random stranger.
I don't believe any fingerprints were recovered from the tent peg. Maybe the cyclindrical shape and/or surface didn't lend to recoverable fingerprints. Maybe SJ wiped it.
If SJ had a violent temper how come he was about to be promoted to headmaster? If he was so violent why did his former wife agree to foster BJ? Who witnessed his violent temper?
-
You argue the case well Gascoigne, but stress the shortcomings of everyone save the perpetrator, shortcomings which pale into insignificance when one reflects on Billie-Jo's fate. It's strange that Christianity is also a link between the two cases on which you don't pick up: the first is the hypocrite who uses the Church to his own advantage when it suits, the second whom I genuinely believe wanted the best for her daughter but was torn between God's anger and wrath of the Old Testament and the Love Thy Neighbour and forgiveness philosophy of the New.
Julie was nineteen when she met Bamber; Lois at the time of the murder was twice that age. She knew full well what her husband was like from personal experience, and would have heard tales from Bille-Jo such as the ankle incident in France, testified by an independent witness with no ulterior motive in bringing Sion Jenkins down.
Pardon me, but I just assumed that the faults of the perpetrators in the two cases - whoever they were - would be quite obvious and almost superfluous for comment. Though I am not as certain as you seem to be about who the perpetrators were in these cases. Both cases, I believe, fall into a legal 'grey' zone of doubt.
I wasn't giving an exhaustive list of all the parallels between the two cases. I completely understand that there were church-goers in both families and I am sure you make the right points about that. If I listed all the known parallels and similarities, we'd be here all week.
My post was in reply to a completely different thread and the context has now been somewhat lost with the move of the posts to this thread.
-
iont think jenkins did it ut i ont think the other uspect dd ethere.
-
I don't believe any fingerprints were recovered from the tent peg. Maybe the cyclindrical shape and/or surface didn't lend to recoverable fingerprints. Maybe SJ wiped it.
If SJ had a violent temper how come he was about to be promoted to headmaster? If he was so violent why did his former wife agree to foster BJ? Who witnessed his violent temper?
Lois witnessed his temper on several occasions whilst they were married. Why do you think she took her family off to the other side of the world?
Here's another incident: https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/jenkins-kicked-billiejo-7213619.html
Jenkins had got his job as Deputy Head under false pretences, claiming he had attended fee-paying Gordonstoun school, alma mater of Prince Charles. He has a good appearance and is eminently plausible, which is why he fooled a jury twice. If I were to hazard a guess he was a successful disciplinarian at the all boys school (which is now Ark William Parker Hastings) but it's still an academically-failing school. I wouldn't blame him for that. But in an all-male environment and then coming home to the opposite he regarded himself as lord and master, the delusions acquired therein finally leading to tragedy.
-
Lois witnessed his temper on several occasions whilst they were married. Why do you think she took her family off to the other side of the world?
Here's another incident: https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/jenkins-kicked-billiejo-7213619.html
Jenkins had got his job as Deputy Head under false pretences, claiming he had attended fee-paying Gordonstoun school, alma mater of Prince Charles. He has a good appearance and is eminently plausible, which is why he fooled a jury twice. If I were to hazard a guess he was a successful disciplinarian at the all boys school (which is now Ark William Parker Hastings) but it's still an academically-failing school. I wouldn't blame him for that. But in an all-male environment and then coming home to the opposite he regarded himself as lord and master, the delusions acquired therein finally leading to tragedy.
But Lois had been with SJ for decades before the murder. Why did she allow BJ to become part of the family if she thought SJ was a risk? Why didn't she insist he engaged on some anger management course if he was that explosive. Why didn't she share her concerns with others eg friends, family etc?
She may have thought taking the children away from all the publicity was the best thing for them.
I'm not condoning the kicking incident but it seems it only came to light after the event. It was one person's interpretation. Did BJ complain to others at the time or thereafter? If SJ has serious anger managment problems I would have expected to have heard more given he was managing hundreds of children at school and then going home to 5 young girls and a wife.
Maybe he felt insecure with a need to big himself up with the Gordonstoun claim or maybe it lent to his idea of how a school should be managed. Its somewhat of an embellishment to say the least but I don't see a correlation with uncontrollable anger leading to murder of a young girl in his care.
SJ/LJ on the surface seem an unlikely combination. He looks like he would spend an age on his appearance and break the bank for designer clothes to cruise around Hastings in his MG soft top. I read also he was into local Tory politics? Whereas LJ gives the impression she would wear a sack cloth if it fitted with her ideals.
Up until posting here I knew little about the case and although he was acquitted I assumed he probably was responsible but now I am unsure.
-
But Lois had been with SJ for decades before the murder. Why did she allow BJ to become part of the family if she thought SJ was a risk? Why didn't she insist he engaged on some anger management course if he was that explosive. Why didn't she share her concerns with others eg friends, family etc?
She may have thought taking the children away from all the publicity was the best thing for them.
I'm not condoning the kicking incident but it seems it only came to light after the event. It was one person's interpretation. Did BJ complain to others at the time or thereafter? If SJ has serious anger managment problems I would have expected to have heard more given he was managing hundreds of children at school and then going home to 5 young girls and a wife.
Maybe he felt insecure with a need to big himself up with the Gordonstoun claim or maybe it lent to his idea of how a school should be managed. Its somewhat of an embellishment to say the least but I don't see a correlation with uncontrollable anger leading to murder of a young girl in his care.
SJ/LJ on the surface seem an unlikely combination. He looks like he would spend an age on his appearance and break the bank for designer clothes to cruise around Hastings in his MG soft top. I read also he was into local Tory politics? Whereas LJ gives the impression she would wear a sack cloth if it fitted with her ideals.
Up until posting here I knew little about the case and although he was acquitted I assumed he probably was responsible but now I am unsure.
My thinking entirely
-
Lois suffered in silence because she didn't want to break the family bond. I haven't read the Sion Jenkins book but all references to how difficult Billie-Jo was to manage and the failings of her birth relatives are irrelevant to this case and smack to me of post-murder justification. His ego as he lost it that Saturday morning wouldn't countenance calling the police and admitting to losing his temper, so he had to concoct the ludicrous visit to the DIY centre.
-
Lois suffered in silence because she didn't want to break the family bond. I haven't read the Sion Jenkins book but all references to how difficult Billie-Jo was to manage and the failings of her birth relatives are irrelevant to this case and smack to me of post-murder justification. His ego as he lost it that Saturday morning wouldn't countenance calling the police and admitting to losing his temper, so he had to concoct the ludicrous visit to the DIY centre.
What evidence exists that SJ had a temper?
Next, the officers raised the subject of the appellant's temper, and his excessive use of violence on them when they were naughty. L became distressed, and defended her father, saying that it did not even hurt them. When the police added that he used to hit their mother, L said that this was not true, and she stormed out of the room in tears.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/Jenkins/index.htm
-
And how worrying is this?
59. On 25 February, the officers decided to tell Mrs Jenkins about the bloodspots that had been found on the appellant's clothing. The relevant pocket book entry reads: "Told them to feed into Mum". On the following day, Mrs Jenkins was informed. The pocket book entry records that the officers spent two hours convincing her that her husband had murdered Billie. It describes in vivid detail the distress that was being suffered by Mrs Jenkins and the children.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/Jenkins/index.htm
Why the need to spend two hours convincing Mrs Jenkins that her husband had murdered Billie? What happened to the presumption of innocence?
-
What evidence exists that SJ had a temper?
Next, the officers raised the subject of the appellant's temper, and his excessive use of violence on them when they were naughty. L became distressed, and defended her father, saying that it did not even hurt them. When the police added that he used to hit their mother, L said that this was not true, and she stormed out of the room in tears.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/Jenkins/index.htm
I don't like reposting links, but it is relevant..https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/jenkins-kicked-billiejo-7213619.html
-
I don't like reposting links, but some people just won't be told..https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/jenkins-kicked-billiejo-7213619.html
Police records show Lois told officers he repeatedly hit her and had been heavy handed with his smacking of his natural children. However, she also says she was not aware of him having ever hit Billie-Jo.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/sion-jenkins-saw-who-killed-2155743
-
Police records show Lois told officers he repeatedly hit her and had been heavy handed with his smacking of his natural children. However, she also says she was not aware of him having ever hit Billie-Jo.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/sion-jenkins-saw-who-killed-2155743
So he saw who killed his foster daughter but kept the information to himself for ten years? Or did he think it would be a juicy titbit to sell a book to people whose memory had faded?
The following extract comes from the link you posted in #108:
61. On 7 March, Mrs Jenkins made a statement to the police. She said that the appellant had a bad temper, and had been violent towards her, and that he would use a slipper or stick on A and L: all of them were afraid of him. The appellant was arrested again on 13 March, and charged with obtaining a pecuniary advantage, namely his post as a deputy head teacher, by deception. On 14 March, he was charged with murder.
-
So he saw who killed his foster daughter but kept the information to himself for ten years? Or did he think it would be a juicy titbit to sell a book to people whose memory had faded?
The following extract comes from the link you posted in #108:
61. On 7 March, Mrs Jenkins made a statement to the police. She said that the appellant had a bad temper, and had been violent towards her, and that he would use a slipper or stick on A and L: all of them were afraid of him. The appellant was arrested again on 13 March, and charged with obtaining a pecuniary advantage, namely his post as a deputy head teacher, by deception. On 14 March, he was charged with murder.
And you have the following from the same link/doc:
65. The officers went on to tell the children that their father had not been truthful when he got his job as a deputy head teacher. The children suggested that perhaps he had made a mistake: they did not think that he would be untruthful on purpose. Next, the officers raised the subject of the appellant's temper, and his excessive use of violence on them when they were naughty. L became distressed, and defended her father, saying that it did not even hurt them. When the police added that he used to hit their mother, L said that this was not true, and she stormed out of the room in tears.
He said he referred to the person in his original witness statement 1997:
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/sion-jenkins-saw-who-killed-2155743
Chillingly, Mr Jenkins now claims Billie-Jo’s murderer was still in the family home when he returned and that the man spoke to the distraught father calmly and concisely before vanishing.
Mr Jenkins says this man hid in the family’s dining room before he could emerge into the hallway, present himself to Mr Jenkins then walk out.
“I have stood face to face with him. I have spoken with him. I know what he looks like and I remember his mannerisms,” he says.
“He wore a dark navy or possibly dark olive overcoat and was smartly dressed. I could see he was wearing a tie. He had highly polished shoes. It was this fact that reassured me he was a police officer.
“This man was standing in the hall. I turned around and looked at him. He said, ‘She’s going to be okay.’
“He then left me staring at the door to the dining room.
“I honestly believe this man is responsible for my daughter’s murder. I believe he killed her in cold blood for reasons that I can only speculate and surmise.”
He pre-empts the issue of why it has taken him so long to reveal this glaring fact by pointing out that he refers to the man in his original witness statement in 1997.
He wants a photo-fit compiled to track him down. It means working with police and the media again, despite being understandably unable to contain his disdain for either.
He claims he wrote the book for his daughters. Much the same way Kate McCann did for her children I guess. Its not unusual for those involved in such cases to write books. Colin Caffell wrote a book along with an updated version on the back of a tv series.
I am not saying he's innocent but I can see why its a controversial case involving retrials and appeal hearings.
-
Analysis by Pat Brown: https://youtu.be/Z3SJ7-2AWO0
-
But Lois had been with SJ for decades before the murder. Why did she allow BJ to become part of the family if she thought SJ was a risk? Why didn't she insist he engaged on some anger management course if he was that explosive. Why didn't she share her concerns with others eg friends, family etc?
She may have thought taking the children away from all the publicity was the best thing for them.
I'm not condoning the kicking incident but it seems it only came to light after the event. It was one person's interpretation. Did BJ complain to others at the time or thereafter? If SJ has serious anger managment problems I would have expected to have heard more given he was managing hundreds of children at school and then going home to 5 young girls and a wife.
Maybe he felt insecure with a need to big himself up with the Gordonstoun claim or maybe it lent to his idea of how a school should be managed. Its somewhat of an embellishment to say the least but I don't see a correlation with uncontrollable anger leading to murder of a young girl in his care.
SJ/LJ on the surface seem an unlikely combination. He looks like he would spend an age on his appearance and break the bank for designer clothes to cruise around Hastings in his MG soft top. I read also he was into local Tory politics? Whereas LJ gives the impression she would wear a sack cloth if it fitted with her ideals.
Up until posting here I knew little about the case and although he was acquitted I assumed he probably was responsible but now I am unsure.
spot on
-
Did you watch Pat Brown's analysis? Of course nobody knows precisely what goes on inside a marriage apart from the two people who are in it, but Lois to me did not look like she wore the trousers in the relationship. She had endured physical abuse at her husband's hands in the past. Billie-Jo had a half-brother who stayed with the family, but he was returned to the Local Authority not long after he arrived. Billie-Jo herself vandalized some of Annie's dolls and was generally badly behaved. There was no blood trail on the side gate pathway, which seems to rule out a random intruder.
This was not a premeditated crime: Sion Jenkins snapped on Friday 14th February 1997. He would have been found out eventually over lying about his cv, he had a tough school to deal with and probably left the caregiving at home to his wife. He was juggling too many balls and the pressure became too much. But it's no excuse.